The PET Form and IDPC

[CaseDismissed]

I was looking at what happened in my case versus what I can see online in other cases, and even from a search of this forum I can see discussion of the IDPC. There is another important form, and I wish I had known about it, as it ultimately led me to "sniff" my way to victory in my own trial. I cannot see this form mentioned in the Magistrates' Court guide at https://www.drinkdriving.org/drink_driving_magistrates_court_guide.php, or even in a forum search.

The above-mentioned guide doesn't even mention the IDPC. In my case, I received the IDPC from the duty solicitor on the day of the first hearing, and I wasn't able to scrutinise it properly on my mobile phone.

The PET Form (Preparation for Effective Trial)

The PET form is used by the court, the prosecutor, and your legal representative to establish the issues in the case and schedule future hearings. If you have been charged and are going to a Magistrates' Court in England or Wales, you will normally have to complete this form.

It requires you to:

Indicate your plea:
Guilty or Not Guilty.

State disputed issues:
If you plead not guilty, you must specify exactly why (e.g. challenging the breathalyser calibration, post-incident drinking, or disputing who was driving).

Provide case management details:
Information regarding witness availability and any special measures needed.

Why the PET Form Matters in Drink Driving Cases

If you plead not guilty to a drink or drug driving charge, your solicitor can use the PET form to build a strong foundation for your defence.

Key functions include:

Detailing legal issues: Clearly stating your defence (e.g. procedural failures by the police, medical conditions, or "hip-flask" post-incident consumption).

Requesting evidence: Formally requesting that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) disclose vital evidence such as body-worn video (BWV) footage, custody records, and breathalyser calibration logs.

Case management: Agreeing deadlines for both sides to share evidence, which can sometimes result in charges being discontinued or dismissed if the prosecution fails to comply.

I hope that anyone else facing a first hearing and wondering what happens will be able to better understand the process (IDPC, PET form) and seek legal assistance where appropriate.

My suspicion is that many people who may not have had a strong defence go on to spend large amounts of money without realistic prospects of success. Perhaps a free consultation with a solicitor could have helped set their expectations at an earlier stage.

 

[pb3010]

I was looking at what happened in my case versus what I can see online in other cases, and even from a search of this forum I can see discussion of the IDPC. There is another important form, and I wish I had known about it, as it ultimately led me to "sniff" my way to victory in my own trial. I cannot see this form mentioned in the Magistrates' Court guide at https://www.drinkdriving.org/drink_driving_magistrates_court_guide.php, or even in a forum search.

The above-mentioned guide doesn't even mention the IDPC. In my case, I received the IDPC from the duty solicitor on the day of the first hearing, and I wasn't able to scrutinise it properly on my mobile phone.

The PET Form (Preparation for Effective Trial)

The PET form is used by the court, the prosecutor, and your legal representative to establish the issues in the case and schedule future hearings. If you have been charged and are going to a Magistrates' Court in England or Wales, you will normally have to complete this form.

It requires you to:

Indicate your plea:
Guilty or Not Guilty.

State disputed issues:
If you plead not guilty, you must specify exactly why (e.g. challenging the breathalyser calibration, post-incident drinking, or disputing who was driving).

Provide case management details:
Information regarding witness availability and any special measures needed.

Why the PET Form Matters in Drink Driving Cases

If you plead not guilty to a drink or drug driving charge, your solicitor can use the PET form to build a strong foundation for your defence.

Key functions include:

Detailing legal issues: Clearly stating your defence (e.g. procedural failures by the police, medical conditions, or "hip-flask" post-incident consumption).

Requesting evidence: Formally requesting that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) disclose vital evidence such as body-worn video (BWV) footage, custody records, and breathalyser calibration logs.

Case management: Agreeing deadlines for both sides to share evidence, which can sometimes result in charges being discontinued or dismissed if the prosecution fails to comply.

I hope that anyone else facing a first hearing and wondering what happens will be able to better understand the process (IDPC, PET form) and seek legal assistance where appropriate.

My suspicion is that many people who may not have had a strong defence go on to spend large amounts of money without realistic prospects of success. Perhaps a free consultation with a solicitor could have helped set their expectations at an earlier stage.

