Proposed sentencing guidelines for offenders convicted of motoring offences committed while driving vehicles without the owner’s consent, were published for consultation by the independent Sentencing Council today.

The draft guidelines cover four aggravated vehicle taking offences, which would apply when offenders have driven dangerously, or caused death, injury or damage to property while, for example, driving a stolen vehicle, or a vehicle driven without the owner’s authority.

There are currently sentencing guidelines for magistrates’ courts for aggravated vehicle taking offences involving dangerous driving, accident causing injury, and causing damage to vehicle/property published in 2008.

The proposed guidelines which, when in force, will apply to adult offenders in England and Wales, will replace the existing guidelines and will, for the first time, include sentence levels for the Crown Court.

Sentencing Council member, His Honour Judge Simon Drew KC, said:

“Drivers who commit motoring offences that result in death, injury or damage to property in vehicles they do not have permission to drive, can cause anguish and inconvenience both to the vehicle owner and to victims affected by their driving.

“Victims can suffer serious consequences including death or life-changing injuries or serious damage to property including to the vehicles that were used without permission. The guidelines we are proposing today will allow courts to take a consistent approach to sentencing these offences.”

The Council is also proposing a new guideline for vehicle registration fraud offences which include forging, altering, or fraudulently using vehicle number plates, and a new overarching guideline for driver disqualification which includes principles to follow when imposing a disqualification.  The proposed guidelines will complete the Sentencing Council’s package of new and revised motoring offence guidelines, following the publication in 2023 of guidelines for causing death by dangerous driving and other offences.

The Council is seeking views on the draft guideline from judges, magistrates and organisations or members of the public with an interest in this area. The consultation runs from 21 February 2024 to 22 May 2024.

Notes to editors

1. The proposed guidelines are :

• Aggravated vehicle taking – injury caused
• Aggravated vehicle taking – dangerous driving
• Aggravated vehicle taking – vehicle/property damage caused
• Aggravated vehicle taking – death caused
• Vehicle registration fraud guideline
• Overarching guideline for driver disqualification

2. Aggravated vehicle taking is an offence under section 12A of the Theft Act 1968. The underlying act of taking a vehicle without the owner’s consent can be aggravated in four different ways:

• where the vehicle is driven dangerously
• where injury is caused
• where property (other than the vehicle) is damaged)
• where the vehicle is damaged.

3. In general, the offence has a maximum of two years’ custody and is triable either way (i.e. in either the magistrates courts or the Crown Court). Where a death has resulted, the maximum penalty is 14 years’ custody. Where the value of property or vehicle damage does not exceed £5,000 the offence is deemed summary-only with a maximum penalty of six months’ custody.
4. The Sentencing Guidelines Council (the predecessor body to the Sentencing Council) published two guidelines for use in the magistrates’ courts in 2008: one covers aggravated vehicle taking involving injury and dangerous driving, and the other covers aggravated vehicle taking involving vehicle and property damage. These will be replaced by the new proposed guidelines.
5. Vehicle registration fraud is an offence under section 44 of the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994. This was amended by the Finance Act 2014 to remove vehicle licence fraud from scope of the offence, as part of the abolition of tax discs. The Sentencing Guidelines Council produced a guideline for Vehicle Licence/Registration Fraud in 2008, which the proposed guideline will replace. The offence is triable either way with a maximum penalty of two years’ custody.
6. Sentencing guidelines must be followed, unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so in all the circumstances of a particular case.
7. The Sentencing Council was established by Parliament to be an independent body, but accountable to Parliament for its work which is scrutinised by the Justice Select Committee.
8. Justice Ministers are accountable to Parliament for the Sentencing Council’s effectiveness and efficiency, for its use of public funds and for protecting its independence.
9. Judicial Council members are appointed by the Lady Chief Justice with the agreement of the Lord Chancellor. Non-judicial council members are appointed by the Lord Chancellor with the agreement of the Lady Chief Justice.

The Sentencing Council has published a statistical bulletin and data tables, explaining current sentencing practice for aggravated vehicle taking and other motoring related matters.

This is in preparation for the launch of the Council’s consultation on the aggravated vehicle taking offences guidelines, disqualification and other motoring related matters, which will be published tomorrow (Wednesday 21^st February).

The Sentencing Council has launched a consultation on new sentencing guidelines for offenders convicted of blackmail, kidnap or false imprisonment.

The proposed guidelines will ensure judges in England and Wales are able to take a consistent approach when sentencing these offences, which can range in severity and can cause serious harm to victims.

These will be the first dedicated sentencing guidelines for these offences. Currently, courts sentencing such cases will follow case law that has developed over time to sentence the offences and the Council’s General guideline, which provides guidance to judges when sentencing offences for which there is no relevant offence-specific guideline.

The Council is seeking views on the draft guidelines from the judiciary, legal professionals who use the guidelines, and organisations or members of the public with an interest in this area. The consultation runs from 31 January 2024 to 24 April 2024.

Proposed guidelines for sentencing offenders convicted of blackmail, kidnap or false imprisonment, were published by the independent Sentencing Council today.

