Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
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?
yep, it’s not the norm. I had
yep, it’s not the norm. I had to do quite a lot of polite pestering.
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!
It makes a mockery of the 6 point limit for new drivers. People lose their licences for using a mobile phone when driving in the first 2 years, which is a serious offence, but not as bad as failing to stop (or even slow) for a pedestrian crossing.
I’m not sure if the police
I’m not sure if the police can withdraw the offer of a driver course. I suspect they probably can if it hasn’t gone ahead yet.
It sounded to me like the
It sounded to me like the driver course was the police’s opening gambit and there might still be time to challenge it.
When I got close passed, the police wanted to send a warning letter. I was livid! I asked to escalate and got up to an inspector, who then offered a driver course. I then spent 30mins on the phone convincing him that this warranted more than that. Eventually, it went to court, police-led careless driving and the driver got 5 points and a hefty fine.
Unfortunately, as far as I’m aware, there is no real mechanism whereby a victim can challenge a traffic penalty decision.It’s hard to challenge a decision, but you do have the right to do so under the victims code of practice.
When considering an out-of-court disposal option, the police must ask the victim their opinion on this. If the victim is unhappy about it, then that must form part of the police’s decision making. Ultimately, the police can decide what to do, but if they don’t ask the victim and fail to consider their view or justify their actions, then they will not have followed due process and a police complaint could be raised.
This is appalling from the
This is appalling from the police. It makes you wonder if the driver knows someone in the force. To offer a driver improvement course for this monumental failure to operate a vehicle safely, and the consequences that are every parents worst nightmare, is a dereliction of duty in my opinion.
I would try and discuss with the inspector overseeing the case the options for a charge. There is a charge of causing serious injury by dangerous driving. A broken wrist would meet the threshold for serious injury (GBH) and passing a car stopped on zig-zags at speed could be dangerous driving (although only momentary, it can still be considered dangerous). This would need CPS backing to proceed to court.
A lesser option would be careless driving. This can be a police led prosecution, they do not need to involve the CPS, but it will need to go to court to have a chance of the maximum 6 points (I think this warrants more than the 3 points and £100 of a FPN).
Failing that, you could contact the Essex PCC (although there’s a limit to what they might do), and also raise a complaint via IOPC (the admission of the collision investigator that he had done the same, could be seen as bias). Good luck and a speedy recovery to your son.
Third time’s a charm… Title
Third time’s a charm… Title – the car did it. Photo caption – the car did it. Opening sentence – ah, it was the driver after all!
I got mine insured through
I got mine insured through buildings and contents with Aviva. IIRC, they just wanted the replacement (new) value of the most expensive bike. Didn’t have to list them all. Covered at home or when out (in UK), as long as it is locked up. Quote was competitive. Excess is quite high at £350, but I’m happy with that as I really do take care of my stuff, insurance is just damage limitation should the worst happen.
Neat! Spotted a table of
Neat! Spotted a table of aggregated stats on their website.
https://www.mybiketraffic.com/stats/countries
Average number of overtakes per ride in the UK is 102.
I think it’s had a bit of a
I think it’s had a bit of a polarising effect. The cautious majority have become even more careful, but the reckless idiots seem to be emboldened to drive closer and faster than before.
In the last month, I’ve had two drivers angrily beep at me for absolutely no reason other than I was on the road ahead of them. One then swerved to side-swipe me whilst holding down the horn (police report submitted – I must chase it up!).
Yep, I agree. I’m not 100%
Yep, I agree. I’m not 100% against a toot on the horn in the situation you describe, I just don’t think it was warranted in this particular scenario.
Yep, I do really think the
Yep, I do really think the problem is Ashley hasn’t got much experience cycling, he says so here… https://youtu.be/J9RJfhVVe2A?t=33
I don’t think he quite gets defensive cycling techniques and just sees agressive/arrogant rather than assertive riding.
If we ignore this video, as
If we ignore this video, as there was easily 1.5m, probably over 2m and he’d already slowed, and just think of the situation you give…
If it’s a 50mph road and only 1.5m distance is available when cyclists are two abreast, it means either a car should slow to 30mph or the cyclists should single out.
I would normally slow to 40mph or less when passing a cyclist anyway. Speed limits are based on an absolute maximum and not suitable for all conditions, I take cyclists in the road as one of those conditions where the maximum is not appropriate (although that’s just me, it’s not stated anywhere like it is now for passing horses).
So, when there is light traffic, to me it seems like singling out is more trouble for the cyclist than slowing down is for the driver.
With traffic approaching that quickly, the cyclists probably wouldn’t have time to single out anyway before the car had to slow. So that means you would have to ride singled out all the time, then you lose the benefit of preventing dangerous close passes that riding two abreast gives.
Maybe, but the cyclists pictured are clearly riding along in their own little bubbles…Shields up!
They do seem to be chatting away, but then perhaps they were not concerned about the amount of space available for an overtake.
I did have a look at the location, it’s the A506, which sounds like a major route, but it runs parallel to the M58. So unless there’s a delay on the motorway, it’s likely to be very light with traffic.
I’d love to look that relaxed when cycling. I’m a bag of nerves most of the time, hypervigilant for the inevitable idiot driver of the day to appear.
I think Ashley misspoke there
I think Ashley misspoke there, the 2m rule got dropped. The HWC says ‘more than’ 1.5m when passing at speeds over 30mph. It’s based on the vehicle speed, not the limit applied to the road, which I think he’s misunderstood too.
It’s also just a guide. Nobody can be expected to judge that distance accurately.