Thank you for sharing the info. First hearing on thu and still unsure of plea. Need the driving licence for a few more mths before moving abroad

 

[CaseDismissed]

I wrote the snippet below in the thread of someone else but it could be very useful together with the ^^^ information about the PET and IDPC. I hope someone going to trial finds this useful.

In hindsight, I would obtain my IDPC from the CPS right now by emailing them, your Court Admin will be able to give you the CPS details. If you can pay them a visit and see the court this will ease your nerves on the day of your actual hearing. I was given the IDPC on the day by the duty solicitor after being told by Court Admin to wait for day of court. This meant I could not read the 20 plus pages properly on my phone.

What does your MG04 and MG05 say? The documents the MG04 and MG05, are critical components of your police and prosecution file.

The MG04 is the official Charge Sheet. It is the formal record showing exactly what crime the police have accused you of committing. It will detail:

*The exact wording of the drink driving offence under the Road Traffic Act 1988.
*The exact date, time, and location where you were stopped or caught.
*Your precise breath, blood, or urine reading (which you noted is 6 times the limit).
*Your bail conditions (if any) and the command to appear at court.

The MG05 is the Case Summary. This is the most crucial document for you and your solicitor to read before pleading guilty. It is a narrative written by the arresting officer that explains the entire story of your arrest to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the Magistrates.

It will detail:

*The Reason for the Stop: Why the police noticed you (e.g., erratic driving, a collision, a broken headlight, or an anonymous tip).
*Your Demeanour: How you acted when stopped (e.g., slurred speech, glazed eyes, unsteady on your feet, argumentative, or fully cooperative).
*The Procedure: Details of your roadside breath test and the subsequent evidential breath machine test at the police station.
*Aggravating Features: Any factors that will make the sentence worse, such as carrying passengers, driving at high speed, or causing an accident.
*Your Interview: A summary of what you said if you were formally interviewed, or any significant statements you blurted out while being arrested

Can't remember where this was but it freaked me out (and I almost fainted). It stated Anticipated plea mine said "Guilty", as they thought it was an easy win for them

Why Checking These Documents Matters
When you receive your IDPC, you and the duty solicitor must check the MG05 specifically for factual accuracy and procedural errors. In my case (Case discontinued by CPS) the Police had done a copy pasta, as the description did not match the location (I wish I pointed this out in court to Magistrates), and they had dramatised quite a bit (glazed eyes, unsteady on feet) probably copying from other cases.

The initial charge in my case was drunk in charge then crossed out and driving excess alcohol written. One of the magistrates noticed this but CPS insisted on "driving excess alcohol".

I found the Duty Solicitor not as helpful in my situation because they gave me very brief help (I was not facing a potential prison term) and it was my own homework before that enabled me to tell the Magistrates why I was pleading not guilty. If you are likely to face prison, then you may qualify for legal aid and the Duty Solicitor will represent you at trial.

 

[Luna2000]

Juist one t

I wrote the snippet below in the thread of someone else but it could be very useful together with the ^^^ information about the PET and IDPC. I hope someone going to trial finds this useful.

In hindsight, I would obtain my IDPC from the CPS right now by emailing them, your Court Admin will be able to give you the CPS details. If you can pay them a visit and see the court this will ease your nerves on the day of your actual hearing. I was given the IDPC on the day by the duty solicitor after being told by Court Admin to wait for day of court. This meant I could not read the 20 plus pages properly on my phone.

What does your MG04 and MG05 say? The documents the MG04 and MG05, are critical components of your police and prosecution file.

The MG04 is the official Charge Sheet. It is the formal record showing exactly what crime the police have accused you of committing. It will detail:

*The exact wording of the drink driving offence under the Road Traffic Act 1988.
*The exact date, time, and location where you were stopped or caught.
*Your precise breath, blood, or urine reading (which you noted is 6 times the limit).
*Your bail conditions (if any) and the command to appear at court.

The MG05 is the Case Summary. This is the most crucial document for you and your solicitor to read before pleading guilty. It is a narrative written by the arresting officer that explains the entire story of your arrest to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the Magistrates.

