As the Government cracks down on loopholes in motoring legislation, Grania Langdon-Down looks at the work of road traffic lawyers


How much is your licence worth? At a time when the government is cracking down on loopholes to ensure offenders ‘do not escape justice’, that is the $64,000 question.



And it is a question that motoring law specialists are finding provides a lucrative answer to the ever-shrinking returns from general criminal legal aid work.



A string of cases involving celebrity drivers who have escaped bans after being accused of drink driving, speeding or other motoring offences have very publicly highlighted how ‘technical defences’ can expose failings by the police and prosecution.



However, provisions under the Road Safety Act 2006 came into force on 24 September, which are designed to tighten up loopholes in legislation. Car owners who refuse to name who was driving when a speeding offence was committed will face six penalty points on their licence, up from three. In cases of causing death by careless driving while under the influence of drink or drugs, unconscious drivers who have a blood test can be prosecuted in the same way as drivers who refuse a test while conscious. Prosecutors will also be able to introduce alternative verdicts, such as death by dangerous driving, if someone is acquitted of manslaughter or culpable homicide.



At the same time, the Crown Prosecution Service is consulting on its policy on bad drivers, while the House of Commons transport committee is pressing the government to introduce tougher measures against new drivers to combat the disproportionate number of people under 25 killed in collisions, including raising the driving age to 18, a zero-alcohol limit, an extension of the driving test to include motorways and a curfew on carrying young passengers late at night.



Jeanette Miller, senior partner of Manchester motoring law specialists Geoffrey Miller, says she has seen a ‘growing trend of decisions which are very much against technical defences – what the media love to call “loopholes”’.



Certainly, the media is quick to condemn the lawyers who get their celebrity clients back behind the wheel. Solicitor Nick Freeman, aka ‘Mr Loophole’, who has made his name acting for celebrity clients, recently successfully challenged a speeding case against ‘Top Gear’ host Jeremy Clarkson because of an incorrectly filled-in form.



In an interview last year (see [2006] Gazette, 18 May, 20), Mr Freeman responded to criticism that he was a classic hired-gun lawyer. ‘I completely [abhor] people who drink and drive and who drive like idiots,’ he said. ‘But as a lawyer I look at the case objectively and professionally. I am a lawyer and this is what I do – I don’t have any difficulty at all in reconciling the two.’



Ms Miller, who took over her father Geoffrey’s practice in 2005, says any suggestion that their work is morally ambivalent could be put to any general criminal practitioner. ‘Everyone is entitled to representation,’ she says. ‘I don’t feel I am helping keep criminals on the road. I feel that I am working as a lawyer in a democracy. It is a matter for Parliament to change the law rather than me not do my job.’



Brian Koffman is senior partner of criminal defence practice Koffman & Co, also in Manchester, which has a specialist motorist division called Motoring Offence Solicitors. ‘I feel very strongly that I have a responsibility to represent my clients’ interests and I do that by ensuring that the prosecution does its job properly,’ he says. ‘If people disapprove, they should go to the police and the CPS and say: “Why did you let them get away with it?”. We are people of integrity and we are officers of the court. We don’t mislead or tell lies. All we do is go to court and say this is the law.’



Andrew Dalton, senior partner of White Dalton Motorcycle Solicitors and its specialist division the Motor Defence Team, says the vast majority of his road traffic cases are speed camera challenges. The practice draws the line at drink drivers. ‘We price ourselves so we don’t have to take them on. We see the aftermath of what they do to motorcyclists and we have very little sympathy for them. If they are willing to pay the price, they will get a good job but it is not an area we want to practise in,’

he says.



When you ring the Motor Defence Team, a recorded message tells you to have any relevant documentation and ‘a credit or debit card’ available. Mr Dalton says the work is not especially lucrative and they have to have a filter. ‘Unless we ask people to pay for our time, we could have 30 or 40 inquiries with each person wanting half an hour’s advice and we would end up with four lawyers working full-time pro bono. We are not a charity.’



