DR61 Conviction Offence Code

What Is A DR61 Offence?

The official DVLA definition for the DR61 endorsement code is: “Refusing to give permission for analysis of a blood sample that was taken without consent due to incapacity in circumstances other than driving or attempting to drive”. This situation most commonly occurs following a road traffic accident where an individual, who was not driving, is found incapacitated and is taken to hospital.

The legal foundation for this offence is found in Section 7A of the Road Traffic Act 1988. This law creates a two-stage process. It allows the police, under very specific circumstances, to request that a healthcare professional take a blood sample from an incapacitated person without their consent to preserve evidence. However, the law provides a crucial safeguard: that sample cannot be analysed until the person has regained their capacity and has given their explicit permission. The DR61 offence is committed at this second stage, when permission for the laboratory analysis is refused without a reasonable excuse.

How Does A DR61 Offence Differ From Other Motoring Offences?

Understanding the precise nature of the charge against you is the first step in building a defence. The DR61 code is often confused with other, more common, “failure to provide” offences.

The Difference Between DR61 and DR31

Both offences stem from the same unique situation: a blood sample is taken during a period of incapacity, and permission to analyse it is later refused. However, the law distinguishes between the driver and other persons involved in the incident. The DR31 offence carries a variable penalty of 3 to 11 points, while the DR61 carries a fixed, high penalty of 10 points. This distinction is critical for the police investigation and for the potential sentence you may face.

The Difference Between DR61 and Failing To Provide (DR30)

A DR30 charge relates to an active failure to cooperate with the testing procedure itself. For example, not blowing into a breathalyser correctly or refusing to allow a blood sample to be taken. In contrast, a DR61 case begins passively; the sample is already in the possession of the police. The offence is the subsequent refusal to allow that sample to be tested. This highlights the unique procedural nature of a DR61 allegation.

What Are The Penalties For A DR61 Conviction?

A conviction for a DR61 offence results in 10 penalty points on your driving licence, an endorsement that remains on your record for 11 years, and you may also face a significant fine, a driving disqualification, and in some cases, a community order.

The penalties for a DR61 are deliberately severe. The legal system views the refusal to allow analysis as a serious attempt to obstruct a police investigation, and the sentence reflects this. The consequences are designed to be a strong deterrent and are comparable to those for drink driving itself.

How Many Penalty Points Will I Receive For A DR61?

You will receive 10 penalty points.

This is a fixed penalty, not a range. Receiving 10 points is a serious matter. If you have any existing valid points on your licence, a DR61 conviction will almost certainly trigger a “totting-up” disqualification. A totting-up ban is imposed automatically when a driver accumulates 12 or more penalty points within any three-year period.

How Long Does A DR61 Endorsement Stay On A Driving Licence?

The DR61 endorsement code must stay on your driving record for 11 years from the date of the conviction.

This is one of the longest endorsement periods in UK law, reserved for the most serious motoring offences. For the entire 11-year period, the conviction will be visible on your driving record. This will have a substantial and long-lasting impact on your car insurance premiums, as insurers will view you as a high-risk driver.

Can I Be Disqualified From Driving For A DR61 Offence?

Yes, a court can impose a discretionary driving disqualification for a DR61 offence, and a ban is mandatory if the 10 points lead you to accumulate 12 or more points under the totting-up system.

Even if the 10 points do not result in a totting-up ban, a judge still has the discretion to disqualify you from driving. The court will consider the specific circumstances of your case when making this decision. If you do face a totting-up ban, it is for a minimum of six months unless an “exceptional hardship” argument can be successfully made. Presenting such an argument requires specialist legal expertise.

The table below shows how the DR61 penalty compares to other related offences.

What Is The Legal Process That Leads To A DR61 Charge?

The procedure leading to a DR61 allegation is a strict sequence of legal and medical checks. A failure by the police or healthcare professionals to follow this procedure correctly at any stage can invalidate the entire process and provide grounds for a defence.

When Can Police Request A Blood Sample From An Incapacitated Person?

The police can request a blood sample if you have been involved in an accident, they believe you are incapacitated and unable to give valid consent, and a doctor confirms that taking a sample would not be harmful to your health.

