Drink driving on private land

Associate
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
723
Location
Preston
Wife works at a holiday park and one of the guests was seen walking around the park drinking, then drove around the park with his kids in the back.

The manager phoned the police, they turned up and did very little, the guy was obviously worse for wear and was on camera driving but the police insisted as he wasn't on a public highway they couldn't arrest him.
I would have thought as its a busy park with kids and families about it might be private land but not in the sense say a farmer's field or someone's driveway.
Thoughts?
 
Soldato
Joined
28 Sep 2012
Posts
3,860
Location
Monterrey, Mexico
If it's an area the public have access to, then normal traffic laws apply. For example, if I owned a gated field, I could drink drive as much as I want inside the field, but if I was caught over the limit in Sainsbury's car park I'd be charged just the same as I would be on the public road.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
723
Location
Preston
If it's an area the public have access to, then normal traffic laws apply. For example, if I owned a gated field, I could drink drive as much as I want inside the field, but if I was caught over the limit in Sainsbury's car park I'd be charged just the same as I would be on the public road.

This is what I thought when the wife mentioned it so not sure why the police had an issue arresting him.

Why would the manager phone the police and not simply eject the idiot?

Would have been the obvious step to take next tbh :confused:
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Mar 2012
Posts
6,558
Why would the manager phone the police and not simply eject the idiot?

I imagine anybody who is prepared to drive their kids around a place with other people's kids roaming free while drunk isn't the most accepting of being told off and likely get irate about it.

Far easier to call people who are trained and able to deal with that sort of person.
 
Associate
Joined
7 Sep 2014
Posts
1,158
Roughly speaking regardless of it being private land if there is a public road or the public are there then it applies. If the public has no access the land it does not apply.
Again not to sound like a legal douche but that's not the law as I understand it. If access to the land is restricted (could even be a sign saying Private Property) then even if the public are there then it'd be difficult to enforce.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
723
Location
Preston
Sounds like the police may well have been mistaken then - I can't see any reason why they couldn't have done something about it. Might be worth a call to the local police station to confirm their reason for not intervening.

Having spoken to the wife they will be trying to get him off-site tomorrow once he has sobered up.
The police did go and see the guy and apparently the wife was driving :rolleyes: at this point they pointed out all the cameras and they shut up :D

Roughly speaking regardless of it being private land if there is a public road or the public are there then it applies. If the public has no access the land it does not apply.

I turned up after the police had gone as I was picking the wife up but I think a few staff questioned them as to why they couldn't do anything and they just said private property mate so we can't do anything other then have a word with him.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
723
Location
Preston
Again not to sound like a legal douche but that's not the law as I understand it. If access to the land is restricted (could even be a sign saying Private Property) then even if the public are there then it'd be difficult to enforce.

I would have to ask about any signage, but they won't stop people coming onsite as the bar and swimming pool are open to the public if they want to use them for a small fee.
Obviously they don't want every man and his dog turning up but this doesn't happen.
I suppose if the law is as you say then surely this puts the police in a tricky situation if he goes in his car again and hits someone/something?
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
12,712
Location
Manchester
For S5 RTA it needs to be "a road or a public place". It's doubtful it'd be a road but would be a public place.

DPP v Vivier (1991) found a caravan park to be a public place, so a holiday park would probably be included.

To be fair to the officers, it's not straight forward to know stated cases, so you could understand them not being sure. If they've not stopped the driver either, you can see why they've gone down alternate means.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 May 2007
Posts
3,220
Again not to sound like a legal douche but that's not the law as I understand it. If access to the land is restricted (could even be a sign saying Private Property) then even if the public are there then it'd be difficult to enforce.

That's the issue, how public it is and if the public are expected to be there but it is not clear cut.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Dec 2009
Posts
7,174
Again not to sound like a legal douche but that's not the law as I understand it. If access to the land is restricted (could even be a sign saying Private Property) then even if the public are there then it'd be difficult to enforce.

If land is publicly accessible for pedestrians i.e. unrestricted access then the highways act applies.

I'm quite sure it's as clear cut as that especially in terms of drunk whilst in charge of a motor vehicle.
 
Back
Top Bottom