A teenage motorist who forced a cyclist off the road has been allowed to keep his driving licence by a court in Scotland.
Jack Hart, aged 19, had been charged with dangerous driving in relation to the incident on the A930 between Carnoustie and Monifieth on a Saturday afternoon in April this year, reports the Dundee Courier.
However, when he appeared at Forfar Sheriff Court, the sheriff – the Scottish equivalent to a magistrate – accepted a guilty plea to the lesser charge of careless driving.
The court heard that despite there being no vehicles approaching from the opposite direction, Hart, from Invergowrie, made a very close pass on the cyclist.
When the rider, who was heading to work, heard Hart’s vehicle approaching, he turned to see what was happening and swerved onto the grass verge to avoid being hit.
He reported the incident to police when he arrived at his place of work.
When officers from Police Scotland tracked down the teenage driver, he said: “Really sorry, I should never have done that.”
He also said in a letter to the court that he had been aware the cyclist had been shouting and waving.
Defending Hart, solicitor Brian Bell said: “Essentially he never allowed the cyclist enough room and he does apologise.
“He’s embarrassed – it was a momentary lapse.
“He works as an apprentice mechanic and does require his driving licence.
“It’s clear of points, but if he was to get six points he would lose it,” the solicitor explained.
Fining Hart £300 and endorsing his driving licence with four penalty points, Sheriff Derek Reekie told him: “You’re going to have to take more care.
“You’re a young driver and if you get six points you’ll have to resit your test.
“It’s well known young men in particular given the privilege of a driving licence think they are very clever and drive in an inappropriate manner.
“I take into account your circumstances and agree with Mr Bell this was a mid-range offence,” the sheriff added.
He added: “You’re going to have to be very careful,” the sheriff warned him.
“It’s amazing how points can rack up on speed cameras and things like that so you need to watch out.”
Under the Road Traffic (New Drivers) Act 1995, any motorist who gets six or more penalty points within two years of passing their test will have their driving licence revoked.
The total includes any penalty points accrued before they passed their test, and penalty points are valid for three years.
29 thoughts on “Teenage motorist who forced cyclist off road keeps driving licence”
Keep this persons name handy
Keep this persons name handy as I have no doubt they will kill one day.
essexian wrote:
No, he may actually learn from his mistake and be a fine driver.
NZ Vegan Rider wrote:
???????? Oh they’ll learn. That there is little consequence for running riders off the road…..
Very true, he may be one of
Very true, he may be one of those people that getting a visit from a police and have had to go to court that it’ll give them a wake up call.
Sadly, there are more than a few that would see such a lenient sentence as the system essentially saying that what they had done wasn’t actually all that bad or serious.
Huh?
Huh?
So a new driver shows that they clearly do not have the temperament to not endanger others on the road and is allowed to continue driving?
A simple year’s driving ban would send a clear message that there is literally no reason to deliberately and without provocation endanger other road users.
This sends the message that as long you drive to work you can just do whatever you like on the road.
It’s difficult to know
It’s difficult to know whether this driver routinely intimidated cyclists, or if this was a genuine lapse, whether for whatever reason he noticed the cyclist late, also no bike cam images, which presumably there must be otherwise how did the cyclist get the police to take action.
Certainly the police comments suggest remorse, no attmept to claim he wasn’t too close or deny the offence.
If every driver who closed passes a cyclist got 4 points, I’m sure we would all be a lot safer on the roads, it’s far more common that no action is taken. £300 is also quite significant to most teenagers, as will be the impact on his insurance premiums.
Whether it was passing close that was a one off or the getting caught that was a one off, hopefully the impact of the points will be enough to prevent re-offending. Certainly young enough to learn
The sherrifs comments that it is amazing how quickly points rack up is odd. Is he speaking from is experience as a driver? or from his experience of hearing cases? In either case one more offence leads to a ban, so racking up of points is not really relevant.
If he was genuinely
If he was genuinely remorseful, then he could have stopped at the scene and apologised or at least handed himself in to the police. As it was, the police had to track him down and once he was caught, he became remorseful.
As to the impact on his insurance premiums – there’s a reason why insurance is high for young people and it’s mainly down to aggressive driving which this is a prime example of. In fact, other young adults have to bear the cost of insurance premiums due to drivers like this one (though luckily he didn’t cause a collision this time).
The sherrifs comments that it
“(The sherrifs comments that it is amazing how quickly points rack up is odd. Is he speaking from is experience as a driver? or from his experience of hearing cases?)”
GOOD POINT – certainly, should be taken as conflict of interest any judge, or defence lawers for dangerous drivers, any number of driving points, and rightly be barred from these cases – aswel any cops with points should not be handling cases where vulnerable groups are victims.
It would be nice if they had
It would be nice if they had published the licence plate of the car. Ive cycled Monifeith to Carnoustie many times, especially this year … and have had a few overtakes that were either dangerous or closer than I’d like. Be interesting to see if they have previous … or worse … continued to do it after being caught initially.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Quite. A new driver can lose their licence for simply using a mobile phone, and rightly so. But this guy gets to keep his….
“He works as an apprentice
“He works as an apprentice mechanic and does require his driving licence.”
How? He fixes them, he doesn’t need to drive them.
exactly. and there is a
exactly. and there is a bloody good cycle path from Invergowrie all the way to Carnoustie that he could use to cycle to work after losing his licence – or buses – so wouldn’t exactly be a hardship as it’s only about 12 miles each way and as flat as holland. For cases where drivers have displayed a lapse in judgement like this, it should be an immediate ban until you’ve taken, and passed, an extended driving test to prove that you can drive in a safe manner – just because you passed the standard test doesn’t mean that you are necessarily a “safe” driver.
