Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

FightBack Forums _ Speeding and other Criminal Offences _ COllided with a scooter whilst starting u-turn

Posted by: Nickle Thu, 9 May 2019 - 17:17
Post #1483827

Hi, I don't know if I should be posting any exact details on here, because I just got a letter from the police to describe what happened and saying alleged offence - driving without due care and attention, so I guess that means this is now an investigation?

I went to make a U-turn. Single carriageway on our side, dual on the other side. Just after some pedestrian lights. I was doing around 15-20mph.
I checked my mirrors, looked right, traffic was way back, nothing coming the other way, so I indicated right, slowed the car and started turning. Immediately a scooter scrapped down the side of my door.
He's fine, he didn't fall off or anything, that's really all I was concerned with at the time, because I felt really awful and totally shocked that he was even there and how could I not have seen him, given that it was at night.
We took photos, exchanged details and he called the police, he wanted an ambulance and insisted not to move the vehicles until they arrived. When the police said they were not coming, we moved out of the way, exchanged details, and both went on our way.

I'm just a bit concerned now with being alleged to cause this offence, I've never experienced anything like this before. If I was just being wreckless or careless then ok, I'l accept it, but I checked as I always have if I'm making any kind of turn. I honestly can't answer why I didn't see him and I do feel sincerely sorry about that, but it was not because I didn't look. But also, how did he end up there? We were only about 4 car lengths past an island in the road.

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 9 May 2019 - 17:29
Post #1483832

Well clearly you were driving without due care and attention otherwise you would have seen him, however IF he reports it the police aren’t likely to take action for a minor moment of inattentiveness though it’s not impossible.

Posted by: Nickle Thu, 9 May 2019 - 17:45
Post #1483843

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 9 May 2019 - 18:29) *
Well clearly you were driving without due care and attention otherwise you would have seen him, however IF he reports it the police aren’t likely to take action for a minor moment of inattentiveness though it’s not impossible.

Ok thank you. He must have reported it to the police for this letter to arrive, he called them immediately at the time aswell.
I'm just at an absolute loss as to how I didn't see him, and it is spooking the hell out of me all day & night. But anyway, I just thank my lucky stars that whatever happens now, it wasn't worse than that.

Posted by: Churchmouse Thu, 9 May 2019 - 22:57
Post #1483920

QUOTE (Nickle @ Thu, 9 May 2019 - 18:45) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 9 May 2019 - 18:29) *
Well clearly you were driving without due care and attention otherwise you would have seen him, however IF he reports it the police aren’t likely to take action for a minor moment of inattentiveness though it’s not impossible.

Ok thank you. He must have reported it to the police for this letter to arrive, he called them immediately at the time aswell.
I'm just at an absolute loss as to how I didn't see him, and it is spooking the hell out of me all day & night. But anyway, I just thank my lucky stars that whatever happens now, it wasn't worse than that.

It happens all the time. There's even a term for it: "SMIDSY" (sorry mate I didn't see you).

--Churchmouse

Posted by: TonyS Fri, 10 May 2019 - 10:06
Post #1483974

But I guess equally the motorcyclist didn't see the indicators.

Posted by: Churchmouse Fri, 10 May 2019 - 13:32
Post #1484041

QUOTE (TonyS @ Fri, 10 May 2019 - 11:06) *
But I guess equally the motorcyclist didn't see the indicators.

How do you know that?

We do know that the OP did not see him, and is sorry about it, from the words, "I didn't see him" and "I do feel sincerely sorry about that".

--Churchmouse

Posted by: TonyS Fri, 10 May 2019 - 14:26
Post #1484057

QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Fri, 10 May 2019 - 14:32) *
QUOTE (TonyS @ Fri, 10 May 2019 - 11:06) *
But I guess equally the motorcyclist didn't see the indicators.

How do you know that?

Well I did say it was a guess. Taking the OP at his word that he was in fact indicating as he said, either the motorcyclist didn't see the indicators or he decided to overtake anyway.

Posted by: Nickle Fri, 10 May 2019 - 22:59
Post #1484187

Yes 100% I did put my indicator on.
For whatever it's worth, no he definitely should not have been overtaking me there. It was just after a pedestrian crossing, so I'm guessing he must have committed to getting past me as soon as we were clear of the island in the road. We must both have made our decision to manouver at the same time, but nonetheless I've always been extra careful when I know there is a bike around me and try my best to make sure he can see that I know he is there. I should have seen him and I didn't. I just feel extra bad because it was a guy on a bike.

