PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Careless in Scotland, Careless Driving Charge Single Vehicle Collision
Del76
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 20:39
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 26 May 2015
Member No.: 77,427



Dear All I'm back with a problem so need to post again although I'm always lurking.

I've had a few days to mull this over and I'm now throwing it open to those much more knowledgable than me.
A few days ago I was involved in a single vehicle collision with a Dry Stone Wall in Scotland.
The circumstances were as such I was driving a 3.5t medium wheelbase van loaded at the time it was 06:30 dark and weather was wet A class road with central markings but no white lines marking the edge of the carriageway making it difficult to differentiate road from verge on a wet dark morning, tight right hand bend with broken white line even though it has no visibility around the bend which I had negotiated. On exiting the bend a timber hauler was approaching the bend to them it was left hand and stealing some of my side of the road. I sharply moved left to avoid the oncoming lights and put my wheels onto the verge. The verge was about 3 foot wide with a 2 -3 foot Dry stone wall which then had a 4-5 foot drop down to the field.

The verge being wet pulled me in and I parked the left hand side of the van into the Dry Stone Wall knocking over about 40-50 foot of it. Damage to my vehicle was all on the lower left hand side both wheels bore the brunt with burst tyres and body work damage to the rear lower panel behind the wheels. There was no frontal impact and the airbag did not deploy. I ran along the wall and came to rest on the verge with half of the van in the carriageway facing the correct direction I suppose I should count myself lucky that I didn't topple over into the field. No injuries were sustained.

The timber hauler had carried on his merry way.

I called my insurance arranged recovery and called Police Scotland to let them know I had caused damage to the Stone Wall. I then got out stood on the bend and warned traffic to slow down for an hour until the police arrived.
An hour later Police turned up and asked me to sit in the car. I handed over my licence and they checked my details.
Before asking what had happened they said they would issuing me a fixed penalty for careless driving as despite the poor conditions nobody else had hit the wall.
Anyway gave my statement as per the above they went to do a breath test but there machine wouldn't initialise so they both agreed I hadn't been drinking and were happy to forgo it.
I said I didn't believe I had been driving carelessly to which they replied there was two options.
I could accept a fixed penalty or the could put it forward to the Prosecutor Fiscal. It was force policy that all single vehicle collisions had to be careless.

There was no other witnesses to the incident and no examination was made at the scene once I was released they went off to another job.
I've returned at the same time this morning this time with a dash cam to video the approach.

I've replayed it 100 times in my mind to see what I would of done differently and I still would choose the verge over a 44t Timber Hauler drivers side to drivers side collision as there would only be one winner. Was I careless by mounting the verge? I don't believe so? Was I careless for hitting the Stone wall? In normal circumstances yes I would say I was but fully laden on wet ground avoiding a collision I'd say I was unlucky not careless, although I'm happy to be corrected.

I'm fully expecting them to go ahead with it as it's force policy so do I need to contact a solicitor? I know I could of taken the easy option of a 3pt fixed penalty and £100 fine but I really couldn't accept I was careless although reading the guidelines it does seem a very broad spectrum.
So I shall throw it open to you good people and see if principles have shot me in the foot.
For the full picture I hold c+e and cpc Van is a year old and had new front brakes and front tyres the previous day I have three points from two years for speeding at 71 on a dual carriageway in a van limit of 60. For this reason I drive in Scotland with the speed limiter set to 50mph on single carriageways in Scotland.
I'm being deliberately vague with location as of yet I've not received a summons. Anything else you'd like to know let me know.
Kind regards.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 20:39
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Peppipoo316
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 21:02
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 59
Joined: 23 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,918



Do you have dashcam fitted in your vehicle? Although I am no expert here, I believe dashcam footage can be of great help.

This post has been edited by Peppipoo316: Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 21:03
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Del76
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 21:06
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 26 May 2015
Member No.: 77,427



No unfortunately it was fitted in the car. I've driven the road again at the same time but on a weekend so no timber lorries. I've filmed it just to show how dark the road is.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
StuartBu
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 21:57
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,178
Joined: 1 Jan 2013
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 59,097



" Despite the poor conditions nobody else had hit the wall"
Odd thing for PS to say... presumably nobody else had refused an invitation to tango with a great big timber lorry. !!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lostinlondon
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 22:03
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 19 Jun 2016
Member No.: 85,088



What was your speed at the time? What do you estimate the speed of the timber hauler to be? How much of your side of the road did the opposing traffic take and it was necessary to go into the verge to avoid a collision or did you 'overdo' it?

