|
In case this degenerates in an anti Police rant. The first threshold test applied would have been the independant witness one followed by the personal injury one. These tests are appplied by the CPS before they take a case on (amongst others), police prosecution departments and most Officers are well aware of the tests applied before pen goes to paper.
|
S3 Road Traffic Act 1988.......Driving Without Due Care and Attention
if you've reversed into someone else you've virtually got to have committed the above
|
Some places don't even have the facility for a patrolling officer to issue a form (HO/RT1) to a motorist to check their driving docs any more unless there is a specific offence or accident attached with it...... so it's no wonder so many people zip around with no insurance
HO/RT1s are close to obso;ete. All Driver details can be accesed by radio, Insurance details and VEL vailidity is on PNC as MoT will be or is even now.
|
|
In Germany you are not allowed to move the vehicles until the police have been and decided whos fault it was ,much better system but we have a police force in Germany not a band of muppets and pretend police masquerading in uniforms.
|
|
|
true............ and the ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) system should pick them up.... but these are few and far between.
my point was that police forces are discouraging keen cops to spot check likely people for insurance (or lack of) by removing the right for them to submit the forms, unless they acompany an accident or offence booklet.
any young man in a decent expensive large engined car must have either;
-paid an absolute fortune for his insurance
- be on some kind of business policy (which may or may not have had the full risk disclosed)...or
- hasn't got any insurance
|
Thanks to all who replied, will try and answer each one.
yorkiebar?yes, did toot horn, and other drivers waved him down and also tooted. He finally stopped. Presumably deemed an accident, but I argue how can a lorry with a load reverse backwards without ensuring no one is behind him, since his action could be deemed careless/without due care and attention?? His load obscured his rear cab window, so must have relied on side mirrors. Why do you think its far safer than going onwards and does every lorry do that on ?B? roads instead of safely going onwards and then returning to go to missed turning ( or go the long way round)?? I can understand a car doing that, but not a lorry with load?I would have thought it was careless driving/undue care&attention if he didn?t see me behind him?
Westpig?in one sense you are correct, at the end of the day I may have to swallow the garage bill (£600 labour exc parts).
Adam?was about twenty feet behind him, and no one behind me. As he started reversing, I tooted my horn?no good?so I slammed into reverse and went backwards but his rear cross member caught me and shunted me backwards. He was no slouch?
ChrisM?he presumably could only see me through side mirrors. Surely a HGV driver must take all reasonable steps to prevent an accident, especially with a load obscuring his rear cab window. I don?t think he did so?
The point is, if I stop my Ford on a ?B? road because I missed my turning, and reversed backwards and shunted someone behind me, (whether carelessly or not) does that mean I wont get prosecuted anywhere in the UK??
|
ps...just looked up S3 RTA..."A person who drives a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road is guilty of an offence."
Was there reasonable consideration for the vehicle behind him??? Was there undue care and attention???
|
Was there reasonable consideration for the vehicle behind him??? Was there undue care and attention???
there can't have been reasonable consideration...because he hit you. There must have been undue care and attention.... because he hit you
The Road Traffic Act works on the principle of 'what a careful and prudent driver would have done' not on individual circumstances.. so for example a learner driver can't say they were inexperienced so should be entitled to some leeway.
A lorry driver has to take the same amount of care driving as anyone else.
Another example is emergency services drivers........ they get prosecuted when it all goes wrong, despite the fact they wouldn't dream of taking their own car the wrong side of keep left bollards and through red lights etc.
|
|
|
|
No personal injury - no obligation to report to police. Or has that changed since I was last in UK?
|
that is still correct...but there's bit more to it...
the reporting to police also includes 'damage only' accidents if there is damage to roadside property, no names and addressed exchanged and offences alleged........ amongst others
|
|
The law is largely unchanged since the 1972 Act. As westpig points out. Reality hese days the CPS won't look at prosecuting unless the standard of driving falls well below what is rasonable, there are personal injuries and an independant witness etc. The law is still a bit minimalistic, the theory being you could cause a fatality, as long as you tie a label to the deceased's toe with your name address, car owner, reg mark and insurance details written on it you have complied with the law. Nothing then requires you (as the driver) to report to the Police.
|
|
|
>>at the end of the day I may have to swallow the garage bill (£600 labour exc parts).
