I have been charged by the police and have a court hearing
regarding a crash i had earlier on this year. The reason for the
crash was that my Peugeot 306 1.6 Virant engine cut out while
driving and somehow i lost control of the car as my power steering
was stiff (no pun please) :-) and therefore i hit a tree. There was
a lot of damage on the driver side so the fire services had to cut
part of the car just to get me out (how embbrassing). At the moment
i want to gather some information (proof) to u guys that if u have
had similar situation with their pug 306 whether the car is new or
old. I have got myself a solictor and i want to present him with
information that it is not a one off thing in my car and that is
may have happen to other peoples cars as well.
The history of my car was that i bought it from new 'R' reg and the
first month of driving the engine cut out while changing down in to
3rd gear, boy was i scared!!!. i took it to the dealer , he said it
could be a software problem in the chip of the gear , he said it
was fixed , but a couple of months later it happened
again!!!...this happened 5th time but by the 6th time i wasn't that
lucky as i crashed the car and its been written off. :-(
I would like to hear from u guys please so i can pass this on to my
solictors.
Like i said, i am going to court and fight my case , i could plead
guilty as the police said i could have been speeding (yeah right!)
or plead not guilty with some proof.
Cheers all,
William Chiu
|
William,
What are they charging you with?
Vin
|
|
|
William
As Vin says what are they charging you with? It's rare to be prosecuted for an accident when no other car was involved.
Your first line of defence, surely, is the service record from the dealer of the work done in response to the reported engine failures.
Regards
John
|
|
At the moment, the police are charging me for Due Care and Attention, at the moment the dealship have not come forward with a statement regarding my problem with the car, and they claim i haven't been back for 17months on this problem but i only went in for a service last october.
|
|
|
|
William, cannot help with the Peugeot problem, but wish you well. I had a lot of support from the backroom with my son's motorbike being confiscated by plod, and they are a helpful lot. ( The backroom, not plod) Were there any witnesses to your accident? If not, I should think they have their fingers crossed.
Regards, Mike
|
|
|
Sorry to hear of your accident, but it highlights a major problem with modern cars with assisted brakes and steering, particularly those with fat low profile tyres.
When the hydraulic pump stops pressurising the system, it reverts to a manual system, still fully functional but with much greater forces required to operate them. Most people have not experienced raw control of their car and I think it was Paul Ripley that suggested drivers should turn off the engine while the car is still rolling (off the road somewhere please) and then see how the vehicle feels. Don't turn the key all the way off or else you'll engage the steering lock.
It never surprises me the amount of people who claim the brakes or steering "failed" and assume they have lost everything. At least you had the sense to recognise what was wrong, although it didn't help you in this case.
Colin
|
|
|
If your engine cuts out, I assume that you must then have taken it out of gear or put your foot on the clutch ?
I assume that the power steering would have remained if the engine was turning over ?
The question to ask your solicitor, and perhaps the police, is "if I can prove the engine cut out, does this mean I will not be prosecuted ?".
You may find that the answer would be that you still be prosecuted.
The second question, to your solicitor is "if this goes to court and I can prove the engine cut out, will I be found not guilty ?".
Unless proving the engine cut out will avoid prosecution or will avoid conviction, I would say that there isn't much point. You're solicitor should be able to find out exactly *why* you're being summonsed. If it is speeding, although it would be "excessive speed", nto speeding - then you're stuffed.
If it is driving into a tree for no good reason, then maybe you have a chance.
Certainly, if you don't already know this stuff, I suggest you find out pdq.
M.
|
Many thanks for all the replies, at the moment my main concern is that the jury will probably say that if u feel the car was unsafe to drive so why drive it in the first place! , and all i could say will be that the dealership have so-called fixed the problem and it was safe for me to drive (it happened 5 times)...at the end of the day if the jury find me guilty i will have 3-9 points on my licence and probably a few hundred pounds fine and also solictor fees which is costing me just under a grand..
In many ways its only money and luckly there was no other people involved. If there was someone involved like i knocked someone over then i don't think i could live with that on my conscience.
|
|
|
|
I presume you are being summoned (charged is a different kettle of fish and means you were arrested for this accident which then must have been serious)
to a Magistrates Court which does not have a jury which applies to Crown Court and a more serious case.
You say this was a single vehicle accident - no other person involved or injured which I find strange to attract the attention of Plod.
If you have been booked for a Court appearance presumbably then Plod can prove it was the nut behind the wheel that was responsible by proving the road had no defects, the weather was OK and the vehicle examined and no defects found neither was the driver ill/drunk. Also, and most important, is there any witnesses to your post accident manner of driving? Your Solicitor should be able to tell you this under the disclosure of evidence rules.
Crown Prosecution Service (the Prosecutor - not Plod) have to prove the offence of driving without due care and attention beyond any reasonable doubt and from what YOU say with a good Solicitor you should stand an above average chance of
(1) CPS dropping the case as you are pleading Not Guilty or
(2) Not Guilty verdict if the case goes ahead.