Under the proposals judges will, for the first time, have dedicated guidelines to follow when sentencing these offences. The new guidelines will ensure that the courts are able to take a consistent approach when sentencing these offences, which can range in severity and can cause serious harm to victims.

Currently, courts sentencing such cases will follow case law that has developed over time to sentence the offences and the Council’s General guideline, which provides guidance to judges when sentencing offences for which there is no relevant offence-specific guideline.

The proposed guidelines, which apply to all adults being sentenced in the Crown Court of England and Wales, cover the following offences:

Blackmail where cases generally involve demands for money coupled with a threat to do something against the victim’s interests if they don’t pay. The Council is proposing a range of sentences from a community order to 12 years’ custody for the most serious offences.

False imprisonment which generally occurs when a person restrains another from leaving a place against their will.

Kidnap which occurs when a person takes a victim by force, or threats, to another place without their consent and without lawful excuse.

The Council is proposing a single guideline covering both kidnap and false imprisonment offences with a range from six months to 16 years’ custody for the most serious offences.

Sentencing Council member, Mrs Justice Juliet May, said:

“Blackmail, kidnap and false imprisonment are serious offences, and there are currently no guidelines for courts. The offences cover a wide range of offending and, in some of the cases, victims suffer substantial harm at the hands of the offenders.

“The draft guidelines aim to reflect the considerable impact these cases can have on victims, promote consistency of approach in this area of sentencing and bring together information that will assist the courts to pass appropriate sentences when dealing with these offenders.”

The Council is seeking views on the draft guidelines from the judiciary, legal professionals who use the guidelines, and organisations or members of the public with an interest in this area. The consultation runs from 31 January 2024 to 24 April 2024.

Notes to editors:

1. There are currently no sentencing guidelines for blackmail, kidnap or false imprisonment offences, which are some of the last serious offences without sentencing guidelines.
2. Blackmail is contrary to section 21 of the Theft Act 1968, with a maximum sentence of 14 years’ custody and heard in the Crown Court only.
3. Kidnap and false imprisonment are both common law offences with a statutory maximum of life imprisonment and heard in the Crown Court only.
4. Sentencing guidelines must be followed, unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so in all the circumstances of a particular case.
5. The Sentencing Council was established by Parliament to be an independent body, but accountable to Parliament for its work which is scrutinised by the Justice Committee.
6. Justice Ministers are accountable to Parliament for the Sentencing Council’s effectiveness and efficiency, for its use of public funds and for protecting its independence.
7. Judicial Council members are appointed by the Lady Chief Justice with the agreement of the Lord Chancellor. Non-judicial council members are appointed by the Lord Chancellor with the agreement of the Lady Chief Justice.

The Sentencing Council has published a statistical bulletin and data tables, explaining current sentencing practice for kidnap, false imprisonment and blackmail. The format of the data tables has been adapted to improve accessibility.

This is in preparation for the launch of the Council’s consultation on the kidnap, false imprisonment and blackmail guidelines, which will be published tomorrow (Wednesday 31 January).

The Council has responded to recommendations made by the Justice Committee following the Committee’s inquiry into public opinion and understanding of sentencing. The Council has considered in detail the report and the specific recommendations that relate to our work, and we are committed to doing what we can to address those matters for which we are responsible.

The Sentencing Council is consulting on proposed revisions to the Imposition of community and custodial sentences guideline

The proposed revisions reflect changes in legislation, developments in case law, recent sentencing research, and feedback from criminal justice practitioners.

The Imposition guideline sets out the general principles for imposing community orders and custodial sentences, and in what circumstances a custodial sentence can be suspended, among other sentencing considerations. The current guideline was published in 2017.

The Council’s proposed revisions are designed to encourage courts to consider the widest range of circumstances when considering the full range of sentencing options available to them, in order to ensure that the most appropriate sentence, tailored to the individual offender and offence, can be imposed.

The proposed revisions include reordering and restructuring the different sections to align better with the steps the courts follow when sentencing, and various new sections including information on evidence regarding the effectiveness of rehabilitation when compared with short custodial sentences,.

Proposals also include more guidance for the courts on the circumstances in which courts can request a pre-sentence report and new sections on sentencing young adult offenders and female offenders.

The consultation runs from 29 November 2023 to 21 February 2024, and the Council is seeking views on the draft guideline from the public and the criminal justice community, including and any individuals or organisations who work in, have an interest in, or have lived experience of the criminal justice system.

Proposals to revise the Imposition of community and custodial sentences guideline in England and Wales were published for consultation today by the independent Sentencing Council.

The proposed revisions reflect changes in legislation, developments in case law, recent sentencing research, and feedback from criminal justice practitioners.

The existing guideline, which applies to adult offenders only, came into effect in 2017. It sets out general principles for imposing community orders and custodial sentences and deals with other sentencing considerations, such as the requesting of pre-sentence reports.

The Council’s proposed revisions are designed to encourage courts to consider the widest range of circumstances when considering the full range of sentencing options available to them, in order to ensure that the most appropriate sentence, tailored to the individual offender and offence, can be imposed.

Revisions are being proposed for all the existing sections of the current guideline and include reordering and restructuring the different sections to align better with the steps the courts follow when sentencing.

