Forum menu
His misfortune was that the person he hit wasn't a cyclist without hi viss. He'd have probably got a slap on the wrist
Grossly unfair sentence, which imo no way serves the public interest
Never having driven one, I do wonder whether e-vehicles need some sort of attenuation to that "instant max power" when in townsThere are a few manufacturers who are doing stuff with geo location, forward looking radar/camera, proximity sensors etc to limit power delivery, or at least, limit ridiculous acceleration.
Power delivery is not that different either.Yeah, no. Some brands have got it sorted, others *really* don't. Some of our early prototypes could go from zero wheel torque to ALL the wheel torque in under 250ms. Some BEV manufacturers still haven't got it sorted.
There's no road legal car on planet earth that only has a combined accelerator and brake pedal plus an emergency brake. There are lots now that have one pedal drive mind, but they still have a brake pedal. Which works exactly as you'd expect.A mate of mine has an EV, the accelerator and brake are one combined pedal - you lift off and it brakes. There is an emergency brake but it is, well, an emergency brake.
Its an e-transit, its fairly conventional. I'm not sure what you describe is quite right - "all" ev's use regeneration (KERS) to slow you down rather than the brakes in the first instance (without this the range would be dreadful), its more or less noticeable depending on the vehicle and even the settings the driver selects. It is possible on some cars to drive mostly without using the brake pedal - but if you try to drive it "normally" the pedals still work exactly like any other car/van just with more dramatic "engine braking" when you lift off.the EV thing seems not at all relevant. Pedals are identical to a conventional vehicle just no clutch, so akin to any automatic.
A mate of mine has an EV, the accelerator and brake are one combined pedal - you lift off and it brakes. There is an emergency brake but it is, well, an emergency brake.
I have no opinion on this case as I don't know the facts of it, but I wouldn't assume that the vehicle in question was identical to conventional ones.
I spent years doing that in competition. IME the worst that happens is you end up with two feet on the brake. Muscle memory takes over and both braking reflexes kick in a the same time.
You might be right - but I bet you didn't teach yourself to left foot brake whilst driving an unfamiliar van in reverse out a parking space!
It is odd that you can drive an auto having only taken a manual test but not the other way around.
Not really - there's an extra pedal and a very specific extra skill to learn going the other way doesn't have the same skills gap. You could argue that there should be some sort of vehicle familiarisation with any new vehicle, but needing to convince an external examiner? Whereas trying to get the control right and maintain observations etc whilst working three pedals is definitely a step up.
If there wasn't a reasonable chance of conviction for Death by Dangerous Driving, rather than Careless, in that case, then the law isn't fit for purpose.
Seems like the mistake the chap in the electric van case has made is being remorseful enough to plead guilty to the more serious offence at the first opportunity, whereas all the scumbags who are selfish enough to kill someone and only care about themselves need to get off lightly is a half-decent solicitor and a hole where their conscience should be.
Initially driver was told they'd face no action, not sure what the result will be now...
Edit - just seen the driver had epilepsy, don't know the ins & outs but brother in law had to refrain from driving for 12 months when he was diagnosed.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwykmdze2gno
"It is possible on some cars to drive mostly without using the brake pedal - but if you try to drive it "normally" the pedals still work exactly like any other car/van just with more dramatic "engine braking" when you lift off. "
Or in the case of the Volvo Ex30 I drive at work you can switch the regeneration off completely as I do. As I can be driving different models of cars or vans every day I prefer to keep the driving characteristics as close as possible. So accelerator to go and brake pedal to stop.
There's no road legal car on planet earth that only has a combined accelerator and brake pedal plus an emergency brake. There are lots now that have one pedal drive mind, but they still have a brake pedal. Which works exactly as you'd expect.
