[base849]

I’ve followed the forums a long while, but never needed to post…

Welcoming any opinion and advice on the following:

My 11 year old son was cycling to school last Friday along a cycle route in Southend & crossed the A127 at a recognised controlled cycle crossing.  
As he does every day, he pressed the button & once he got the green he checked that the cars had stopped (I’d previously warned him to double check people actually stopped).

He said that the car in the lane closest stopped & he started to cycle across past the car stopped in lane 1 & was hit by a driver in lane 2 of this two lane 40MPH limit road that had not slowed at all- he said he simply hadn’t seen her coming at all.  There were several witnesses that agreed that the lady driving had gone through a very solidly red light at speed , passed a stationary car in lane 1 & hit the front of my son’s bike, sending him cartwheeling down the road.  One of the witnesses said that her two children had to drag my son out of the road afterwards, which she informed me traumatised them.  The Essex air ambulance was dispatched, along with paramedics & an Ambulance Operational Commander; the police were on scene quickly & shut the road for investigation & they took statements from witnesses.  

A witness called my son’s school, who in turn called us- we got there within about 15 min.  

The lady driving maintained that she had gone through on a green light & the policeman that shut the road said it would come down to my son’s statements & those of the witnesses.  

When the (white hat) traffic collision investigator arrived he quickly explained that the course of action would be determined by the severity of my son’s injuries & that they had a unit waiting at Southend A&E for a verdict.  He swiftly told me that the lady had only passed her driving test a couple of weeks ago & that he himself had knocked a child over by accident not long after passing his test.  
They had me wait on the verdict from the hospital before they would let me take his bike, as it would be evidence if there was the possibility of a fatality resulting from his injuries.   

The woman’s car had a smashed near side head light, the entire mirror assembly had been smashed off & the almost flush indicator light had been ripped out, with marks & scratches all down the side of the nearside of the car so it was a heavy impact, but thankfully my son did not make it out onto the front of that car.  That fraction of a second saved his life.  

He was also wearing a fairly new cycle helmet & that was comprehensively trashed, with scuffs all over the left hand side of it, creases where it had deformed & a tear right through the polystyrene liner on the left side. 
The paramedics, A&E doctors & the police all emphasised that it definitely prevented him suffering serious head injuries.  

It seems that the most serious injury he suffered was a broken right wrist.  He’s got an appointment to see a consultant today to find out recovery time, but mum bought a lottery ticket for the first time in 25 years.  He has bruises & cuts all over his body, a very painful chest & ribs & he couldn’t walk unaided for a couple of days.  He has been waking up at night suddenly & he asks for his door to be left open in case he needs us, but seems happy to settle himself back to sleep.  

He’s a very keen & competent skier & we’ve got a trip in just under a month, where he was going to do a week of slalom and ski cross training.  That’s so physical that I cancelled that straight away.  
He also races motocross & he’s supposed to have his first race for his championship in just over five weeks- he’s never going to be strong enough for that with a broken throttle wrist, so he scores zero for the first one at least.  
There’s also the question of what this does to his confidence cycling to & from school- we work shifts & walking takes him about 40 minutes, compared to 10 mins gentle cycling. 
He had a really good bike that he was very proud & careful with- a Specialized Sirrus 3.0, which now has scratches all over the frame & forks & so much play in the headstock that I doubt it can be repaired. I can’t find the receipt, but I’m hoping that we can just ask the driver’s insurers to repair or replace the bike until it’s usable again.  

So the positives: he’s alive, not in a coma & actually lasted a whole day of school today, where he had to walk by himself; the driver actually had insurance & didn’t leave the scene.  

