hit and run

[glenn forger]

"The case is closed"= we can't be bothered.

 

[HLaB]

Thanks for the update @Crankarm

"The case is closed"= we can't be bothered.

Sounds familiar, IMC the police accepted the drivers excuse that the sun was in their eyes. Tbh I got the 'we can't be bothered' feeling from the cops at the scene. I thought however, they would have took Crankarm's case further

 

[glenn forger]

"I see sir, you were driving at speed whilst you couldn't see ahead of the vehicle you were driving, that's all we need from you, have a nice day"

 

[Leodis]

I don't think the police know the impact poor driving has on cyclists, I only had a knock but cycle in fear of been pulled out on again. Its time some MP would introduce presumed liability, I feel this would make drivers take more care around cyclists. I was totally against segregated cycle infra before my off, now I feel its the only way we can make cycling safer.

 

[Leodis]

If you want segregated infrastructure, what need of the presumed liability?

At some point cyclists will need to use the roads, segregated infrastructure will only ever be limited.

 

[Leodis]

At which point it clearly cannot work.

Either way cyclists need more protection on the roads. Cyclists shouldnt have to dress up like a HiViz clown just to be seen by drivers.

 

[glenn forger]

Disappointing actions of the police, especially when you consider today in the papers it states the police spent a year investigating the theft of a violin(worth £1.2m) from a very careless owner.

Violin theft isn't a significant factor in deaths in this country. Uninsured drivers, involved in a great deal of hit-and-runs, kill people every year and cost the rest of us £400m a year and rising. The police could check cctv, put up an incident board appealing for witnesses, check local garages for a vehicle of the description booked in for repairs, instead they shrug and brush it off and somewhere out there there's a driver who knows he can smash into vulnerable road users and get away with it.

 

[benb]

I would be complaining to the Chief Constable in the first instance, and then the IPCC.
To close the case without even having the courtesy to discuss it with you is outrageous.

 

[glenn forger]

Have they checked Joe90's report? Seems a bit premature when third parties may have pertinent info.

 

[Pale Rider]

I wonder if - for whatever reason - the police have not grasped the seriousness of what happened.

The press stories came over as 'cyclist took a tumble after being nudged from behind'.

Crankers can hardy be accused of making a fuss, but his account is much more serious than that: 'I flew for 14m, bike is mashed'.

 

[Crankarm]

Today I received a letter from the Camera, Tickets & Collision Unit based at Stevenage Police station. It states,

Dear Mr Crankarm,

Road Traffic Accident 03/10/2013 19:45 HOURS
Location AT JUNCTION WITH 150 METERS SOUT OF WYTON MAIN GATE, SAWTRY WAY, HUNTINGDON

The collision that you were involved in has now been investigated. All of the available evidence has been reviewed and a decision has been reached by the case manager on behalf of the police.

In this instance it has been decided that no further police action will be taken. Unfortunately, we have been unable to trace the vehicle on the partial vehicle registration mark obtained and no witnesses or CCTV were present.

The role of the Police once a collision has been reported is to investigate the matter and to decide on the evidence obtained whether any offences have ben committed; it is not our role to apportion blame, this is to be decided by Insurance Companies.

Now that a decision has been made your insurance company are entitled to apply for a copy of the police report containing information collected during our investigation. Your insurance company should send a covering letter including the collision reference number to the address below.

If you have any queries regarding your collision, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Yours sincerely,

(Not signed)

Process & Collusions Unit.

What a disappointment. I get the impression they don't seem to have done very much at all. Probably just received the case waited a few weeks then rubber stamped it closed - NFA. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't even realise I was riding a bike and was victim of a hit and run. They certainly don't give details of what enquiries if any they have made to try to identify the vehicle other than relying on a partial registration number and a description of the vehicle. Another dangerous, possibly drunk, uninsured or disqualified driver has got away. I was under the impression that injuring some one in a hit and run was a rather serious motoring offence not to mention other offences that may have been committed. Poor, very poor.

 

[ComedyPilot]

If you want segregated infrastructure, what need of the presumed liability?

It works in the Netherlands where they have both.

 

[ComedyPilot]

Sorry to hear this Cranks.

On one side, without witnesses or CCTV etc, the police could only rely on an appeal for info. Without that then there's not a lot they can do. How you got told this was the case was wrong IMO given the nature of the incident.

 

[semislickstick]

The role of the Police once a collision has been reported is to investigate the matter and to decide on the evidence obtained whether any offences have been committed; it is not our role to apportion blame, this is to be decided by Insurance Companies.

That doesn't sound like they have recorded it as a hit and run on a person.

 

[CopperBrompton]

Indeed, I would make an immediate complaint to the IPCC, CCing your MP (and marking it so on the letter to the IPCC as it tends to focus attention).