Its an e-transit, its fairly conventional. I'm not sure what you describe is quite right - "all" ev's use regeneration (KERS) to slow you down rather than the brakes in the first instance (without this the range would be dreadful), its more or less noticeable depending on the vehicle and even the settings the driver selects. It is possible on some cars to drive mostly without using the brake pedal - but if you try to drive it "normally" the pedals still work exactly like any other car/van just with more dramatic "engine braking" when you lift off.
I'm only repeating what he told me. Or at least, how I interpreted what he told me. I haven't driven it.
My point was simply that one vehicle might be unpredictable or unfamiliar compared with another. Back when autos were relatively uncommon a friend and I - the same guy, as it happens - got one as a pool car for a site visit, we shared the driving. I could start it and he couldn't, we were baffled for a bit, turned out that I habitually started a car with my foot on the brake and he didn't.
That's how I was taught (coming back to Edukator's comment), I've always started cars with one foot on the brake and one pressing the clutch when it has one.
I did wonder if this would become more of an issue with more EV's around, as panic pressing the accelerator has been a thing ever since elderly people started switching to autos later in life, but assumed that "auto city brake" features and tech would counter act it. Only times I drive an auto I tend to brake too sharply until I've got used to it after a mile or two.
All electric cars have two pedals - an accelerator and a brake.
Some allow one pedal driving (regenerative braking) but there's still a bog standard brake pedal if you need to use it.
So just like driving an auto, but potentially less need to use the friction brakes.
Or in the case of the Volvo Ex30 I drive at work you can switch the regeneration off completely as I do.You've only switched the OPD off, it still brakes using the motors. You just get very little braking when you lift off (not sure what level EX30 uses, i know it *almost* but not quite, coasts.)
My point was simply that one vehicle might be unpredictable or unfamiliar compared with another.That's been a thing since they invented cars. Can pretty much guarantee that the first car and the second car both used completely and almost incomprehensively different control set ups...
One pedal driving in an EV doesnt give you emergency braking when you lift off the throttle, it just does a state of regen braking that is like slowing gently down (otherwise there would be major issues for other road users when on medium to fast roads).
Probably with company/rental vans in general, the issue is that they tend to get caned when being driven: just listen to a std diesel white van (eg Transit, Sprinter, Trafic etc) when accelerating away from a junction or traffic lights) and you'll hear the engine being revved out regardless and peak torque be dammed. As an EV tends to deliver all of its torque instantly this is where the issues can arrive, if you stand on the throttle it will just accelerate, hard... As an aside I work for a company that reuses EV batteries: we got a sudden surge of offers of batteries recovered from trashed brand new electric vans a year or so back. Turned out they were being written off very quickly when being put on fleets as the drivers were either hooning them and running out of talent, or being given a nasty surprise when they tried to drive them like a diesel. Mixing up brake and accelerator and then panic pushing the accelerator to the floor would mean a very bad situation can arise very quickly as seems to the case in the OP's news story.
From a Whatcar review of the E-Transit: "The top-rated version has a massive 261bhp available, and there’s also a less powerful 181bhp model. Both will be far quicker than any large van you’re likely to have driven, and the E-Transit is instantly fast and effortless in the way it builds speed. Indeed, fleet managers will have to really trust their drivers not to floor the accelerator pedal at every opportunity"
Both will be far quicker than any large van you’re likely to have driven,
That's a double whammy then. I've driven any number of Transits and similar, albeit some time ago, and you wouldn't exactly have described them as performance vehicles. I worked for a coachbuilder for a while, standard operating procedure was to put it in 2nd gear and stomp the accelerator to the floor. That's only going to end one way in an unladen auto van with north of 250 brake under your foot.
IMO its not so much this sentence is excessive but that others are too lenient. Death by vehicle should be treated like manslaughter. true accidents are very very rare, most have at least one serious error. He may not have intended to kill but his conduct caused a death because of something stupid he did
He may not have intended to kill but his conduct caused a death because of something stupid he did
So comparing like for like with cases that come to mind the Austrian climber that did a series of "stupid" things got five months suspended.
