The magistrates’ court can be a place of stern retribution for wrongdoers.

And those accused of offending in ‘mechanically propelled vehicles’ make up by far the majority of defendants listed on the daily court sheet.

But while the Bench will deal robustly with the man caught doing 137mph on the M1, or the driver zooming down the M62 at 92mph, there is mercy for ‘totters’ who can prove exceptional hardship (EH).

Here are recent cases where Bradford and Keighley Magistrates decided not to ban men and women from Bradford and beyond who had racked up 12 points on their licences.

All defendants who successfully fight a ban cannot use the same argument again for three years.

  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: EH granted on basis of supporting mother and mother-in-law.
  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: Diagnosed with PTSD 6 years ago. Loss of licence would affect family members. ‘If can’t drive, would be back where I was.’ Have to go to a debt management company.
  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: Single parent loss of licence would detrimentally affect income and financial effect on self and child. Loss of licence would detrimentally affect defendant’s mental health.
  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: Exceptional Hardship would be caused to wife and daughter who would lose their home if you were to be disqualified as there would be a loss of employment. You are the main income provider and without that income the household costs could not be sustained as well as the loan repayments which are secured on the family home.
  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: Loss of employment. Impact on family. Mother in ill health and needs to drive to take her regularly to hospital and care for her.
  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: Loss of employment. Defendant recently released from prison would be unable to find employment.
  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: Satisfied of the impact on the business, especially needs vehicle to carry equipment and difficulties this would have on family financial circumstances, together with impact on the children.
  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: EH granted on the basis that he will lose his business, the effect on his employee and risk to home.
  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: Loss of employment. Business would be disrupted if defendant could not work. Defendant only person working in family and wife and 3 children suffer if defendant lost job. Would be unable to pay mortgage.
  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: Loss of licence would lead to loss of income which would cause exceptional hardship to the children of the family and result in loss of accommodation.
  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: Loss of employment and severe financial impact on family.
  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: Would result in loss of employment and would impact greatly on caring duties provided to elderly mother.
  • No totting disqualification. Mitigating circumstances: Exceptional Hardship: Loss of employment and impact on co-director and vulnerable clients. Cause financial hardship to self.