---

Sentencing for causing death by dangerous or careless driving

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) website defines driving offences as ranging “from ‘document’ offences, for example when a person fails to produce a copy of their driving licence or other documents, to cases involving the death of another person.”

Driving offences are covered in section 3 of the House of Commons Library paper on Road Safety.

A petition, started by a constituent of Cardiff West, is calling for changes to sentencing for deaths caused by careless driving and has gained eleven thousand signatures. The petition is specifically calling for:

• Automatic licence revocation following serious traffic incidents
• Longer prison terms for drivers who cause death or serious injury through carelessness
• Mandatory reassessment and vetting before any return to driving 
• A review of current sentencing guidelines for repeat traffic offenders

Dangerous and careless driving

The offence of dangerous driving under The Road Traffic Act 1988 is committed when someone’s driving falls far below the standard expected of a competent and careful driver, and it would be obvious that driving in that way would be dangerous. Some typical examples from court cases are:

• speeding
• drink/drug driving
• driving when unfit (potentially due to consumption of legal medication)
• the driver being avoidably and dangerously distracted, for example by using a phone or lighting a cigarette

The offence of driving without due care and attention (careless driving) under section 3 of the RTA 1988 is committed when the defendant’s driving falls below the standard expected of a competent and careful driver. Some examples of careless driving are:

• overtaking on the inside (the left)
• driving too close to another vehicle
• driving through a red light by mistake
• dazzling other drivers with un-dipped headlights

Prison terms for drivers who cause death or serious injury through careless driving

The current guidelines for motoring offences are listed on the Sentencing Council website, including the guidelines for causing death by dangerous driving and causing death by careless driving. The Sentencing Council also provides information on the powers available to courts to order a driving disqualification.

The maximum penalty for causing death by careless driving is five years' imprisonment with a mandatory minimum period of disqualification of twelve months.

The maximum penalty for the offence of causing death by dangerous driving is life imprisonment with a mandatory minimum period of disqualification of 5 years.

For offences committed before 28 June 2022, prior to the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, the sentencing guidelines will be different. Section 2 of the House of Commons Library paper Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill: Part 5 Road Traffic (2021) explains the process by which sentencing for these offences was reviewed and changed.

Automatic licence revocation following serious traffic incidents

For serious offences like dangerous driving or causing injury/death by driving, courts typically impose a driving disqualification (ban) rather than an automatic revocation of a licence. A ban temporarily stops someone from driving and may require the offender to reapply to the DVLA to get their licence back.

New drivers (within their first 2 years of passing a practical test) who have accumulated 6 or more penalty points from an incident or series of offences, will have their licence automatically revoked by the DVLA under the Road Traffic (New Drivers) Act 1995.

Mandatory reassessment before returning to driving

If a licence has been revoked for careless or dangerous driving, then reaching the end of the ban would not automatically restore the full licence. An offender would be required to pass an extended driving test (which is longer and more rigorous than a standard practical test) as well as the standard theory test.

Sentencing guidelines

Sentencing guidelines are issued by the independent Sentencing Council. It is responsible for developing sentencing guidelines, monitoring their use and assessing their impact on sentencing practice. The requirement for the Sentencing Council to prepare sentencing guidelines is set out in legislation.

The purpose of guidelines is to help ensure that judges and magistrates take a consistent approach to sentencing. Legislation states that the courts must follow any relevant guideline when sentencing, unless it is contrary to the interests of justice to do so.

Legislation sets maximum sentences for offences. Guidelines provide guidance on the factors the court should take into account when deciding on a sentence within that maximum. As the Sentencing Council explains, guidelines “set out different levels of sentence based on the harm caused to the victim and how blameworthy the offender is (referred to in the guidelines as 'culpability')”.

The Sentencing Council provides an explanation of the steps a court goes through when using a guideline.

• The first step is to determine the offence category by assessing the offender’s culpability and the harm caused or intended.
• The guideline provides a starting point and category range for each offence category. At the second step, the court will consider whether any adjustment upwards or downwards from the starting point is necessary to reflect any aggravating or mitigating factors relating to the context of the offence and to the offender. An offender’s previous convictions is one of the factors considered, as required by legislation. The court will reach a provisional sentence usually within the range given in the guideline for the offence.
• The court will then consider other matters such as whether the offender pleaded guilty to the offence before deciding on the sentence.

A court is required by legislation to give reasons for, and explain the effect of, a sentence.

Review of guidelines

The Sentencing Council reviews and updates existing guidelines. It has published its criteria for developing and reviewing guidelines which include the following factors:

• the Lord Chancellor or the Court of Appeal formally requests the review of sentencing for a particular offence, category of offence or category of offender and the Council considers that the production or revision of one or more guidelines is justified.
• Existing guideline(s) have become significantly out of date because ofamendments to legislation or other external factors.
• There is evidence (from the Council’s own research or evaluations, interested groups or other sources) of issues relating to sentencing that the Council considers could be addressed by the development or revision of one or more guidelines