# Offence of Dangerous Driving



## nick boardman (24 Nov 2017)

Has anybody been involved in an incident where the vehicle driver has been charged with ' Dangerous Driving ' ? 

I was cycling around a blind corner and hit a car turning right out of his driveway causing a broken collar bone. The police have indicated ' No Further Action ' , but in my opinion the circumstances fit the criteria and CPS guidelines for the offence of Dangerous Driving. By choosing to turn right the driver carried out a dangerous manoeuvre - he took a chance as he couldn't see around the blind bend - instead of simply turning left on the straight road and then turning around about 100 metres away. Of course this would have added 30 seconds to his journey time and his time is more important than a life ( apologies for the sarcasm ).

I'm going to appeal the police inaction so any stated cases or knowledge of incidents where Dangerous Driving was charged would be gratefully received.


----------



## I like Skol (24 Nov 2017)

It could equally be argued that you were also cycling dangerously by riding at a speed where you could not stop in the distance you could see to be clear. If it were a blind bend then surely slow and cautious is the answer, in case there is an obstruction or vehicle pulling out of a hidden entrance?


----------



## derrick (24 Nov 2017)

The police do not like to prosecute motorist's involved in accidents with cyclist's. My wife got hit on a round about, by a motorist on her mobile phone. the police refused to check her phone then refused to prosecute. i wrote to the police complaints department after many exchanges of emails they said they would put her on a drivers awareness course. What a load of tossers.


----------



## Bonefish Blues (24 Nov 2017)

Seems like careless is the maximum you could expect. Random internet quote:

In the jargon, you're guilty of a careless driving offence if you drive a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place.


----------



## mjr (24 Nov 2017)

I like Skol said:


> It could equally be argued that you were also cycling dangerously by riding at a speed where you could not stop in the distance you could see to be clear. If it were a blind bend then surely slow and cautious is the answer, in case there is an obstruction or vehicle pulling out of a hidden entrance?


More or less agree except I'd say it was careless cycling rather than dangerous. Sorry OP, but I think you could be open to prosecution too, so I'd leave this one alone unless you think you could defend it better than the motorist, especially at the moment when any jury or bench in most of the country is much less likely to cycle than drive. There are far more clear-cut incidents which go unpunished - if you want to help change things, rather than use your case, I'd put equivalent time into cycle campaigning or a donation to the cyclists defence fund.


----------



## RichK (24 Nov 2017)

I suggested the driver of the moped that hit me should be prosecuted for dangerous driving (at excessive speed round a blind bend on a pathway where motor vehicles are explicitly prohibited). He pleaded guilty to driving without due care & attention (along with no ved, no mot, no licence, no insurance & failure to stop). I've no idea where/when the charges were agreed.


----------



## iluvmybike (24 Nov 2017)

Bonefish Blues said:


> Seems like careless is the maximum you could expect. Random internet quote:
> 
> In the jargon, you're guilty of a careless driving offence if you drive a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place.


I;'d agree that would be the charge if there were to be one as 'dangerous' implies an intent to carry out something you know may have a bad outcome - which doesn't seem to be the case here from the info given - but it sounds as though both may have been at fault - as someone says it it was a blind bend everyone needs to take care and go slowly. Its just an unfortunate accident. Pursuing these things unnecessarily wastes valuable police time & resources.


----------



## brucers (24 Nov 2017)

On the face of it if the driver had been turning left the car would have still been occupying almost the same area of road where the impact took place.


----------



## alicat (24 Nov 2017)

It would have been dangerous driving if the driver had driven out of the driveway and turned right as fast as he could and without looking left or right or having any intention to stop. Having his eyes blindfolded would have also helped a prosecution.

At best the police would charge with driving without due care and attention or more likely and usefully send on a driver awareness course.


----------



## mjr (24 Nov 2017)

brucers said:


> On the face of it if the driver had been turning left the car would have still been occupying almost the same area of road where the impact took place.


Depends on the road width, Shirley?


----------



## NickNick (24 Nov 2017)

From what you've described, it definitely wouldn't meet criteria for dangerous driving and doubt it would meet the threshold for careless/without due care& attention as it would be impossible to prove that the driver pulled out without looking. CPS aren't going to lay charges if there isn't a reasonable chance of conviction. 