Do you have a google maps link to the location?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 22:10
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



Did they issue an FPN or was it a warning that one may be served ?
I'm reading the latter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Del76
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 22:23
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 26 May 2015
Member No.: 77,427



They informed me they would be issuing me a fixed penalty for the collision before they took the statement so hadn't even enquirer as to whether there was a reason. They were polite and relatively apologetic but it's force policy so I was told.

My speed I said to the police approx 40mph however I drove it this morning and it was a brake to 30 for the sharp bit building speed to 35-40 for coming out of it.
I didn't really get much chance to judge the timber lorries speed as when I saw him he was approx 40 foot away and closing I was looking directly at his drivers side head light so I steered left until I was clear of it, we would not of passed using just the road surface. He had to swing wide for his trailer to make the bend. If we had met on the bend we could of passed because the road is wider due to the circumference of the bend if that makes sense.

I've not checked to see if the location is in google street view I'm sure it is however I didn't want to put up a specific location just yet as they may decide not to pursue it. Don't poke the bear and all that.

Nothing at all was issued
I was cautioned and I'd said I wouldn't be prepared to accept a FPN so the only other option they gave me was they were going to report it to the Procecutor Fiscal which I think is Scottish for CPS and let them have a crack.
I subsequently rang up to get an incident number and names.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 22:28
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,735
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



Massive timber lorry on same sharp bend - did you not see his headlights on the wall in the dark as you approached the bend?


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Del76
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 22:38
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 26 May 2015
Member No.: 77,427



No approaching the bend it is wooded on the LHS and on the right it's a 10 foot bank. I had full beam on so I imagine his lights blended into mine. The coming together with the Stone wall happened after the bend for me but before it for him If it had happened on the bend it would of been a front end impact and a big recovery job from 5 foot down in the field.
And whilst I was sat there waiting for recovery there must of been a timber lorry haring along every 5 minutes with me wildly waving arms to slow them down.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lostinlondon
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 22:50
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 19 Jun 2016
Member No.: 85,088



Fare enough with the location, just to see sharpness of bend etc....

I'm no expert, but if it was me I'd consider challenging it.

Based on what you've said there is clearly some basis of a defence to careless to driving. It is a very broad offence. However any prosecution would need to show that a competent driver in the same circumstances would not take the action you did. If this was the only way to avoid a collision then clearly a competent driver would take the option of the grass verge than that of a wagon carrying timber at speed.

Alternatively they may discredit that any timber lorry was there. However drivers don't take to a grass verge for no reason. There is obviously no allegation of being drunk, or distracted by mobile phone/ tuning radio given there are no witnesses and presumably the police did not raise this as a reason for reporting you for careless (you already mention re drink).

The fact you stopped, warned traffic, and reported the accident suggests you were diligent after the accident.

If it was me, and I received an FPN, I would write back a succinct concise one page letter rather than waiting for prosecution to take place highlighting:

The reason for the accident.

Conditions and speed (if conditions were poor and you were traveling below the speed limit to mitigate for this)

The fact you had to take to the grass verge to avoid a collision, and evidence you have to back this up. e.g. find the width of your van, find the average width of a timber hauler/articulated lorry, estimate how far over the driver was, add all these up and take it away from the width of the road (you can get this from street view), and potentially show the only way to avoid a collision in those circumstances was to take to the verge. Describe the lorry as best as you can to help credit that it was there, e.g. colour trailer age etc, anything you can remember.

Your actions after the accident (e.g. reporting to Police Scotland, warning traffic etc).

If you do this promptly you can judge their response (if it arrives in time) and decide whether to take the FPN or proceed to prosecution.

Don't be combative in the letter.

I guess the only question is - if timber lorries negotiate that bend a lot (e.g. they timber in the local area), and it is necessary for them to take a wide line at that bend then why hasn't there been an accident there before?

See what others think though. They may disagree with writing the letter.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 22:54
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,735
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (Del76 @ Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 22:38) *
And whilst I was sat there waiting for recovery there must of been a timber lorry haring along every 5 minutes with me wildly waving arms to slow them down.


So obviously a rat run for timber lorries if they're passing by every few minutes.

If what happened was the only way out of the situation, how many other vehicles have ended up in the ditch in the last month/year? Local BiB should be able to tell you.

If you had been travelling much slower, would you still have ended up in the ditch?

