We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Rtc police report contains inaccuracies, help please
Comments
-
Why would he/she want to deal with you privately after dissing the thread and publicly telling us he/she was off elsewhere prior to your entrance on stage?
Makes you think dunnit?
Probably because most of the first set of replies failed to get the point. Post #2 was pretty good advice then it went downhill.
Your reply especially seemed to assume that her question was about payout for injuries when she didn't once mention that.
When you assume things rather than take posts at their face value, your advice is going to be crap. Our concern should not be what their motives are but simply in responding to the question. Or not. It's up to you, nobody gets paid for posting here. But you clearly assumed she was after a bit of compensation from the word go.What will your verse be?
R.I.P Robin Williams.0 -
Given that she's been held completely blameless for the collision, the ONLY reasons to go digging into the police report with the aim of complaining and getting the case re-opened are revenge or compensation. Everybody - including you - seems to be convinced that she is in receipt of all the compensation to which she's entitled. Which only leaves revenge.But you clearly assumed she was after a bit of compensation from the word go.
But, please, if you have an alternative theory - share it.0 -
The OP's reason for caring about the punishment can only be revenge, whether they admit it to themselves or not.
The problem is, as long as the legal system incorporates the notion of "punishment" rather than restituion and rehabiliation, the line between justice and revenge is blurred a the best of times. When you're the victim it can become impossible to define objectively.
About 18 years ago I had a car stolen and burned out. It wasn't anything special - a 15 year old Mk II Cavalier but I'd just resprayed and fully polished it in gleaming black. I heard it driving away at about 3 in the morning (thanks to he scrotes doing donuts round the car park) but the Police couldn't find it till the next morning, by which time it was a shell.
Justice in that case would have involved red hot pokers and making the offenders stand naked in a tank of candiru. Luckily they never caught whoever was responsible because the courts tend not to keep tropical fish and anything short of that would have been them getting off too lightly.
For the record, the Victim Support leaflet explaining how it was "understandable" I might feel that way didn't help much :rotfl:0 -
Why would he/she want to deal with you privately after dissing the thread and publicly telling us he/she was off elsewhere prior to your entrance on stage?
Makes you think dunnit?
Plus thanking all of the posters posts up until this point. She's flounced off but is still taking the time to read the thread, strange behaviour indeed.0 -
Given that she's been held completely blameless for the collision, the ONLY reasons to go digging into the police report with the aim of complaining and getting the case re-opened are revenge or compensation. Everybody - including you - seems to be convinced that she is in receipt of all the compensation to which she's entitled. Which only leaves revenge.
But, please, if you have an alternative theory - share it.
How about making sure the police took into account all of the evidence when they came to their decision? As I've said hundreds of times now.
It doesn't have to be motivated by revenge. She hasn't said that she has a problem with the driver not being prosecuted, she only said she wondered whether or not this difference in the evidence would have made a difference to that decision. None of us know whether or not it would have made a difference, so the only sensible thing to do is to speak to the police about it.
I suspect that this thread wouldn't have been started were it not for the error in the evidence. If it was about revenge, then the whole scope of the first post would have been more like "How the hell did he get away with a driver improvement course?" It wasn't - she simply asked whether this difference in the evidence would have made a difference.
To quote the OP:
"Also, I have noted that the two uninjured passengers that were travelling (and were witnesses) on the bus, have been mistakenly recorded on the Official Report, as being passengers in my car!
I want this error corrected, and seriously wonder what bearing it had on the final decision not to prosecute the bus driver. Had I had rear seat passengers in my now written-off Fiesta, very serious injuries were likely to have been sustained by them.
But as the report falsely stated them to have been uninjured rear seat passengers in my car this gives me little doubt as to how much of a factor that had on the final decision not to prosecute that bus driver,"
The bulk of her post simply says that she's sure this error had an effect on their decision not to prosecute the bus driver. You are making an assumption by saying that it's about revenge.
Also, in response to your comment earlier about how the outcome has nothing to do with the victim, you're wrong about that. The law has been pushing restorative justice a lot lately, which is where the victim is more directly involved in the process.
Sometimes it is a way of disposing with the case at the police station, e.g. if the offender apologises to the victim or offers to pay for damage then that is the end of the matter.
Other times, the judge will take a restorative justice report into account when passing sentence. Offenders will often have a supervised meeting with their victims and will be offered the opportunity to apologise and the victim can have their say. If the victim doesn't want to meet the offender then they will be offered the opportunity to receive a letter from them instead. The victim and offender will both be asked how they think the meeting went, and the entire report will be passed to the judge to assist with sentencing.
So far I've only heard of RJ reports being used at the crown court, I'm not sure if they're used at the magistrates court as well.What will your verse be?
R.I.P Robin Williams.0 -
I suspect that this thread wouldn't have been started were it not for the error in the evidence. If it was about revenge, then the whole scope of the first post would have been more like "How the hell did he get away with a driver improvement course?" It wasn't - she simply asked whether this difference in the evidence would have made a difference.
No the thread would not have been started if the OP hadn't spent £80 on the police reports. What was the original motive for that, we haven't been told?So far I've only heard of RJ reports being used at the crown court, I'm not sure if they're used at the magistrates court as well.
And all totally irrelevant as the collision investigators and those who reviewed their report considered a driver improvement course was the appropriate course of action rather than taking the matter to court.0 -
No the thread would not have been started if the OP hadn't spent £80 on the police reports. What was the original motive for that, we haven't been told?
Maybe you wouldn't but I'm sure a lot of people would want a copy and to make sure the investigation had been conducted properly.And all totally irrelevant as the collision investigators and those who reviewed their report considered a driver improvement course was the appropriate course of action rather than taking the matter to court.
...in the face of erroneous evidence.
Repeating myself ad nauseum here.What will your verse be?
R.I.P Robin Williams.0 -
Given that she's been held completely blameless for the collision, the ONLY reasons to go digging into the police report with the aim of complaining and getting the case re-opened are revenge or compensation. Everybody - including you - seems to be convinced that she is in receipt of all the compensation to which she's entitled. Which only leaves revenge.
But, please, if you have an alternative theory - share it.
Bearing in mind the accident was eight months ago, I would be very surprised if the OP has received all the compensation for the accident, Especially if you through into the equation that the third party was a bus company who are well known for taking a long long time to settle claims.
I would expect their claim for injuries and loss of earnings is more likely to take upwards of twelve months to settle and more likely 18 months.0 -
Sorry, yes - I wasn't suggesting it was a closed case in terms of payment of compensation, just that it was all agreed-in-principle and all under way.Bearing in mind the accident was eight months ago, I would be very surprised if the OP has received all the compensation for the accident, Especially if you through into the equation that the third party was a bus company who are well known for taking a long long time to settle claims.
I would expect their claim for injuries and loss of earnings is more likely to take upwards of twelve months to settle and more likely 18 months.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards