Jenkins
Legendary Member
- Location
- Felixstowe
This may be the incident which @mjr is referencing.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj3mzkyy7zro
Note the comment halfway down...
The Road Maniac and Pathetic Punishment Thread
- Thread starter Drago
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
This may be the incident which @mjr is referencing.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj3mzkyy7zro
Note the comment halfway down...
Well that would explain why the charge might be careless driving then.
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
I suspect that the incident paperwork hadn't gone from pack to division to county HQ before the BBC asked and there isn't a later report.
Alex321
Guru
- Location
- South Wales
Yes, I had assumed that was the one. I hadn't previously seen that comment. Nor the one saying the car was moving "at walking pace", which one has to assume is why it was not reported as dangerous driving.
Actually, it was probably the other half of that section in the RTA - it is "careless or inconsiderate driving".
Emanresu
I asked AI to show the 'real' me.
'All he had to do was say sorry' .... a Cycling News article which suggests you should be nice when a driver rear ends you.
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/...ourt-case-and-gbp4k-after-being-hit-by-driver
Read this article with a bit more interest as I lost a cycling work colleague this year in a car accident. Like this case, there appears to be no police action due to a lack of evidence. However this cyclist was lucky and it wasn't life threatening and pursued civil action. Civil action has a lower evidence threshold (balance of probabilities) than criminal (beyond reasonable doubt) so could be used in far more cases. A simple chat with one of the accident lawyers is all that is needed for them to assess if the evidence threshold has been reached - it's their money they are putting up.
I'm also coming at this from the other side, as I've been involved in a few cases where actions in a personal injury case (PI) have had to be defended. PI claims are an absolute pain to work on as they involve collection of information, interviews with people who may not tell the truth, and making sure all internal processes have been followed.
But the bottom line is that the PI industry is surprisingly cheap and effective for those who have been injured. If the police are not able to get involved, talk to a PI lawyer for an assessment (but don't sign up on the day)
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/...ourt-case-and-gbp4k-after-being-hit-by-driver
Read this article with a bit more interest as I lost a cycling work colleague this year in a car accident. Like this case, there appears to be no police action due to a lack of evidence. However this cyclist was lucky and it wasn't life threatening and pursued civil action. Civil action has a lower evidence threshold (balance of probabilities) than criminal (beyond reasonable doubt) so could be used in far more cases. A simple chat with one of the accident lawyers is all that is needed for them to assess if the evidence threshold has been reached - it's their money they are putting up.
I'm also coming at this from the other side, as I've been involved in a few cases where actions in a personal injury case (PI) have had to be defended. PI claims are an absolute pain to work on as they involve collection of information, interviews with people who may not tell the truth, and making sure all internal processes have been followed.
But the bottom line is that the PI industry is surprisingly cheap and effective for those who have been injured. If the police are not able to get involved, talk to a PI lawyer for an assessment (but don't sign up on the day)
OP
OP
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
Okay thanks. I didn't know bobbies now sent copies of their reports to Girlguiding county HQ if Brownies are involved. I suppose that makes sense for safeguarding.
Nearly kill somebody - two year ban
A campervan driver was using a hands-free phone when she seriously injured a cyclist in a collision in Exeter, a court heard. Sally Gallagher, 62, crashed into the man on Rydon Lane at the junction with Old Rydon Lane.
He suffered life-threatening injuries and spent 10 days in hospital with multiple fractures and a badly damaged kidney. Gallagher, who was behind the wheel of a VW Transporter, should have seen the cyclist who was wearing bright yellow reflective clothing and had flashing lights on his bike.
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/hands-free-call-driver-caused-9805262
A campervan driver was using a hands-free phone when she seriously injured a cyclist in a collision in Exeter, a court heard. Sally Gallagher, 62, crashed into the man on Rydon Lane at the junction with Old Rydon Lane.
He suffered life-threatening injuries and spent 10 days in hospital with multiple fractures and a badly damaged kidney. Gallagher, who was behind the wheel of a VW Transporter, should have seen the cyclist who was wearing bright yellow reflective clothing and had flashing lights on his bike.
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/hands-free-call-driver-caused-9805262
OP
OP
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Yet sell some dodgy Amazon Fire sticks and they'll send you to jail for three years...
grldtnr
Über Member
Is it reasonable doubt to say the 'phone was a mitigating factor in this incident? Shades of what happened to me, except I had less injuries.
When I drive I don't have radio, phone or anything like media to distract me, I do have a Sat Nav, but only use it the 'Final' mile so to say, as I have been traveling the roads for over 50 years and know my way about and if I did need to go anywhere I didn't know I'd study the map, i don't need anything to distract me from what i am doing.
The laws say no mobile phone usage , so I don't.!
OP
OP
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
The phone should be an aggravating factor. She chose to have a hands-free chinwag, a conscious decision that Mavis from down the bingo was more important than road safety. It's well publicised thwt chatting even hands-free reduces reaction times to those of a drink driver.
I'll have the radio on, but about town if it's busy I'll turn it off and crack the window open an inch to reduce auditory exclusion, as per my training and much to Mrs D's annoyance.
I'll have the radio on, but about town if it's busy I'll turn it off and crack the window open an inch to reduce auditory exclusion, as per my training and much to Mrs D's annoyance.
Alex321
Guru
- Location
- South Wales
Absolutely not. The opposite in fact. Even hands-free is a distraction, and very probably contributed, but that was very much her choice.
OP
OP
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Everything we do or fail to do is very much our choice.
ebikeerwidnes
Guru
- Location
- Z’ha’dum
When I was with my ex she used to get very annoyed that I would never answer my phone on my way home
If she rang then I woul notice it and then find somewhere to pull over and ring her back to find otu what she wanted
which - according to her- just meant that it took me even longer to get home as now I was parked up somewhere talking to her when I could have been driving
I refused to do it because I did once or twice and there was no way I was able to use the phone and drive at the same time safely
my wife totally agrees with me - if my phone rings now then I just pass it to her and she will sort it out - even though my phone has hands free I don;t even think that is properly safe
(note - I think the "passing to her" part is technically breaking the law anyway!!)
If she rang then I woul notice it and then find somewhere to pull over and ring her back to find otu what she wanted
which - according to her- just meant that it took me even longer to get home as now I was parked up somewhere talking to her when I could have been driving
I refused to do it because I did once or twice and there was no way I was able to use the phone and drive at the same time safely
my wife totally agrees with me - if my phone rings now then I just pass it to her and she will sort it out - even though my phone has hands free I don;t even think that is properly safe
(note - I think the "passing to her" part is technically breaking the law anyway!!)
