Tim Smit appeals against drive ban
THE joint-founder of the Eden Project has had a driving ban quashed – despite being caught speeding six times in three and a half years, writes Chris Matthews.
Sir Tim Smit, 66, was given a six-month ban for totting offences, but appealed against the ban at Truro Crown Court on the grounds of “exceptional hardship”.
Sir Tim, of Bodmin Hill in Lostwithiel, is well known throughout Cornwall for his work at Eden and is currently seeking the go-ahead for a project at Gillyflower Farm, to include an educational facility, orchards, a distillery, a microbrewery, a restaurant and 20 accommodation units.
Barrister Ramsay Quaife told the court how Sir Tim was clocked driving his Audi A5 at 88 miles per hour at Dunheved Bridge on the A30 on December 3, 2019.
His driver’s record showed he already had nine points on his licence relating to speeding matters in June 2017, June 2018 and September 2019, meaning he should have been given a totting disqualification.
His case was previously heard by magistrates sitting in Bodmin, who fined him £320 and ordered him to pay costs of £85. He was also disqualified as a totter, but his ban was put on hold to allow for the appeal to be heard.
Michael Gregson, on behalf of the entrepreneur, said that Sir Tim was appealing the ban due to “exceptional hardship”. Giving evidence, Sir Tim said: “My father is blind and is 90 and step-mother six years younger, but in the latter stages of Alzheimer’s. That has created a number of problems.
“She, like I, is Dutch by birth and has forgotten English and gets angry when people speak English to her. I speak Dutch so my visits have gone up to daily, sometimes twice daily, and losing my licence would be catastrophic.”
He added that he is responsible for taking his parents to hospital appointments and that his stepmother won’t go anywhere unless it’s with him. He added he was a diabetic and is shielding, and that losing his licence would bring his life “to a standstill”.
Considering the appeal, Judge Robert Linford said: “The appellant’s record shows a worrying lack of concern for speed limits.” But the judge went on to acknowledge his father and step-mother needed transport to medical appointments.
“A driving disqualification would deprive his parents of medical care,” he said. “If times were different, this appeal would have been dismissed and he would have to make alternate plans for their transportation but in these times we find exceptional hardship would exist if a disqualification is imposed.” The appeal was granted.