The driver of a £90,000 Maserati Granturismo S filmed by a cyclist in Glasgow eating breakfast at the wheel last year has been fined for careless driving.
Dave Brennan posted the footage to YouTube in February 2014, saying: “Nice car. Shame it means he can’t also afford a house to eat his cereal in …”
The driver was initially charged with careless driving, but that was subsequently revised to a charge of dangerous driving with the case due to go to court next Monday, Mr Brennan told us.
However, he has now heard that the motorist had pleaded guilty to the reduced charge of careless driving, receiving a £150 fine and 3 penalty points.
He said: “I'm obviously pleased that I don't have to attend court, and I think careless driving is an appropriate charge in this case, due to the relatively low speeds that I witnessed the driver going.
“However, I think the fine is too low and that 3 points acts as little deterrent. Driving a car is a privilege not a right, and drivers must be fully aware of their surroundings and be able to react accordingly. This is not possible whilst eating cereal, using a spoon, from a bowl held in one hand.”
Four months before the footage of the Maserati driver was shot, another helmet camera-sporting cyclist – this time in Edinburgh – spotted a motorist eating cereal while driving.
The motorist was subsequently charged with an alleged driving offence.
Kevin Clinton, head of road safety at The Royal Society of the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA), said of that incident: “This driver is being irresponsible and risking his own life and the lives of people around him, especially the cyclists he is overtaking.
“Trying to hold and eat from a bowl while driving is a particularly stupid and dangerous thing to do.”
32 thoughts on “Video: Maserati driver filmed eating breakfast at wheel fined for careless driving”
Speed in Richmond Park on a
Speed in Richmond Park on a cycle, £65.
Drive a supercar eating your breakfast, £150.
Fair play. #onmessage
bendertherobot wrote:Speed in
you want the two fines to be equal? Chap in charge of car got fined more than the one on the bike. Sounds ok to me.
andyp wrote:bendertherobot
you want the two fines to be equal? Chap in charge of car got fined more than the one on the bike. Sounds ok to me.— bendertherobot
Be nice if the punishments actually reflected the relative danger posed by a bike and a car
oldstrath wrote:andyp
you want the two fines to be equal? Chap in charge of car got fined more than the one on the bike. Sounds ok to me.— andyp
Be nice if the punishments actually reflected the relative danger posed by a bike and a car— bendertherobot
Quite. It was a charge of dangerous driving. Negotiation would have taken place with the Prosecutor to change that to careless in return for a guilty plea. Plea bargaining by any other name.
It sends the message that careless driving is slightly worse than triggering a speed camera.
Or, to put it another way, it’s £60 worse than using a mobile phone.
Getting hit by someone riding
Getting hit by someone riding a bike at 41mph might do more damage than getting hit by a car moving that slowly while stuck in traffic.
Hindmost wrote:Getting hit by
There’s lots of ‘mights’ in that – the point is you can’t predict it. A slow push could send someone under a nearby HGV, for example, or into approaching traffic. Crush injury ? – doesn’t matter how fast the car’s going.
Another possibility is the driver dropping their breakfast in their lap – does this have the effect of them braking, or pushing on the gas pedal ?
You don’t know – but they certainly don’t have full control of the vehicle.
That charge looks a little
That charge looks a little harsh to me. He wasn’t actually eating it when moving in any of the footage, only holding it. You can see the spoon not being used throughout. That was a fairly long hardly moving queue.
Can’t see that’s too different to drinking out of a bottle or having a gel thingy whilst riding.
Fair spot on the number plate though, no mention of whether he got done for that or not.
atgni wrote:That charge looks
hmm so the spoon was for decoration and he was not really using it as wasn’t caught on camera.
You need 2 hands for driving and 2 hands to eat cereal from a bowl, you do the sums…
joneboy wrote:atgni
hmm so the spoon was for decoration and he was not really using it as wasn’t caught on camera.
You need 2 hands for driving and 2 hands to eat cereal from a bowl, you do the sums…— atgni
Ever hold something one handed in a queue? Map?
I’m not saying eating cereal from a bowl whilst driving is safe; I was pointing out that he wasn’t eating in the clip, he was holding a bowl whilst in a very slow moving queue.
I would suggest everyone has driven one handed at times. Otherwise you couldn’t change gear or put your sunglasses on for example.
atgni wrote:joneboy
hmm so the spoon was for decoration and he was not really using it as wasn’t caught on camera.
You need 2 hands for driving and 2 hands to eat cereal from a bowl, you do the sums…— joneboy
Ever hold something one handed in a queue? Map?
I’m not saying eating cereal from a bowl whilst driving is safe; I was pointing out that he wasn’t eating in the clip, he was holding a bowl whilst in a very slow moving queue.
I would suggest everyone has driven one handed at times. Otherwise you couldn’t change gear or put your sunglasses on for example.— atgni
Are you really equating changing gear with eating breakfast at the wheel ?
fenix wrote:
Are you really
No.
atgni wrote:Ever hold
No. Never.
Still against the law.
True, but actually operating your vehicle is slightly different to carrying your breakfast with you…
brooksby wrote:
No.
1. Well done
2. Which law?
Which law? Section 3 RTA
Which law? Section 3 RTA 1988I suspect.
Take a look at the guidance here http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/road_traffic_offences_guidance_on_prosecuting_cases_of_bad_driving/#a30
joneboy wrote:atgni
hmm so the spoon was for decoration and he was not really using it as wasn’t caught on camera.