Posted by: Churchmouse Sun, 12 May 2019 - 11:31
Post #1484495

QUOTE (TonyS @ Fri, 10 May 2019 - 15:26) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Fri, 10 May 2019 - 14:32) *
QUOTE (TonyS @ Fri, 10 May 2019 - 11:06) *
But I guess equally the motorcyclist didn't see the indicators.

How do you know that?

Well I did say it was a guess. Taking the OP at his word that he was in fact indicating as he said, either the motorcyclist didn't see the indicators or he decided to overtake anyway.

Or the indicators came on when it was too late to react? Who knows. Unfortunately, the OP's biggest problem is that a vehicle that was there was not seen, and it is difficult to behave appropriately if you lack critical information.

Back to the OP's question, the police are asking for his/her version of the events. The letter should not be ignored.

--Churchmouse

Posted by: Nickle Sun, 12 May 2019 - 15:25
Post #1484532

Well yes, that's my biggest problem, he was there.
I don't know if I would be doing something wrong(legally) by showing you the exact location, but it was something similar to this traffic island, except it was pedestrian lights. Single carriageway our side, dual on the other, there were cars parked just after the island on our side, where the zig zag ended.

The collision happened right about where that 4x4 is (approx 3-4 car lengths after the island), it was on a 20mph road, so he was on that central part just after the island. To my mind, he must have been either too close, or going too fast to have been passing me such a short distance from the traffic island.
But nonetheless, that doesn't excuse my part, or explain how/why I didn't see him, so I accept that. He may not have had his lights on for all I know, that's the one and only thing that would allow me to sleep better in future, because it really bothers me how I could miss a headlight that was either right behind me, or next to me, when I saw clearly the traffic coming around the corner a few hundred yards back, which is what made me decide I had plenty of space to turn.
I just checked the photos I took of the scene and in all of them, my lights are on and his are off, but I don't know if his lights go off automatically when the bike is stopped.

My concern really is getting prosecuted for driving without due care and attention. I did everything I would normally do.
My bad that I didn't see him, but I didn't just wrecklessly spin the car in the road with no indication and without checking my mirrors, but if the bare fact that I didn't see him = driving without due care and attention, then ok, I'll just have to hope for the best and accept whatever comes of it.

I'm not in New Zealand by the way, this is just the closest illustration I could find on google.

Posted by: The Rookie Sun, 12 May 2019 - 17:37
Post #1484565

Why not just share the google street view link?

Posted by: Nickle Sun, 12 May 2019 - 18:15
Post #1484575

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 12 May 2019 - 18:37) *
Why not just share the google street view link?


https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5419666,-0.1720404,3a,75y,300.58h,77.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syLEufmHCfX3aNlRjwq6Aig!2e0!7i16384!8i8192


I wasn't sure if I would be breaking some law if the police are investigating it and I'm posting about it on the internet.

Posted by: cp8759 Sun, 12 May 2019 - 19:18
Post #1484589

QUOTE (Nickle @ Sun, 12 May 2019 - 19:15) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 12 May 2019 - 18:37) *
Why not just share the google street view link?


https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5419666,-0.1720404,3a,75y,300.58h,77.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syLEufmHCfX3aNlRjwq6Aig!2e0!7i16384!8i8192


I wasn't sure if I would be breaking some law if the police are investigating it and I'm posting about it on the internet.

If it were a crime to report that the police are investigating something, an awful lot of journalists would be in prison.

Posted by: stamfordman Sun, 12 May 2019 - 19:53
Post #1484600

Don't beat yourself up over this - there are blind spots and cyclists and motorcyclist often appear from them especially in London. Motorcyclists often break the speed limit and weave between traffic. There is no way you can spot them all and they bear responsibility for not watching what traffic is doing.

That said it is always best not to make unpredictable moves and a u-turn can be one.

Did he have his lights on?


Posted by: andy_foster Sun, 12 May 2019 - 20:43
Post #1484610

Dual carriageways and single carriageways are defined by whether or not there is a physical barrier or area of land (other than a traffic) island separating the carriageways, not how many lanes are in the carriageway(s).