This power originates from the Police Reform Act 2002. It is not a power the police can use lightly. The legal test for incapacity is specific; it requires that the person is unable to understand the nature of the request, the reasons for it, and the consequences of refusal. It is the police constable’s responsibility to assess this, but this assessment can be challenged.

What Is The Role Of A Doctor Or Healthcare Professional?

A healthcare professional (HCP) takes the blood sample but is not required to do so. They must first satisfy themselves that you lack capacity and, crucially, your treating doctor must not object on the grounds that it would interfere with your proper medical care.

The HCP has a professional and ethical duty of care. While they are assisting a police investigation, their patient’s wellbeing remains their priority. Guidance from the British Medical Association makes it clear that an HCP can refuse to take a sample if it is medically inadvisable or if the patient physically resists. The role of the doctor in charge of your immediate care is also critical; they are limited to objecting only if taking the sample would be “prejudicial to the proper care and treatment of the patient”. An expert solicitor will examine whether these medical protocols were correctly followed.

Why Is My Permission Needed If The Sample Was Already Taken?

UK law protects individuals from having their bodily samples tested without consent. While the law permits the taking of a sample in an emergency to preserve evidence, it strictly forbids the analysis of that sample until you have regained capacity and given your explicit permission.

This is a fundamental safeguard in the Road Traffic Act 1988. Once you are deemed to have capacity again, a police officer must formally inform you that a sample was taken and then require your permission for it to be sent to a laboratory for testing. They must also warn you that failing to give permission without a reasonable excuse is a criminal offence. Your response to this specific, formal request is the central event that determines whether a DR61 offence has been committed.

Can I Defend Against A DR61 Allegation?

An allegation of DR61 is not an automatic conviction. The law recognises that there can be valid reasons for a person’s refusal to consent to the analysis of their blood. A successful defence often hinges on expert evidence and a forensic examination of the prosecution’s case.

What Is A “Reasonable Excuse” For Refusing Permission?

A reasonable excuse is a legitimate reason, supported by evidence, that demonstrates you had a physical or mental inability to provide consent, or that providing it would have posed a substantial risk to your health.

The courts have considered many arguments for what constitutes a “reasonable excuse”. A successful defence cannot be based on a simple preference or a misunderstanding of the law. It must be a genuine condition that is directly and causally linked to the refusal to give permission.

Medical Conditions and Phobias

A genuine and severe phobia of needles, known as trypanophobia, is a well-established potential reasonable excuse. To be successful, the defence must show that the phobia is so overwhelming that it rendered you incapable of giving rational consent at that moment.

Mental Health Conditions

Conditions such as severe anxiety, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), or a panic attack occurring at the time the police made their request can also constitute a reasonable excuse. The key is to demonstrate, with evidence, that your mental state at that specific time prevented you from making a considered and rational decision.

The Need for Expert Medical Evidence

A claim of a medical or mental health condition as a reasonable excuse must be supported by a report from a qualified medical expert. It is not enough to simply state that you have a condition. An expert report must be obtained to explain the nature of your condition and, most importantly, to establish a clear “causative link” between that condition and your failure to provide consent. Once a reasonable excuse is raised, the burden falls on the prosecution to prove that it is not a valid excuse. A strong, independent medical report is therefore essential.

What Is Not Considered A Reasonable Excuse?

The law does not grant you the right to delay the procedure to wait for legal advice to arrive at the hospital or police station. Similarly, disagreeing with the police’s reasons for investigating the accident or being in a difficult emotional state is not, by itself, considered a valid legal defence for refusing to cooperate with the lawful procedure.

Can Police Procedural Errors Form A Defence?

Yes, if the police failed to follow the strict legal procedure, any evidence obtained may be inadmissible, and the case against you could be dismissed.

The entire process, from the initial assessment of your capacity to the final request for permission, is governed by strict rules. Our role as specialist solicitors is to meticulously scrutinise every aspect of the police’s conduct. This includes checking that the statutory warning was given correctly, that all paperwork was completed properly, and that the medical protocols were adhered to. Any significant error can fatally weaken the prosecution’s case.