A cyclist injured by a motorist who cut a corner at a junction, knocking the woman from her bike and leaving her unable to walk properly for four months, has been left wondering “what the point of reporting crime is” — that after the driver responsible was given a driving course over the incident.
Greater Manchester Police told us the collision was subject to a “thorough investigation” and the driver would be sent on a driving course, rather than face prosecution. The cyclist involved, who goes by JustRed on social media, said the police “didn’t care much” and told her it is “expensive to prosecute”.
She was injured while approaching a junction, a driver cutting the corner and hitting her from her bike back in December, an incident which was captured on video.
JustRed reported it to Greater Manchester Police but got no update until a couple of months later.
They recalled: “An officer rang and told me: ‘Just calling about your.. uh [little chuckle] bump with the car. I’ve been to speak with the driver today… it’s expensive to prosecute… careless driving, agreed to a driving course’. He then spent two minutes going on about the driving course. Said they would post me the driver’s insurance details, but never did. That was the end of it. I still couldn’t walk properly at that point.”
The cyclist has now got a new bike through insurance, although it took the driver’s provider a few months to admit liability. The “bump”, as she said the officer described it, left her with “soft tissue injuries including a large bone contusion on my shin, sprained ankle and nerve damage which left me with no sensation in my foot for weeks, damaged rotator cuffs and a myriad of smaller injuries”.
In the footage the driver can be heard briefly asking if the rider is okay, but then leaves the scene as the cyclist shakes her head.
JustRed continued: “Five months on I’m still unstable and pained, with bad PTS creeping in every time I go out. I keep visualising people pulling out in front of me..
My experiences with GMP have never been great and I used to joke they wouldn’t act on bad driving until you were hit. I’m not sure what the point of reporting crime is now as they refuse to prosecute even when you are.
“Although bizarrely, two months after the crash, they sent someone a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) for close passing me, where they would normally send a warning letter. I guess they found some money down the back of the sofa.”
When we contacted Greater Manchester Police for comment, a force spokesperson said the incident was thoroughly investigated and that it was agreed that a driving course was the “best course of action”.
The spokesperson said: “Our Road Traffic Policing Investigation Unit investigate minor collisions, with incidents resulting in death or serious injury being investigated by our Serious Collision Investigation Unit or Road Policing Unit.
“When incidents of minor injury collisions are reported, a thorough investigation is conducted, and a decision is made to determine the best course of action, be that an educational course or criminal proceedings.
“In this case, both the victim and driver agreed that the driver should take a safe and considerate driving course, which is ran by an external company on behalf of the police, funded by the driver. If the driver fails to attend or pass the course, court proceedings would follow. The victim is kept up to date throughout.”
39 thoughts on ““I’m not sure what the point of reporting crime is”: Cyclist injured by motorist claims police “didn’t care” and sent driver on course as “it’s expensive to prosecute””
The number of motorists who
The number of motorists who do cut corners in junctions like that (and who don’t see anything wrong in it) is pretty scary.
Its completely standard and
Its completely standard and up to a point the design of roads encourages it. They all have sweeping corners on them to encourage people to enter and exit them as fast as possible. There is one near me that is genuinely 2x or more wider at the point it joins the main road than it is about 5m into the road. Makes it much more dangerous for pedestrians and encourages people to fly in and out of it at full speed.
People also need to start raising complaints with the police when they ignore cases like this. This was a hit and run. The person was seriously injured and remains so months later. The fact all the driver got was a short “don’t do it again” course is a joke.
mctrials23 wrote:
Good lord! You want them to have to slow down at junctions??
When I was involved in a hit
Number of drivers who see no wrong in all sorts of illegal/dangerous driving is very scary
I mean, the law pretty much
I mean, the law pretty much agrees with them so why wouldn’t they. Kill someone? Few years. Get caught speeding? Don’t worry, you have to be unlucky enough to get caught 4 times in a certain amount of time and we light up our cameras like christmas trees to make sure they don’t catch you out.
Hit someone and seriously injure them because you admit that you are driving when you can’t see and are happy to drive on the wrong side of the road? No worries, have a little refresher course on the dangers of driving.
No no no, stop this war on
No no no, stop this war on motorists.
It is only the evil and demonic cyclists that are the problem.
Lane disipline is at all time
Lane disipline is at all time low, everyone forgot how to drive properly after covid and there’s no traffic police around to correct bad behaviour.
It doesn’t sound like the
It doesn’t sound like the victim “agreed” that the driving course was the best course of action…
I have on two occaisions been
I have on two occaisions been told by the police that “I agreed” to something, which I plainly did not. Only communicate with the police in writing, if possible.
