A cyclist who suffered a broken neck and back after being struck by a motorist at a junction, leaving him unable to work, says he wishes “no ill will” on the 19-year-old student, who was banned from driving for a year in court this week.
Nottingham Magistrates’ Court heard that teenager David Jeffrey was distracted by his sat nav, leading to what was described in court as a “very brief moment” of inattention which caused him to turn without looking properly and hit a man riding his bike in the opposite direction.
Jeffrey, a student at the University of Nottingham, had only been driving for three months when the collision took place on 9 March 2025, at the junction of Melton Lane and Landcroft Lane, in Sutton Bonington, a village south of Nottingham, at around 12.30pm.
“He turned a corner, having not seen the cyclist, who suffered a number of fractured vertebrae, a fractured shoulder and a broken neck,” prosecutor Neil Howlett told the court.
The cyclist also suffered an injury to his eye, which has caused him ongoing issues, and he is currently unable to work or drive. Jeffrey remained at the scene following the crash, and was described by witnesses as “distraught”, Nottinghamshire Live reports.
> Lorry driver “blinded by sun” when he killed cyclist cleared of careless driving
The 19-year-old, who is now in his second year studying computer science, while also acting as a mentor to younger students, pleaded guilty to causing serious injury by careless or inconsiderate driving.
Jessica Skelton, mitigating, also told the court that Jeffrey volunteers to help maintain his local country park, while working on IT-related matters for his parents’ business.
“He passed his driving test in December [2024] and has had this hanging over him since March of last year,” the solicitor said.
“He found it quite difficult to get back into a vehicle for a long time and will now only go out with his parents.
“On the day he did not know where he was going and there is a suggestion that the road was also closed.
“For a very brief moment he was distracted and did not see the cyclist but he remained at the scene and was really concerned about the cyclist.”
District Judge Katy Rafter handed the teenager a 12-month community order, requiring him to carry out 100 hours of unpaid work, and disqualified him from driving for a year. He was also ordered to pay £85 in costs, along with a £154 victim surcharge.
“You turned into a junction and you were momentarily distracted trying to follow your satellite navigation system,” the judge said.
“What followed left the cyclist with very serious injuries including fractures to his neck, ribs, and an injury to his eye which is still causing him ongoing issues.
“What happened has left him unable to work or drive but I have read his victim impact statement and he wishes you no ill will and understands that you remained at the scene offering help and were described as distraught by those who saw you.
“It has affected him significantly. But you have no previous convictions and I am confident you will never trouble the courts again.
“You are studying at the University of Nottingham and you have a bright future ahead of you. I take all of that into account and that you are clearly remorseful.”
5 thoughts on “Teenager banned from driving for a year after breaking cyclist’s back, neck, and shoulder while distracted by sat nav”
“I am confident you will
“I am confident you will never trouble the courts again….”
Based on exactly what? The fact he is studying at university and has never been caught committing a crime? I studied with a lot of self-important twits at university some of whom I am sure are probably driving around today while texting because, well, they think their entitled to take their eyes of the road to do what they need/want to do because they are important.
From the sound of it, he’s likely to be back driving before the cyclist is fully healed. What a justice system. Should the sentence have kept him from driving at least until the victim is able to legally drive again?
Cyclist bears him no ill-will
Cyclist bears him no ill-will. That’s what got him off. So, we can’t really argue with that. The real question is what the penalty would have been if the cyclist had stated: I definitely bear him ill-will for leaving me with all these injuries. My suspicion is: no different, but a different summing-up.
This kid will be driving in a
This kid will be driving in a year meanwhile £154 compensation for multiple injuries is pretty f’ed up.
The victim surcharge is
The victim surcharge is nothing to do with the injuries suffered by the cyclist.
It goes into a big pot “Revenue raised from the surcharge is used to fund victim services through the Victim and Witness General Fund”
Vey stupid practice by the
Vey stupid practice by the District Judge.
The student has not been properly trained to drive, or has neglected to learn. Things like don’t start driving when you don’t know what is there because you have your head in your satnav or phone are the basics of the basics.
It would be appropriate to have insisted on a lot more lessons, and an extended test.