You should not have to do this. Have you approached the driver, company or their insurance company for your company to be put right? If you have not then you should be doing this promptly. If you have and seem to be getting nowhere then you should consider legal action. You can either approach a solicitor or use the small claims court to recover your losses. The loss will be quantified as the repair to the car and the hire of another vehicle whilst being repaired only.
My advice would be to try and get your car repaired as quickly as possible to get you back on the road. If the car is too old to warrant an expensive repair then claim for the value of the car plus disposal costs.
If the CPS have decided not to prosecute then there is little you can do, unless you wish to follow a private prosecution for careless driving. Ultimately the lorry driver will still have a mark on his file if a claim has been made against an insurance policy.
Many years ago I had a vehicle slightly damaged whilst parked by a lorry. The delivery company did not want to make a claim on their policy for £350, so I dealt with them direct. I arranged for the repair to be made at my choice of repairer after obtaining and submitting a quote. A cheque was received promptly and I was not out of pocket.
Accidents happen and you should aim to not to let them get to you as you will gain nothing from worrying about the what ifs. You quite rightly feel aggreived that someone damaged your car and has not had to "pay" in the legal sense.
One day you may make a mistake and feel relieved that you are not prosecuted. Remember beside the court appearance there will also be a fine, points on your licence and increase in insurance premium which may remain for years to come.
--
Roger
I read frequently, but only post when I have something useful to say.
|
Again some very interesting and valid points, thanks to all.
ArtfulDodger, my insurance company has this week given the other side 21 days to pay the garage pro forma invoice, if not it (apparently) it goes to court.
The only problem I have is I am ThP/F/Theft, and would have to prove my case (presumably) on the balance of probabilities. If I was Comp, I wouldnt have minded...
Since I have legal expenses cover with DAS Ltd, will they back me up to the hilt?? As their rep said to me on phone, in 90% of cases they get money from other side on threat of legal action. But surely before any court case they would weigh up the risk of court costs etc before starting any action (eg 60% chance or more of winning).
My worry is that they dont think its worth it and let me down at the last minute. We shall see.....
|
Long gone are my days when every reported accident was investigated and files put in for offences disclosed.
In this case:
Drive without due care and attention Section 3, Road Traffic act 1988 Max fine 2,500 discretionary disqualification, 3 -11 points
Drive a vehicle backwards on a road further than may be requisite for the safety or reasonable convienance of the occupants of the vehicle OR OTHER TRAFFIC unless roadroller or engaged in the repair of the road. Regulation 106 Motor Vehicle (Con and Use) Regs 1986. Because a lorry is involved max fine raised to 2,500 pounds - no points etc.
Regrettably a shunt like this in Plod circles is classed as a non - injury minor RTA so NFA if names and addresses exchanged. Things may get better when a camera is developed that will address rank bad driving like this.
Do not forget an avenue under Small Claims at County Court to recover the damages if the other parties Insurance does not cough up.
dvd
|
|
|
|
DAS Ltd, wont let you down i am 99.9% sure
|
|
|
"yes, did toot horn, and other drivers waved him down and also tooted."
Ah! other drivers, you have their details to act as wintesses for you when you start legal proceedings?
you do have their details dont you?
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
quote "you have their details to act as witnesses for you when you start legal proceedings" unquote.
Sadly, they didnt stop, just gawped and shook their heads and went on their way.... all over in a few seconds...
|
|
ps...if I pay for my own car damage, do my insurers pay me and collect from opposite insureres under my ThP/F/Theft policy?? Or doesnt it work like that??
|
Just got letter from my insurers today, stating other side have finally admitted liability.
Had to read it a few times to believe it, now have to wait for cheque.
Thanks to all.
ps have renewed my policy with Comp, the extra £65 from TP/F/Th not worth the hassle after the experience.
|
|
pleased to read that RobertG.........
|
|
Back of the net as they say in Lacrosse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
