- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Nathan Brown (image: North Wales Police)Hit-and-run driver without licence who left cyclist with multiple injuries jailed for a year and disqualified from driving for four years
A hit-and-run motorist who was driving without his licence and hit a cyclist, who said he thought he had “hit an animal”, has been sentenced to one year in prison and disqualified from driving for four years, with the judge also saying that he must pass an extended re-test before being allowed back on the roads.
The cyclist, Phillip Pike, was riding an e-bike with a max speed limit of 15mph in Prestatyn, Denbighshire in north Wales at 10:30pm on May 26, 2023, when he heard “high revving” from behind, and was then hit by a Mini being driven by 26-year-old Nathan Brown.
Pike suffered two fractured ribs, a fractured left collar bone, a lacerated spleen and grazing to his chest. His bike was trapped under the car for a few seconds, but Brown didn’t stop and continued to drive despite the bike igniting sparks.
North Wales Live reports that police traced the car two days later, which belonged to Brown’s girlfriend who said that Brown had taken the car without her permission despite not being eligible to drive as his licence had been revoked after accruing 12 penalty points.
Brown was seen coming out of a pub to his girlfriend’s car, and when questioned by the police, he said that he thought he had hit an “animal”.
Meanwhile, Pike was later taken to a hospital and was admitted there for two weeks. In December, he gave a statement to the court saying that he was still in pain and discomfort seven months after the incident. The cyclist, who already had ADHD, said the thought of going on a road raised his anxiety levels and he stopped going out at night.
Pike died in February this year. His partner of 13 years, Ruth Green, said in her statement that the collision and court hearing adjournments had a significant negative impact on his mental health, leading him to develop paranoia. She said: “Philip was my world and now he's gone. The collision has been instrumental in bringing to an end two lives as I don't know how to carry on.”
The defending lawyer said Brown maintained that he did not initially realise he had struck Mr Pike, and “struggles to explain how this incident occurred,” but is “truly remorseful”. He also added that his client has now been “clean from drugs for at least six months” and “no longer drinks alcohol to excess”.
Sentencing, Judge Niclas Parry told Brown that he had “no regard for the roads”. He added: “You did not report the accident - no call for any help, no call for an ambulance. But I cannot sentence you on the basis the sad passing was attributable to your offending. That's subject to continuing investigations.”
Brown was handed a 12-month sentence in prison for causing serious injury by careless or inconsiderate driving. He was also sentenced for 12 more months after part of a suspended sentence for an earlier offence was activated, making a total of two years imprisonment.
Judge Parry also disqualified Brown from driving for four years, adding to the conviction that he must also then pass an extended re-test before being allowed back on the roads.
In September last year, a new report by the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Cycling and Walking (APPGCW) has advised that motorists who commit driving offences while behind the wheel of larger, heavier cars should receive tougher penalties, with the size and weight of the vehicle seen as an “aggravating factor” when it comes to sentencing.
The cross-party group’s report, also called for speed limits to be strictly enforced, with the current tolerances for inaccurate readings scrapped, along with recommending that anyone who is banned from driving for a period should be forced to undertake a fresh driving test, while criticising those who use the “exceptional hardship” excuse to avoid bans.
Adwitiya joined road.cc in 2023 as a news writer after completing his masters in journalism from Cardiff University. His dissertation focused on active travel, which soon threw him into the deep end of covering everything related to the two-wheeled tool, and now cycling is as big a part of his life as guitars and football. He has previously covered local and national politics for Voice Cymru, and also likes to write about science, tech and the environment, if he can find the time. Living right next to the Taff trail in the Welsh capital, you can find him trying to tackle the brutal climbs in the valleys.
Latest Comments
- hawkinspeter 0 sec ago
Ridiculed or is it just jealousy?
- belugabob 10 min 58 sec ago
I had to double-take the headline... https://www.kentonline.co.uk/sandwich/news/takeaway-driver-19-who-left-e...
- Rendel Harris 25 min 55 sec ago
Thank goodness for that. I don't suppose anyone would want you to. You certainly behave like one though.
- Eton Rifle 33 min 37 sec ago
You do see some utterly ridiculous examples of car use....
- Eton Rifle 55 min 54 sec ago
Exactly. Every road death is a tragedy but this is at the "twat deserved it" end of the spectrum, looking at the state of that car.
- Rendel Harris 1 hour 3 min ago
I'm not the editor of this article, nor indeed of anything on this website. One would have thought that didn't require explaining.
- Eton Rifle 1 hour 3 min ago
I think the answer is in your question. I genuinely didn't know he was married to her. It does kinda explain it. Disappointing, nevertheless.
- Daclu Trelub 5 hours 49 min ago
In a perfect world, we'd have a measure of how easily distracted someone is, as part of their driving test....
- Sredlums 6 hours 16 min ago
These products are nothing but ridiculously expensive and superfluous, and they bring nothing but bragging rights....