Only communicate with the
Only communicate with the police in writing, if possible
Absolutely correct- I never give the police a phone number as they would only fabricate parts of any conversation as it suited them. In this case, the police claim the victim agreed to the joke driving course. It would be important to know if this is true, and why she did so. Possibly the offer was: ‘driving course or nothing’
“In this case, both the
“In this case, both the victim and driver agreed that the driver should take a safe and considerate driving course”
From the article it doesn’t sound as if the victim agreed to this?
Institutionally anti-cyclist
Institutionally anti-cyclist
When I was involved in a hit
When I was involved in a hit and run in North Somerset the driver was prosecuted for careless driving as well as the failure to stop (i.e. no insurance details exchanged) and failure to report (all injury collisions are meant to be reported).
Seems like the northern police forces are still stuck in the last century.
is there no rigth to complain/request the police prosecute
makadu wrote:
Victims right to review.
One big issue of course is that to prosecute a lot of driving offences they have to issue a NIP within 14 days.
So even if the review finds careless/dangerous driving occurred, if there wasn’t a collision resulting in harm, the result will be “sorry, we got it wrong, but can’t do anything about it now because we have to issue a NIP within 14 days”
we got it wrong, but can’t do
we got it wrong, but can’t do anything about it now because we have to issue a NIP within 14 days
This is the favourite police dodge!
Just wondering, old age and
Just wondering, old age and all that, why is it only 14 days?
Is it the same if you are attacked and beaten up if walking down the street?
Iirc it’s a limit so that the
Iirc it’s a limit so that the NIP can be sent in a timely fashion and drivers can recall the incident properly. For which we can take that drivers are so often breaking the law they forget after a while which specific incident the NIP refers to
And the law may well say 14days, there are police forces who won’t pursue action if its after 7 days.
there are police forces who
there are police forces who won’t pursue action
if its after 7 daysagainst motorists offending against cyclists, everand drivers can recall the incident properly- which leads to the ‘we can’t do anything because the driver doesn’t recall the incident’ so beloved of ScotRozzer. So what’s the point of all that HD video without which ‘they can’t do anything’ either.
The point of it is that it gives them something to do, and a feeling of power and decisiveness, when they jet it into the bin.
The 14 day NIP limit does not
The 14 day NIP limit does not apply in the event of a collision. Dependant on the offences committed or being considered, the statutory limit of 6 months may apply…. Contrary to what may be cited by police as referenced by wtjs.
Yep just clarifying where the
Yep just clarifying where the 14days comes from. It doesn’t always apply.
qwerty360 wrote:
But there was a collision causing harm!
The driver got out and admitted on camera they couldn’t see as “the windows were steamed up”. That is dangerous driving whichever way you want to dress it up.
Putting other road users lives at risk because you can’t be arsed to wait for your windscreen to clear indicates that you are not to be trusted driving a large letheal weapon.
Do not pass go.
Do not collect £200.
GO direct to take a 5 year ban!
WTF are the police doing to uphold public safety?
NIP within 14 days does not
NIP within 14 days does not apply to collisions, its for camera detection etc, where the driver may not have noticed, and thus 14 days is the reasonable time limit for recalling who was driving when etc.
The driver was clearly aware of the collision as he asked if ok – thus courts recognise this as a “memorable incident” and can go beyond the 14 day NIP limit
Seems like the northern
Seems like the northern police forces are still stuck in the last century
Last century? You’d be lucky, happen…!Looks like GMP have been training at LancsFilth Driving Academy so they think this offender’s driving on the wrong side of the road is perfectly acceptable- they should soon move onto the ‘just bin every report from cyclists’ stage.
https://upride.cc/incident/hk64pzt_audiq5_dwlcross/
https://upride.cc/incident/kn21axh_lancspolice_closepass/
In Lancashire, the driving schools (with the implicit approval of the police) even teach driving grossly at odds with traffic law- this school boasts about its ex-police instructors.
https://upride.cc/incident/yx74soj_greenpass_closepass/
https://upride.cc/incident/ej65pff_greenpass_closepass/
So, the local b*****d drivers follow the example of the b*****d police drivers with alacrity- you will see that this pickup (a very bad group!) driver comes even closer than the police judging by the road ‘grating’
“Said they would post me the
“Said they would post me the driver’s insurance details, but never did.”
And whats the betting that if you requested the details in person you would get told to have a solicitor/insurance rep demand them, with the argument that they won’t give them out to the victim in person because of the “risk of vigilante actions” (despite official guidance being this should only be done if the victim has a history of violent behaviour).