Negatives: we got a call from Essex Police today & they’ve decided to offer the woman a driver improvement course.  Apparently, faced with several witness statements contrary to her own she amended it, admitting to going through an amber light.  The police mentioned again that she had only passed her driving test a couple of weeks ago & they said that she hadn’t been drinking or been on her phone.  They reasoned that the greatest benefit would be a driver’s improvement course, rather than points.  I believe that the standard would be 6 points & as a new driver she would have to retake an extended test, which I believe would be more beneficial & appropriate.  But I also believe that Essex Police know that she’s highly likely to contest this in court, costing them time for at least two of their officiers to attend.  

I’m very unhappy at the outcome & I think it is completely inappropriate, but we feel that we are up against the system.  
My aunt that retired from being a traffic cop a good twenty years ago found out about this driver improvement course outcome & rang us up tonight saying she wanted to write a letter of complaint- that in her day it would have been 6 points, end of story.  

I have been trying to call my Union’s legal team to initiate a claim for his bike & injuries, but not got through yet.  His mum’s union will also take on personal injury claims for family members, but are there other options?

I’m interested in what anyone thinks we should do?  I’m keen on not learning the hard way, having never done this before, so if anyone has experience they don’t mind sharing to avoid pitfalls, please do.
I have been really upset by the whole thing, but I do have a thick skin- if people think we need to just accept it, I’m happy to hear why.    

Topic

[ktache]

When I was hit on the

When I was hit on the clockhouse roundabout, Farnborough, the investigating officer came to see me after I had got out of several nights in hospital, traffic officer I believe, he said that he knew how I felt as he had run over a kid on the roundabout outside the Farnborough police station…

[wtjs]

Do you just have a remote

Do you just have a remote camera set up at those lights, wtjs?

I could probably set one up in the hedge and trigger from over the road, but it wouldn’t solve the problem of Lancashire Constabulary coming to bent agreements with the offenders to ignore the case! As a reward for tongue-in-cheek questioning:

[Seventyone]

You shouldn’t be giving any
You shouldn’t be giving any percentage of what you manage to claim to the lawyers. They can claim their costs separately from the drivers insurance too

I’d definitely look into getting specialist representation

[brooksby]

Do you just have a remote

Do you just have a remote camera set up at those lights, wtjs? 😉

[mdavidford]

HoarseMann wrote:

I just can’t believe they think a driver awareness course is appropriate. If the driver really did just pass their test 2 weeks ago, they’ve literally just completed an intense period of driver training. How on earth can a ‘refresher’ course be deemed any benefit, can they really have forgotten how to drive after 2 weeks!

Perhaps they should be offering the ‘improvement course’ to the driver’s instructor and examiner?

[HoarseMann]

Yes, they do consider the

Yes, they do consider the impact of the charge on the perpetrator before deciding what the charge will be. In the case I refer to, eventually the police were of the opinion it was upper-end careless and lower-end dangerous driving. They said getting a conviction for dangerous is really difficult as it’s an automatic 12 month ban, plus it would mean CPS involvement. So they went for the easier careless charge. I do also wonder if the driver already had points, as they only gave him 5 points rather than 6, was that tactical so he just missed the 12 point ban?

[IanMSpencer]

I think that most bases have
I think that most bases have been covered, but if this ends up with an unsatisfactory result, do follow up with a formal complaint. It is quite wearing to follow up on these incidents and complaints processes can be all consuming if you are not careful, but for the good of the whole community – pedestrians, cyclists and even motorists are put at risk by people who fail to respond to red lights, accidentally or on purpose – these decisions need to be challenged.

In fact, I would suggest that in any lobbying or communication you avoid talking about the cycling aspect, I am afraid there is a clear anti-cycling bias in the community. Simply emphasise that your son was run over on a pelican crossing by a motorist that did not slow or stop for a red light.

Perhaps RoSPA might be interested to help?

[base849]

I completely agree- my
I completely agree- my already pounding heart sank when I heard those sentiments.

He’s a traffic collision investigator.
They have a huge amount of autonomy & are considered professionals who’s judgement, experience & knowledge is to be trusted, pretty much implicitly.