I've been Googling for building site deaths with negligence causing death and have been unable to find more than a suspended sentence for "stupid" mistakes and negligence
Several sometimes fatal train crashes with gross negligence and only suspended sentences and or fines
Kill 11 flying a plane "stupidly' and it's only gross negligence:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sussex-65779379
Or in the case of the Volvo Ex30 I drive at work you can switch the regeneration off completely as I do.You've only switched the OPD off, it still brakes using the motors. You just get very little braking when you lift off (not sure what level EX30 uses, i know it *almost* but not quite, coasts.)My point was simply that one vehicle might be unpredictable or unfamiliar compared with another.That's been a thing since they invented cars. Can pretty much guarantee that the first car and the second car both used completely and almost incomprehensively different control set ups...
I stand corrected re braking using motors OPD or not. With OPD off it is as near as can be felt complete coasting. Less braking than lifting off in a manual car in 5th or 6th gear.
Volvo seems to say no regeneration with OPD off.
"The available One pedal drive settings are:
| Off | The function is off. Releasing the accelerator does not engage the brakes. |
|---|
"
Edukator
selby train crash caused by driver - 5 years. Plenty of others
Volvo seems to say no regeneration with OPD off.No, they say no OPD. Press the brake pedal and you get regen, instead of friction brakes.
Regeneration isn't the same thing as OPD.
Hell, if the battery is full, or too hot, or too cold many EVs use friction brakes instead of motors for OPD... (but not the EX30 AFAIK)
Thanks TJ, so 3 years less than the van driver for falling asleep at the wheel and killing ten. Another comparable one I've found is a Polish van driver on the wrong side of the road causing a fatality, 2 years. Where I'm failing is to find a harsher sentence for anything comparable i.e. no intent, no drugs or drink, genuine mistake. The more cases I look at the more I'm inclined to answer "yes" to the thread's opening question. I don't see that the sentence is justified in terms of rehabilitating the driver and his reintegration in society. I don't think it wil help protect society from the driver who is highly unlikely to reoffend. I don't think it's a deterant in the way harsh sentencing of deliberate dangerous driving or drink driving is. In fact I'm left with revenge as the only justification that holds up.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c78x4qvp44vo
Another comparison
Keely Morgan, 15, died in May 2023 after being hit by Christopher West in Cardiff. He was given a custodial sentence of 16 months in July 2025.
...
West had been "showing off" at the wheel, driving between 32-43mph and moving the car from side to side on Heol Trelai, Caerau, when he hit Keely, who was waiting [on the pavement] at a pedestrian crossing.
Grim, bails. In that case we have blatant disregard for the law - no insurance. Deliberate dangerous driving and speeding over a zebra crossing. So a jail term would be pedagogical. There's a good chance of someone who deliberately offends reoffending so society needs protecting. People need detering from this type of deliberate offending. 8 years wouldn't shock and there wouldn't be a thread questionning the sentence.
It seems similar to the accidental accelerator press here...
Driver reached to get a something from the back and put foot on accelerator. I think its something like 500-1000bhp and 2.5 tons
And then this..
I just don’t get it, and why no life bans?
Mum's disbelief at sentence for driver who killed daughter, 15, on zebra crossing> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c78x4qvp44vo
Causing the death of another person with a motor vehicle should be the automatic revocation of the licence to drive. There is no better demonstration of an inability to drive in a safe manner. Too many people get in the vehicle and follow the bumper in front without concentrating on what is a very simple process.
an ex colleague was in a fatal collision on the A31 between Farnham and Alton - if you know it, there's long dual carriageway sections but side roads that cross it with a central stopping point. And some old guy just came down a side road, paused, and then just drove straight out. My colleague hit him broadside. The verdict was accident but my colleague was convinced it was deliberate, ie suicide.
Stats suggest up to 10% of fatal crashes are actually suicide, many single vehicle into trees etc., but not all fatal accidents have the 'killer' at fault.