The proposals include providing the courts with:

• more guidance on the circumstances in which it may be necessary to request a pre-sentence report,
• new sections on sentencing young adult offenders and female offenders, and
• new information on evidence regarding the effectiveness of rehabilitation when compared with short custodial sentences, based on external research reviewed for the Council.

The Council is seeking views on the draft guideline from judges, magistrates and organisations or members of the public with an interest in this area. The consultation runs from 29 November 2023 to 21 February 2024.

Sentencing Council chairman, Lord Justice Davis, said:

“The Imposition guideline in its current form is one of the most important of all the guidelines the Council has produced. 

“It gives judges and magistrates guidance on when a community order may be appropriate, whether a custodial sentence should be imposed and, where a custodial sentence is appropriate, when it should be suspended.  The purpose of the guidance is to ensure a consistency of approach across all courts.

“The revised guideline updates and extends the current guidance.  It reflects new information and research in relation to young adult and female offenders and findings from research on the effectiveness of sentencing.   We hope that judges and magistrates will find the guideline clearer and easier to use than its predecessor.”

Notes to editors

1. The existing Imposition of community and custodial sentences overarching guideline was issued on 1 February 2017 to replace the Sentencing Guidelines Council guideline New Sentences: Criminal Justice Act 2003.
2. The guideline is the overarching guideline for general principles around imposing community orders and custodial sentences, and in what circumstances a custodial sentence can be suspended.
3. It is also the main guideline for guidance on requesting pre-sentence reports and community requirements and includes a sentencing decision flow chart.
4. Sentencing guidelines must be followed, unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so in all the circumstances of a particular case.
5. The Sentencing Council was established by Parliament to be an independent body, but accountable to Parliament for its work which is scrutinised by the Justice Select Committee.
6. Justice Ministers are accountable to Parliament for the Sentencing Council’s effectiveness and efficiency, for its use of public funds and for protecting its independence.
7. Judicial Council members are appointed by the Lady Chief Justice with the agreement of the Lord Chancellor. Non-judicial council members are appointed by the Lord Chancellor with the agreement of the Lady Chief Justice.

The Imposition guideline sets out the general principles for imposing community orders and custodial sentences, and in what circumstances a custodial sentence can be suspended.

The guideline is designed to provide guidance to courts to consider a variety of things before they sentence an offender to a community order or custodial sentence. This includes considering the seriousness of the offence, the harm caused by the offence, how culpable the offender is and any previous convictions that may warrant passing the threshold for a community or custodial sentence.

It then provides guidance on how courts should consider the offender’s circumstances when determining whether to sentence them to prison or impose a community order, and how to impose the most suitable sentence that achieves the purposes of sentencing set out in law.

The Council published the current Imposition guideline in 2017 in response to concerns that suspended custodial sentences were potentially being used as a more severe form of community order. Suspended sentences should have been reserved for offenders whose case had passed the custody threshold but were eligible and suitable for their custodial sentence to be suspended.

Community sentences

The Imposition guideline sets out the general principles courts should follow when imposing community orders. It provides a table on three levels of community order, and guidance on the 14 requirements that can be imposed on a community order (or suspended sentence order – see below).

Community orders can fulfil all the five purposes of sentencing. They can restrict the offender’s freedom while providing punishment in the community, rehabilitation for the offender, and/or ensure that the offender engages in activities that in some way seek to repair the harm they have done.

The requirements courts can impose on a community or suspended sentence include unpaid work, a rehabilitation activity requirement, curfew or a mental health treatment, alcohol treatment or drug rehabilitation requirement.

Custodial sentences, including suspended sentence orders

There is no general definition of where the custody threshold lies, that is the point at which an offence becomes so serious that a custodial sentence is required. However, the Imposition guideline emphasises that:

• prison should be reserved as a punishment for the most serious offences only
• a prison sentence must not be passed unless the offence or the combination of the offence and one or more offences associated with it is ‘so serious that neither a fine alone nor a community sentence can be justified’, and
• where an offender is on the cusp of custody, imprisonment should not be imposed if there would be an impact on dependants (for example, children) that would make a custodial sentence disproportionate to achieving the aims of sentencing.

Even where the court decides that custody is the only option considering all the circumstances of a case, the Imposition guideline makes clear that the court should consider the shortest custodial sentence that is appropriate for the seriousness of the offence and provides factors for the court to consider whether that sentence could be suspended.

Offenders who have their sentences suspended do not go to prison immediately but are given the chance to not commit any further offences and comply with up to 14 requirements set by the court. The guideline also sets out a variety of other considerations that courts should take into account before sentence to help them reach the most suitable sentence for that offender with all the circumstances in mind.

Bringing the guideline up to date

The Council is reviewing the current Imposition guideline, following changes in law made by Parliament and feedback from people from the criminal justice community who use the guideline. We ran a public consultation between November 2023 and February 2024, and expect to publish our response to this consultation and the revised guideline in autumn 2024.

We have published a mid-year update to our Business Plan for 2023/24, which summarises changes to the published plan, in particular to the timing of consultations and the publication of definitive guidelines.

The business plan sets out the work the Council aims to undertake in the year to March 2024.