How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask LondonlawyerJ Your Own Question
LondonlawyerJ
LondonlawyerJ, Advocate
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 814
Experience:  Solicitor with over 15 years experience.
76316425
Type Your Law Question Here...
LondonlawyerJ is online now

I have twelve penalty points ,I have been caught doing 43 inside

Resolved Question:

I have twelve penalty points ,I have been caught doing 43 inside 30 ,I need to be able to drive to put food on the table for my family,what can I do ...
Submitted: 3 years ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  LondonlawyerJ replied 3 years ago.

LondonlawyerJ :

Hello I am a solicitor with over 15 years experience. I will try to help you with this.

LondonlawyerJ :

It may be that you ca avoid a ban through arguing that there will be exceptional hardship if you are banned from driving.

LondonlawyerJ :

The way to avoid a ban is by arguing that you will suffer exceptional hardship as a result of a ban. The distinction between ‘hardship’ and ‘exceptional hardship’ is important because “hardship” is not good enough. You will need to show that the hardship is “something out of the ordinary”. A loss of employment on it’s own may well not be enough.


“Exceptional hardship” is an imprecise concept so the Magistrates’ Court have a broad discretion to assess applications. This enables lawyers or defendants in person to be innovative, drawing the fcats together so that the ‘exceptional’ threshold is passed.


Focussing on the implications of loss of employment may increase the strength of the argument. If, for example, the defendant would in losing his job face the prospect of bankruptcy or defaulting on a mortgage, the hardship may be greater than simply a loss of job.


The Courts have a duty to consider the implications of a disqualification upon persons other than the defendant, bearing in mind that such persons are effectively innocent and will be punished irrespective of this. This can be a crucial factor in an exceptional hardship argument.


There is no rule preventing a “totter” from making an exceptional hardship argument themselves but it is often more effective to have the arguments made by a lawyer. The “totter” can then concentrate on his role as a witness.


If the exceptional hardship argument is successful, the sentencing Court can either reduce the period of mandatory disqualification or make no disqualification order at all. The arguments used, if successful, can not be used again in the next 3 years.

LondonlawyerJ and other Law Specialists are ready to help you