Volvo seems to say no regeneration with OPD off.No, they say no OPD. Press the brake pedal and you get regen, instead of friction brakes.Regeneration isn't the same thing as OPD.
Hell, if the battery is full, or too hot, or too cold many EVs use friction brakes instead of motors for OPD... (but not the EX30 AFAIK)
Correct. I meant to say full coasting with OPD off. No braking effect at all lifting off the throttle. If you want to slow you need to use the brake. Aside from air friction of course but as a heavy car with good aerodynamics it feels like it coasts forever.
Stats suggest up to 10% of fatal crashes are actually suicide, many single vehicle into trees etc., but not all fatal accidents have the 'killer' at fault.
I said nothing about fault, it's more fundamentalist than that. We have too many drivers on the roads; too many of them not concentrating and anticipating what is likely to happen. As a society we are too "motornormative" when we should be more people focussed.
Causing = fault. You're confusing us, Sandwich. Nothing should be automatic in these cases, each case on its merits with either aquital or guilty and sentencing according to the circumstances if guilty. Even if there are sentencing guidelines they are just that, guidelines.
On your reasoning every time another suicidal person runs in front of a train the train driver would be banned form train driving in addition to being traumatised.
Do trains run on the highways of UK? They are a separate case and just shows that driver-normatives are unable to concentrate on the process of driving a motor vehicle on the highway.
The thought porcess is that the driver is responsible for ensuring that they don't kill another person on the highway however that happens. Accellerators can go up as well as down, brakes can be applied and if you're imperfect then hands up and accept the sanction with your big-person pants on.
So you really think that if a pedestrian stepped off the pavement without warning when you were a couple of metres away you could avoid them even at 20mph? I don't think so. Do you creep past every parked vehicle at less than 10mph? I know I can't stop in time to avoid someone opening a door on me on my bike at 10mph so I'm sure I'd fail if somene lept out from behind a parked van when I was only a metre away. I got taken out on a cycle lane by someone reversing out of a blind entrance on to it. Junior crashed into a car when out jogging, the car pulled out of a blind entrance and he couldn't stop when jogging at less than 10mph.
If you think you can avoid absolutely everything when doing even 10mph, you can't. I'm very careful around pedestrians, cyclists too, give parked cars a wide and take extreme care around buses, but I'm absolutely certain that someone either taking no care whatsoever or suicidal could beat my vigilance unless I drive everywhere at walking pace.
So you really think that if a pedestrian stepped off the pavement without warning when you were a couple of metres away you could avoid them even at 20mph? I don't think so.
Stamp on brake and swerve, probably. With the computer having negligible thinking time and doing the braking for me, almost certainly. There are more to these things than reported in the press, and there's no shortage of people who get into their cars and turn off collision avoidance / stability control etc on every journey because they think they're great drivers.
Modern cars will give you a warning when they anticipate a pedestrian or cyclist on a trajectory that will put them into harms way even before they apply the brakes. It's also why even 20mph might be too fast in some situations.
Vulnerable road users emerging abruptly into the path of the vehicle is part of the EuroNCAP testing.
In an effort to stop the usual bickering, this story popped up in my feeds this morning...
Pulled onto A55 and missed seeing a moped rider. Appealed 16w suspended sentence successfully.
The comments are the usual range of nonsense, but I thought it's interesting given the "moment's inattention" resulting in serious injury to an entirely innocent third party.
(If you read the story, the moped rider was half blamed by the defence for having something slightly over his dayglo jacket - and the comments are about him riding too slow. So he must have deserved it) /s
Now assume .5 second reaction time if you're being really vigilant and you don't even have time to react at 20mph and 2 metres. People are usually slower than that because driving decisions are rarely simple so you have a combined reaction and decision time. Even if the car does the thinking for you and reacts instantly (it won't) it has 1g at best and that isn't good enough. It's down to physics.
