[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Derek S

There is talk of the roadside machines being accepted as evidential samples (at least up here in Scotland) as they are pretty accurate these days. Far better than the old crystals in a bag. As far as I know that is still at the discussion stage and everyone over at the roadside is carted off for a go on the intoximeter.

These machines only determine whether the suspect is over the legal limit. It does not determine how much.

---------- Post added at 00:42 ---------- Previous post was at 00:36 ----------

Originally Posted by Wayfair

They don't ask for your licence details when you apply for insurance only when you make a claim, so you can have apply and pay for insurance but it would be invalid if ever needed, although he could of had insurance for a car he owns while being a provisional licence holder.

Insurance companies do ask and they check with DVLA at the inception of the policy. When they find out you have lied, the insurance is invalidated and you will be reported for fraud. This is a criminal offence and the police are informed.

---------- Post added at 00:47 ---------- Previous post was at 00:42 ----------

Originally Posted by AndyCambs

Being slightly pedantic here, but no

- and therefore liable to seizure of the car. No licence per se wouldn't mean seizure of the car.
A condition of the insurance policy is that you hold a licence for the vehicle insured - hence if you have no licence, or an expired licence, disqualified, or provisional licence and are driving without a qualified driver - then you invalidate your insurance and you have no insurance - hence seizure of the vehicle.

No exactly correct. If the driver has no licence then he would not be insured to drive any vehicle. However, the car itself would still be insured and therfore still be legal to be on the road.

---------- Post added at 00:53 ---------- Previous post was at 00:47 ----------

Originally Posted by blackthorn

I`ve tried googling for an answer to this but I`ve not had much success so I`m hoping someone on here might be able to clarify this for me.
One of my staff at work was off the other day and when he returned to work he told me that 2 days previously he was followed from the local supermarket to his house by the police. He said, that they followed him because he failed to use an indicator at some junction. When they got to his house, they could smell alcohol and breathalysed him, which he failed. (This is what he is telling me btw). I asked him what happened next, he said the police took his car away to the compound. I asked him if he was arrested and he said no because he fully admited to drinking and driving. ( I find that a bit weird ). He appeared in court the next day where he tells me that he has been given a 18month driving ban.
Right I have a couple of problems with this guy now. We all work at an outdoor shopping centre, which is private property. Part of his job is driving a mini road sweeper and a small mule which tows a jetwash. None of these vehicles have license plates or road tax (not needed). He tells me that the police said he was ok to carry on driving these on our site but I am not so sure. My main worry is, that he sweeps the carparks, where the public have access. So what I am asking is, what are the laws on this situation ?
Also, if anyone can tell me if it is normal procedure to take someones car away when stopped for drink driving. I would understand them taking it away if say he was stopped on a road miles from his house but he was at his own house when they done him.

From the very inconsistent account of his experiences, I would think that he has some alternative motivation behind this. Could he be swinging the lead? Has he been unhappy with the task of driving this sweeper and thinking that if he told you he had been banned from driving, you will take him off this task?