Reversed into a car and didn't know

stormbreaker

Sorry, Too many Points and a.turner, I've not read your posts but reading between the lines, I think you need to agree to disagree and put a line under it as it's way off topic.

TooManyPoints

:rotfl:

What we have is a damaged car in a car park. A car park that the op is admitting being the driver of a vehicle in that car park on that particular day.

Yes I completely agree. That is why I am very surprised that the OP has been charged. Police very often have reports of "failing to stop/report" for incidents like this but in most cases they simply ensure the two parties are in touch and NFA it. I wonder if there is something we don't know?

If the incident is as described the OP has a statutory defence to the failing to stop/report (that he did not know a collision had occurred) which will be his burden to make out. Whether Careless Driving will stand up is arguable. Careful and competent drivers do not collide with stationary vehicles (however minor the collision may be).

I think you need to agree to disagree and put a line under it as it's way off topic.

x2. (I tried once and failed!!) :rotfl: Apologies to everyone for the derailment.

a.turner

TooManyPoints wrote: »

No I'm not at all confused, though you seem as if you might be:



Which is exactly what I've been arguing. They can be heard on indictment so they are indictable. They are indictable (i.e. they have the potential to be dealt with by way of indictment) unless and until the Magistrates' Court accepts jurisdiction (and the defendant agrees to a summary trial). When the defendant appears for the first time at the Magistrates' Court he faces an offence that is, potentially, indictable.



No it isn't. (see above for the definition of "indictment"). If the Magistrates decline jurisdiction (following their "Mode of Trial" decision) an indictment is prepared and the defendant is "sent" to the Crown Court.

I'm fully conversant with what an Either Way offence is and well acquainted with the process used to progress a defendant who faces one in the Magistrates' Court from there to the Crown Court for trial. Now I really am out.

Exactly an indictable offence cannot be heard in Magistrates Court.

stormbreaker

jammiejimmy wrote: »

I do have the witness statements and a copy of what I wrote on the form asking for my details last November which arrived earlier this week.

Please check that it is a copy of the actual statements given and not the police summary of evidence. These are completely different.

Car_54

TooManyPoints wrote: »

:rotfl:
If the incident is as described the OP has a statutory defence to the failing to stop/report (that he did not know a collision had occurred) which will be his burden to make out. Whether Careless Driving will stand up is arguable. Careful and competent drivers do not collide with stationary vehicles (however minor the collision may be).

Where is this statutory defence? It's certainly not in s170 of the RTA.

Herzlos

Was it definitely your car? Is it possible that someone has gotten the registration number of something else wrong and it just happens to match yours which was in the same area? Or did they hear a bang and your car looked close enough to the other one for them to assume it was you?


Most people can tell if they hit something.

jammiejimmy

stormbreaker wrote: »

Personally, I would plead not guilty to all three charges. What kind of vehicle were you driving? Could you 'reasonably' not have known that you had bumped the other vehicle? Did it have a tow bar? What parts of the vehicles connected? Is there anyone speaking to there being any damage on your vehicle? What exactly are the witnesses saying?

Did they see your vehicle collide with the other? Are they independant? Was it their car? If so, did they just see your vehicle leaving a parking space, then notice the damage, then assume it was your vehicle that caused it?

I am really surprised you were not visited by the police. I would have expected them to have examined both vehicles for damage.

In the forms you completed for the police all I expect you were doing was identifying who the driver of the vehicle was at the material time.

As much as failing to stop and failing to report will not show as convictions they can be treated as serious by the courts. It is considered that there must have been good reason for you not to have done so. If your driving license and insurance are in order it may be considered that the reason you didn't was you were under the influence of drink or drugs. This can come with disqualification and a heavy fine.

That said if there was any evidence to suggest that you were under the influence even more reason the police should have followed it up immediately.

Police do not normally charge folk with driving without due care and attention unless there is injury or substantial damage, that's just been put there as an add on. Police rarely take reports of minor bumps, never mind attend at the locus (most if not all, have been caused by someone not driving with due care and attention) leaving it to insurance to fight it out.