Remove his licence for a year
Remove his licence for a year and suggest he cycles to work instead.
alchemilla wrote:
I certainly feel this is worthy of consideration by all magistrates faced with the ‘need to drive to work’ argument. Even more so where the dangerous driving has endangered cyclists. It’s highly likely that anyone who spend 6 months commuting by bike will become a better driver, with increased traffic awareness and greater consideration for vulnerable oad users.
alchemilla wrote:
And retrain as a cycle mechanic.
‘…it was a momentary lapse’
‘…it was a momentary lapse’
FUCK
OFF
It was a concious decision to drive like a dangerous twat.
When is the judiciary going
When is the judiciary going to acknowledge that driving is a privilege that can be taken away at any time if you demonstrate that you are not capable of driving in a way that doesn’t threaten the life and limb of other road users? If he’d accidentally threatened the life of an innocent person in any other manner, he’d be facing serious consequences, not a slap on the wrist and being told not to do it again or they’d really do something next time; after he’d killed someone.
The driving public will never take their responsibilities to other road users seriously until their transgressions are dealt with speedily and with a punishment which makes the likelihood of a repeat offence zero. This guy should have lost his licence and had to do a re-test after at least a year, and that should be broadcast far and wide so all the other drivers hear it. This is yet another message to them that it really doesn’t matter if you threaten the life of a cyclist.
Could not Cycling UK offer to take some of these judges and magistrates for a ride around the nearest city? Maybe they’d see how serious the matter is before letting drivers off with wigging. This is life and death, not shoplifting.
Sorry, bit of a long rant, but I’m distinctly under-happy with this and the other recent cases.
“You’re going to have to be
“You’re going to have to be very careful”Try not to get cvaught!
Why only 4 points? Surely 9
Edit, should have read it to the end.
Forcing someone off the road
Forcing someone off the road to avoid losing their life is a “mid range offence”???
Sit that bloody judge on a bike and let me drive him off the road and then put it to him again.
Idiot.
This word, “careless”,
This word, “careless”, Sheriff Reekie: i do not think it means what you think it means.
I don’t think being an
I don’t think being an apprentice mechanic requires a driving license, unless he’s some sort of mobile mechanic getting called out to breakdowns. Besides, surely it’s irrelevant: The punishment should fit the crime regardless.
But our criminal justice
But our criminal justice system attempts to rehabilitate rather than simply punish. Now we can debate for hours the rights & wrongs of that approach and also that society now views the need to drive to get to employment as an essential need,rather than share lifts or just hop on your bike instead.
So the sentencing will take account of that, as it will first offence & age of the individual,remorse and whilst we all know and can cite shocking examples where a driver should have been banned and then went on to cause more harm because they werent capable of learning or rehabilitating, that’s the way the system works.
Without knowledge of the full details of the incident,though I’ve never in all my near misses had the time to react enough to ‘get out of the way’ like that, the fine and points dont seem that unreasonable, one 3pt ticket for speeding and that should trigger a ban, again we know it doesnt always but you cant sentence based on what the next court decides.
You can have a system that
You can have a system that punishes instead of rehabilitates – Like in the USA; but this has one of the largest prison populations in the world, and a high rate of reoffending. Or you can have a system that attempts to rehabilitate people – like us and many European countries; with lower reoffending, but cushier prisons (Or holiday camps according to the Daily Mail).
You can have one system or the other, but neither is perfect, and both have their critics.
A motor mechanic would
A motor mechanic would require a driving licence in order to be able to carry out test drives.
Yes, they need to be able to
Yes, they need to be able to drive to test vehicles.
However this is a very good reason to hold them to a high standard. They will be testing vehicles with suspected faults, or testing repairs (mistakes possible e.g. probably 1 in 5 times after servicing my bicycle I forget to close the brakes so either front or rear don’t work. Of course the first thing I do when starting a ride is check the brakes work. Dad has had the local tyre fitter fail to tighten wheel bolts (Not long after a car he was driving was written off by a truck losing a wheel because the bolts weren’t done up to torque…)), therefore a mechanic should be making additional allowances for this when driving.
This should still apply in their own vehicles as the only way to ensure they do it correctly when testing (potentially fairly regular and mostly safe) is for high safety standards to be habit.
This is unavoidable unless we require all mechanics have a full off road track for testing (clearly not practical).
“Sorry I shouldn’t have done
“Sorry I shouldn’t have done that” suggests he knew exactly what he was doing and was probably going to boast about it when he got to work. I suspect there is a lot of banter regarding ‘cyclists’ in a vehicle workshop, and he wanted to get a few laughs from his work mates. He got caught, now he’s “sorry, won’t happen again”. What if the cyclist had not taken evasive action, had not noticed the vehicle bearing down on him? The biggest improvement that can be made for cycle safety is to put proper penalties in place for dangerous drivers, this will do far more for us than segregated lanes, hi-viz, compulsory helmets etc. Get these w@nkers off the road and the roads will be safer.
“He’s embarrassed – it was a
“He’s embarrassed – it was a momentary lapse.”
That’s a lie, by his own commentary. He says he saw the cyclist shouting and waving their arms. That’s not a momentary lapse – it’s planned. He chose to do it. It wouldn’t have even inconvenienced him to move over slightly on the empty road, so it seems like he wanted to cause an accident.
My daughter was unlucky
My daughter was unlucky enough to fail her driving test recently, seemingly on some fairly minor actions in the scheme of things, but fair enough; good to have standards.
It is a shame that similarly rigorous standards are not applied to people keeping their licence once they have one.