Section 1 Criminal Damage Act 1971

Destroying or damaging property.

(1) A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence.

(2) A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another:

(a) intending to destroy or damage any property or being reckless as to whether any property would be destroyed or damaged; and
(b) intending by the destruction or damage to endanger the life of another or being reckless as to whether the life of another would be thereby endangered;

shall be guilty of an offence.

But...…

(2) A person charged with an offence to which this section applies, shall, whether or not he would be treated for the purposes of this Act as having a lawful excuse apart from this subsection, be treated for those purposes as having a lawful excuse:

(a) if at the time of the act or acts alleged to constitute the offence he believed that the person or persons whom he believed to be entitled to consent to the destruction of or damage to the property in question had so consented, or would have so consented to it if he or they had known of the destruction or damage and its circumstances; or

(b) (Doesn't apply in this case)

(3) For the purposes of this section it is immaterial whether a belief is justified or not if it is honestly held.

Were you arrested and interviewed, or a non-custodial interview? Were you legally represented, did you provide the defence in law?

If you haven't been legally represented, I suggest you speak to a brief! To poorly quote Lt George from Blackadder Goes Forth, "you appear as guilty as a puppy sitting next to a pile of poo", however, if my licence were at stake, I'd obtain legal advice