Drink Drving
My husband was arrested for dink driving first offence after a clean license, we didn't know which way to turn, we looked up representation and came across Kent traffic law, we called and within an hour Sunil called back and my husband had a free 45 minute call where all circumstances of the arrest were discussed, he advised as my husband was three times over the limit it was a serious offence and he would realistically be looking at a minimum of
2 and a 1/2 years ban, fine and community service. When we looked around and saw Sunil was a barrister and wanted the best to face as small a ban as possible so my husband wouldn't loose his job, I checked the barristers register and all was fine full member and listed. We were advised of the price and told we would meet in a hotel reception area 20 minutes from home, as an overly cautious person I felt slightly unsure of handing over the money before meeting Sunil, but I was so very wrong as Sunil arrived early and he controlled the meeting by asking all necessary relevant questions advising us when we cut in with irrelevant information, he explained the judge doesn't know my husband and needed a brief ideas of his life and commitments, he explained he was building a picture of my husband and the situation to give him the best outcome he could, on court day we were advised by Sunil he would arrive early and speak with the prosecution and probation officer as my husband had a serious motorbike accident in the past and finds it painful to do physical activities or stand for long we then had the opportunity to see the probation officer before we entered court and she suggested an alcohol tag as my husband had admitted alcohol was a problem in his life. We had already been attending AA from the day he got arrested so that was a perfect option for us, thus without increasing his fine it just reiterated his commitment to attending AA. Sunil spoke to the court about my husband his good character, his clean license, his distance to work, travel time, length of employment even going back to saying he left schoolband went straight into a job, factors i would not have thought about mentioning, but Sunil really knew the questions to ask us that were relevant making us more relaxed and confident in his ability. never advising the court of what he wanted just suggesting it was the courts decision but,if the court could please bear in mind all the previous factors and the impact on how he would be affected by his sentence. Sunil stuck to all relevant facts and when the court came back after 10 minutes they advised they were issuing a 12 month ban YES 12 MONTHS BAN which could be reduced to 9 MONTHS ban if the TTC course was completed. ( not available for everyone only if the court thinks its suitable, again Sunil suggested the course may be an option but thankfully the court agreed. My husband was given the alcohol tag for 4 months and a fine and costs of less than £800 total. WHAT A RESULT!!!!!! Trust this guy he really is the BEST.
Reply from KentTrafficLaw
You have kindly set out a fairly full and accurate account of what transpires when my services are engaged. Firstly, I take the time to ensure that I understand the caller’s situation. I give ‘provisional guidance’ not legal advice during that call. If it is clear that I can help I quote fixed fees. We meet in order for me to take detailed instructions from the client both as to the offence and as to his or her background. (I have recently learned that some solicitors’ firms take instructions by questionnaire! Others have a telephone or virtual meeting. I consider that there is no substitute for an in-person meeting). At the meeting I give formal legal advice as to the range of sentencing options. I also advise the client at this stage if any steps should be taken prior to the hearing date in order to improve sentencing prospects.
On the day of the hearing I personally attend to represent the client. (However, solicitors make prolific use of agents, such as junior barristers or local solicitors, to represent their clients so that, frequently, clients are represented by lawyers they have not met before. I consider this unsatisfactory. This is why I attend personally). I usually arrange with the client to meet at court early in order to answer any last minute questions and to ensure that we are completely ready for the hearing.
As a senior barrister I have decades of experience of oral advocacy. I use that experience to present the most persuasive plea of mitigation to ensure that the client receives the best outcome his or her circumstances will allow. In your husband’s case he had very good mitigation which the court accepted in full. It is very unusual for the court to depart from the sentencing guidelines but in this case they did just that! This is why the court felt able to literally give the shortest disqualification allowed by law. I was really pleased for him as this gives your husband the best chance of retaining his employment.
In so far as fixed date court cases, such as this one, are concerned I only take the case if I can see it through personally from start to finish as I believe this gives the client the best chance of the most favourable outcome. There are no guarantees but, fortunately, this is what happened in your husband’s case.
Thank you very much for your review.