Driving without due care and attention, Wrongly accused Options

[john1253]

I was driving along a straight dual carriageway at 6.04 in the morning, I moved into the outside lane to overtake the car in front of me when he decided to move into the outside lane forcing me to brake, when he moved back into the nearside lane I accelerated to pass him then moved back into the nearside lane because I was nearing my slip road exit, I indicated and braked to leave the dual carriageway but this other car stayed extremely close to me, I waved at him for driving so close, At 4.00pm the same afternoon a policeman came banging on my door to ask me was I the driver on the dual carriageway that morning, on saying I was he told me he was the driver of the other car off duty, he accused me of careless driving and issued me with a section 59 and told me I would be reported for driving without due care and attention, I couldn't believe what was happening and I feel he maybe got in before me in case I reported him for tailgating me, anyway I am in court on the 14/2/2019 on a charge of driving without due care and attention and the person accusing me is the who drove without due care and attention, life just isnt fair.

This post has been edited by john1253: Sat, 5 Jan 2019 - 17:14

[Advertisement]

[cp8759]

You might want to consider getting the services of a specialist motoring solicitor. In any event you need to ask the prosecution for a copy of the officer's witness statement, they should provide this to you. If you came here for advice, rather than just a rant, I suggest you post a redacted copy on here.

[Jlc]

Do you have a question?

That charge is falling below the standard expected of a safe and competent driver. If as described then you don’t appear to have driven carelessly. I suspect his version of events may be different to yours.

Did the matter go straight to court?

[KH_]

How close to your exit road were you when you pulled back in front of the other driver?

A couple of hundred yards, no problem. Ten feet would be too late to overtake.

How long is the slip road, there may have been no need to brake on the carriageway if the slip road was a long one.

Were you exceeding the speed limit when the other vehicle pulled into your lane? It could be the off duty was attempting to slow you down.

I'm making no accusations here, just trying to get context.

[NewJudge]

On the face of it he may have a point. The court may ask itself why, when you were nearing your exit, did you still need to overtake him to leave yourself in a position where you had to pull back in front of him only to then have to brake?

It's always difficult to envisage exactly what happened when only one version of events is available. But the above question immediately sprang to my mind after reading your account a couple of times. Careless driving is when the standard of driving falls below that expected of a careful and competent driver. The court may ask itself whether overtaking when you were about to pull off the dual carriageway - especially when the driver of the vehicle you overtook had already caused you a little difficulty shortly beforehand - meets the standard of a careful and competent driver.

You should be provided with the officer's statement in order to help you decide how to plead. You should study its contents carefully.

[666]

How close to your exit road were you when you pulled back in front of the other driver?

A couple of hundred yards, no problem. Ten feet would be too late to overtake.

How long is the slip road, there may have been no need to brake on the carriageway if the slip road was a long one.

Were you exceeding the speed limit when the other vehicle pulled into your lane? It could be the off duty was attempting to slow you down.

I'm making no accusations here, just trying to get context.

As above. The purpose of slip roads is to allow you to adjust your speed before joining or after leaving the main carriageway. You should not be braking before leaving.

[john1253]

Do you have a question?

That charge is falling below the standard expected of a safe and competent driver. If as described then you don’t appear to have driven carelessly. I suspect his version of events may be different to yours.

Did the matter go straight to court?

I am in court on the 14/02/2019

You might want to consider getting the services of a specialist motoring solicitor. In any event you need to ask the prosecution for a copy of the officer's witness statement, they should provide this to you. If you came here for advice, rather than just a rant, I suggest you post a redacted copy on here.

[john1253]

How close to your exit road were you when you pulled back in front of the other driver?

A couple of hundred yards, no problem. Ten feet would be too late to overtake.

How long is the slip road, there may have been no need to brake on the carriageway if the slip road was a long one.

Were you exceeding the speed limit when the other vehicle pulled into your lane? It could be the off duty was attempting to slow you down.

I'm making no accusations here, just trying to get context.

the exit slip road is very short indeed, the other driver stated he was in the outside lane to let traffic enter the dual carriageway, he had no need to do that, the traffic was ver light like three vehicles, it was 6am.

How close to your exit road were you when you pulled back in front of the other driver?

A couple of hundred yards, no problem. Ten feet would be too late to overtake.

How long is the slip road, there may have been no need to brake on the carriageway if the slip road was a long one.

Were you exceeding the speed limit when the other vehicle pulled into your lane? It could be the off duty was attempting to slow you down.

I'm making no accusations here, just trying to get context.

As above. The purpose of slip roads is to allow you to adjust your speed before joining or after leaving the main carriageway. You should not be braking before leaving.

I would have to undertake him, I braked and indicated to adjust my speed to enter the slip road which is extremely short, the other car stayed extremely close behind me, he could of easily gone into the outside lane.

[baggins1234]

What exactly did you say to the officer?

I’m assuming you verbally admitted being the driver at the material time?

That in itself possibly fills the requirements of the S172 (application for driver details) which would usually be sent to you through the post.

However an NIP needs to be served and I believe there was a stated case where it was held that unless the interaction with the Police was immediately after the alleged offence when a verbal NIP was given and held to be lawfully given then a written one MUST be served...

If you havent had a written one then this may be worth mentioning?

[peterguk]

I would have to undertake him, I braked and indicated to adjust my speed to enter the slip road which is extremely short, the other car stayed extremely close behind me, he could of easily gone into the outside lane.