You need 2 hands for driving and 2 hands to eat cereal from a bowl, you do the sums…— atgni
Poof that Aliens ARE amongst us.
atgni wrote:That charge looks
yak! soggy cornflakes. :&
Sent video of driver going
Sent video of driver going through pedestrian lights with little green man showing. Avon and Somerset said they couldn’t prosecute as even though I told them the number plate they couldn’t see it on the film – he was going to fast. Not only that even though my wife and I were willing to go to court, CPS would not take my word for the number plate and would disregard my wife’s testimony as she was my wife and therefore not an independent witness. They would prosecute, however, if he had injured or killed one of us, how nice of them.
Personally I think the
Personally I think the Scandinavia country’s which fine proportionately according to earnings have got it right. The guys driving a £90k car what’s £150? Pocket change! It’s not about bashing the rich or anything like that it’s about fairness a fine should mean something to everyone! That’s fined.
29erKeith wrote:Personally I
Of course the problem with that is anyone driving a £90k car in this country probably has no declared earnings. Off-shore companies, self-employed contractors, etc.
drivers trying to defend this
drivers trying to defend this are bloody hilarious. If in charge of a car capable of doing very fast speeds, then that for me should be dangerous driving.
How about the woman who was
How about the woman who was reading a book while driving a SUV with a kid in the back?
skull-collector-not-really
Ah yes, but she had the ability to turn on the fake waterworks when the gormless plod turned up so got away pretty much scot free.
Pathetic punishment! The
Pathetic punishment! The driver should be banned for 12 months and doing porridge.
And did he get done for not having a front number plate on his car?
Looks like a serial offender.
Cycles up the middle of two
Cycles up the middle of two lanes in sub optimal wet conditions cuts in front of a car and starts focusing on filming an incident and giving a commentry. Who is the distracted road user here? 😕
Thextos wrote:Cycles up the
Completely agree, and with Timsen. Self-righteous vigilante helmet-cam warriors don’t do any of us favours.
Yes I agree …… he who is
Yes I agree …… he who is without sin cast the first stone !
I am a long standing club cyclist but also surprisingly a car driver. We all have to get along and by acting as self righteous vigilantes, cyclists open themselves to more criticism from other road users. It’s possibly a bit of a jump but in my view this could ultimately lead to more legislation which will damage us all. Who wants compulsory helmets, registration of bikes, type approval, insurance etc etc all of which could be introduced by politicians as a knee jerk reaction & justified in the interests of safety.
Timsen wrote:Yes I agree
Platitudes like “we all have to get along” don’t address the problem that motorists are killing people on bicycles in increasing numbers and the vast majority of cycle/motor collisions are the fault of the motorist. Yet the police are reluctant to prosecute on good video evidence and the courts reluctant to convict. Helmet camera cyclists are merely providing evidence and are not vigilantes. Your argument is used against all protest movements. You are correct that standing up for your rights often leads to persecution but that is a very pusillanimous attitude and merely promotes the status quo.
I was surprised to see the
I was surprised to see the video NOT because of the driver eating cereal but because of the cyclist riding between lanes. And in rainy conditions, nonetheless.
I ride in the US, where the norm is for cyclists to obey the same traffic laws as any other vehicle on the road, including stopping at red lights and not passing cars between lanes.
Do you guys/gals believe cyclists in the UK will eventually use their bikes in the same manner as other vehicles?
PLEASE NOTE: This is a question, not criticism.
Be safe,
Marcelo
mbeolchi wrote:I was
Hey Marcel. What this guy was doing was totally legal. Motorcycles and cyclists are allowed to filter in situations like this and is actually pretty safe. Majority of drivers will glance into their wing mirror (when so inclined) and will see somebody coming up their side. They rarely look to the nearside – the point where most cyclist fatalities occur. If the cyclist was heading down the inside he runs the risk of a left hook or being doored. I actually feel safer doing this and will always drift to the offside of vehicles in slow moving traffic.
First thing which struck me
First thing which struck me was the speed of the cyclist passing between two lines of traffic in the wet. Going too fast. And then, as someone else points out, starts filming the cereal offender which means he’s no longer paying attention to the road!
However, the fact remains, that the driver was fined, so his eating at the wheel was clearly considered an unsafe thing to do in law.
So how long before the action of a cyclist taking a drink from a bottle on the move, or eating an energy bar – a practice as old as the sport itself – is also considered unsafe?
Condor flyer wrote:First
Main issue in the wet is keeping tyres off the white lines, which you can’t see. The most dangerous bit when filtering is if there’s a car sized *gap* adjacent to another vehicle – when traffic’s continuous you don’t get vehicles moving into a gap that isn’t there. In fact the rider slows and slots into the first clear slot in the lane that opens up as traffic starts moving.
Too fast ? – perhaps if the road was openly accessible, but there’s a solid wall to the left, you won’t get people or small furry animals crossing between vehicles.
It is lawful to filter
It is lawful to filter between lanes on a cycle I think u may find motorcycles do the same and even go I touch faster than the cyclist. As for him being distracted I agree we should always look the other way if I crime is being committed, that’s why we live in such a lovely crime free society
As for the USA were people obay Same law as cars but have one of the highest gun crime (killing people) rates in the western world? I know what I would prefer.