Avoid A Totting Up Ban (Scotland) Page 29

are from a person who is claiming to be affected by the loss of the
driver's licence.

Letters are more useful, and more likely to be agreed, when they
are from persons not directly affected by the loss of the driver's
licence. Thus a letter from a doctor confirming that a person has a
medical condition, meaning that the person is dependant upon the
assistance of people with driving licences, is useful.

Another example would be a letter from an employer stating that
the accused would lose his job if he lost his licence. However if the
employer is claiming that this would also cause the business
significant hardship, then it is preferable if the employer either
appears as a witness or signs an affidavit.

That said, there may be sound medical, practical or economic
reasons why an affected party cannot appear as a witness or sign
an affidavit. In such circumstances, the letter should state the
reasons for this.

Ideally, the letters should be served on the Procurator Fiscal prior
to the hearing so that the Crown has fair notice of their content. If
the Crown does not dispute the evidence, it has the effective status
of agreed evidence and should be accepted as a true statement of
fact (Findlay v Procurator Fiscal Aberdeen XJ948/04). Acceptance of
such undisputed evidence can mean that exceptional hardship is
established even without any other evidence (Findlay, supra).