Not sure if this has already been done but just spotted it on the BBC Sport website.

The full story doesn’t seem to be there but the guy driving the car was convicted of aggressively passing the young lady (19 years old) and her dad on their bikes then braking hard – causing her to crash into a traffic island.

£1000 fine and 10 points but no ban? Surely if you’ve just used your vehicle as a weapon that should be a ban.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/56461907

Christ on a bike that is shocking. Failing to stop or report a RTC. Bloke needs a prison sentence not a fine.

Doesn’t surprise me at all. I was victim of a very similar crime (rammed intentionally, fail to stop, albeit lower speed and I wasn’t injured) and the police were useless. They didn’t care, refused to document as assault, ended up not even charging the guy for leaving the scene. I pointed out that I had more evidence of assault (mashed bike) than the usual outside-a-pub assault that people (occasionally) go to jail for.

At least she has a criminal case found in her favour. The civil suit will be a walk in the park.

Sad story though.

It clearly wasn’t his fault: even the article says that she suffered “serious injuries in a crash caused by a car”.

They don’t even name the driver. He should be named and shamed.

I know Lauren and her dad Mark. She has been through a lot on and off the bike and was back in a good place. To have this happen must have been devastating particularly as it was no accident.

Any compensation won’t give her back the opportunities she has now lost.

Disgraceful

I’m of the opinion that every driving offence should result in a ban. Maybe 1 week for minor offences, 1 month for repeats, increasing for repeats or more serious offences. Driving isn’t a right.

bit of a tabloid headline you are using there.

Wonder why they didn’t charge them with dangerous driving (would attract a prison sentence). Must have got points for failing to stop as well.

Had a similar incident to this while living in Sheffield 10 years ago . I was side swiped by a car that over took me and then turned in front of me. I went straight over the bonnet and head first into the ground. I ended up with 2 broken wrists a broken shoulder and some cracked ribs yet the driver got away with points on his licence and a driver awareness course.
As a result of this crash I gave up riding on the road altogether and have zero trust in the police and magistrates.

I’m intrigued in the full story, not just the BBC version.

That said, having had my assault this year not taken forward because they basically lacked the resources to go interview the driver, nothing surprises me any more.

Sadly, I’m impressed he got what he did.

But I’m all in favour of something like this.

I’m of the opinion that every driving offence should result in a ban. Maybe 1 week for minor offences, 1 month for repeats, increasing for repeats or more serious offences. Driving isn’t a right.

Maybe not every minor offence. But certainly a month long driving ban, maybe with car being impounded for the month. Employer has to keep their job open for a first offence, but up to the driver and their employer how they juggle getting to work, working from home, using up leave and unpaid leave.

I genuinely don’t care if it means that little Jimmy can’t get to piano lessons, even that Auntie Flo has to get a taxi to get to a vital hospital appointment. Driving a car is not a god given right, and punishments are meant to at least inconvenience you to help you learn the error of your ways.

I’m saying this in the knowledge that my driving is not perfect, but I try and not be a dangerous bellend to other road users

For as long as people who make the laws only travel by car, this will continue to be the norm. Sad and depressing as that is.

I remember them appealing for witnesses at the time as we had been walking on the coast path from Torquay to Dawlish that day.

Here

Cyclingweekly

Should be prison for dangerous driving.

It’s not about politicians travelling by car; if it’s about anything I’d look first at the century of momentum behind the lobbying activities of the automotive industry.

I think we need to look seriously at the under resourcing of the Police and judicial system.

All the laws in the world are no use if there is no one to actually look for the evidence. People speed and drive dangerously- deliberately or not – because the chance of getting caught is so small they don’t have to concentrate every second behind the wheel.

It seems like they treat hitting a cyclist (or causing a cyclist to crash) the same as hitting a car, madness

@poah

Wonder why they didn’t charge them with dangerous driving (would attract a prison sentence). Must have got points for failing to stop as well.

Isn’t this because almost no-one gets convicted of this charge so its a safer bet to go for a lesser charge in the knowledge it might stick. It’s disgusting either way.

The civil suit will be a walk in the park

I’d hope so. It won’t be the driver who pays, it will be his insurers, but it could well make his future premiums unaffordable. I don’t know if 10 points is a significant factor in the 3 yearly licence renewal for over 70s, if not it should be.

The problem with prosecutions is there are still many people who will say ‘It was an accident’ when actually, it resulted from deliberate irresponsible behaviour by somebody who didn’t understand the potential consequences (or deliberate malicious behaviour but not provable).

I’m of the opinion that every driving offence should result in a ban. Maybe 1 week for minor offences, 1 month for repeats, increasing for repeats or more serious offences. Driving isn’t a right.

Agree. A month ban for speeding for example would have more of an impact on someone that attending an awareness course.

Wonder why they didn’t charge them with dangerous driving (would attract a prison sentence). Must have got points for failing to stop as well.

Wild speculation:

My guess would be conviction rates/burden of proof? Those bringing the case knew they could score the conviction for driving without due care, but would maybe struggle for dangerous driving as the outcome doesn’t necessarily equate to the intent and they perhaps lacked sufficient evidence? Or they couldn’t count on the court not to have some sympathy for the defendant.

From the court (magistrate?) POV when sentencing it reads like they treated it as a ‘boarder-line’ category 1/2 offence: (sentencing council guide)
i.e. they could have imposed a ban and/or bigger fine but either didn’t consider it appropriate and/or were aware of other factors that made harsher sentencing inappropriate, those points might have actually acted as a defacto driving ban for a 73 year old bloke if already carrying some points… it’s simply not expanded on.