Despite what some might think, pulling across the path of another vehicle without properly checking your blind spot(s) generally makes you liable, or at least partially liable.

Posted by: Nickle Sun, 12 May 2019 - 23:15
Post #1484632

QUOTE (stamfordman @ Sun, 12 May 2019 - 20:53) *
Don't beat yourself up over this - there are blind spots and cyclists and motorcyclist often appear from them especially in London. Motorcyclists often break the speed limit and weave between traffic. There is no way you can spot them all and they bear responsibility for not watching what traffic is doing.

That said it is always best not to make unpredictable moves and a u-turn can be one.

Did he have his lights on?

Its hard not to. I suppose partly because many of my family are life-long bikers, a friend of mine killed herself on her bike way back when we were youngsters. So for me to turn my car and find a bike scrape along my door just makes me feel sick enough as it is, but even more so because I didn't see him and I can't for the life of me answer why.
And furthermore now, I'll have a claim against me and possible prosecution for bad driving. The claim and the prosecution, I can deal with. The fact that I didn't see him will bother me for a long time to come, but at least he wasn't hurt, so I can be thankful for that.

I honestly can't tell you if his lights were on or off at the time. They are off in all the photos, but he had stopped and got off by then, so that means nothing.

QUOTE (andy_foster @ Sun, 12 May 2019 - 21:43) *
Dual carriageways and single carriageways are defined by whether or not there is a physical barrier or area of land (other than a traffic) island separating the carriageways, not how many lanes are in the carriageway(s).

Despite what some might think, pulling across the path of another vehicle without properly checking your blind spot(s) generally makes you liable, or at least partially liable.

The thing is, I did check my blind spots (assuming you mean looking over my shoulder, to see what is to the right of my car), I also checked both mirrors, it's just a standard thing to do, especially when turning around. I didn't see him, that's a fact, but I definitely did look and that's pecisely what is bugging me so much.

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 13 May 2019 - 02:14
Post #1484640

I understand why it’s bugging you, it’s not a legal issue but it leaves you with that ‘is there someone I haven’t seen’ feeling each time you do a manoeuvre for a while.

Posted by: Earl Purple Mon, 13 May 2019 - 08:04
Post #1484661

If it was at night, then his lights must have been visible. Scooters have their lights on all the time, but it's more visible at night.

It's difficult to know what your exact manoeuvre was. If you pulled right over to the left-hand side of the road to give yourself more room to turn, and slowed down a lot, it may have appeared you were pulling over, then indicated right to pull out again. Thus the scooter had no idea you were intending a U-turn.

In general you do not pass a vehicle on the right hand side which is showing the right indicator, but that doesn't apply when they are pulling out of a parking space and you are simply not letting them out. Vehicles that do that and intend to turn at the same time have to be extra vigilant.

For insurance purpose there is likely to be a claim against you, including a whiplash claim.

Posted by: NeverMind Mon, 13 May 2019 - 08:42
Post #1484670

Don't beat yourself up over it. I ride a motorcycle daily, and it's not unusual for cars to pull out on me in broad daylight. It's not that they didn't look - or they'd be pulling out on cars too - I'm convinced it's just that they are looking for cars, and expecting to see cars, and because of the weird way your brain works when it's doing frequent or automatic tasks, if they don't see a car something in your brain says "all clear". There are some interesting psychology research projects in there! For the future: Mirror, shoulder check, and think bike. It's not just a slogan. wink.gif

QUOTE (Earl Purple @ Mon, 13 May 2019 - 09:04) *
If it was at night, then his lights must have been visible. More recent scooters have their lights on all the time, but it's more visible at night.