Add new comment
22 comments
The offence of assault with a weapon is commonly referred to as 'assault with intent to cause serious harm' or 'assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. ' It is an offence under Section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and is punishable by a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
I would argue 1.5+ tonnes of metal without a licence to use it in public constitutes a weapon??
A few observations
Truly remorseful??????
Failure to stop once again more or less ignored when it should mean a much increased sentence.
Careless or inconsiderate! Careless to cause serious injury to a cyclist or even worse "inconsiderate". Should have been dangerous driving but that would mean more work for the CPS.
"That's subject to continuing investigations." I assume this means that someone is looking into whether the death was caused by the serious injuries so there is hope of a more serious charge in future. Let's hope that's the case.
The defending lawyer said Brown maintained that he did not initially realise he had struck Mr Pike, and “struggles to explain how this incident occurred,” but is “truly remorseful”.
I think that sentence says everything we need to know. He lied about knowing he'd hit someone, he can't explain how it happened because he did it deliberately, and doesn't give a flying flamingo.
Like others, I can't understand the extremely light sentence, and if the CDF want to mount an appeal against it, count me in for a few quid.
Yep. Another scumbag using the ''truly remorseful'' defence. He will be out in months and free to get on with his life, unlike his victim. And anyone who thinks he will be in any way affected by a driving ban must be seriously deluded. As others have said, condolences to Mr Pike's family and friends.
The relatives might of course disagree, but in general I'd countenance a relatively light sentence* if only we could fix it so that those who reoffend have a moderate chance of being caught AND we did something meaningful with them at that point. Perhaps that could be some kind of long-term suspended custodial sentence immediately kicking in (an often repeated idea)?
Banning someone who doesn't have a licence or was already banned seems close to futility if the next punishment is another ban.
* Possibly not in this case - seems this chap needs some longer term interventions or maybe just getting off the streets for as long as possible.
I've been arguing for long-term suspended sentences.
I've seen partial suspended sentences in Ireland for up to around 8 years.
That's a very light sentence. I hope at the very least, the victim can make civil claims against the driver and take every penny he has. Sadly, it's unlikely.
Too late for the victim. Whether Ruth Green can take action I don't know.
Yep, I didn't see that part of the story. It's an appalling case. A life ban from driving would be suitable here.
A life ban would make no difference - he was already banned at the time of the offence. Perhaps, when they add a ban to those already banned it needs to come with the automatic consequence of escalating prison time if flouted.
I simply can't comprend how he has got off virtually scott-free. Why bother taking these morons to court, as nothing happens to them.
Waste of taxpayers money.
My sympathies to the family and friends of Mr Pike.
- previously loses licence for hitting 12 points
- takes car without permission
- drives without licence
- hit and run, causes pretty much life changing injuries, lucky not to kill the cyclist
- doesn't stop to at least check what it hits and to offer assistance
Judge: "...told Brown that he had “no regard for the roads”. He added: “You did not report the accident - no call for any help, no call for an ambulance. But I cannot sentence you on the basis the sad passing was attributable to your offending. That's subject to continuing investigations.” ...
Hands Brown 12 month sentences, plus 12 from previous suspended sentence and 4 years driving ban plus extended re-test.
Yeah. That'll teach him...
He heard the car revving behind him. Sounds like a deliberate hit and run. Charlie Alliston gets 18mths, this wanker gets just a year. I hope he gets a nasty cancer
How long did those JSO protestors get again?
Erm - so he drives into a cyclist from behind, carries on driving with the bicycle stuck under the front of his car and creating sparks off the road (according to witnesses), but he thought he struck an animal?
Not many animals cause grinding noises when underneath a vehicle.
That's the first I've heard of the proposal for the weight and size of a vehicle to be considered an aggravating factor. I'm sure there will be a lot of push-back, but I hope it is taken forward.
The car industry has been allowed to get away letting people think they need these larger vehicles to be safe, and it would provide a bit of balance if potential customers knew they came with increased liability.
I don't know how they'd enforce it. Would it automatically be assumed that a driver of a larger vehicle takes more liability, or would it depend on an assessment of whether the use of a large vehicle is reasonable for their needs? I'd like to see it considered for insurance claims too. Even a low speed, mutual fault collision between a big car and a small car will result in more damage than necessary to the small car.
Sounds like the APPGCW report is going to be interesting reading.
I don't see a need for any major analysis.
A larger vehicle is a higher risk, and that is the factual context that the driver is required to take into account as part of the 'conditions' - just the same as fog or a wet road or if driving a lorry.
What's the point of a four-year ban for someone sentenced to prison for causing severe injuries while banned from driving? Should have added those four years to his prison sentence. That might at least make him think twice about doing it again.
I have said before that a driving ban needs to be treated like a suspended sentence, breaching that ban should automatically result in jail time equal to the original ban
I know nothing will change until it does, but (FFS) yes - a prison sentence (and they've actually applied a previous suspended one) BUT why are we holding out "mustn't let them lose hope of driving legally again"?
This chap has clearly worked out he doesn't need a licence, or to drive safely; and that all that will happen if he doesn't have one is he will be told not to drive for a while and to get one before he does so again.