If someone decides to step out when you're 2m away there's not much you can do about it. It doesn't matter whether it's the car or driver anticipating both are programmed to assume people aren't suicidal and take care crossing the road. That's why your car will do 20mph along a road with a narrow pavement with pedestrains walking along it. If cars automatically slowed I'd know about it, I live on such a road and even the most modern ones wizz along way over the limit and with no hope of stopping if ever I get sick of living. No-one would buy a car that was programmed not to hit a pedestrian under any circumstances, it would be the equivalent of a man walking in front with a red flag.
The EuroNCAP includes a series of tests aimed at reducing the chances of pedestrians being hit and improving survivabilty if they do. However humans are sometimes unpredicatable and vulnerable. A cycling friend died in just the kind of accident I'm refering too. Very low speed, a fall you'd think he'd have survived but he hit his head on the edge of the pavement - dead.
There's controversy in France at present because cars are deciding to stop dead for no apparent reason when doing 130kmh on the autroute and getting hit from behind. Manufactureres claim this is impossible as you'd expect but there's a growing weight of evidence to say it's the cars deciding to crash stop all by themselves. One driver has been prosecuted for manslaughter despte numerous case of phontom braking being reported:
https://42mag.fr/2025/08/freinages-fantomes-de-130-km-h-a-larret-ce-que-lon-sait-sur-les-accidents/
Sentence does seem harsh but the EV thing seems not at all relevant. Pedals are identical to a conventional vehicle just no clutch, so akin to any automatic. Power delivery is not that different either. Moving from ICE to electric car there was really no adaption other than they’re easier to drive.
Again, I've only driven a couple of elec vehicles and done so briefly but not my experience. I got one as a car club rental. Acceleration was much quicker than a comparable small car with the lack of audible feedback adding to it. I definitely had to pay more attention than normal not to let my speed creep up (in an ICE vehicle generally you've hear more engine noise with more speed).
I've seen lots of complaints that e car insurance is expensive and the van crash comments above would seem to suggest that they are higher risk. Maybe as the market matures we'll see stuff with limited acceleration/power but that would be more than adequate - fast acceleration in the city *does* create more danger - but knowing the auto industry I doubt it.
But yes, sentence seems very harsh, especially when compared to typical.
I wonder if with these apparently lenient sentences there's an element of "there but for the grace of god"? A lot of them are obviously a piss poor standard of driving but plenty are just a moment's inattention or lack of judgement. Anyone saying they've never had an 'oops' moment is lying, it's just that the vast majority of us are fortunate enough to get away without a major incident.
It'd be very easy to see how a juror or even a judge might be thinking "shit, that could have been me." One split-second mistake and it's years behind bars. What are we prosecuting here, actions, intent... or severity of the outcome? Moreover, are we doing so consistently?
there's a growing weight of evidence to say it's the cars deciding to crash stop all by themselves
I've had a lower grade version of this in a US hire car - I think it took exception to the rapid lateral movement of a nearby car, but that was two lanes away. Either that or an insect or bit of debris flew straight at the sensor. Car jammed on and then luckily let go again before we lost too much speed (busy traffic behind). Quite scary.
I wonder if with these apparently lenient sentences there's an element of "there but for the grace of god
That's definitely the case, IMO.
The case in the OP got round the jury aspect because he pleaded (pled?) guilty to death by dangerous driving. I can't believe a jury would've convicted him of it, given typical jury behaviour - in fact I'd be amazed if the prosecution even tried for dangerous driving. Him coming across a judge with the opinion/interpretation as shown by this one was extremely unlikely IMO. If you stacked up all the cases where drivers have killed somebody, I'd have this one right down at the lower end in terms of culpability ... and yet there he goes off to jail
What are we prosecuting here, actions, intent... or severity of the outcome? Moreover, are we doing so consistently?