While the legal system puts tight caps on how much can be claimed in legal costs in insurance claims, meaning a solicitor has to charge more to take the case than the insurer will pay out…
(I can see a few solutions for this. The obvious one would be require a contact + reference that police MUST provide to the other party; If the driver doesn’t want personal details given out fine – contact details for their representative (the insurer) with a claim reference number can be supplied instead)
Isn’t it a legal obligation
Isn’t it a legal obligation to hand over the insurance details at the scene?
brooksby wrote:
Legal obligation for driver to hand over details at the scene, or (if not possible) provide them to police as soon as possible (and within 24 hours).
The issue is the police don’t have an obligation to pass on the details.
“Sorry I ran over your bike/
“Sorry I ran over your bike/ Your Pushchair/ Your Child, my windows were steamed up”
I’ve said it before, would this be the same outcome were it a parent and child crossing the road they had hit? If you cant see through your windscreen you are dangerous. Not careless, Damnright dangerous.
I think it is safe to assume
I think it is safe to assume that had a police officer been the victim in this instance that the perp would have faced a far different “solution”
You couldn’t make some of
You couldn’t make some of this up! This story landing in the week that we learn that Parliament is considering whether cyclists that cause serious injury through dangerous cycling should face sentences of up to 5 years and those who kill should face up to life sentences. Meanwhile, someone driving dangerously and leaving the scene of an accident gets a driving course as a “penalty”. WTAF ?!!
I’m almost certain* that the
I’m almost certain* that the option of a training course will be offered to cyclists who kill or seriously injure.
* No it won’t.
If JustRed is reading this
If JustRed is reading this (or anyone else that has suffered similar) then I am sorry to see what happened to you and the injustice in how it was dealt with. If it is affecting your enjoyment of cycling I would recommend looking into Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT). It helps your mind deal with the incident in a healthy way so you can move on. My recommendation comes from experience as it helped me overcome visualisations of drivers pulling out on me (which meant I had lost situational awareness as I was so focused on the perceived threat). I got the driver’s insurance company to pay for my CBT but even if I had to pay myself it would have been worth it.
The best way forward would be
The best way forward would be a formal complaint via a solicitor with a request for a referral to the Independent Office for Police Conduct. This is clearly an injury RTA which should have been prosecuted. Alternatively there is the option of taking civil action against the driver. This might be easier as the standards of proof required are lower than in criminal cases.
The best way forward would be
The best way forward would be a formal complaint via a solicitor with a request for a referral to the Independent Office for Police Conduct. This is clearly an injury RTA which should have been prosecuted. Alternatively there is the option of taking civil action against the driver. This might be easier as the standards of proof required are lower than in criminal cases.
“When incidents of minor
“When incidents of minor injury collisions are reported, a thorough investigation is conducted, and a decision is made to determine the best course of action, be that an educational course or criminal proceedings”
Who conducts the investigation? The station caretaker?
What level of competence do they have for road traffic law, a specialist field, hence specialist officers and investigators.
Why are they not triggered by an admission of guilt by the driver?
Shocking and sad.
Quote:
In case JustRed is reading this, putting aside the question of whether or not the victim agreed, did the driver complete the educational course?
This story is very disappointing. Driver cuts a corner, driving with seriously reduced visibility, hits a cylists and drives off without exchanging details. I hope that the police have satisfied themselves that the driver has no previous driving convictions otherwise this does does seem to be completely unacceptable. The only crumb of comfort is that the courts and the police will save a load of time and money and there is a small chance that the diver will learn their lesson.
If not too late, get on to
If not too late, get on to Slater & Gordon and get compensation for your bodily injuries.
All too common.
All too common.
Me – knocked down by driver emerging from side street. Broken hip, broken back, compartment syndrome in my thigh and lots of soft tissue damage. 10months off work. Lots of witnesses.
Court date arranged to prosecute driver, case dropped a week before. No Comms from Scottish Proc Fiscal. Driver got clean away with it. Even if Police take it seriously, the prosecutor often lets the side down. An appalling experience.
I would be amazed if this
I would be amazed if this could not be successfully followed up in a “no win-no fee” case with an appropriate solicitor which could provide some recompense. I had an “incident” where I was knocked off by a motorist and experienced a similar lack of interest from the police. I would judge my evidence to be less than that found in this case. However, as a Cycling UK member I contacted Fletchers Solicitors via Cycling UK and, despite it being, in comparison, a relatively trivial incident (are there any?) after around two years and some work on my part, a lot on the Solicitor’s part and the inevitable delaying and distracting tactics from the defendant’s insurance I received significant financial compensation, and the solicitors received a well-deserved payment for their work. It was a satisfying moment – and I can only recommend that approach to anyone sufficiently angered and injured to take the same route.
GMP are renowned as a poorly
GMP are renowned as a poorly performing failing force. This is just more of that.