As others have mentioned it might also be that you were going too fast for a blind corner which would further muddy the water. They are less than keen on charging drivers in much more clear cut cases. I got knocked onto a bonnet when going round a roundabout a month or so back, driver clearly at fault and dangerous/incompetent, but as I wasn't injured (due to sheer luck of holding on to bonnet, she would have killed/maimed me if i had slipped off) they didn't want to know.


----------



## Drago (24 Nov 2017)

From my considerable experience investigating such matters, going from the brief scenario described I would suggest it wouldn't meet the threshold test for DD. As the aggrieved and the witness the first thing CPS will do will be to examine your actions to establish that you did nothing to contribute to the outcome, and that you are credible as a witness. You will, sadly, fall at then first hurdle as you failed to exercise due caution on a blind corner, and failed in your duty to ride at a speed which would allow you to stop in the distance you can actually see to be clear.

There may be a slim case for knocking off the driver of car 1 for careless, but your riding would likely meet the same criteria, undermining your credibility as a witness and apportioning a degree of culpability to you, therefore it wouldn't meet the public interest test.

Suck it up, screw the insurers for every penny instead, and take more care when you can't see what's ahead. Good luck.


----------



## Profpointy (24 Nov 2017)

Presumably if the driver.had turned left the OP would have cycled up his arse rather than into his side. Would that have been OK ?

Or did the op ride up his arse as he'd not yet accelerated away. in which case would the op have hit him if he'd, say, just stopped because of a hazzard?


----------



## jefmcg (24 Nov 2017)

nick boardman said:


> I was cycling around a blind corner and hit a car turning right out of his driveway causing a broken collar bone.


Don't cycle (or drive) around a blind corner so fast you couldn't stop if there was something in the road. I'm with @I like Skol - I think you have committed a more serious traffic offence than the driver.

(sorry about the clavicle, those buggers really hurt )


----------



## DaveReading (24 Nov 2017)

A person drives dangerously when:
i) the way they drive falls far below the minimum acceptable standard expected of a competent and careful driver; and
ii) it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/fact_sheets/dangerous_driving/


----------



## Drago (24 Nov 2017)

Had the chap parked his car there we may have the offence of leaving a vehicle in a dangerous position. However, the same rules apply as described my myself above to other road users, and we shouldn't be driving or riding blind at a speed that would not allow us to stop at within the distance we can see to be clear. 

We have a duty of care to ourselves as well as other road users, and just because someone else isn't exercising due care doesn't negate the requirement for us to do so.



DaveReading said:


> A person drives dangerously when:
> i) the way they drive falls *far* below the minimum acceptable standard expected of a competent and careful driver; and
> ii) it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.
> 
> http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/fact_sheets/dangerous_driving/



I've highlighted the word that thee CPS place enormous importance upon. Unfortunately, the definition above applies equally to people encountering blind corners.


----------



## NickNick (24 Nov 2017)

Drago said:


> Had the chap parked his car there we may have the offence of leaving a vehicle in a dangerous position. However, the same rules apply as described my myself above to other road users, and we shouldn't be driving blind at a speed that would not allow us to stop at within the distance we can see to be clear.
> 
> We have a duty of care to ourselves as well as other road users, and just because someone else isn't exercising due care doesn't negate the requirement for us to do so.



Yep, that could equally have been a mother with a pram, an elderly person, small child... crossing the road at that point which would not have had a pretty ending!


----------



## jefmcg (24 Nov 2017)

I apply a rule I read somewhere 

Always cycle (or drive) as if a refrigerator has fallen off the back of a truck just out of sight around the next corner.


----------



## I like Skol (24 Nov 2017)

jefmcg said:


> I apply a rule I read somewhere
> 
> Always cycle (or drive) as if a refrigerator has fallen off the back of a truck just out of sight around the next corner.


I am an enthusiastic cyclist/driver and use a similar maxim to the above.... 'What if I meet myself coming the other way?' It certainly makes me slow down when driving on twisty single track country lanes!


----------



## brucers (24 Nov 2017)

mjr said:


> Depends on the road width, Shirley?


Hence 'on the face of it' plus it was a driveway so more likely single lane.