Fixed that for you. Older scooters and motorcycles don't always have automatic lights. I think it became a Euro compliance feature in the mid 2000s

Posted by: Nickle Mon, 13 May 2019 - 09:18
Post #1484681

QUOTE (NeverMind @ Mon, 13 May 2019 - 09:42) *
Don't beat yourself up over it. I ride a motorcycle daily, and it's not unusual for cars to pull out on me in broad daylight. It's not that they didn't look - or they'd be pulling out on cars too - I'm convinced it's just that they are looking for cars, and expecting to see cars, and because of the weird way your brain works when it's doing frequent or automatic tasks, if they don't see a car something in your brain says "all clear". There are some interesting psychology research projects in there! For the future: Mirror, shoulder check, and think bike. It's not just a slogan. wink.gif

Fixed that for you. Older scooters and motorcycles don't always have automatic lights. I think it became a Euro compliance feature in the mid 2000s

It was 4 years old. The keys are in the ignition in my photos, lights are off, but again this is maybe just me trying to find an answer, rather than any proof that he was driving with his lights off.
For what it's worth, think bike has always been burned into the back of my eyeballs, ever since I started using the road. That won't change, but I will, as the Rookie says be more doubtful and perhaps over cautious now. I'll wait and pull into a side road now, even on an empty road at night, just to be sure this can't happen again.

QUOTE (Earl Purple @ Mon, 13 May 2019 - 09:04) *
If it was at night, then his lights must have been visible. Scooters have their lights on all the time, but it's more visible at night.

It's difficult to know what your exact manoeuvre was. If you pulled right over to the left-hand side of the road to give yourself more room to turn, and slowed down a lot, it may have appeared you were pulling over, then indicated right to pull out again. Thus the scooter had no idea you were intending a U-turn.

In general you do not pass a vehicle on the right hand side which is showing the right indicator, but that doesn't apply when they are pulling out of a parking space and you are simply not letting them out. Vehicles that do that and intend to turn at the same time have to be extra vigilant.

For insurance purpose there is likely to be a claim against you, including a whiplash claim.

No, I didn't pull to the left, since I didn't need to, but there were cars parked there anyway, I drove right along the white line.
There was a dual carriagway on the other side, so that was more than enough space for me to complete the turn. It was a glancing contact, as it happened literally the moment I steered right.

I'm expecting he's gonna claim whatever he can yes, I already got that from talking to him, he was asking the police to send an ambulance.

Anyway, I'll just fill in the forms and be honest and wait and see what happens, I suppose thats all I can do.

Posted by: Earl Purple Mon, 13 May 2019 - 09:32
Post #1484686

A dual carriageway is a road layout that has a barrier between the oncoming lanes.

What I think you mean is that there were 2 lanes oncoming, and one in the direction in which you were travelling.

My guess is that the scooter was close behind you, and I have no idea how long before your manoevure you actually indicated, and whether you left room for the scooter to pass the other side, but they would have been also to blame if they passed on the right when you were clearly indicating right.

The case where dashcam / headcam footage would be useful to see.

Posted by: Nickle Mon, 13 May 2019 - 09:43
Post #1484689

QUOTE (Earl Purple @ Mon, 13 May 2019 - 10:32) *
A dual carriageway is a road layout that has a barrier between the oncoming lanes.

What I think you mean is that there were 2 lanes oncoming, and one in the direction in which you were travelling.

My guess is that the scooter was close behind you, and I have no idea how long before your manoevure you actually indicated, and whether you left room for the scooter to pass the other side, but they would have been also to blame if they passed on the right when you were clearly indicating right.

The case where dashcam / headcam footage would be useful to see.

Sorry, yes 1 lane on our side, 2 lanes on the other side. No Barrier.
You can see from the google street view a few posts ago. Although this view is facing the other way, but it shows the exact spot where we were.

There was no room to pass on the other side, because there were cars parked there.

Posted by: 666 Mon, 13 May 2019 - 10:15
Post #1484707

QUOTE (Nickle @ Mon, 13 May 2019 - 10:18) *
There was a dual carriagway on the other side, so that was more than enough space for me to complete the turn. It was a glancing contact, as it happened literally the moment I steered right.


There wasn't a dual carriageway. See post #15 above.

Posted by: TonyS Mon, 13 May 2019 - 10:42
Post #1484718

QUOTE (Nickle @ Mon, 13 May 2019 - 10:18) *
It was 4 years old. The keys are in the ignition in my photos, lights are off, but again this is maybe just me trying to find an answer, rather than any proof that he was driving with his lights off.

Why so much concern about the scooter's lights, unless it was dark and that hasn't been mentioned before.

