Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

Mmm

Hi,

I’m still in my probation (Met), I had a notepad on my phone with the correct wording for requiring a specimen of breath for drink driving however i’ve somehow lost this. 
 

Can anyone please give me the wording required for requiring a specimen and for the arrest? I would appreciate it very much. 
 

I haven’t had to conduct a roadside test yet but i’m sure I will soon with everything going back to normal!

 

Thanks very much. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mmm
Author of the topic Posted
16 minutes ago, XA84 said:

I'm sure that somebody will be able to give you a more detailed and precise answer but in the meantime this may help: https://www.drinkdriving.org/police_breath_alcohol_test_preliminary.php

Thanks for the reply. 
 

I’ve already been on that page, it’s mostly the legislation behind requiring tests etc which I’m comfortable with. I appreciate the link though, thank you.  
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LosingGrip

If you are happy to, drop me a PM with your .pnn email and I'll send you a copy of the proforma that I use in Dorset :). 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mmm
Author of the topic Posted
8 hours ago, LosingGrip said:

If you are happy to, drop me a PM with your .pnn email and I'll send you a copy of the proforma that I use in Dorset :). 

 

 

I’ve messaged you. I appreciate the help. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IrateShrike

There isn't actually any prescribed wording for making a lawful requirement for a preliminary test or evidential specimens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MajorDisaster
On 25/07/2020 at 15:10, IrateShrike said:

There isn't actually any prescribed wording for making a lawful requirement for a preliminary test or evidential specimens.

This.  I just inform them that I require a specimen based on what I have observed or been told and tell them that it is an offence for which they will be arrested if they refuse or fail to provide. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
miffy

 

On 25/07/2020 at 15:10, IrateShrike said:

There isn't actually any prescribed wording for making a lawful requirement for a preliminary test or evidential specimens.

Pretty much this - you need to say that they are required to provide a specimen for analysis for one of the three reasons for asking for a test and warn them if they fail it or fail to provide, then they get arrested.

Wouldn't over think it too much - just make sure you have the right justification to get them to provide a sample.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bensonby

Just don’t arrest them “for prompt and effective” or any of the other Code G considerations. It always makes me cringe when I see that. It has a preserved power of arrest and is not a s.24 PACE arrest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sceptre
On 26/07/2020 at 20:13, miffy said:

Pretty much this - you need to say that they are required to provide a specimen for analysis for one of the three reasons for asking for a test and warn them if they fail it or fail to provide, then they get arrested.

If you suspect they have alcohol or a drug in their body or are under the influence of a drug. If it was a procedural test following a moving traffic offence or RTC, they fail to cooperate and you don't have those reasonable grounds for suspicion then there's no power of arrest and you'd have to report them instead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
miffy
On 29/07/2020 at 22:40, Sceptre said:

If you suspect they have alcohol or a drug in their body or are under the influence of a drug. If it was a procedural test following a moving traffic offence or RTC, they fail to cooperate and you don't have those reasonable grounds for suspicion then there's no power of arrest and you'd have to report them instead. 

Where is the legislation behind the procedural test and reporting them? I haven't heard of that before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IrateShrike
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, miffy said:

Where is the legislation behind the procedural test and reporting them? I haven't heard of that before.

The preserved power of arrest for failing to cooperate with the preliminary test requires there to be reasonable grounds to suspect that the person has alcohol or a drug in their body.  This is not an arrest for an offence - it is in order to be able to take them to a place where a requirement for evidential specimens can be made.

Failing to cooperate with a preliminary test is also an offence under the RTA however the power of arrest is under S24 PACE like all other offences so would be dependent on the necessity test being met.  If the necessity test was met resulting in an arrest for that offence, there would still be no lawful grounds to make any requirement for evidential specimens at the station.

In other words - you can't begin an investigation into an offence under S4 / S5 / S5A following preliminary test refusal if you don't have reasonable grounds to suspect that subject has alcohol or drugs in their body.

Edited by IrateShrike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DodgeRam
On 29/07/2020 at 20:40, bensonby said:

Just don’t arrest them “for prompt and effective” or any of the other Code G considerations. It always makes me cringe when I see that. It has a preserved power of arrest and is not a s.24 PACE arrest.

I never knew that! Thanks for your input. I'll make sure to drop that on the custody sergeant on the next drink drive I bring in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DodgeRam
Posted (edited)
On 29/07/2020 at 22:40, Sceptre said:

If you suspect they have alcohol or a drug in their body or are under the influence of a drug. If it was a procedural test following a moving traffic offence or RTC, they fail to cooperate and you don't have those reasonable grounds for suspicion then there's no power of arrest and you'd have to report them instead. 

To be fair, I don't think there can be many sutustions in which a person refuses to provide a specimen at the roadside and you don't have enough grounds to suspect that they have alcohol or drugs in their system.

 

Maybe old Mrs Miggins has bumped her car and is physically unable to complete the test due to having half a lung left after smoking 40 a day for the last 60 years. But beyond that, I'm pretty confident that if someone refused to provide a sample I would be suspicious as to their reasoning and would perhaps consider that they could be trying to avoid the test due to having alcohol in their system.

 

Interesting little point of law though that many (including me) won't have known about I'm sure.

Edited by DodgeRam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sceptre
2 hours ago, miffy said:

Where is the legislation behind the procedural test and reporting them? I haven't heard of that before.

S6D(2) RTA here

(2)A constable may arrest a person without warrant if—

(a)the person fails to co-operate with a preliminary test in pursuance of a requirement imposed under section 6, and

(b)the constable reasonably suspects that the person has alcohol or a drug in his body or is under the influence of a drug.

1 minute ago, DodgeRam said:

To be fair, I don't think there can be many sutustions in which a person refuses to provide a specimen at the roadside and you don't have enough grounds to suspect that they have alcohol or drugs in their system.

Maybe old Mrs Miggins has bumped her car and is physically unable to complete the test due to having half a lung left after smoking 40 a day for the last 60 years. But beyond that, I'm pretty confident that if someone refused to provide a sample I would be suspicious as to their reasoning and would perhaps consider that they could be trying to avoid the test due to having alcohol in their system.

Interesting little point of law though that many (including me) won't have known about I'm sure.

There might well be - you require a specimen following a no-fault collision because it's your force's policy to, or because the Christmas drink drive campaign has started in July this year so they want all moving traffic offence stops to be tested, and the driver simply refuses because they don't want to or because they're scared of coronavirus. You might be suspicious as to their reasoning, and if you have the reasonable grounds for that suspicion as required by S6D that's fine.

As Irateshrike says, there's an argument for arresting them under S24 if it is necessary, however personally where at all possibly I would avoid trying to use a general power to broaden limits imposed by Parliament on a specific power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...