----------



## vickster (24 Nov 2017)

Drago said:


> From my considerable experience investigating such matters, going from the brief scenario described I would suggest it wouldn't meet the threshold test for DD. As the aggrieved and the witness the first thing CPS will do will be to examine your actions to establish that you did nothing to contribute to the outcome, and that you are credible as a witness. You will, sadly, fall at then first hurdle as you failed to exercise due caution on a blind corner, and failed in your duty to ride at a speed which would allow you to stop in the distance you can actually see to be clear.
> 
> There may be a slim case for knocking off the driver of car 1 for careless, but your riding would likely meet the same criteria, undermining your credibility as a witness and apportioning a degree of culpability to you, therefore it wouldn't meet the public interest test.
> 
> Suck it up*, screw the insurers for every penny* instead, and take more care when you can't see what's ahead. Good luck.


Why if the OP is equally culpable as you suggest ?

Fair enough if the motorist has accepted full liability which isn’t stated (has the OP engaged a solicitor to pursue for personal injury as well as seeking police action?)


----------



## DCLane (24 Nov 2017)

brucers said:


> Hence 'on the face of it' plus it was a driveway so more likely single lane.



I know the Op here (or at least I know a Nick who's recently had an accident on a RH bend with a car breaking his clavicle so it's a good guess I do). The road's quite wide and a main road but with a series of blind turns and high walls.

What I'm not is clued up on the stuff he's asking about so not commenting.


----------



## brucers (24 Nov 2017)

DCLane said:


> I know the Op here (or at least I know a Nick who's recently had an accident on a RH bend with a car breaking his clavicle so it's a good guess). The road's quite wide and a main road but with a series of blind turns and high walls.
> 
> What I'm not is clued up on the stuff he's asking about so not commenting.


It's all food for thought and can help give a clearer insight. Sometimes accidents are just that with no fault.


----------



## nick boardman (27 Nov 2017)

nick boardman said:


> Has anybody been involved in an incident where the vehicle driver has been charged with ' Dangerous Driving ' ?
> 
> I was cycling around a blind corner and hit a car turning right out of his driveway causing a broken collar bone. The police have indicated ' No Further Action ' , but in my opinion the circumstances fit the criteria and CPS guidelines for the offence of Dangerous Driving. By choosing to turn right the driver carried out a dangerous manoeuvre - he took a chance as he couldn't see around the blind bend - instead of simply turning left on the straight road and then turning around about 100 metres away. Of course this would have added 30 seconds to his journey time and his time is more important than a life ( apologies for the sarcasm ).
> 
> I'm going to appeal the police inaction so any stated cases or knowledge of incidents where Dangerous Driving was charged would be gratefully received.



Update. Thanks for the replies, although nobody has actually related any stated cases or specific incidents, some of the comments are interesting. My overwhelming sense of all this and having researched cases on the internet, many involving death or life changing injuries to cyclists, is that the majority of Police do not treat these incidents with the seriousness they deserve, and that is reflected in many of the comments looking at the culpability of the cyclist ( vulnerable road user ) rather than the motorist. That mindset will need to change or the carnage will continue.

In my case, the driveway from which the car emerged was about 5 metres from the corner . The driver had a choice - he could turn right uphill and ' chance it ' as he couldn't see around the bend or he could turn left downhill and turnaround about 100 metres down the straight road - the safer option. I wasn't going fast - about 15 miles an hour and not pedalling as it was downhill and a tight corner. I was immediately confronted with a Range Rover straddling both carriageways , braked hard but had nowhere to go in the short distance but luckily managed to steer so I hit it more side on than head on , which would have been more serious.

In my opinion and I would say from a commonsense viewpoint, the driver chose to carry out a dangerous ( and unnecessary ) manoeuvre. My actions did not contribute to the collision. If he hadn't been there I wouldn't have hit him. In fact, what he seemed most worried about afterwards was moving his precious Range Rover as it was in a ' dangerous position ' ! 