OK, a lot to get through here-

1. I was driving a car. A saloon- I hit a Mazda MX5. I had several bags of rubbish in the back which I'd just picked up from the office I was leaving. I'd offered to take them to the local recycling centre. I think (although I don't remember) that they were still settling when I was reversing. This, coupled with the fact that the car I hit was low slung and my back view was obscured, meant that I didn't noticed that I'd bumped the Mazda. At least that's what I'm hypothesising as I genuinely don't recall!

2. I think it was reasonable, the proof being that I don't recall.

3. My car didn't have a tow bar. I don't know about the other car.

4. I don't know, I'm told that the rear driver's side brake light was broken and pieces of glass fell to the ground as I drove off. I assume it was my bumper that hit the other car (in fact I guess it must have been given that I was reversing).

5. One witness says she saw the car connect and drew it to the attention to the other witness who were in a kitchen connected to an office about (I'm guessing) 100ft away. There obviously was an incident. I can't dispute that as the witnesses are people I don't know who presumably have no reason to lie. I didn't know about it so I didn't report. However listening to others it seems the fact I didn't know I'd hit another car heavily implies I was driving without due care and attention. I have to concede this.

6. It wasn't their car car but belonged to a third party. They took my details and passed these on to her.

7. No damage to my car. I've since sold the car and took pictures. I've looked at the pictures minutely and there's no damage to the car. Apparently it was a red car I hit, mine was silver. Before someone points out that I might have had it fixed/ the pictured could have been taken early, let me point out that I'm aware of those points. There's no need to be pointing out the obvious!!

8. Yes, I got a form from the "Camera, Tickets and Collision Unit" and identified myself as the driver. On the back of the form I wrote, "I have no knowledge of being involved in an accident and would like a chance to review any evidence".

9. I wasn't "under the influence" . I'd been doing some work in a small office with other people around.

10. Yes, my insurance is all OK. I have business insurance. Relevant as I was working in an alternative office to my usual place of work. I also have excess protection insurance which does exactly what it says.

Finally, although I welcome all comments, a message to those who suggest I plead guilty-

I'M NOT PLEADING GUILTY.

At least not to the first two charges. I didn't have any knowledge of the incident so I couldn't report it!! I appreciate any comments and advice but don't bother advising me or telling me to go guilty as I'm not doing it!

I don't know what you mean by statutory defence, but I did speak to a friendly solicitor who gave me the following references to cases which act as precedent and where the defendants were being prosecuted for a similar thing. I haven't got round to reading them yet but feel free to have a look and they might prove useful to someone in a similar situation in the future-

i) Harding vs Price (1948 1 All E.R 283)
ii) Hampson vs Powell (1970 1 All E.R 929)
iii) Selby vs Avon & Somerset Police (1988 R.T.R 216)

I'm seeing if I can get my LEI to pay for a solicitor so I can get some professional advice tomorrow- but in the mean time thanks to those members who have made comments with the intention of helping me! It is appreciated.

Court date is 4th June.:eek:

Thanks everyone.

(P.S. Sorry about the structure of this post- the multi-quote thing is too complicated for me!)

jammiejimmy

I'm not sure where I stand on typing up and posting the witness comments? My intuition tells me not to.

[Deleted User]

I wouldn't cop to driving without due care either, after all the collision was so gentle that you didn't even notice. Accidents happen, and if such a collision met the threshold for prosecution then every minor accident would result in points and conviction.

Good luck.

jammiejimmy

stormbreaker wrote: »

Please check that it is a copy of the actual statements given and not the police summary of evidence. These are completely different.

I have copies of three statements. One from "woman 1" who actually saw the incident, her colleague (woman 2) who looked up as I hit the car after being told by woman 1 that I was about to hit the car, and a statement from the owner of the car (who didn't see anything as she was in a building).

I don't have the "police summary of evidence". This sounds like something I should see prior to court? How would I get it?