Cyclist hit and run

Semple

Retrogamer wrote: »

It was a case of them claiming not to know who was driving, rather than not willing to tell them who the driver was.

You really believe that?

This wasn't a case of "maybe" speeding through an area, he/she would definitely have known they knocked the cyclist off, so you can't plead ignorance here.

He was either protecting his own skin, or is other half - i'm betting his own.

What would the penalty have been if he had stopped? I assume dangerous driving or driving without due care and attention. CPE guidelines typically suggest a driving ban in this situation.

So the law really needs to be changed so that if you flee an accident you've caused, and don't own up to your mistake, then the punishment is the same if not worse.

Assuming the driver has a clean licence, he'll see a £150 fine and 6 points as getting off very lightly indeed.

neilmcl

sacsquacco wrote: »

Given the seriousness of the accident, possibly someone killed or in a wheelchair for the rest of his life, a mere £150 is not an acceptable fine for failing to reveal who was driving.Its an admission of guilt in itself why the person decides not to help the police or admit they were guilty.

Although I agree it was serious, the guy wasn't killed or ended up in a wheelchair for life.

I think the driver has definitely calculated that they'd be better of with a failing to identify driver offence to one of dangerous/careless driving.

AlanCarter

sacsquacco wrote: »

It does nt mention that the driver claims "not to know who was driving " in the Nottingham news item. Just that the driver initially refused to answer a "formal request for driver details "and failed to respond. Then fined 6 points and a mere £150 for failing to provide driver details.
The other offence committed is failing to stop after an accident as well as dangerous driving.

Unfortunately they have no evidence of who committed those offences.

neilmcl

Semple wrote: »

So the law really needs to be changed so that if you flee an accident you've caused, and don't own up to your mistake, then the punishment is the same if not worse

Wouldn't make a difference here given that the driver can not be identified.

[Deleted User]

This story could do with posting in the Public Transport and Cycling section. To get maybe a slightly different take on it than a car biased forum. There we have active policemen who are cyclists who can explain why someone who fails to respond for a "formal request for driver details " gets off with such a paltry fine for a "brutal " accident.
The evidence of who committed it is the person who paid for the car hire and who now won t admit it or who will not "shop " the person who was behind the wheel attempting to flatten a cyclist. Absolutely no way would that driver not know he d slammed into a cyclist.

AlanCarter

Semple wrote: »

You really believe that?

This wasn't a case of "maybe" speeding through an area, he/she would definitely have known they knocked the cyclist off, so you can't plead ignorance here.

He was either protecting his own skin, or is other half - i'm betting his own.

What would the penalty have been if he had stopped? I assume dangerous driving or driving without due care and attention. CPE guidelines typically suggest a driving ban in this situation.

So the law really needs to be changed so that if you flee an accident you've caused, and don't own up to your mistake, then the punishment is the same if not worse.

Assuming the driver has a clean licence, he'll see a £150 fine and 6 points as getting off very lightly indeed.

It is so no need to change the law. In this case though they couldn't prove who was driving.

Semple

neilmcl wrote: »

Wouldn't make a difference here given that the driver can not be identified.

Sorry yes you are correct.

I should have said the registered owner/hirer should be slapped with a heavy punishment.


What would have happened here if the driver had killed that cyclist, and then the registered owner/hirer refused to hand over details. Would he still get away with a £150 fine and 6 points?

I would expect in this scenario that the police would have investigated CCTV around the area to capture a clear image of who was driving the vehicle. Which can only suggest they couldn't be bothered in this case because no-one was killed or severely hurt.

Retrogamer

Semple wrote: »

You really believe that?

This wasn't a case of "maybe" speeding through an area, he/she would definitely have known they knocked the cyclist off, so you can't plead ignorance here.

He was either protecting his own skin, or is other half - i'm betting his own.

I don't believe it personally, no.

Both however had produced "undeniable" evidence that they were both somewhere else at time & day the accident happened.

AlanCarter

sacsquacco wrote: »

This story could do with posting in the Public Transport and Cycling section. To get maybe a slightly different take on it than a car biased forum. There we have active policemen who are cyclists who can explain why someone who fails to respond for a "formal request for driver details " gets off with such a paltry fine for a "brutal " accident.
The evidence of who committed it is the person who paid for the car hire and who now won t admit it or who will not "shop " the person who was behind the wheel attempting to flatten a cyclist. Absolutely no way would that driver not know he d slammed into a cyclist.

So which on is it? The person who hired the car or someone he allowed to drive it.

There is no evidence as to who was driving, that's why the keeper at the time if the offence was prosecuted for failing to name the driver.

AlanCarter

Semple wrote: »

Sorry yes you are correct.

I should have said the registered owner/hirer should be slapped with a heavy punishment.


What would have happened here if the driver had killed that cyclist, and then the registered owner/hirer refused to hand over details. Would he still get away with a £150 fine and 6 points?

I would expect in this scenario that the police would have investigated CCTV around the area to capture a clear image of who was driving the vehicle. Which can only suggest they couldn't be bothered in this case because no-one was killed or severely hurt.

The fine may have probably been more but still six points.

Yes, had he been killed more work would have gone into it.. But unfortunately Mr Cameron likes to keep costs down.