I am aware of all the legal definitions relating to Dangerous Driving such as ' falls far below ........etc ' . The CPS also include the following in their guidelines - ' Failing to have a proper and safe regard for vulnerable road users such as .......... cyclists ........ and when in the vicinity of a ........ school ' . It was near a school with 2 'School' signs fixed to telegraph poles near the driveway. CPS guidelines also state - ' It is not necessary to consider what the driver thought about the possible consequences of his actions: simply whether or not a competent and careful driver would have observed, appreciated and guarded against obvious and material dangers '. 

The Police Officer who saw me ( 2 weeks later ) told me they were taking ' no action '. I expressed my concern that the same thing could happen to somebody else with graver consequences to which he replied - ' It shouldn't , as I have advised him to always turn left ' !


----------



## NickNick (27 Nov 2017)

nick boardman said:


> In my opinion and I would say from a commonsense viewpoint, the driver chose to carry out a dangerous ( and unnecessary ) manoeuvre. My actions did not contribute to the collision. If he hadn't been there I wouldn't have hit him. In fact, what he seemed most worried about afterwards was moving his precious Range Rover as it was in a ' dangerous position ' !



You should always be going slowly enough to be able to stop in the distance that you have visible, whilst in this instance you were the vulnerable road user, that could have been a walking bus of school kids crossing the road, a parent with a pram, someone in a wheel chair and although you might have been able to manoeuvre around them, you equally could have hit them if anything went wrong with said manoeuvre.

Equally there could have been a que of traffic just around that blind bend, you would have ended up either in the back of a car (which you would be liable for, as the person rearending another is pretty much always guaranteed to be) or you would have had to cross on the wrong side of the road.


----------



## NickNick (27 Nov 2017)

Forgot to add, the other way to look at the situation is what if that had been a cyclist turning right out of that driveway and instead of you coming round the blind bend on a bike it had been a car driver going at the same speed. Surely the bulk of the blame would go to the car driver for having driven too fast to be able to stop in time, irrespective of whether or not the cyclist could have done a safer left turn?


----------



## mjr (27 Nov 2017)

nick boardman said:


> Update. Thanks for the replies, although nobody has actually related any stated cases or specific incidents, some of the comments are interesting.


This site covers two years of cyclist deaths and lists only one driver being charged: https://beyondthekerbcasebook.wordpress.com/tag/charge-causing-death-by-dangerous-driving/

There doesn't seem to be any way to search the later version https://beyondthekerb.org.uk/casebook/ by charge.

I agree broadly with this comment:


> My overwhelming sense of all this and having researched cases on the internet, many involving death or life changing injuries to cyclists, is that the majority of Police do not treat these incidents with the seriousness they deserve, and that is reflected in many of the comments looking at the culpability of the cyclist ( vulnerable road user ) rather than the motorist. That mindset will need to change or the carnage will continue.


...but I remain of the opinion that the driver you encountered was more careless than dangerous.


----------



## I like Skol (27 Nov 2017)

nick boardman said:


> Update. Thanks for the replies, although nobody has actually related any stated cases or specific incidents, some of the comments are interesting. My overwhelming sense of all this and having researched cases on the internet, many involving death or life changing injuries to cyclists, is that the majority of Police do not treat these incidents with the seriousness they deserve, and that is reflected in many of the comments looking at the culpability of the cyclist ( vulnerable road user ) rather than the motorist. That mindset will need to change or the carnage will continue.
> 
> In my case, the driveway from which the car emerged was about 5 metres from the corner . The driver had a choice - he could turn right uphill and ' chance it ' as he couldn't see around the bend or he could turn left downhill and turnaround about 100 metres down the straight road - the safer option. I wasn't going fast - about 15 miles an hour and not pedalling as it was downhill and a tight corner. I was immediately confronted with a Range Rover straddling both carriageways , braked hard but had nowhere to go in the short distance but luckily managed to steer so I hit it more side on than head on , which would have been more serious.
> 
> ...


Let this one go Nick. I know you are not getting what you want to hear but neither your initial description of the incident or this later, more biased account suggests anything other than the fact YOU were going too fast.


nick boardman said:


> I was immediately confronted with a Range Rover straddling both carriageways , braked hard but had nowhere to go in the short distance but luckily managed to steer so I hit it more side on than head on , which would have been more serious.
> 
> In my opinion and I would say from a commonsense viewpoint, the driver chose to carry out a dangerous ( and unnecessary ) manoeuvre. My actions did not contribute to the collision. If he hadn't been there I wouldn't have hit him. In fact, what he seemed most worried about afterwards was moving his precious Range Rover as it was in a ' dangerous position ' !