You will appreciate that my comments are not formed from all the true facts of the case of which I presume you only know 75%.
|
Hi,
You are right that i have been summoned to go to court on Nov 2, the case itself have be cancelled 3 times (due to the fact that Peugeot haven't given a report/statement about my the my car) so therefore my solictor have been in touch with the people at the Magistrates Court to drop the case but with no luck as yet, so it looks like Nov 2 will be judgement day for me :-(
My solictor said that if i plead guilty (which i am not gonna) i may get a fine and points on my licence or plead not guilty in court and if i lose i will lose the money i have paid for the solictor and also court fees , fines and points on my licence , so therefore it doesn't leave me with much of an option does it? :-)
|
It really comes down to whether you consider yourself to have been foolish in driving a car with a potentially dangerous fault that you knew about.
I would not drive a car with power steering and servo brakes if the engine was prone to cutting out. It is very difficult to steer and stop cars designed with these components when they don't work. (This happened to my father when an immobiliser cut in when he was on the motorway. He didn't use the car again until the immobiliser was removed). If I did drive the car I would certainly consider myself to be guilty of dangerous driving or driving without due care.
If the Peugeot garage told you it was repaired then you have my sympathy, it's beyond most people to figure out if a garage has fixed a fault or not, and hopefully the sympathy of a Judge / jury.
So, if the accident was down to a fault you knew hadn't been fixed you are lucky it's only a tree you hit and you were foolish to drive the car. You should plead guilty and stop wasting time and money.
Piers
|
Piers wrote:
Essentially I agree with Piers, that's why you have to work out what exactly you are being prosecuted for.
There are some things I could conclude would be just, and some less so.
Mark.
|
What's to do with "justice"? If they want you they will have you.
Do not throw money at the case, because they have unlimited funds (that is, my taxes and everybody elses) to throw at you. Consult with your solicitor (if he's any good) to concoct a sob story - I think it's called a plea in mitigation.
|
|
|
|
|
Get the garage, who assured you the problem was fixed, to give you a written explanation for the court. Based on what you said, the unresolved fault was caused by their failure to sort it out. At least they could explain that they had agreed that the fault did exist and was cured at the time but reappeared later.
|
|
It may be signifigant as to whether the garage billed you for investigating the fault or investigating and rectifying it. If you had a mechanical problem in a vehicle with a full dealer service history you should be able to claim that it was a mechanical problem beyond your control. What would you have been charged with if you had had a blown tyre and gone into a tree - nothing I suggest. Don't pay any attention to Piers! There is reasonable doubt and if you want to take that line then you will have to go to court to see what happens. Do you think you are guilty? If you don't and, depending on what you are charged with, get into court and let them prove it. Enough doubt to get you off IMHO, if you want throw money at the case.
|
|
|
|
William.
I see Dwight has put you right on the mechanics of summonses and type of court. I presume you were interviewed formally regarding the accident. At this time did the police present any independent evidence to you and if so what?
I find it strange, on the facts you have give,n that a single vehicle accident has been taken to court. The CPS will only run a case that has a very high likelyhood of a conviction at court ( I cannot remember the exact % ). Independent evidence re manner of driving is almost a pre-requisite. They work within a framework of guidelines as to which cases to pursue and have you noticed the lack of reported ' Careless Drining ' cases in the local papers over the recent years. I'll say no more.
You appear to be relying heavily on the defence of the engine cutting out and therefore loosing your steering. Some form of speed may have been a contributory factor, if so a rolling car is much easier to steer power steering or no power steering and the higher the speed the easier it becomes.
You have to be totally honest with yourself to decide which way to go. If you feel you are totally blameless then so be it.
Do you really think the dealer who ' fixed' your car is going to provide a statement? If they do they could be - an ultimately Peugot - admitting some form of liability and can be held liable in a civil court for damages by yourself.
As Dwight says your solicitor is entitled to copies of all Police statements appertaining to your case under the Rules of Disclosure so you will know what you are up against.
As I say, be honest with yourself. If you honestly think you are ' Not Guilty ' then pursue the matter through your solicitor. If you are looking for an excuse to ' Get Off ' then remember if you are found Guilty on the evidence presented then you will be liable to court costs, your fine and presumably your legal expenses unless you have some form of legal cover.
|
|
|
William,
Have been following this thread with interest.
I am really sorry to say I think the cutting out and failure of steering assistance is something of a red herring in this case. If so then all the detail of who said/did what at the dealers isn't important.
Look back over this forum and you will see loads of cases of cutting out for a variety of reasons. It is a fault than can happen with a car. I do accept that the effect on power steering and brakes is dramatic. But this shouldn't be a reason to crash, more a case of "blimey that went heavy".
I look after Citroens with the fully powered hydraulic systems and they often suffer an erratic power steering fault that will give assistance turning left but not right, or the other way round....sometimes the assistance just goes....at worse it will come on and off throught a corner second by second. My wife's car is doing it at times and she regards it as merely interesting.
I wouldn't spend a fortune on fighting this, just take every bit of advice you can get and get the best possible result. Be thankful neither you or a bystander were hurt and get it behind you.
David
|
|
But us Citrön owners have the added advantage of a foot operated front wheel parking brake
|
Andy,
Yes you "big" Citroen guys do. Even us little Xantia guys have a handbrake that would pass a front footbrake test at MOT time.
David
|
|
|
|
|
I know what you are saying but i feel justice is not done till i've at least go to court and see what they have to say about it, at the end of the day its only money and i should be grateful that i am still alive...
|
|
|
|