Posted by: Earl Purple Mon, 13 May 2019 - 15:08
Post #1484809

Having looked now where the location is (Adelaide Road, Swiss Cottage), which is close to many junctions, the motorcyclist would have assumed you were planning to turn right at the next junction and they were nowhere near the junction. They would not have assumed you would be doing a U-turn there.

For example, if you were heading West, you were probably planning to go round the gyratory towards the A41 Finchley Road northbound, and if you were heading East, you were probably planning to turn right into King Henry's Road.

As you said, you indicated right and slowed down, and there was no room to pass on the left because of a parked vehicle. The motorcyclist assumed you were planning to go right at the next junction and overtook you on the right feeling they had plenty of time, but you were doing a U-turn and drove across him.



Posted by: Nickle Tue, 14 May 2019 - 06:42
Post #1484924

Ok, well I filled in the forms. All I can do now is wait and see what happens.

Thanks everybody.

Posted by: Nickle Fri, 24 May 2019 - 13:10
Post #1487557

I filled in the forms and sent off to the police.

I didn't quite realise the seriousness of the police prosecuting me for driving without due care and attention, this is not just going to be an insurance claim.
I can get anything from 3 points to a ban and £2500 fine!
He was doing food deliveries on a company bike, they have a law firm dealing with it for him. They've claimed for rental of a bike, while his one has repairs, not sure what damage was done to the bike, but the photos show nothing and he rode off on it, but I suppose its normal if the other side is deemed at fault, its like an open goal to claim whatever you can. But what concerns me most is, he's claiming that I knocked him off the bike, that's not true at all! Also, his mate turned up on another scooter a little while later to help him take my details because his English wasn't so good. He is now listed as a witness to the accident. There's no statement from him in their paperwork as to what he saw, but he definitely wasn't there at the time.
My other half was in my car, but I don't know if they'll take her word for anything, since she stayed in the car the whole time.
I feel I'm about to get pretty well screwed for this now.

Posted by: Mr Rusty Sun, 26 May 2019 - 08:53
Post #1487860

So you slowed down, checked mirrors indicated R and turned across the central area. The scooter decided to ignore your indicator and overtake. The fact that you were doing a U turn in an unexpected place personally I don't think should enter the equation unless it was an illegal manoeuvre. You could have been turning across the lanes to enter a private drive opposite - again maybe unexpected, but it happens.

I was run into the back of when the car in front of me anchored up to enter a farm gateway. I stopped, the range rover behind didn't. He obviously wasn't concentrating assuming a straight open road meant traffic wouldn't just stop. Should the blame be with the party making an unexpected but legal manoeuvre, or with the party who comes unstuck because the other party didn't do what they assumed they were going to do?

Posted by: thisisntme Sun, 26 May 2019 - 09:40
Post #1487865

QUOTE (Mr Rusty @ Sun, 26 May 2019 - 08:53) *
I was run into the back of when the car in front of me anchored up to enter a farm gateway. I stopped, the range rover behind didn't. He obviously wasn't concentrating assuming a straight open road meant traffic wouldn't just stop. Should the blame be with the party making an unexpected but legal manoeuvre, or with the party who comes unstuck because the other party didn't do what they assumed they were going to do?


A careful and competent driver would leave an appropriate distance in front of them so that they could stop in a ways that does not cause a collision.

Posted by: Nickle Mon, 27 May 2019 - 10:27
Post #1488029

QUOTE (TonyS @ Mon, 13 May 2019 - 11:42) *
Why so much concern about the scooter's lights, unless it was dark and that hasn't been mentioned before.

Yes, it was late at night, I did mention that before.

I'm gonna dispute this as much as I can, they're trying to throw the book at me now, so I got nothing to lose, unless I end up liable for their legal costs.
It grates enormously on me that I didn't see the bike, but its also true that he must have been either too close and/or speeding to have been there at all. We were only about 4 car lengths past a pedesrian island, which we could only have passed in single file. This is the bit that baffles me most, because I saw the traffic coming around the corner in my mirror, there should have been a headlight directly behind me at that point, how the hell could I not have seen it?
I know that doesn't change the fact that I didn't see him, but I can't be the only one in the wrong here. Even if I came to a dead stop, surely he should have been able to avoid hitting the back of me, let alone end up alongside my door on a 20mph road?