It will detail:

*The Reason for the Stop: Why the police noticed you (e.g., erratic driving, a collision, a broken headlight, or an anonymous tip).
*Your Demeanour: How you acted when stopped (e.g., slurred speech, glazed eyes, unsteady on your feet, argumentative, or fully cooperative).
*The Procedure: Details of your roadside breath test and the subsequent evidential breath machine test at the police station.
*Aggravating Features: Any factors that will make the sentence worse, such as carrying passengers, driving at high speed, or causing an accident.
*Your Interview: A summary of what you said if you were formally interviewed, or any significant statements you blurted out while being arrested

Can't remember where this was but it freaked me out (and I almost fainted). It stated Anticipated plea mine said "Guilty", as they thought it was an easy win for them

Why Checking These Documents Matters
When you receive your IDPC, you and the duty solicitor must check the MG05 specifically for factual accuracy and procedural errors. In my case (Case discontinued by CPS) the Police had done a copy pasta, as the description did not match the location (I wish I pointed this out in court to Magistrates), and they had dramatised quite a bit (glazed eyes, unsteady on feet) probably copying from other cases.

The initial charge in my case was drunk in charge then crossed out and driving excess alcohol written. One of the magistrates noticed this but CPS insisted on "driving excess alcohol".

I found the Duty Solicitor not as helpful in my situation because they gave me very brief help (I was not facing a potential prison term) and it was my own homework before that enabled me to tell the Magistrates why I was pleading not guilty. If you are likely to face prison, then you may qualify for legal aid and the Duty Solicitor will represent you at trial.

I wrote the snippet below in the thread of someone else but it could be very useful together with the ^^^ information about the PET and IDPC. I hope someone going to trial finds this useful.

In hindsight, I would obtain my IDPC from the CPS right now by emailing them, your Court Admin will be able to give you the CPS details. If you can pay them a visit and see the court this will ease your nerves on the day of your actual hearing. I was given the IDPC on the day by the duty solicitor after being told by Court Admin to wait for day of court. This meant I could not read the 20 plus pages properly on my phone.

What does your MG04 and MG05 say? The documents the MG04 and MG05, are critical components of your police and prosecution file.

The MG04 is the official Charge Sheet. It is the formal record showing exactly what crime the police have accused you of committing. It will detail:

*The exact wording of the drink driving offence under the Road Traffic Act 1988.
*The exact date, time, and location where you were stopped or caught.
*Your precise breath, blood, or urine reading (which you noted is 6 times the limit).
*Your bail conditions (if any) and the command to appear at court.

The MG05 is the Case Summary. This is the most crucial document for you and your solicitor to read before pleading guilty. It is a narrative written by the arresting officer that explains the entire story of your arrest to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the Magistrates.

It will detail:

*The Reason for the Stop: Why the police noticed you (e.g., erratic driving, a collision, a broken headlight, or an anonymous tip).
*Your Demeanour: How you acted when stopped (e.g., slurred speech, glazed eyes, unsteady on your feet, argumentative, or fully cooperative).
*The Procedure: Details of your roadside breath test and the subsequent evidential breath machine test at the police station.
*Aggravating Features: Any factors that will make the sentence worse, such as carrying passengers, driving at high speed, or causing an accident.
*Your Interview: A summary of what you said if you were formally interviewed, or any significant statements you blurted out while being arrested

Can't remember where this was but it freaked me out (and I almost fainted). It stated Anticipated plea mine said "Guilty", as they thought it was an easy win for them

Why Checking These Documents Matters
When you receive your IDPC, you and the duty solicitor must check the MG05 specifically for factual accuracy and procedural errors. In my case (Case discontinued by CPS) the Police had done a copy pasta, as the description did not match the location (I wish I pointed this out in court to Magistrates), and they had dramatised quite a bit (glazed eyes, unsteady on feet) probably copying from other cases.

The initial charge in my case was drunk in charge then crossed out and driving excess alcohol written. One of the magistrates noticed this but CPS insisted on "driving excess alcohol".