Be interesting to know how many "accelerator instead of brake" accidents there are every year. I know my mil had one before giving up driving but luckily for her only her pride, a fence and her car were damaged.
as i put in an earlier post, sins of omission (didn't take time to familiarise with the van, didn't feel able to tell their boss they didn't feel capable of driving a new type of vehicle) - and then a 'yep, another day and time that could be me'
vs sins of commission (choosing to speed, drive when drunk, read your whatsapp) where I think more legitimately people would (or should) throw the book
I can't believe a jury would've convicted him of it, given typical jury behaviour
Which is why jury trials are a really outdated concept when trying to apply modern technical law. The concept behind jury trials was that people of a similar background would make the decisions not some upper class judge making prejudiced decisions based on class assumptions (although it was still rife back in the day).
Which is why jury trials are a really outdated concept when trying to apply modern technical law. The concept behind jury trials was that people of a similar background would make the decisions not some upper class judge making prejudiced decisions based on class assumptions (although it was still rife back in the day).
Also, it's harder to secretly bribe 12 people than one?
I agree that juries, esp in driving cases, are far too lenient/credulous/biased. More widely even but deffo with driving, I think that juries should be asked to give decisions of fact, not interpretation - "we accept that stumpyjon was travelling at 50-55 mph when his car struck the pram" Then the court should turn to EXPERT judges of driving standards and ask whether this was careless or dangerous (perhaps how a driving examiner would act if a candidate behaved similarly: Minor downscore = probably (sadly) within normal standards; major = careless driving; stop the car immediately and terminate test = dangerous)
There also should be a proper definition of "momentary", as in "momentary loss of concentration". How long can that be allowed to stretch before it's failure to attend to the task in hand ? So many times a drive has a "momentary lapse" on a straight road with good sightlines and hits a bike after 20 seconds of them being visible
I'm for mandatory black box fitment to any vehicle they're insured for, for anyone who collects 6 points in a 12 month period, too - funded by the offender.
What are we prosecuting here, actions, intent... or severity of the outcome? Moreover, are we doing so consistently?
Be interesting to know how many "accelerator instead of brake" accidents there are every year. I know my mil had one before giving up driving but luckily for her only her pride, a fence and her car were damaged.
Even then though, as Jon says there are degrees of... is "culpability" the right word? Your MIL, I assume, was still driving when she was no longer fit. The airborne warrior on the previous page though, he just accidentally stood on the Go pedal whilst reaching behind for something. That's easily done, I've done it myself, though I wouldn't be faffing about in the back with the car still in Drive...!
I'm for mandatory black box fitment to any vehicle they're insured for, for anyone who collects 6 points in a 12 month period, too - funded by the offender.
It's a little surprising that they've not been made mandatory on new vehicles by now, what is it, Whole Vehicle Type Approval or something? Mind you, we'd probably brexit our way out of any EU legislation.
Not even necessarily for prosecutions or to make people drive more cautiously, but they must have a value for crash investigations. Dashcams too, why aren't they integrated by now? My car isn't special and it's dripping with RADAR and gods know what else, there's already a rear view camera, why can't I stick an SD card in it?
I am surprised insurance has not made cameras virtually mandatory by discounting those with them
I am surprised insurance has not made cameras virtually mandatory by discounting those with themThat would imply that having a camera makes you less likely to be the subject of a claim! If all it does is clarfiy who was at fault it might not be in insurers' best interests! Indeed they might show their insured was actually liable!
It's a little surprising that they've not been made mandatory on new vehicles by now, what is it, Whole Vehicle Type Approval or something? Mind you, we'd probably brexit our way out of any EU legislation.Not even necessarily for prosecutions or to make people drive more cautiously, but they must have a value for crash investigations.
It is under consideration https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/mandating-vehicle-safety-technologies-in-gb-type-approval/mandating-vehicle-safety-technologies-in-gb-type-approval
I think the EU may already be ahead of us (or perhaps its still in the pipeline there) but many new cars do have speed, pedal, steering etc recorded and accessible to forensic crash investigators even if not required in the UK. I'm not sure many drivers are aware of this.