 

Posted by: andy_foster Mon, 27 May 2019 - 10:54
Post #1488032

You are responsible for what you did or did not do - to the standards of a careful and competent driver. What the other driver did or did not do is a largely separate matter, other than regarding any presumptions as to the causes of the accident.

From what you have said, the scooter rider was also driving carelessly, but that is not a defence.

It might well be the case that you did everything that you reasonably could and yet still somehow failed to see the scooter. However, the problem is that without having seen the scooter, you cannot know why you did not see the scooter, so it would be exceedingly difficult to prove that you were not at fault. Maybe if you can show that the scooter rider must have been driving erratically, you can cast reasonable doubt on any assumption that you didn't see him because you didn't look properly.

The court may be able to take judicial notice that fast-food delivery scooters are generally ridden erratically, and by unqualified young drivers.

Posted by: Nickle Mon, 27 May 2019 - 11:08
Post #1488036

Thanks, sorry, yes I'm not trying to suggest I'm not at fault.

When I explained what happened to my insurance company, they told me that I am gonna be liable, so they're already sure to get whatever they want to claim.
I just don't get why they wanna have me prosecuted by the police aswell, unless its something they want to do in order to ensure their claim, or claim more, or make some kind of personal claim against me aswell? Not that they'll get much, the fact I'm driving a little old car should tell them that already!

So this will go to court? I don't have legal cover, so I'd have to represent myself against their lawyers?
This is the thing that worries me most. I'm struggling a fair bit as it is right now, so if I end up with a big fine and legal costs, it's gonna sink me.

Posted by: andy_foster Mon, 27 May 2019 - 11:25
Post #1488038

The decision as to whether or not to prosecute is taken by the police. This is often influenced by the 'victim's' wishes.

If you are convicted, that can be used in any civil claim - so it is common to push for a prosecution to make the claim easier.
Any civil claim would be nominally against you, but would be dealt with and settled by your insurers.

Posted by: southpaw82 Mon, 27 May 2019 - 11:31
Post #1488040

QUOTE (Nickle @ Mon, 27 May 2019 - 12:08) *
I just don't get why they wanna have me prosecuted by the police aswell,


That isn’t up to “them”, it’s a matter for the police and the Crown Prosecution Service.

QUOTE
or make some kind of personal claim against me aswell?


Any claim will be against you personally but your insurance company will pay it - that is what insurance is.

QUOTE
Not that they'll get much, the fact I'm driving a little old car should tell them that already!


You’re insured, so your personal finances are irrelevant.

QUOTE
So this will go to court?


Will what go to court? The criminal allegation of careless driving or the civil claim?

QUOTE
I don't have legal cover, so I'd have to represent myself against their lawyers?


Whose lawyers? In a criminal matter, you’d be facing a lawyer from the CPS. Unless you’re pleading not guilty there’s very little adversarial conduct between you - they will simply state the facts, you’ll present mitigation and be sentenced. In a civil matter it sounds like your insurance company will settle, so you won’t ever go to court.

Posted by: Nickle Mon, 27 May 2019 - 12:08
Post #1488049

Ok, thanks for helping me understand.
So, even though it's no defence for my part, I do at least need to put it to them that he must have been too close or speeding, he would have stopped otherwise. I mean, if they're prosecuting me for driving without due care and attention, then maybe it might mitigate whatever punishment I might get, if they're satisfied that he must have been too close, speeding, or on a part of road that he shouldn't have been, for him to have been unable to avoid me?

The thing is, his mate who turned up later is now claiming to have witnessed it (assuming its the same guy named by their lawyers), so no idea what he is going to say.
There were 2 busses that had to go onto the other side of the road to pass us, maybe their cameras might show he wasn't there?

Southpaw, thanks so much for answering all those questions for me.

Yes, I meant going to court for the careless driving. So I guess these lawyers are just the lawyers dealing with his insurance claim then.
I didn't know if it would also be them going to court to prosecute for careless driving.

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Mon, 27 May 2019 - 12:31) *
Unless you’re pleading not guilty there’s very little adversarial conduct between you - they will simply state the facts

In his statement on the documents I got from the law firm, he says that he was knocked off the bike. He wasn't.

In all honesty, whatever happens I'm still grateful that we're only disputing material things now.