I found the Duty Solicitor not as helpful in my situation because they gave me very brief help (I was not facing a potential prison term) and it was my own homework before that enabled me to tell the Magistrates why I was pleading not guilty. If you are likely to face prison, then you may qualify for legal aid and the Duty Solicitor will represent you at trial.

Just one thing. The Police do not need a reason to stop you. They can pull you over for a random check and if they are in uniform,, you must provoide them with your name, address and driving licence.

 

[CaseDismissed]

Juist one t


Just one thing. The Police do not need a reason to stop you. They can pull you over for a random check and if they are in uniform,, you must provoide them with your name, address and driving licence.

Hi,

This is from a defence point of view based around my case (cross-examination line) but may be useful in someone else's. There were two police officers who came over to me in my car parked on PRIVATE LAND. PC1 tried to use force and failed to open my car. PC2 was successful in smashing the glass. PC2 then said to me, "We did that to stop you driving for your own safety."

My phone records all of my movements and it did not show me making movement so this was the first question mark. The Police PC2 also told a family member that they had seen me in town. This contradicts what they wrote in their statements.

The justification according to the PC1 statement was a police code for drink driver reported.

PC1 was scheduled to appear in court as the only prosecution witness and I carefully dissected their statements with a fine-tooth comb, particularly when I looked at the Custody Record. They claimed to have saved the BWV and Custody procedure videos, which I asked the CPS for as I wanted to confirm exactly what MYSELF, PC1, and PC2 did.

One of the hints that there were irregularities was that "Drunk in Charge" was the initial charge by the PCs, but it was then crossed out to carry the more serious charge of "Driving with Excess Alcohol". This was queried by a magistrate on the day of the first hearing.

My next cross-examination question would have been given the state of my injuries, why wasn't I taken to hospital?

Guess what? Case Dismissed.

 

[CaseDismissed]

Actually Luna2000, in the UK, police generally cannot stop, search, or enter private land without a reason. Officers usually need reasonable grounds to suspect you are committing an offense, carrying prohibited items, or responding to an emergency.

This is why I'm preaching, know your case, know your case, know your case .....

 

[Luna2000]

Actually Luna2000, in the UK, police generally cannot stop, search, or enter private land without a reason. Officers usually need reasonable grounds to suspect you are committing an offense, carrying prohibited items, or responding to an emergency.

This is why I'm preaching, know your case, know your case, know your case .....

Drink Driving is actually one of the few offences where police CAN follow you onto private land. Also, if the general public has access to this land, e.g., a driveway, then this is still considered a highway and you can be arrested for drink driving, yes, even on your drive.

 

[CaseDismissed]

Why do you think the CPS dropped my case if they could have prosecuted me on private land secured behind a barrier that restricts public access? I was not in an ASDA or McDonald's car park. I remember driving this point to the Duty Solicitor who wanted me to fall on my sword and plead guilty.

In the UK, using "private land" as a defence under the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA) relies primarily on whether the land is considered a "road or other public place" and whether the public has unhindered access to it. If the land is strictly private and enclosed (e.g., restricted by locked gates or fences), many moving driving offences cannot be prosecuted.

BlackBeltBarrister has done a video on leading UK case law of R v Jones (Gwynamy) [2004] EWCA Crim 1981 and ther is also Fox v Chief Constable of Gwent [1985] AC 800, which specifically deal with the concept of police trespass and the revocation of an "implied licence" during a drink-driving investigation at a suspect's home.

When a driver explicitly tells the police to leave their house, the legal mechanics of a "failing to provide" charge shift dramatically under the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA) and the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE).

The Catch: Entry Powers vs. Road Traffic Requests

Whether a "failing to provide" charge sticks depends entirely on where the demand for the breath sample was made and what statutory power the police used to enter:

1. The Demand Was Made While Officers Were Trespassing
If the police followed the driver into their home, were told to leave, refused to do so, and then demanded a roadside breath test (under Section 6 of the RTA), the demand is unlawful.