I know you are expecting to whip up some anti-4x4 feeling here but the make and type of car is also irrelevant and without being there it sounds as though you would have hit him regardless of his turning left or right. As has also been pointed out, it could equally have been a queue of traffic, a stalled/broken down vehicle or any number of other obstructions not visible around a blind corner. You were going too fast to stop in the road you could see to be clear!
I'm not surprised he was anxious to move his vehicle, some loon might come flying around the corner and seriously injure themselves at any moment.

You also raise the point that this was a signposted 'school' area. If that is the case what the hell where you doing hooning around a tight downhill blind corner at 15mph? Did it never cross your mind that there could be children in the road?

The final line from your account that prevents me from taking your commonsense viewpoint as anything other than the deluded ramblings of someone incapable of accepting responsibility for their own mistakes is when you claim 'If he hadn't been there I wouldn't have hit him.' Really, this claim is so tragic it isn't even funny and I dread to think that I have to share the roads with people like you.


----------



## nick boardman (27 Nov 2017)

User said:


> I would agree with this bit but the fact remains that, in the particular circumstances you describe, you were at fault. This may seem harsh but you were going faster than you were able to stop given the road conditions.
> 
> @NickNick makes a very salient point:


So no fault apportioned to the driver then ? !


----------



## nick boardman (27 Nov 2017)

I like Skol said:


> Let this one go Nick. I know you are not getting what you want to hear but neither your initial description of the incident or this later, more biased account suggests anything other than the fact YOU were going too fast.
> 
> I know you are expecting to whip up some anti-4x4 feeling here but the make and type of car is also irrelevant and without being there it sounds as though you would have hit him regardless of his turning left or right. As has also been pointed out, it could equally have been a queue of traffic, a stalled/broken down vehicle or any number of other obstructions not visible around a blind corner. You were going too fast to stop in the road you could see to be clear!
> I'm not surprised he was anxious to move his vehicle, some loon might come flying around the corner and seriously injure themselves at any moment.
> ...



It's not a more biased account , these are the facts with more information as some of the replies were based upon assumptions. If you are a cyclist ( are you ? ) you would know that 15mph isn't ' hooning ' when going downhill in a 30mph zone. And I wouldn't have hit him if he hadn't been carrying out a 'dangerous manoeuvre ' . All your other ' If , buts and maybe's ' are not relevant . As Columbo used to say ' Let's stick to the facts ' .


----------



## nick boardman (27 Nov 2017)

User said:


> Unless there is a specific prohibition on turning right, why should there be any fault apportioned to the driver?
> 
> View attachment 384945


Oh dear........ I'm not going to use capitals but I am shouting ............ Because it's a ' Dangerous Manoeuvre ' as in the thread title of Dangerous Driving !


----------



## mjr (27 Nov 2017)

User said:


> Unless there is a specific prohibition on turning right, why should there be any fault apportioned to the driver?


Not all cockwomblery is specifically prohibited, like nothing says I can't turn right out of my drive, but the acute angles of the road layout where it meets the main road to the right means I'd be either merging into oncoming traffic or making a U turn swinging across both lanes and possibly the cycleway opposite, even in my little car, so instead I turn left and make a U turn out of that end. If I went right and didn't reverse back along the 30m or so (or maybe far enough to turn in the road) once I realised the road layout, I'd expect to be open to an accusation of carelessness.


----------



## nick boardman (27 Nov 2017)

User said:


> And the facts are you were cycling a manner where you weren't able to stop when you needed to do so, on a road which you admit you knew had blind corners.


Not a cyclist then ?


----------



## nick boardman (27 Nov 2017)

mjr said:


> Not all cockwomblery is specifically prohibited, like nothing says I can't turn right out of my drive, but the acute angles of the road layout where it meets the main road to the right means I'd be either merging into oncoming traffic or making a U turn swinging across both lanes and possibly the cycleway opposite, even in my little car, so instead I turn left and make a U turn out of that end. If I went right and didn't reverse back along the 30m or so (or maybe far enough to turn in the road) once I realised the road layout, I'd expect to be open to an accusation of carelessness.


