New law in France

[Fugazi-p]

Got an email at work yesterday regarding foriegn travel, below are the important bits. I am told these can be purchased at Halfords for around £5. Thought it might be good to share this info as it was news to me and some of you may be planning a trip over the channel.

On July 1st 2012, France will implement a new law that requires all drivers to carry a certified alcohol breathalyser in their vehicle ( including rental cars ).
A NF ( Norme Francais ) certified alcohol breathalyser must be carried in all motor vehicle types.

This relates to motorists, quad bikes, truck drivers and motorcyclists ( above 50cc ).
Only riders not exceeding 50cc and cars already fitted with a breathalyser immobiliser are exempt.

If stopped by police, the fine for not having a breathalyser will be 11 euros rising to 90 euros if not paid within 5 days. There will be a limited period of grace until 1st November 2012 when it will become mandatory.

[Nelly]

I think this is the dumbest thing the french have ever come up with.
I just cannot see the point in it. :-?

[Mitch9128]

We have an office in France, when i've been there, they have long lunch breaks in a bar, then come back to their desks, neck loads of vino and cheese, and then drive home.

As i've seen this at other offices/companies in France, i imagine it's very common, although i'm not sure how carrying a breathalyser will help.

[Snowy]

We have an office in France, when i've been there, they have long lunch breaks in a bar, then come back to their desks, neck loads of vino and cheese, and then drive home.

As i've seen this at other offices/companies in France, i imagine it's very common, although i'm not sure how carrying a breathalyser will help.

Having spent a lot of time in France I tend to agree that its common, certainly outside of Paris, to consume a far amount during a long lunch. The only thing I can see as for a reason is that it does put a bit of the onus of responsibility back onto the driver. If they're unsure they should drive or not there's a test they can take. So there's no real excuse if they're caught and haven't used the breathalyser. Having said that though, if they're caught they are going to get prosecuted regardless as I would suspect the police would still have to use their own certified monitors as evidence anyway.

[Geordie Stu]

Is this just in case the French Police forget to carry their own in the Police car... :

[Fugazi-p]

I think the aim is to encourage people to excercise self-control with regard to alcohol consumption and if in doubt about their limit then use the personal tester as a check.
My thoughts are... if you use the tester and are deemed fit to drive, do you then get stopped and cop a fine for not having an unused breath tester in your glove box ?
As of September all Hertz rentals will be supplied with one and Hertz recommend that a further tester is purchased in case the driver uses one, which suggests to me that an unused one must always be available in the vehicle.

Bloody Frogs !! :

[Dan505]

how about the argument that the personal one said you were ok to drive but the police say your over ???

[Snowy]

I doubt the police would take the drivers own test into account as they would use their own calibrated machine. Its a little like taking a risk with speeding - you can trust your speedo to tell you roughly what speed you are doing but its not accurate and is immaterial as far as any prosecution is concerned. You take your own risk if your marginal on an uncalibrated test.

[Dan505]

I doubt the police would take the drivers own test into account as they would use their own calibrated machine. Its a little like taking a risk with speeding - you can trust your speedo to tell you roughly what speed you are doing but its not accurate and is immaterial as far as any prosecution is concerned. You take your own risk if your marginal on an uncalibrated test.

i doubt it too but why put the onus on the driver to check if their test is not considered evidence of fit to drive?

[Snowy]

[quote author=BMWGraeme link=1341310575/7#7 date=1341317825]I doubt the police would take the drivers own test into account as they would use their own calibrated machine. Its a little like taking a risk with speeding - you can trust your speedo to tell you roughly what speed you are doing but its not accurate and is immaterial as far as any prosecution is concerned. You take your own risk if your marginal on an uncalibrated test.

i doubt it too but why put the onus on the driver to check if their test is not considered evidence of fit to drive?[/quote]

The onus is always on the driver to make sure they are fit to drive...I guess this is just one of those tools you could use to tell if you're near or over the legal limit. Without some form of test, the only way of knowing 100% if your're in the clear is not to drink at all. I would see it as a tool for the driver to use to make a decision rather than a tool for the police to use to make a conviction.