Police and Car Keys

[Phil D. Rolls]

Someone was arguing that the police can come into a pub and if you have car keys they can arrest you. I say this is nonsense, and the keys have to be in the ignition. Anyone know where I can get a definitive answer on this?

[H18sry]

Someone was arguing that the police can come into a pub and if you have car keys they can arrest you. I say this is nonsense, and the keys have to be in the ignition. Anyone know where I can get a definitive answer on this?

If you are sitting/sleeping in any part of the car and you have the key's in your possession you are deemed to be in control of the car and therefore liable to arrest if you are over the limit .

But not in the pub :wink:

[Jack]

I’m not sure they cant come and get you; in the pub or in your house.

I think if the police have the usual reasonable grounds to think you have committed a driving offence, and in this case I presume drinking and driving is in some way involved, they can come and get you.

I suspect the keys would be an indication that the person had access to the vehicle but they'd need witnesses or evidence that the key person was driving.

[JimBHibees]

I’m not sure they cant come and get you; in the pub or in your house.

I think if the police have the usual reasonable grounds to think you have committed a driving offence, and in this case I presume drinking and driving is in some way involved, they can come and get you.

I suspect the keys would be an indication that the person had access to the vehicle but they'd need witnesses or evidence that the key person was driving.

Yep they would need people to have reported you in the car otherwise No IMO.

[Hillsidehibby]

My uncle was done for being over the limit beside his car with his keys in his pocket.

A good few years ago mind you. His advice is if you see them coming throw your keys away.

[Future17]

They could confiscate your keys if they had reasonable grounds to believe you were about to commit an offence, but couldn't arrest you (legally).

Mind you, this is the police we're talking about - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12732432

[Killiehibbie]

I always wondered what the legal position is if a lorry or motorhome driver is asleep in vehicle after drinking. Anybody know?

[Scouse Hibee]

Someone was arguing that the police can come into a pub and if you have car keys they can arrest you. I say this is nonsense, and the keys have to be in the ignition. Anyone know where I can get a definitive answer on this?


Nonsense, you could be in the pub having a soft drink :greengrin

[Sylar]

So I decide to walk into town and have a few beers whilst watching the football, leaving my car at home.

The police decide to do a quick sweep of the pub and find I have my keys (as ALL my keys are on the same keyring) on my, and my car is parked less than 2 miles away, outside my door.

They wouldn't have ANY right to remove my keys/car or take any legal action.

If my car was parked outside though and someone reported me as having driven to the pub or drinking heavily within (knowing the car was just outside), then I'd imagine they might have cause.

[JimBHibees]

So I decide to walk into town and have a few beers whilst watching the football, leaving my car at home.

The police decide to do a quick sweep of the pub and find I have my keys (as ALL my keys are on the same keyring) on my, and my car is parked less than 2 miles away, outside my door.

They wouldn't have ANY right to remove my keys/car or take any legal action.

If my car was parked outside though and someone reported me as having driven to the pub or drinking heavily within (knowing the car was just outside), then I'd imagine they might have cause.

Yep that is about right I reckon.

[Sir David Gray]

So I decide to walk into town and have a few beers whilst watching the football, leaving my car at home.

The police decide to do a quick sweep of the pub and find I have my keys (as ALL my keys are on the same keyring) on my, and my car is parked less than 2 miles away, outside my door.

They wouldn't have ANY right to remove my keys/car or take any legal action.

If my car was parked outside though and someone reported me as having driven to the pub or drinking heavily within (knowing the car was just outside), then I'd imagine they might have cause.

:agree: There's no way that you could be arrested or have your keys confiscated just for having them on you whilst you're in the pub.

As you say though, if your car was parked outside and someone had reported seeing you driving to the pub, they may question you because they would have reasonable suspicion that you would be driving home again after drinking alcohol.

Without physically seeing you driving your car and then subsequently breathalysing you, I don't see how it could be taken any further than that though as that would never stand up in court.

[Gatecrasher]

So I decide to walk into town and have a few beers whilst watching the football, leaving my car at home.

The police decide to do a quick sweep of the pub and find I have my keys (as ALL my keys are on the same keyring) on my, and my car is parked less than 2 miles away, outside my door.

They wouldn't have ANY right to remove my keys/car or take any legal action.

If my car was parked outside though and someone reported me as having driven to the pub or drinking heavily within (knowing the car was just outside), then I'd imagine they might have cause.

I have lost count of the amount of times i have driven into Bathgate only to get pished then got the train home and picked my car up the next evening. I wonder what they would say if searched on the night on the lash?

[Darth Hibbie]

Someone was arguing that the police can come into a pub and if you have car keys they can arrest you. I say this is nonsense, and the keys have to be in the ignition. Anyone know where I can get a definitive answer on this?

