PLEASE HELP WITH ADVICE - taken to court

BigTrouble_2

scotsman4th wrote: »

Something doesnt seem right here. Is there not something in the paperwork that tells you the maximum penalties? (e.g. 3 points, £1000 fine, 3 months imprisonment).
What court is it? In Scotland we have the district court, then the sheriff court then high court.
Is it possible they're trying to chase you for compensation?
If you've no legal cover anywhere, call a local solicitor that offers a free 1st consultation.

Yes, I was surpised too! The summons only states that this offence carries penalty points. And that all the rest will be decided by the court.

There is no indication of compensation in the pack that I received.

It is the Magistrates Court, England and Wales.

flower7

well my arguement would be I couldn't have been driving without due care and attention because I swerved and braked after the child ran out in the road in front of me.

Did you see these witnesses there at the time? Did they give the police a statement there and then?

I think the parents might be after a compo claim.

Have you checked your house insurance for legal cover?

If you hadn't of reacted that child would have been very badly injured a judge might take that into consideration or assume you weren't driving very fast in the first place so that sort of covers the due care.

Are there any witnesses than can back you up?

The difference in the side of the road might help, if they made a statement to the police and they took evidence and it shows you are right it might make them appear to be lying as they can't even get that correct.

I think if you do plead guilty the parents might then go for a compo claim and win because you said it was your fault.

Good luck

colino

Chase up your solicitor and insist on being represented in court. A penitent defendent who admits in court the facts (car hit child) but has strong mitigating defence (actively looking for children near school, reduced speed due to location etc.) will get a better hearing than a postal admission.
Bear in mind too that these non-expert witnesses already have an air of the "Judge Judy" about them and an uncontested guilty verdict leaves you open to a civil claim. Get the info. from the Traffic Cop who attended (should have for an injury car v. pedestrian) about speed, skid marks etc. to prove your story. You might be sorry, but if your not guilty why open up the floodgates?

Rolandtheroadie

BigTrouble wrote: »

Yes, I was surpised too! The summons only states that this offence carries penalty points. And that all the rest will be decided by the court.

There is no indication of compensation in the pack that I received.

It is the Magistrates Court, England and Wales.

The impression I'm getting is that someones trying to get you prosecuted for the offence and will then pursue you for damages.
I'm probably wrong, it's just my suspicious nature but the lawyer once he/she gets back to you should be able to tell you more.

Good luck.

BigTrouble_2

laurz121 wrote: »

I'm no expert so probably couldn't help anyway but the information you have given isn't enough at all for anyone to give you an opinion on whether you are guilty, whether you should appeal or what you are likely to get if found guilty.

Sorry for all the questions but I think that you answering them will help people build up a better picture and will help them to help you

what speed were you travelling at?

15-20mph

was you using a mobile phone or anything like that at the time?

No.

you say it was near a school. How near? Directly outside or just a few streets from one? Was it during school hours?

Directly outside the school. It was just after school hours.

How busy was the area? Both with cars and with pedestrians.

Busy with cars. School parents on both sides of the road. Many cars parked along the road, the rest are taking off/moving slowly towards/from the main road.

You say you saw the boy but still hit him, how early/late did you see him?

I saw him immediately because I was looking forward. I don't know why he ran in from of my car, with the car being so close. I hit him because of the stopping distance, he didn't leave me much room for maneuvres.

How close was your vehicle when he stepped into the road?

Hard to say but probably 2 metres from him.

You say that the witnesses say he came from one side of the road and you say he came from another. Which side do you think he came from?

I will remember this image for the rest of my life. He was between parked cars on the left with his friends and that's where he ran out from. That's what I said to the police at the scene. The boy and two witnesses (questioned within next 4 months) state that he ran from the right side.

What explanation has the victim and/or witnesses given for him walking into the path of a moving vehicle? Walking straight into the path of a car isn't normal behaviour.

The boy says he saw my car but didn't know I would keep moving. He (and the witnesses) said that I was trying to overtake the moving traffic which is not true - it is pointless to try to overtake it on this road at this hour, I know it very well. I was going around the parked cars so was in the middle/on the right side - the roads are quite narrow. The statements say I was on the right side of the road trying to overtake the traffic.

Have the witnesses claimed you were speeding?

No, just one mentioned the speed - 10-20 mph.

laurz121

From the answers you've given it seems that you could easily defend yourself.

You have a witness saying you was going at a slow speed, this is good and will contradict their statements that you was overtaking over vehicles.

If the boy ran (or even walked) out in front of your car then surely you can't have been too close to the vehicle in front of you right? This will again support the claim that you was not overtaking any other moving vehicle.

The boy has admitted that he saw your vehicle coming towards him yet still stepped in front of it. Any court in the land would see this as an admission of guilt. The fact that he says he thought you would stop yet again contradicts the claim that you was overtaking another vehicle. It is impossible to suggest that you were overtaking someone and yet also stopping at the same time.

You say he came from the left, he says from the right. Which side was the school on and which side were the other witnesses on? Common sense says that a child is more likely to be heading away from school after it finishes rather than heading towards it.

It sounds to me like its worth defending yourself but thats just my opinion

Soubrette

Do you know if the boy's injuries are consistent with being hit from the left or the right?

Which side is the school on? ie Why would he step out from the other side? Why would the witnesses lie?

Is it at all feasible that you could have been driving so slowly and yet overtaking at the same time? Why were you driving so slowly - was it weight of traffic or were you already taking into account the fact that school children were around?

The answers to these points could help things go in your favour.

A word of caution - the same tricks of memory are going to be equally applicable to you - the witnesses may genuinely believe something that is false but equally so might you.

If it were me, if I honestly thought I was not guilty (and I'd be really cross that the boy might only be alive because I was driving with exceptional due care and attention because I was outside a school) then I would fight it on principle - but I'm a bit bloody minded.

Good luck

Sou

LandyAndy

scotsman4th wrote: »

The impression I'm getting is that someones trying to get you prosecuted for the offence and will then pursue you for damages.
I'm probably wrong, it's just my suspicious nature but the lawyer once he/she gets back to you should be able to tell you more.

Good luck.

Which will be a matter for your insurers.

Rolandtheroadie

LandyAndy wrote: »

Which will be a matter for your insurers.

But wont prevent points on your licence and increased insurance premiums.

flower7

Taken from legal website

"The Magistrates will also wish to consider whether there were any aggravating factors. They will consider whether there was serious injury to others persons, use of a mobile phone or satellite navigation system, other wilful distractions such as map reading or a high degree of carelessness, the speed driven will also be considered."

it sounds like you weren't doing anything wrong you weren't speeding etc and the child wasn't badly injured. It looks like you have a good case.

When did this happen because a summons must be issued within 6 months of the date of the alleged offence.