So in reality, you should never have overtaken him if the slip road was so close.

immediately

Which could be a few hours?

[baggins1234]

Which could be a few hours?

I’m struggling to see that a few hours could equate to “immediately” but who knows.

There was mention on here in a thread if my memory is right about this which is why I said it.

I’m sure SP with his unrivalled skill can find the thread?

[southpaw82]

Okike and Stacey are the relevant cases.

[notmeatloaf]

The OP should be aware in practical terms a late NIP defence would need unusually astute magistrates or deep pocket.

OP I think you need to focus on the distance between you and the other party when you pulled back in. If there was at least the Highway Code stopping distance when you had fully rejoined the lane.

If there wasn't - and it will be a racing certainty the officer will say there wasn't - then you will likely be found guilty. Needing to leave the road doesn't allow you to cut up other vehicles.

The rest of the story is an irrelevance unless they are alleging you drove aggressively then as well. It seems fairly unremarkable, and it will play poorly if you say that you could judge joining traffic better than the car in front of you. Best to avoid that whole area and focus on the meat rather than the bones.

[southpaw82]

The OP should be aware in practical terms a late NIP defence would need unusually astute magistrates or deep pocket.

It’s not late, it’s non-existent. Doesn’t sound hard to me and if pointed out to the prosecution before the case, or at a pre-trial review, should see the case withdrawn.

[peterguk]

told me I would be reported for driving without due care and attention

Whilst OP has not specifically commented on the point, might he have been given verbal NIP?

[southpaw82]

told me I would be reported for driving without due care and attention

Whilst OP has not specifically commented on the point, might he have been given verbal NIP?

(1)Subject to section 2 of this Act, a person shall not be convicted of an offence to which this section applies unless—

(a) he was warned at the time the offence was committed that the question of prosecuting him for some one or other of the offences to which this section applies would be taken into consideration

[peterguk]

told me I would be reported for driving without due care and attention

Whilst OP has not specifically commented on the point, might he have been given verbal NIP?

(1)Subject to section 2 of this Act, a person shall not be convicted of an offence to which this section applies unless—

(a) he was warned at the time the offence was committed that the question of prosecuting him for some one or other of the offences to which this section applies would be taken into consideration

Thanks. Accepted. I know Baggins touched on it earlier, but i'm certain there was a thread here where the court decided what "at the time of the offence" was defined as. Haven't found it yet, but i'm certain in that case the cop knocked on the door some hours later and the court accepted the delay. Not saying same would happen here but it suggests the OP hasn't got a get out of jail card in his pocket.

If cop in this case was off duty, and not in uniform, i'm assuming he would not have been able to pull the OP over at the time?

This post has been edited by peterguk: Sun, 6 Jan 2019 - 00:50

[john1253]

I would have to undertake him, I braked and indicated to adjust my speed to enter the slip road which is extremely short, the other car stayed extremely close behind me, he could of easily gone into the outside lane.

So in reality, you should never have overtaken him if the slip road was so close.

immediately

Which could be a few hours?

I was in the outside lane about to overtake him, he pulled into the outside lane in front of me saying he did so to let traffic enter from the slip road, which is wrong, down to traffic merging from a slip road, by this time we where approaching the next exit slip road so my only option was to accelerate past him and indicate to leave the dual carriageway, he seemed purposely to stay very close behind me.

[NewJudge]

I was in the outside lane about to overtake him, he pulled into the outside lane in front of me saying he did so to let traffic enter from the slip road, which is wrong, down to traffic merging from a slip road, by this time we where approaching the next exit slip road so my only option was to accelerate past him and indicate to leave the dual carriageway, he seemed purposely to stay very close behind me.

I've an idea that a court may not see it that way. Let me know if I have this wrong:

You were about to overtake but he pulled out preventing you from doing so. (Why he did so and whether he had justification is not relevant to what you did next and concentrating on that is not going to help you). So you are behind him. Then:

"...by this time we where approaching the next exit slip road so my only option was to accelerate past him"

So he must have, by then, pulled back into lane one (or your option to pass him would not have been available). So why didn't you do the same (pull back in, remaining behind him since your exit was fast approaching)? You must have been behind him when he pulled back in. Passing him was not therefore your only option. In fact, from your description, it must have been far riskier to overtake him, knowing you needed to leave the dual carriageway very shortly, than it would have been to simply remain behind him.

As I said earlier, it is always difficult to assess these matters based on one party's brief description. However, the more I read of this the more I get the impression that you overtook him when it was unnecessary and that it was inappropriate to do so with your exit road fast approaching. I have a suspicion that he believes you "cut him up" as you headed for the slip road.

Have you seen the officer's statement?

[cp8759]

I would have to undertake him, I braked and indicated to adjust my speed to enter the slip road which is extremely short, the other car stayed extremely close behind me, he could of easily gone into the outside lane.

So in reality, you should never have overtaken him if the slip road was so close.

immediately

Which could be a few hours?

I was in the outside lane about to overtake him, he pulled into the outside lane in front of me saying he did so to let traffic enter from the slip road, which is wrong, down to traffic merging from a slip road, by this time we where approaching the next exit slip road so my only option was to accelerate past him and indicate to leave the dual carriageway, he seemed purposely to stay very close behind me.

Have you received a copy of the officer's statement?