Basically both are wrong. The first point is just rubbish. Have a read at the road traffic act 1988 sec 4-7 and see what the powers of search and powers to seize keys are. That should answer that one for you.

Drunk in charge however is a bit ambiguous. Courts have found that they keys do not have to be in the ignition. Sleeping in the car whilst drunk and approaching the car whilst in possession of they keys have both been found as being in "charge" however the court would have to look at the circumstances of each case individually. In Charge and Driving are not the same thing.


I always wondered what the legal position is if a lorry or motorhome driver is asleep in vehicle after drinking. Anybody know?

I would emphasize that I used the word car rather than vehicle in those circumstances.


I have lost count of the amount of times i have driven into Bathgate only to get pished then got the train home and picked my car up the next evening. I wonder what they would say if searched on the night on the lash?

Absolutely nothing wrong with that and very sensible if you ask me.


They could confiscate your keys if they had reasonable grounds to believe you were about to commit an offence, but couldn't arrest you (legally).


Have a look at the Road Traffic Act in relation to seizure of keys or for powers of arrest if the police "think" you are about to commit an offence.

Hope that helps a bit. Drink freely with your car keys in your pocket just don't go walking towards your car :greengrin

[Future17]

They could confiscate your keys if they had reasonable grounds to believe you were about to commit an offence, but couldn't arrest you (legally).


Have a look at the Road Traffic Act in relation to seizure of keys or for powers of arrest if the police "think" you are about to commit an offence.

Hope that helps a bit. Drink freely with your car keys in your pocket just don't go walking towards your car :greengrin

Obviously the Road Traffic Act is a good starting place for this topic, but it doesn't tell the full story.

For starters, sections of the 1988 Act have been repealed and additional legislation has been introduced by the Road Traffic Act 1991 and other subsequent legislation. Most of the amendments and additions aren't relevant to this topic but some are - for example the rights of police constables to make arrests in certain circumstances.

Police powers of search and seizure are fairly wide-ranging so aren't just contained within one Act, even when the subject matter appears to be specific (i.e. cars and the Road Traffic Act).

Police tactics is the UK have seen officers confiscate car keys, in circumstances akin to what is being discussed, without making an arrest (although the reaction to the confiscation may lead to an arrest)!

Legislation which the police have relied on in these circumstances previously include the Police Reform Act 2002 (section 59) and the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (section 19) but there are others.

[Darth Hibbie]

Obviously the Road Traffic Act is a good starting place for this topic, but it doesn't tell the full story.

For starters, sections of the 1988 Act have been repealed and additional legislation has been introduced by the Road Traffic Act 1991 and other subsequent legislation. Most of the amendments and additions aren't relevant to this topic but some are - for example the rights of police constables to make arrests in certain circumstances.

In relation to drink driving the 1988 Act is still the relevant one and it has not changes. The powers of arrest there are very specific.

Police powers of search and seizure are fairly wide-ranging so aren't just contained within one Act, even when the subject matter appears to be specific (i.e. cars and the Road Traffic Act).

Powers of search without warrant include for firearms, drugs, weapons, stolen property. There is no power anywhere for a search for car keys

Police tactics is the UK have seen officers confiscate car keys, in circumstances akin to what is being discussed, without making an arrest (although the reaction to the confiscation may lead to an arrest)!

If you can point me in the direction of a credible example of this in Scotland I would be very interested in reading about it.

Legislation which the police have relied on in these circumstances previously include the Police Reform Act 2002 (section 59) and the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (section 19) but there are others.

The Police Reform Act has nothing to do with drink driving and I don't see how it can be seen as relevant to what is being discussed. PACE does not apply in Scotland

Some comments above. To my mind the legislation in relation to drink driving is pretty black and white with the exception if in charge.

[Bryson]

Last year i got my keys taken off me after a night out, was walking passed my car on the way home and went into to collect my house keys. The police seen me and took my car keys off me and had to collect them in morning at the police station. Thought I was going to get done for drink driving.

[Future17]

I wish you wouldn't make it so hard to reply with quote! :wink:


In relation to drink driving the 1988 Act is still the relevant one and it has not changes. The powers of arrest there are very specific.

It has changed, albeit slightly and not in relation to power of arrest, but we're not talking about powers of arrest, we're talking about search and seizure.


Powers of search without warrant include for firearms, drugs, weapons, stolen property. There is no power anywhere for a search for car keys.

Fair enough, that's not an exhaustive list, but it doesn't really matter as these are the reasons that can be given in order for a search to be carried out. Once carried out, if an officer finds an item or items which they believe are intended to be used in the commission of a crime, they can confiscate them.