That's a great word. I know a few cockwomblers !


----------



## I like Skol (27 Nov 2017)

mjr said:


> Not all cockwomblery is specifically prohibited, like nothing says I can't turn right out of my drive, but the acute angles of the road layout where it meets the main road to the right means I'd be either merging into oncoming traffic or making a U turn swinging across both lanes and possibly the cycleway opposite, even in my little car, so instead I turn left and make a U turn out of that end. If I went right and didn't reverse back along the 30m or so (or maybe far enough to turn in the road) once I realised the road layout, I'd expect to be open to an accusation of carelessness.


True.

The OPs description makes it sound as though he would have hit anything that had been in the road regardless of how it got there.


----------



## mjr (27 Nov 2017)

nick boardman said:


> Not a cyclist then ?


 either you've not checked his posting history or think his discussion of off roading this morning was a euphemism 

More to the point, why do you think cyclists will agree with you riding blind around a bend?


----------



## NickNick (27 Nov 2017)

nick boardman said:


> Not a cyclist then ?



If anything being a cyclist should make one particularly cautious around blind corners as we don't have the benefit of ABS to help an emergency stop without loosing control and we're particularly vulnerable if we hurtle round a corner into the back of a broken down vehicle or a traffic jam.

You're also missing the point a few of us have raised, that as cyclists we are not the most vulnerable road users and we have just as much of a duty of care to those more vulnerable than us, as car drivers to towards us. Hence always making sure that you are going at a speed where you can safely stop within the distance that you are able to see.


----------



## alicat (27 Nov 2017)

Hmmm, new member arguing with oldtimers about the definition of a well-known offence. Is this a troll I see before me?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (27 Nov 2017)

nick boardman said:


> So no fault apportioned to the driver then ? !



As has already been pointed out, the car you hit could have been any obstacle in the road that was around that blind bend; the tail of a traffic queue, a previous collision, a fallen tree etc. You can't (especially as a cyclist) ride into unseen space assuming it to be clear.


----------



## potsy (27 Nov 2017)

Careless driving at best, poor cycling.

Lesson learnt and we move on.


----------



## jefmcg (27 Nov 2017)

nick boardman said:


> So no fault apportioned to the driver then ? !


No. You can't criminalise someone's driveway. Because if he had turned left and there had been a car coming the other way, you'd have been in the same situation. Or worse, if you had swerved in the oncoming lane before you realised. 

Who's fault would that have been?


----------



## winjim (27 Nov 2017)

jefmcg said:


> No. You can't criminalise someone's driveway.


Well, you could go down the route of trying to find out whether the driveway conforms to planning regulations regarding visibility etc...


----------



## jefmcg (27 Nov 2017)

winjim said:


> Well, you could go down the route of trying to find out whether the driveway conforms to planning regulations regarding visibility etc...


Sure, of course. But that's civil. I meant criminal precisely.


----------



## winjim (27 Nov 2017)

jefmcg said:


> Sure, of course. But that's civil. I meant criminal precisely.


Indeed. Although it would still be hilarious if the driver ended up having to demolish his drive.


----------



## winjim (27 Nov 2017)

User said:


> One would assume that, if he has a dropped kerb, all that will have been checked as part of the council installation process.


It has about the same level of futility as an attempt to prosecute for dangerous driving. Chances are it's >10years old anyway.


----------



## jefmcg (27 Nov 2017)

Something like this might help the next person


----------



## mjr (27 Nov 2017)

User said:


> One would assume that, if he has a dropped kerb, all that will have been checked as part of the council installation process.


 You have entirely too much faith in the overworked council officers having time to "think bike" and apply the various policies and the "road safety auditors" actually doing anything. Our local cycling campaign's volunteers have had at least one ombudsman ruling in their favour over council failure to follow proper procedure when approving a new driveway crossing a cycle route, if I remember correctly. Once they stopped believing the council or press stirring it, the householder made some changes to reduce the risk, but I don't think there was any way to force them (because the council had approved it) and it's still not great. In another case, the road safety auditors allowed a dangerous cycleway to be built, agreed on site that it needed correcting, but it still remains a death trap waiting for its first unsuspecting victim (most regulars avoid it - I doubt many try it more than a few times).