[Rendel Harris]

Sriracha wrote:

Sriracha wrote:

I wonder whether there is a perverse element of reverse logic at work, where someone in the decision making reasons, “we can’t give her six points since that would mean she loses her licence, just because she is a new driver – its not her fault she’s a new driver.”

Sadly I think that’s more than likely, it wouldn’t be the first time the police have made decisions about who deserves what: some years ago a friend of mine was threatened with violence in a pub, when the police came the perpetrator was sent away with a warning, she was told by the attending officer that they knew he was on probation and, “He’s not a bad lad really and doesn’t deserve to go back to prison.” On top of such value judgments there is the natural desire (with which I can somewhat sympathise without excusing) to go down the route of least paperwork…

[Sriracha]

“he himself had knocked a
“he himself had knocked a child over by accident not long after passing his test.”
Why is this guy not disqualified from the case? Straight away he is empathising with the perpetrator, simultaneously subscribing to the view that these things are “accidents”. In that short sentence he has already dismissed the case.

[Sriracha]

That bit, “it happened to me,
That bit, “it happened to me” really gets me. It is saying that “accidents happen to drivers”, and “won’t someone please think of the driver, the other victim here!”

[Sriracha]

I wonder whether there is a
I wonder whether there is a perverse element of reverse logic at work, where someone in the decision making reasons, “we can’t give her six points since that would mean she loses her licence, just because she is a new driver – its not her fault she’s a new driver.”

[base849]

If anyone has a kid that they
If anyone has a kid that they’ve got an ongoing battle with to wear a helmet, I’ve uploaded a photo of my boy’s hat.
Police, paramedics & A&E all emphasised that this pathetic £30 piece of plastic & polystyrene saved him from “a serious head injury”

Mum’s too cool for school & she’s had me dig out the helmet I’ve been trying to get her to wear for years, after seeing the light.

[base849]

Thanks everyone that’s taken
Thanks everyone that’s taken their time to respond. I’ve read all the contributions & we have some serious decisions to make, so thanks everyone for all the carefully thought out opinion & useful links.

I’m also hugely greatful for the empathy evident throughout. I guess as cyclists we are all acutely aware of our own vulnerability.

I’ll find out how much my union will take, but I’ll ring our home insurer too (mum’s nursing union passes on 70% for injury claims for dependents, so mine will likely be similar). I do think that offering a driver’s improvement course when she passed her test weeks ago is absolutely not what the scheme was intended for (to update & refresh seasoned drivers that have adopted bad habits & attitudes)- it’s an abuse of that alternative for the convenience of the police & courts.

A broken wrist & having the absolute shit beaten out of your 11 year old child is gut sickeningly no where near the definition of serious injury:
https://www.birchallblackburn.co.uk/what-do-you-mean-by-serious-injury/

I like the idea of approaching CyclingUK- we’ll give that a go. I’ve got a deep seated feeling that the traffic collision officer’s empathy for the driver’s need for a license wrongly found itself above the safety of an extremely vulnerable road user that was following the Highway Code to the letter.

We will carefully consider complaining to the police about the decision made- we already gave it serious thought before I came to the forum & concluded that we don’t have the time to take on Essex Police and lose, but you guys have made me rethink that. Don’t think we’ll win, but I think it’s the right thing to do. Then bring it to the attention of our MP.

[Oldfatgit]

Leaving aside the appalling
Leaving aside the appalling decision from the police …
Do you have legal cover on your household insurance?
I know you’ve said about going through the Union, but if you have legal cover, then talk to them; you will probably need their support in dealing with the insurance company.

I take it you’re submitting a claim on the other person’s insurance?
There maybe some tooing and froing, and probably mutterings about contributory negligence – that’s why you need to get legal support.

Get the claim in as soon as possible … You’ll probably have more success with that than fighting the police, and it’ll have the added bonus of putting the other person’s insurance up for the next five years or so.

[Author]

Replies