I'll admit the definitions applied to this are loose (probably intentionally so) but have previously been used in the context of car keys in possession of someone under the influence of alcohol if the officer believes that person intends to drive the car while intoxicated.


If you can point me in the direction of a credible example of this in Scotland I would be very interested in reading about it.

See Bryson's post above. :greengrin

I will try and find other examples, although I'm not sure to what extent that kind of information is in the public domain (or rather the internet domain). :wink:


The Police Reform Act has nothing to do with drink driving and I don't see how it can be seen as relevant to what is being discussed. PACE does not apply in Scotland

Although the Police Reform Act doesn't relate specifically to drink driving, it can do and provides a police officer with the power to seize a vehicle where there are "reasonable grounds for believing that a motor vehicle has been used on any occasion in a manner falling within subsection (1)" which relates to breaches of section 3 or 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and the causing, or likelihood of causing, "alarm, distress or annoyance to members of the public".

Obviously this Act doesn't specifically have this situation in mind, but it has been quoted in similar circumstances in the past.

I'll give you your point about PACE though - I'm nice like that. :greengrin


To my mind the legislation in relation to drink driving is pretty black and white with the exception if in charge.

I would agree that the legislation relating to arrest and charge is pretty black and white, but the confiscation of keys is another matter.

[Darth Hibbie]

I wish you wouldn't make it so hard to reply with quote! :wink:

Sorry I will try harder :greengrin Hopefully this is better




For starters, sections of the 1988 Act have been repealed and additional legislation has been introduced by the Road Traffic Act 1991 and other subsequent legislation. Most of the amendments and additions aren't relevant to this topic but some are - for example the rights of police constables to make arrests in certain circumstances.





It has changed, albeit slightly and not in relation to power of arrest, but we're not talking about powers of arrest, we're talking about search and seizure.

Yes we were :greengrin What has changed in sections 4-7 of the RTA 1988?


Fair enough, that's not an exhaustive list, but it doesn't really matter as these are the reasons that can be given in order for a search to be carried out. Once carried out, if an officer finds an item or items which they believe are intended to be used in the commission of a crime, they can confiscate them.

Can you point me in the direction of this power. Police can seize items that provide evidence of a crime not that somebody "intends" to commit a crime (with the exception of conspiracy crimes)


I'll admit the definitions applied to this are loose (probably intentionally so) but have previously been used in the context of car keys in possession of someone under the influence of alcohol if the officer believes that person intends to drive the car while intoxicated.



See Bryson's post above. :greengrin

I will try and find other examples, although I'm not sure to what extent that kind of information is in the public domain (or rather the internet domain). :wink:


Ok how about I concede that something along those lines could of happened but there is no legal backing for it, and I would be making one major complaint



Although the Police Reform Act doesn't relate specifically to drink driving, it can do and provides a police officer with the power to seize a vehicle where there are "reasonable grounds for believing that a motor vehicle has been used on any occasion in a manner falling within subsection (1)" which relates to breaches of section 3 or 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and the causing, or likelihood of causing, "alarm, distress or annoyance to members of the public".

Obviously this Act doesn't specifically have this situation in mind, but it has been quoted in similar circumstances in the past.

Sec 3 refers to careless driving and sec 34 driving elsewhere than on a road. The police reform act is a fantastic piece of legislation when used properly and is intended to target your boy racer types. The seizing of vehicles is not the same as seizing keys


I'll give you your point about PACE though - I'm nice like that. :greengrin

:greengrin Being nice on hibs.net, it will never catch on :greengrin



I would agree that the legislation relating to arrest and charge is pretty black and white, but the confiscation of keys is another matter.

It should be black and white though because it does not exist.

If I had had a couple of drinks and the Police took my car keys off me for the only reason being I was drunk and then I had to go and collect my keys from a police office then I would going straight to my lawyer.

[Future17]

Sorry I will try harder :greengrin Hopefully this is better

I appreciate it. :greengrin





Yes we were :greengrin What has changed in sections 4-7 of the RTA 1988?

OK, I worded that badly. :greengrin

What I meant was that the confiscation of keys (search and seizure) isn't dealt with under powers detailed in the RTA, it is other acts which are relevant as these are the ones that have been used to justify the confiscation of keys in the past.


Can you point me in the direction of this power. Police can seize items that provide evidence of a crime not that somebody "intends" to commit a crime (with the exception of conspiracy crimes)

Without going in to specifically what section of what Act has been quoted in every circumstance and why, an example scenario I am aware of which has occured in the past goes something like:

Police: Are you a drunk man?

Drunk Man: Yes

Police: Do you own a car which is parked nearby and do you have the keys in your possession?

Drunk Man: Yes

Police: I would like you to relinquish the keys to your car to me. They will be held at (police station) overnight where you can collect them tomorrow.