• The Case Law Rule: In English law (Fox v Chief Constable of Gwent), a police officer cannot lawfully require a preliminary roadside breath test while they are acting as a trespasser on private property.
• The Defence: Because the initial request on the property was unlawful, any subsequent arrest is also unlawful. Consequently, if the driver is taken to the station and refuses to provide an evidential sample there, the charge of failing to provide a specimen (Section 7 RTA) will usually fail in court because the entire chain of arrest was built on an illegal trespass.

In the PET form there is a question for lawful arrest, ^^^^ is a good scenario.

---

 

[CaseDismissed]

This is a good snippet of information I posted earlier as I have seen someone ask about obtaining the evidence.

In terms of requesting the evidence, you have every right to see the prosecution’s case. You (or your solicitor) need to request the Initial Details of the Prosecution Case (IDPC). If self represented (like myself), I would attend court well in advance of the hearing, request the CPS details and ask for the IDPC to be emailed to you. This will give you valuable time.

For a failure to provide charge, you specifically need to look at:

The MGDDA manual guidance form: This is the step-by-step checklist the police must fill out while testing you. If they missed a procedural step or failed to give you the required statutory warning (that failing to provide is an offense), the case against you could collapse.

The printout from the breathalyzer: This will show the exact errors or reasons why the machine registered the samples as incomplete.

The CCTV footage: Bodycam or custody suite footage can prove if you were making a genuine, honest attempt to blow but were physically or mentally unable to do so.

Establishing a "Reasonable Excuse"

To defeat a failure to provide charge, you must prove you had a "reasonable excuse".

The court generally only accepts physical or mental inability:

Physical: Severe asthma, panic-induced hyperventilation, or low lung capacity.
Mental: Extreme panic, severe anxiety, or mental health trauma that physically locked up your ability to comply.

Note: General "stress" or being "scared" is usually rejected by courts unless it is backed up by medical records or an expert medical report.

I would be looking on Youtube and searching for "failure to provide charge", "Reasonable Excuse", "successful defences". I even saw a case of a guy successfully dismantling the Police (even though American there are tips you can use to cross examine the police in your own case). The algorithm has a habit of bringing stuff, this was useful in me identifying how to defeat the CPS in my own case.

This is a link for spotting Police mistakes (do some due diligence before coughing out any £££). Contrary to popular belief "Solicitors are not useless", I paid £0 but the free information/free Support from various defence Solicitors was worth its weight in gold.

https://www.jdspicer.co.uk/site/our-services/driving-offences-solicitors/drink-driving/mgdda-form/

 

[bananarama660]

I was wondering if anyone on here could give me any pointers on self representation? My daughter can't afford a solicitor and I'm assuming won't qualify for legal aid, although we'll apply anyway. She was charged with excess alcohol, but when the police arrived at the scene she wasn't in her car, and she didn't have the keys on her. A friend had them. An eyewitness said she drove the car 'at speed' 50m across a car park (which we're fairly certain is Private land, I've looked at all the relevant case law) but she says she didn't, however her memory is hazy. There's Ring doorbell footage of her sitting in the car but not of her driving. But one eyewitness is adamant. There were others on the scene who said she drove it, but none would go on record and give a statement or will be in court. We've received the IDPC and will look through that (although it took them months to send it, and I had to call the CPS 3 or 4 times).

 

[bananarama660]

I was wondering if anyone on here could give me any pointers on self representation? My daughter can't afford a solicitor and I'm assuming won't qualify for legal aid, although we'll apply anyway. She was charged with excess alcohol, but when the police arrived at the scene she wasn't in her car, and she didn't have the keys on her. A friend had them. An eyewitness said she drove the car 'at speed' 50m across a car park (which we're fairly certain is Private land, I've looked at all the relevant case law) but she says she didn't, however her memory is hazy. There's Ring doorbell footage of her sitting in the car but not of her driving. But one eyewitness is adamant. There were others on the scene who said she drove it, but none would go on record and give a statement or will be in court. We've received the IDPC and will look through that (although it took them months to send it, and I had to call the CPS 3 or 4 times).

Also worth noting it was an 09 reg 1 litre vehicle, which could t have got up to any kind of speed across 50m!