Rtc police report contains inaccuracies, help please

Strider590

Let's just imagine Mr Bus driver had done a double shift, hadn't slept for over 24hrs, because his manager is a complete "cu next Tuesday". Would he still deserve to be hung drawn and quartered for having an accident?

Nobody knows if there were mitigating circumstances here, this is why we have a legal system, this is why we no longer light the torches and sharpen the pitch forks when somebody steps out of line. The law sometimes gets it wrong, its not perfect, but for Christ sake is this REALLY worth dragging you, your family and this drivers innocent family through hell for???

Johno100

matttye wrote: »

Careless driving can carry a discretionary disqualification.

So the range of what can happen is a driver improvement course through to a fine and an instant disqualification.

Again, this would not make not a blind bit of difference to the OP's situation, but of course it's a point of principle.

matttye

AdrianC wrote: »

We do. A bus drove into the back of a stationary car.

The findings were that the bus driver was totally at fault.

I refer you to post #23.

Prosecutors consider culpability and harm when deciding whether to prosecute (as do courts when passing sentencing).

I'm not suggesting the culpability of the bus driver would change at all - but the harm to the victim(s) might. At the moment the police report suggests there were two unharmed victims and two harmed, whereas what actually happened is that there were only two harmed.

AdrianC wrote: »

Well, the only way the outcome could have been different is if the OP, the car driver, had been held to be partially or completely at fault. Is that what you're suggesting happened?

Really, that's the only way the outcome could have been different? What if the OP, or her husband, or both of them, had died? Do you think the result would have been the same then? The bus drivers' actions would have been the same, but the harm caused would have been different.

My point is that police, prosecutors, and sentencing courts, do not only consider the culpability of the offender, but they also consider the result of the offender's actions (the harm caused).

AdrianC wrote: »

So you DO think the OP was partially at fault...?

Unless, of course, you're suggesting that it wasn't an "accident", which would mean the bus driver did it deliberately?

Didn't say either of these two things. Not sure what you're talking about.

Strider590 wrote: »

Let's just imagine Mr Bus driver had done a double shift, hadn't slept for over 24hrs, because his manager is a complete "cu next Tuesday". Would he still deserve to be hung drawn and quartered for having an accident?

Never said the bus driver should be prosecuted. Not once. You're obviously failing to grasp this simple concept.

matttye

Johno100 wrote: »

Again, this would not make not a blind bit of difference to the OP's situation, but of course it's a point of principle.

You're assuming it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference.

I agree that it probably wouldn't make a difference, but there's no way any of us could possibly know that for sure. Hence why the police should review the situation.

If they review the situation and come to the same conclusion - fine. They've done their jobs and OP will need to move on.

AdrianC

matttye wrote: »

I'm not suggesting the culpability of the bus driver would change at all - but the harm to the victim(s) might. At the moment the police report suggests there were two unharmed victims and two harmed, whereas what actually happened is that there were only two harmed.

So, instead of there being a damaged car and two injured people arising from the driver's actions, there would be a damaged car and two injured people? And that would make a difference, would it?

B'sides, how is that relevant to the OP? The only relevance to them is whether they get their car damage paid for, and their injuries are properly compensated. Which it appears they are.

What if the OP, or her husband, or both of them, had died? Do you think the result would have been the same then? The bus drivers' actions would have been the same, but the harm caused would have been different.

And the bus driver would have been facing different and much more serious charges. But, since nobody died, that's a bit of a non sequitur, isn't it?

And, yes, since the driver was found to be 100% at fault, that IS the only possible difference that would be directly relevant to the OP.

Nodding_Donkey

jacques_chirac wrote: »

Excuse my bluntness, but PTSD from a minor accident, really? Some perspective is needed here!

Look at it from the perspective of a nice, juicy, no win no fee compo claim

topdaddy_2

Im still at a loss as to why anyone would pay 88 pounds to read this report.

matttye

AdrianC wrote: »

So, instead of there being a damaged car and two injured people arising from the driver's actions, there would be a damaged car and two injured people? And that would make a difference, would it?

B'sides, how is that relevant to the OP? The only relevance to them is whether they get their car damage paid for, and their injuries are properly compensated. Which it appears they are.

It could do. I feel like I keep repeating myself now, but like I said earlier, it's not unbelievable that two uninjured passengers who allegedly bore the brunt of the collision would alter the decision maker's decision, when in reality everyone who was in the car got injured.

If something happened to me I would expect an investigation to be conducted properly. So long as the investigation was done properly they could come to whatever decision they liked. If there were any errors I'd be on their case big time. It's the principal of it.

AdrianC wrote: »

And the bus driver would have been facing different and much more serious charges. But, since nobody died, that's a bit of a non sequitur, isn't it?

And, yes, since the driver was found to be 100% at fault, that IS the only possible difference that would be directly relevant to the OP.

Hypothetical situation but I was just using it to demonstrate that the culpability of the driver is not the only thing to be considered. You get that, so there's no need to discuss it further.

matttye

topdaddy wrote: »

Im still at a loss as to why anyone would pay 88 pounds to read this report.

To make sure the investigation was done properly.

matttye

In addition, and something I have admittedly only just thought of, is that if statements were taken from the two witnesses on the bus, the evidence that they gave could be taken in a whole different light if the decision maker thought that they were passengers in the OP's vehicle rather than passengers on the bus.