Looking for some advice about a hit & run

biscuitdunker

Just be interested to know a bit more about where I stand currently.

I was the victim of a hit & run 6 months ago when a woman failed to stop at a roundabout and plowed into the side of my car. I hit my head quite badly and was left a bit dazed and confused, but she told me to pull over to exchange details. As soon as I moved my car out of her way, she sped off. I was really shaken by it all, but mostly because of her behaviour, I couldn't believe someone would behave in such a callous way.

I immediately filled out a police report and contacted my insurers. I also had to go to hospital for some minor injuries. There was a witness to the hit & run, and I gave all his details to both the police and my insurers, he thankfully managed to take down the woman's registration details, so I was hoping it wouldn't be too difficult for them to trace her. Because I wasn't fully comp, my insurers tried to track down the other party's insurers to pay for my damages. Unfortunately, because things were moving so slowly, with her ignoring all attempts at contact by my insurers, and I desperately needed a working car for my job, I eventually had to give up my car and replace it as it was such a mess. It wasn't worth a penny because of the extent of damage, and I gave it to my local garage.

FINALLY this morning I received a letter saying that the police were charging this woman with "Failing to nominate a driver", and she's going to have to appear in court. I am now wondering where this leaves me? Will they be able to change her with failing to stop at the scene, or anything else? I'm happy that she's going to court, but I was hoping that it would be for more than simply failing to nominate a driver. Any advice gratefully received!!

Premier_2

It may depend on whether the woman recorded keeper the police have contacted was the woman driving at time of the accident.
You obviously know what the woman who was driving looked like as she spoke to you. Presumably your witness saw her too.
If you both testify to say that she was the driver, perhaps in an identity parade or the modern equivilent, that should be enough for the police to prosecute.

I believe failing to nominate carries a maximum penalty of 6 points & £1000 fine.
It's affectively a paperwork excercise, as the keeper either nominates or they don't.

Perhaps they can then prosecute later if you can prove she was the driver at the time?

biscuitdunker

Yeah, there is the possibility that the woman being prosecuted wasn't actually the woman who was driving. I'm just wondering if she is the woman, and she's found guilty, would the police usually go on to prosecute her for leaving the scene, even after she's been charged with failing to nominate a driver?

Mark_Hewitt

Problem is, if they can't prove who was driving, they can't do anything!

We had a case in Gateshead a few years back where two drugged up chavs ran over an old man and made off. Each said the other one was driving, and without any witness testimony to say who was actually driving, they couldn't do anything!

Chippy_Minton_2

Basically there is on evidence that the RK (Lets call her Ms X) was driving.

The Ms would not have to go to court. Her solicitor can go as her representative. The OP and his witness go to court. Ms X solicitor says "Ms X being the owner of the vehicle is being prosecuted for failing to name the driver at the time. She is not in court today. She say's that she wasn't driving at the time of the collision and the prosecution have no evidence to prove she was".

End of case.

We don't know what Ms X looks like so can't compare her to the description and can't do a dock id cause she's not there.

A DI will not pay for an ID parade for a minor injury collision.

I know you will not like this but it's how the justice system is.

Chippy_Minton_2

Mark_Hewitt wrote: »

We had a case in Gateshead a few years back where two drugged up chavs ran over an old man and made off. Each said the other one was driving, and without any witness testimony to say who was actually driving, they couldn't do anything!

They should have charged them both.

biscuitdunker

Chippy_Minton wrote: »

Basically there is on evidence that the RK (Lets call her Ms X) was driving.

The Ms would not have to go to court. Her solicitor can go as her representative. The OP and his witness go to court. Ms X solicitor says "Ms X being the owner of the vehicle is being prosecuted for failing to name the driver at the time. She is not in court today. She say's that she wasn't driving at the time of the collision and the prosecution have no evidence to prove she was".

End of case.

What if she does appear in court? Should I attend on the first hearing, even though I'm not required to? Just in case she does attend, or does it make no difference?

Chippy_Minton_2

biscuitdunker wrote: »

What if she does appear in court? Should I attend on the first hearing, even though I'm not required to? Just in case she does attend, or does it make no difference?

If at trial you are asked to ID the driver.

The defence could argue you have simply picked out the woman who you saw in court on the first hearing, however she was not driving at the time.

To date there is no Section 9 evidence as to who was driving as I take it you didn't exchange details and she has not admitted to driving.

Premier_2

Correct me if I'm wrong but

biscuitdunker wrote: »

... the police were charging this woman with "Failing to nominate a driver", ...

My understanding is that is a strict liability offence.

Chippy_Minton_2

Premier wrote: »

My understanding is that is a strict liability offence.

Maybe so but the accused still has a right to a trial don't they?

biscuitdunker

Chippy_Minton wrote: »

Maybe so but the accused still has a right to a trial don't they?

Definitely, but surely the fact that the car was involved is not in dispute as there was a witness? If the owner will not say who was driving, is this not a crime in itself?