Case Study: Charge Dropped for Failing to Provide a Specimen (Client Cleared After Police Breach Code C of PACE)

Drug Driving

Overview: Arrest for Failing to Provide a Breath Sample

In early 2025, our client was arrested late at night following a routine stop by police. Officers alleged that he had refused to provide a preliminary roadside breath test, leading to his arrest on suspicion of drink driving.

At the station, he was booked in and directed to provide two evidential samples of breath under the Road Traffic Act 1988. When he was unable to do so, he was charged with failing to provide a specimen - an offence that carries an automatic 12-month driving disqualification and potential criminal record.

However, our client insisted he had never refused to cooperate and contacted M.A.J Law immediately upon his release.

How We Defended the Case

Our legal team began by requesting the Initial Details of the Prosecution Case (IDPC), including the MG5 summary and the MGDD/A breath procedure booklet. We also submitted urgent disclosure requests for:

  • Body Worn Video (BWV)

  • Custody Suite CCTV

  • Full custody record entries

Our goal was simple: to test the legality of the process, scrutinise the evidence, and expose any procedural errors that could undermine the charge. This type of in-depth analysis is crucial in failing to provide cases, and is often the deciding factor between conviction and acquittal.

Key Procedural Errors Identified

Upon close review, several major failings became apparent:

  • Failure to advise the client of their right to legal advice under Code C of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) 1984.

  • No statutory warning given, informing the client that a refusal without reasonable excuse could lead to prosecution.

  • Inconsistent record-keeping, including handwritten corrections within the MGDD/A booklet, suggesting confusion during the procedure.

Once the BWV and Custody CCTV footage were disclosed, they supported our client’s version of events. The video clearly showed the officer rushing through instructions, failing to confirm understanding, and mischaracterising the client’s behaviour as refusal.

These errors were not technicalities, they were critical breaches of PACE, and cast serious doubt on the legitimacy of the charge.

The Legal Test

Under Section 7(6) of the Road Traffic Act 1988, the prosecution must prove that a failure to provide a specimen was:

  • Deliberate, and

  • Without reasonable excuse

In this case, neither condition was met. The evidence suggested confusion and miscommunication - not intentional refusal.

Outcome at Court

At the first court hearing, we entered a not guilty plea and submitted a detailed skeleton argument setting out the breaches of procedure. The CPS prosecutor on the day was unfamiliar with the file and unable to counter our legal submissions.

The court ordered full disclosure of the missing material and required the CPS to respond to our challenges in writing.

Within weeks, the CPS discontinued the case entirely - likely recognising that the evidential threshold under the Full Code Test could not be met.

Our client was awarded a Defence Costs Order, meaning a portion of his legal fees will be reimbursed.

Related reading: How reliable are the test results for drink driving? 

Why Early Legal Advice Matters

Failing to provide a specimen is one of the most misunderstood motoring offences. Many individuals are prosecuted despite never refusing to comply. Anxiety, poor communication from officers, and medical issues can all contribute - but these are rarely investigated unless challenged by a specialist.

Had our client faced court without legal representation, it is likely he would have been disqualified and convicted.

Learn more: What happes if you fail to provide? 

Final Result

✅ Case dropped by CPS
✅ No conviction recorded
✅ No driving ban imposed
✅ Legal fees partially reimbursed

At M.A.J Law, we specialise in identifying the errors others miss. Whether it's a missing statutory warning or a flawed breath procedure, we build strong, evidence-based defences that get results.

Charged with failing to provide a specimen?
Don’t face it alone. Contact our team today for a free consultation.