Posted by: southpaw82 Mon, 27 May 2019 - 14:58
Post #1488071

You need to get it straight in your head that there are two separate issues and two separate cases here. One is any civil claim against you, the second is a criminal prosecution of you by the state. “His” lawyers have nothing to do with any criminal prosecution.

The friend who is listed as a witness - do you know what he’s actually saying? It would be one thing for him to say that he turned up after the fact and you were there etc. It would be completely another to fabricate a story that he saw the collision. However, in the former case he is still a witness.

Posted by: Nickle Mon, 27 May 2019 - 15:46
Post #1488077

Thanks, yes I understand that they are separate.
I just didn't understand what would happen in the case of careless driving prosecution, in terms of how that works, if I would have to go to court, what to expect etc.

There is no statement from his friend at all in their document. Just says he was a witness.

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 28 May 2019 - 09:46
Post #1488206

If driving without due care and attention is progressed by the Police they will do one of
1/ Offer you an awareness course
2/ Offer you a fixed penalty
3/ take it to court

If it is taken to court then you will get a ‘summons’ (Single Justice Procedure Notice) which you can respond to in writing without you having personally to court if you plead guilty if the justice decides to sentence you, they may transfer it to a full magistrates court for sentencing though that would be unlikely.

Posted by: Nickle Tue, 28 May 2019 - 10:21
Post #1488217

Ok thanks, so I guess my best option is just to plead guilty in writing and hope for the best (or the least worst).

I have to say, I feel a bit mugged. There's no way he could have been passing me there without driving too fast and/or too close. I know that doesn't excuse my part, but I'll be getting punished by the law and through my insurance. He'll be getting a cheque.

Posted by: thisisntme Tue, 28 May 2019 - 11:15
Post #1488232

QUOTE (Nickle @ Tue, 28 May 2019 - 10:21) *
Ok thanks, so I guess my best option is just to plead guilty in writing and hope for the best (or the least worst).

I have to say, I feel a bit mugged. There's no way he could have been passing me there without driving too fast and/or too close. I know that doesn't excuse my part, but I'll be getting punished by the law and through my insurance. He'll be getting a cheque.


Him getting done would not necessarily exonerate you.

Posted by: Nickle Tue, 28 May 2019 - 14:04
Post #1488277

QUOTE (thisisntme @ Tue, 28 May 2019 - 12:15) *
QUOTE (Nickle @ Tue, 28 May 2019 - 10:21) *
Ok thanks, so I guess my best option is just to plead guilty in writing and hope for the best (or the least worst).

I have to say, I feel a bit mugged. There's no way he could have been passing me there without driving too fast and/or too close. I know that doesn't excuse my part, but I'll be getting punished by the law and through my insurance. He'll be getting a cheque.


Him getting done would not necessarily exonerate you.

No, I realise that, but this prosecution is being made at his request and whilst I am at fault, so too is he.

Posted by: southpaw82 Tue, 28 May 2019 - 14:13
Post #1488282

QUOTE (Nickle @ Tue, 28 May 2019 - 15:04) *
No, I realise that, but this prosecution is being made at his request and whilst I am at fault, so too is he.

Is it? Or is it that he has reported it to the police, who have decided to prosecute? We don’t “press charges” in the UK like you see on US TV shows.

Posted by: Nickle Tue, 28 May 2019 - 14:15
Post #1488287

Oh ok, yes he reported it to the police.

Posted by: southpaw82 Tue, 28 May 2019 - 15:12
Post #1488313

I appreciate it doesn’t materially alter your position but if it makes you feel any better I don’t think he’s driving the prosecution.

Posted by: Nickle Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 10:34
Post #1489200

Ok fair enough, its out of my hands anyway now. I just have to tell them what happened and leave it to them.
I got another letter from their lawyer today, they've written off the scooter!

Posted by: GAZ237 Tue, 4 Jun 2019 - 04:30
Post #1489718

QUOTE (Nickle @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 11:34) *
Ok fair enough, its out of my hands anyway now. I just have to tell them what happened and leave it to them. I got another letter from their lawyer today, they've written off the scooter!


Weather it had a scratch or written off, affects you in no way.

The same if he gets £1 or £10,000 compo pay out.

What's done is done and to be honest, the fact that you admit to not seeing him at all, and was the one doing the U turn. Apportioning any blame to the rider makes no odds either.








Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)