Court Appearance in relation to a Car Accident

astreix

My wife was involved in a non-fault car accident in Sep 2020. My daughter was a passenger in the car. We had dashcam footage and independent witnesses etc so the our insurer passed us on to a credit hire company (auxillius) and within a few months everything was settled. My daughter had minor back injury but she recovered within a month and we decided not to pursue any claims for that. As far as I know there is no insurance dispute and everything is settled.

However my wife and daughter have now received a letter from met police asking them to attend court as witnesses in relation to prosecution of the offending driver.  No other details are provided other than date / time / address for court hearing.

Has anyone else been in similar position?  What should they expect on the day - will they be questioned by someone etc in court?

Sandtree

This may be better off in the Motoring section as this is presumably the fact the TP is being charged with driving without due care or something similar rather than anything to do with the insurance (police dont have anything to do with insurance unless they were in the accident or charging silly money for their waste of time reports).

There should be contact details for the officer or CPS etc no? My ex used to be in counter fraud for insurance and she and her colleagues would occasionally be called to court to act as witnesses... to the best of my knowledge it was very similar to being a jury member, a lot of waiting around and at the 11th hour being told they werent needed any more.

astreix

Sandtreet- thanks.
Any idea how I move this to motoring section (or delete this thread)

soolin

I have moved this to the motoring board

Car_54

As above, possibly a lot of waiting around. If called, they will certainly be asked questions - that's what a witness is for. Nothing to be frightened of, they simply answer truthfully. If they can't remember something, just say so.

Car_54

PS They can claim expenses - see https://www.gov.uk/going-to-court-victim-witness/expenses-for-going-to-court

TooManyPoints

Have either of them given a statement to the police in relation to the incident?

astreix

TooManyPoints said:

Have either of them given a statement to the police in relation to the incident?

A month or two after the incident they had received a letter from police asking them to describe the incident and provide details of witnesses. So I guess that would count as a statement.
Post that there was a long radio silence and only recently were they informed they may have to attend court.

TooManyPoints

A month or two after the incident they had received a letter from police asking them to describe the incident and provide details of witnesses. So I guess that would count as a statement.

It almost certainly would not. Under the Criminal Procedure Rules a witness statement must conform to a certain standard. The basis is here:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/criminal/docs/2012/crim-proc-rules-part-27.pdf

You will note at 27.2 information regarding the various declarations and warnings which must be included. A reply to a letter such as you describe would almost certainly not fit the bill. You will also see at 27.4 that the prosecution must serve any witness statements they intend to rely on to support their case on the defendant. A reply to a letter cannot meet the requirements of the Criminal Procedure Rules and so would almost certainly be deemed inadmissable. In normal circumstances (i.e. where a "pukka" witness statement has been made) the defendant would be served with a copy and he has the opportunity to either accept its contents (in which case the statement will be read to the court and the witness need not attend) or he can ask for the witness to attend in person and give "live" evidence so that he can be cross-examined. 

I can give you plenty of advice on what to expect if they do have to attend but I think they need to establish on what basis they are being asked  and what will be expected of them. They should point out that they have not provided a statement which meets the requirements of the Criminal Procedure Rules and should establish what the defendant has been provided with which has caused him to ask for their attendance. If they simply want to know what will happen on the day if they do attend just let me know.

DB1904

astreix said:

TooManyPoints said:

Have either of them given a statement to the police in relation to the incident?

A month or two after the incident they had received a letter from police asking them to describe the incident and provide details of witnesses. So I guess that would count as a statement.
Post that there was a long radio silence and only recently were they informed they may have to attend court.

Sounds like they may have completed a witness questionnaire and providing it contained the necessary Magistrates Court Act declaration they have given a statement. 

TooManyPoints

Whether that “statement” would contain sufficient evidence to support a prosecution would depend on its contents. But assuming it does and they do go to court they will report to the court's reception and be directed to the witness waiting room. They should be prepared for a number of things. There should be a member of the Witness Support Service to meet them, explain the court process to them and to keep them informed of progress (or more usually lack thereof) in their case. They might like to take a book as there may be some hanging around to be endured. 

The most important is disappointment (or more probably relief!) at not being required to go into court to give their evidence. This could be because the trial is adjourned to a later date. There are many reasons why this might happen but very often it is because the trial has been “double booked” with another which takes priority. Courts usually double book trials. This is to avoid wasting court time as they often fail to go ahead for various reasons. The downside is if both are ready to go then one must be adjourned. Another reason why their evidence may not be needed is that the defendant may change his plea on trial day. Many defendants maintain their Not Guilty plea until trial day in the hope that the witness(es) will not turn up. If they do they change their plea to secure any discount that may be available for that plea. 

If they do have to give evidence they will be called into court (one at a time). They will be asked to take an oath or affirmation. They will then be asked questions by the prosecutor about the incident they witnessed. The may then be “cross-examined” by the defendant himself or his advocate if he has one. This is the most demanding part of the witness’s experience, particularly if the defendant is represented. His lawyer will seek to cast doubt on their evidence and may all but suggest they are not telling the truth (though usually by suggesting they are “mistaken”). After that the Magistrates (or District Judge) may have questions of clarification. Finally they will be “released” from their duty. They can then go into the public gallery to see the trial to a conclusion if they wish, or they can leave. The first to give evidence will be warned not to discuss their evidence with the second until the trial is concluded. 

The important thing to remember is that a Magistrates’ Court is less formal than a Crown Court. No wigs and gowns. Although there are legal formalities to be observed, the court is simply interested in hearing what they witnessed. There should be no intimidation by either the defendant or his lawyer during cross examination. If there are signs, it will be quickly quashed.