This post has been edited by peterguk: Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 22:55


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Del76
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 23:17
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 26 May 2015
Member No.: 77,427



Yes I'd be prepared to write a letter should I receive a FPN, however I don't know if I've skipped that bit by refusing one at the roadside and opting for it to be sent to the PF.
i was polite and provided the officers with everything I could, although they never asked such inciteful questions as you lot e.g. Lights on approach and colour etc.
Notching was asked about using the phone or distraction it wasn't implied at all. The sole reasoning was an accident with something stationary was cut and dried careless nothing further needed
I've not thought about describing the lorry much I think the cab was a dark colour I'd guess red however I may be biased by the fact one that stopped shortly after to see if he could help was red.
He explained they were mostly self employed owner drivers and got paid by the load and ran 06:00 to 18:00 the only thing that struck me as unusual about the lorry was it appeared to have no load on whereas all the subsequent ones coming that direction were laden, but again I wasn't really looking closely at it I was just trying to avoid it.

Another local who stopped to help said 4 vehicles had been pulled out of the field on that bend this year so within a month but they had gone straight through on the bend excess speed or ice.
I mentioned that to the police and they said they would of all been "done"
If I had been travelling much slower yes I could of stopped and pulled onto the verge which would of been the ideal situation.
However I was fully over my side of the road and wasn't expecting anything on my side of the road travelling towards me. Had it been a stationary vehicle I would of been able to of stopped in the distance visible

The police made no allegation of excess speed being a cause they were pointing towards the conditions being the factor and accepted that the soft water logged verge had pulled me into the wall.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 23:36
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



A letter is a double edged sword. In a borderline case it can persuade the prosecutor not to initiate (or continue) proceedings. Of course, it is also somewhat nailing your colours to the mast and giving evidence to the prosecution.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Del76
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 23:48
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 26 May 2015
Member No.: 77,427



I can see your point, although I have given them what I believe to be my defence in my statement in the back of the police car which they got me to sign in their pocket book.
With no investigation carried out I don't know what evidence they could present to say I was careless apart from the fact that I collided with the wall, however in my eyes that is the outcome not the evidence.
It's like a maths problem at school which says show your working you get one mark for the right answer and nine for the working out what evidence would they be able to provide to prove careless driving or do they not have to produce any?
There were no skid marks as I didn't brake there was a tyre mark going onto the verge until it dug in and turned it to ploughed mud bath. No pictures were taken at the scene
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 23:55
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



All things being equal, competent and careful drivers don't collide with walls. A court would be free to convict you on that basis alone so you'd need to show why colliding with the wall wasn't careless.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Del76
post Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 00:11
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 26 May 2015
Member No.: 77,427



Well yes that is certainly a compelling argument I've replayed it on a loop continuously these past few days to see if I'd of done it differently and I would choose a verge and a wall over a 44t artic any day of the week. A sideways glancing blow to a wall can be fixed, dead by its nature can't be.
Though with it being such a slam dunk case reading how easy it appears to commit an act of careless driving maybe I should of accepted the FPN.
I just think it would of been more careless not to of tried to of avoided it and although still having a collision it was with an inanimate object.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 00:12
Post #17


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 24,213
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



The OP's defence is that all things were not equal. Whether the court believes him is another matter.


--------------------
Andy

Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 01:31
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,572
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



I can't help feeling that knocking over 40 to 50 feet of dry stone wall indicates a fair speed, and perhaps faster than was safe given the road and the weather conditions.



--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
StuartBu
post Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 04:36
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,178
Joined: 1 Jan 2013
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 59,097



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 23:55) *
All things being equal, competent and careful drivers don't collide with walls. A court would be free to convict you on that basis alone so you'd need to show why colliding with the wall wasn't careless.

Oh if only the rest of us lived in such a World where things were so simple and straightforward! lol

This post has been edited by StuartBu: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 06:11
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Del76
post Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 08:51
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 26 May 2015
Member No.: 77,427



Thank you Logician it's good to see things from a different perspective. My vehicle is 5.5 m long so about 16 foot give or take bearing in mind the impact was completely sideways no front end impact at all the first 16 foot is the initial impact. I therefore stopped in two vehicle lengths of brushing along the Dry Stone Wall.
I made sure it said Dry Stone Wall in my statement in the police car as it's obviously not fixed with mortar and this one in particular was narrow in depth and quite flimsy it moved with body weight.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 00:25
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here