----------



## mjr (27 Nov 2017)

User said:


> And what does that have to do with this case? We can all do ‘what if’...


Sorry. In this case, it means dropped kerb doesn't necessarily mean checked for safety.


----------



## mjr (28 Nov 2017)

User said:


> The OP was on the road - not a cycle path, so your anecdote at post #52 is entirely irrelevant.


Cycle route, not path. The dropped kerb is onto the road. Local planning policies say such driveways should go onto adjacent feeder roads whenever possible, which it was in that case. Turning traffic on unprotected cycle routes risks motorists left hooking cyclists and there are no other driveways off that stretch.


----------



## Tizme (28 Nov 2017)

[QUOTE 5058524, member: 9609"]in a built up area I would have thought the presence of driveways should be accepted as highly likely, also highly likely children, dogs and other vulnerable road users doing the most unexpected of things, speeds need to be halved and concentrations doubled[/QUOTE]

Completely agree! Didn't stop me seeing a van driver going through our village (in an area without pavement) drinking a cup of coffee, whilst chatting on his phone, all around the time you'd expect to see kids walking home from the school bus run.


----------



## spen666 (30 Nov 2017)

nick boardman said:


> Has anybody been involved in an incident where the vehicle driver has been charged with ' Dangerous Driving ' ?
> 
> I was cycling around a blind corner and hit a car turning right out of his driveway causing a broken collar bone. The police have indicated ' No Further Action ' , but in my opinion the circumstances fit the criteria and CPS guidelines for the offence of Dangerous Driving. By choosing to turn right the driver carried out a dangerous manoeuvre - he took a chance as he couldn't see around the blind bend - instead of simply turning left on the straight road and then turning around about 100 metres away. Of course this would have added 30 seconds to his journey time and his time is more important than a life ( apologies for the sarcasm ).
> 
> I'm going to appeal the police inaction so any stated cases or knowledge of incidents where Dangerous Driving was charged would be gratefully received.


You have not understood what the offence of "dangerous driving" involves

Dangerous driving involves driving at a standard far below that of the reasonable motorist - not simply that manouvere was dangerous.

The fact that the police are not taking action for the lesser offence of careless driving would suggest the matter is perhsaps not as clear cut as you have described.

The driver coming out of his drive and performing a legal manouvere would almost certainly be travelling at low speed as well


----------



## spen666 (30 Nov 2017)

nick boardman said:


> .... The driver had a choice - he could turn right uphill and ' chance it ' as he couldn't see around the bend or he could turn left downhill and turnaround about 100 metres down the straight road - the safer option. I wasn't going fast - about 15 miles an hour and not pedalling as it was downhill and a tight corner. I was immediately confronted with a Range Rover straddling both carriageways , braked hard but had nowhere to go in the short distance but luckily managed to steer so I hit it more side on than head on , which would have been more serious.



YOU had a choice to ride slower and in such a manner as you were able to stop in case of an pobstruction.

YOU chose not to ride at such a speed



Seems like you had choices as well, but chose to ignore road safety concerns


> ..... In fact, what he seemed most worried about afterwards was moving his precious Range Rover as it was in a ' dangerous position ' !
> 
> ....




Now you are complaining that said motorist showed concern for road safety by ensuring his vehicle was not causing a danger


----------



## spen666 (30 Nov 2017)

I agree with @User


----------



## I like Skol (30 Nov 2017)

I think he's gone, last seen Tue evening. Shame but perhaps he only wanted to hear bad advice rather than suggestions that would prevent him from cycling dangerously?


----------



## DCLane (30 Nov 2017)

I like Skol said:


> I think he's gone, last seen Tue evening. Shame but perhaps he only wanted to hear bad advice rather than suggestions that would prevent him from cycling dangerously?



Hopefully Nick'll be back - he's got a vintage bike collection that makes @biggs682 's seem small.


----------



## biggs682 (30 Nov 2017)

DCLane said:


> Hopefully Nick'll be back - he's got a vintage bike collection that makes @biggs682 's seem small.



My collection is small , if I had a bigger garage then who knows


----------