Drunk Man: Yes/No

Police: (If yes to above) Thank you (no issue as keys were provided voluntarily).
(If no to above) As you are refusing to surrender the keys to your car, I have reason to believe that you are drunk in charge of a vehicle and I will now breathalyse/arrest you and take you to (police station). (Cue Drunk Man handing over keys).

I'm not being flippant, but this is a demonstration of how this has worked previously in practice.


Ok how about I concede that something along those lines could of happened but there is no legal backing for it, and I would be making one major complaint

Fair enough. I agree that there is no statutory stipulation which details in black and white whether this is allowed. However, I am aware of numerous occurences of it happening and zero successful complaints regarding the conduct of the officers involved.

It is worth bearing in mind that every police officer has a responsibility to take steps to ensure the prevention of a crime, rather than just solving crime, and the scope awarded to them in that regard is fairly wide.


Sec 3 refers to careless driving and sec 34 driving elsewhere than on a road. The police reform act is a fantastic piece of legislation when used properly and is intended to target your boy racer types. The seizing of vehicles is not the same as seizing keys.

I agree. I merely referred to it as it has been used to justify the confiscation of keys (or similar) in the past. The seizing of vehicles usually involves the seizing of keys and the seizing of keys is more preferrable to potential "offenders" as, if the vehicle is not moved, there is no cost to reclaim it.


It should be black and white though because it does not exist.

If I had had a couple of drinks and the Police took my car keys off me for the only reason being I was drunk and then I had to go and collect my keys from a police office then I would going straight to my lawyer.

Again, that's fair enough. However, the legislation which exists is sufficiently ambiguous as to allow this type of action to be taken in the public interest.

I'd be fairly happy to wager that you wouldn't get much joy from a complaint (through a lawyer or otherwise) in these circumstances.

P.S. I should also add in reference to the OP, that I am not aware of the police ever actively searching pubs randomly and taking this action, but I am aware it has been done when a specific danger/concern has been reported.

[Darth Hibbie]

What I meant was that the confiscation of keys (search and seizure) isn't dealt with under powers detailed in the RTA, it is other acts which are relevant as these are the ones that have been used to justify the confiscation of keys in the past.

Can you tell me what acts have been used and in what context?




Without going in to specifically what section of what Act has been quoted in every circumstance and why, an example scenario I am aware of which has occured in the past goes something like:

Police: Are you a drunk man?

Drunk Man: Yes

Police: Do you own a car which is parked nearby and do you have the keys in your possession?

Drunk Man: Yes

Police: I would like you to relinquish the keys to your car to me. They will be held at (police station) overnight where you can collect them tomorrow.

Drunk Man: Yes/No

Police: (If yes to above) Thank you (no issue as keys were provided voluntarily).
(If no to above) As you are refusing to surrender the keys to your car, I have reason to believe that you are drunk in charge of a vehicle and I will now breathalyse/arrest you and take you to (police station). (Cue Drunk Man handing over keys).

I'm not being flippant, but this is a demonstration of how this has worked previously in practice.


Fair enough. I agree that there is no statutory stipulation which details in black and white whether this is allowed. However, I am aware of numerous occurences of it happening and zero successful complaints regarding the conduct of the officers involved.

I'm going to be honest here and say I have never heard of this happening and would be very interested if you could source it.



It is worth bearing in mind that every police officer has a responsibility to take steps to ensure the prevention of a crime, rather than just solving crime, and the scope awarded to them in that regard is fairly wide.

They still have to act within the confines of the law and police procedure. IMO this is out with these confines



I agree. I merely referred to it as it has been used to justify the confiscation of keys (or similar) in the past. The seizing of vehicles usually involves the seizing of keys and the seizing of keys is more preferrable to potential "offenders" as, if the vehicle is not moved, there is no cost to reclaim it.

If the police were entitled to seize the car then they would do so they would not just take the keys. What is to stop the owner from going home and getting the spares?




Again, that's fair enough. However, the legislation which exists is sufficiently ambiguous as to allow this type of action to be taken in the public interest.

I'd be fairly happy to wager that you wouldn't get much joy from a complaint (through a lawyer or otherwise) in these circumstances.

I would disagree with you there but unless either of us are in that position I guess we will never find out for definite. Hopefully it never comes to that :greengrin


P.S. I should also add in reference to the OP, that I am not aware of the police ever actively searching pubs randomly and taking this action, but I am aware it has been done when a specific danger/concern has been reported.

:agree: Totally agree there

I think the gap between us is closing :greengrin I have an interest in finding out more about this. I am still skeptical about this happening (particularly on a frequent basis) but am prepared to be proved wrong(ish) :greengrin