The first contact with Ms Miller’s firm is free. Her firm’s fees, set out on its website, then start at £1,000 for guilty pleas. Appeals start from £3,000, while dangerous driving cases start at £5,000 (all plus VAT) for the most straightforward case. She offers a PR service and will invoice ‘discreetly’ so no embarrassing details are revealed. However, Ms Miller also co-authored the Lawpack publication, Fight a motoring ticket, designed for drivers to represent themselves in court.



Concern that inexperienced practitioners are setting themselves up as experts prompted Ms Miller to set up the Association of Motor Offence Lawyers (AMOL) earlier this year. She explains: ‘This is an attractive area for general criminal practitioners in the light of the current legal aid reforms because it is privately paid work and far more lucrative than general crime. There are a number of solicitors who know what they are doing but there are also some who don’t.’



With six founding members, Ms Miller says they plan to open the association up to new members as long as they pass strict criteria to ensure they have the relevant experience.



David Sonn, principal with London firm Sonn MacMillan Walker, specialises in road traffic offences and fraud. He says: ‘The margins are pretty high because you are paid something approaching commercial rates. That’s why people purport to be experts when they aren’t. You have to know road traffic law inside out and you have to know the laws of evidence and have experience in predicting how things will unfold in magistrates’ courts.’



For Mr Koffman, developing this specialism means his firm is less reliant on legal aid, so they feel less vulnerable as a practice.

As a BMW driver, Ms Miller loves the work but says she is ‘not a petrol head’. A good motoring law specialist requires an ‘analytical mindset’, she says. ‘It is very technical and you need to understand the science behind the technology used in speeding cases to challenge them. I look at the general criminal practitioner as the GP, whereas the motoring specialist is the consultant.’



The attraction of the job is the client contact – ‘and most of the time we win, which is very nice. You always have to remain professional, but there have been occasions when somebody’s actions have shocked me. I have had words with certain clients, repeat offenders, but it doesn’t happen often. Most people learn their lesson.’



Mr Sonn, AMOL’s chair of ethics and professional conduct, drives a Mini and is not ‘particularly keen on cars’. The attraction for him is that many of the issues are complicated. ‘Mastering them and applying them to beat the system gives you an intellectual buzz,’ he says.



The competitive element also appeals to Mr Koffman, one of AMOL’s founding members. ‘I love the work,’ he says. ‘I have a very competitive nature and a gift of the gab, and I enjoy getting on my feet. This is not a specialism for people who dabble in it. You need to know the law, have good preparation skills, good advocacy skills and good personal skills with the client.’



Mr Dalton, who started out as a motorcycle courier, is driven by his enthusiasm for motorbikes, as are several of his colleagues. Also a founding member of AMOL, he rides a BMW R1200GS, the bike made famous by actor Ewan McGregor’s ‘Long Way Round’ adventure. He had planned to join the Royal Marines but broke his ankle in a motorbike accident. ‘I saw a local solicitor and formed the view that he wasn’t very bright or effective but seemed to be making a good living and I thought, I could do this,’ he says.



He qualified as a barrister in 1993, before going on to qualify as a solicitor in 1997 when he set up his Leighton Buzzard practice, establishing the Motor Defence Team in 2004. ‘My interest in this area of work started when I found myself on the receiving end of two fixed penalty notices in a fortnight,’ he says. ‘When I looked through the rules, I found them remarkably easy to challenge.’



He highlights a new development involving identity theft and the cloning of number plates. ‘It was rare five years ago but it is now rife in London and affects one in ten of the cases I deal with,’ he says.



‘One of my clients, who has a Mitsubishi pick-up truck, got 60 congestion charge notices. When we saw the photograph it showed a “pimped-up” version – my client’s is a working vehicle held together by bailer twine which hasn’t been out of Buckinghamshire.’



Grania Langdon-Down is a freelance journalist