They are meant to consider consequences/injuries/impacts for victims when sentencing, however they may also have been cognisant of the fact that the criminal conviction could support a further civil claim…

None of that lessens the impact for Lauren though, so far as a criminal court is concerned (as recorded) her career was worth a grand and a few points, all because some codger was in a rush…

FWIW I’d like to see much harsher sentencing guidelines for causing injury/death by driving without due care; blanket 12 month ban and mandatory advanced driving course completion before issuing a new license for first conviction. But if they get convicted for a 2nd time, that indicates a pattern and in the interests of public safety they win a lifetime ban.
Any form of ‘Dangerous driving’ conviction should simply carry a lifetime ban…
Drink driving should be treated similarly.

Sentencing should reflect an offence’s potential for harm, and the offender’s implicit disregard for others people’s well being…

I’m interested to see where this goes – recent electric scooter road rage(?) incident where they have very quickly and rather unusually gone for a murder charge.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-lancashire-56034590

This is from an old post on her instagram:

“After returning back home to Devon, I was back training on home roads with my father on Tuesday,” Dolan wrote. “Nearing the end of the ride, we encountered a frustrated driver, beeping on his horn behind us whilst riding single file. The man wasn’t able to pass immediately due to oncoming traffic on the other side of the road.

“To seemingly display his frustration/anger for the hold up, he passed us with inches to spare. As soon as the driver was directly in front of us at 45kph on a descent and with feet to spare the driver slammed his breaks on. I’ve learnt since that the police have a phrase for it – ‘punishment braking’,” Dolan wrote.
⁣
“Having nowhere to go I tried to squeeze down the outside of the car between a traffic island and the car with my front wheel centimeters from the car. Needless to say my back wheel just clipped the island throwing me over the top of the bike. The car sped off.”

https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/dolan-blames-drivers-malicious-intent-for-crash-that-hospitalised-her/

Failing to stop at the scene of an accident alone carries a potential penalty of 6 months. It’s the whole ‘there but for the grace of God go I’ thing that gets people off lightly for this, IMO.

I wonder if the argument re the person behind being responsible applies with bikes as well? Not so much when someone has just overtaken you though surely.

That’s much more clearly malicious than the BBC report suggested. Since she was with her father, as a witness, I can’t see why dangerous driving wasn’t pursued.

I stopped commuting after 15years as I came to the conclusion that if this/any government can’t provide infrastructure and a legal framework for me to cycle safely then why should I risk my life for the reduction of CO2/congestion.

I drive 12miles a day now.

.

That’s unbelievable. A poxy fine and a few points on his license for deliberately endangering, injuring and destroying their career is nowhere near enough.

Had a similar incident to this while living in Sheffield 10 years ago . I was side swiped by a car that over took me and then turned in front of me. I went straight over the bonnet and head first into the ground. I ended up with 2 broken wrists a broken shoulder and some cracked ribs yet the driver got away with points on his licence and a driver awareness course.

I had a driver physically grab my handlebars and try to drag me into a barriered traffic island outside Cardiff Prison (ie crawling with CCTV) at 5.30am one morning while cycling to work, it was only pure luck that I managed to bounce off the kerb, rub myself along the barrier for a second and not fall off. Phoned the police immediately and all that happened is three phone calls, the last one telling me the driver had been spoken to and given an official warning. They had it all on video, the driver had admitted doing it and all he got was a single line on his file! I made a complaint about it and was basically fobbed off by them saying there was no evidence on intent to harm me. Couple this with the response after I got grabbed by the throat by a bloke outside a supermarket, he also got away with a slap across the wrist despite admitting he did it too, and my faith in the justice system is very low. I have full respect for the police as I used to work with them on a regular basis but the actual system is completely unfit for purpose.

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/driver-73-fined-crash-ended-5200459

Having carried out what was seen as an aggressive overtake, Robert Newton – aged 73 – braked hard after pulling back in front of Lauren, causing her to hit a traffic island

He was found guilty of driving without due care and attention, failure to stop and failure to report the accident. He received fines totalling £1,089 and his licence was endorsed with 10 penalty points. He is also required to pay a £78 victim surcharge and £500 contribution to the court’s costs, a total of £1,667.

Think if I ever have the need to kill or seriously injure someone, the car would be my weapon of choice

The civil suit will be a walk in the park

I’d hope so. It won’t be the driver who pays, it will be his insurers…

Isn’t there a policy term like “behaving like a reasonably prudent uninsured”? (Or is that other types of policy?)

Isn’t there a policy term like “behaving like a reasonably prudent uninsured”?

Let’s hope not

grum
Free Member

Failing to stop at the scene of an accident alone carries a potential penalty of 6 months.

Does that apply when it wasn’t an accident?

I’m of the opinion that driving badly which results in serious injury and/or death to other innocent parties should include a prison sentence, lifetime ban from driving and current vehicle being crushed.

Lesser offences should be ban and fine with repeated offences carrying longer bans, bigger fines and eventually car crushing. Sadly the motorist is king.

I lost my older brother due to somebody speeding. I had a drunk guy put a hole in my living room last year before driving off. He got a short ban, which won’t bother him because he was already driving with no insurance. Fifty hours community service and has to pay me £150 compensation. I’ve had £20 so far in five months. My insurance excess was £300 and £6k of damage was caused. So perhaps my view is slightly skewed.

Oh, almost forgot! Had an old dear reverse in to the house last month too. Luckily she was driving very slowly so it just resulted in cracked rendering. Her excuse was that the car was new and the reversing camera didn’t warn her. I feel bad about it but I might’ve said “Use your **** eyes”. She was clearly too old and not cognisant enough to be allowed to drive a car.

I wouldn’t mind but the house is frigging white and not exactly hard to see.

Let’s hope not

Thinking about it, car insurance is to help victims, so I can’t see it. I worked in professional negligence and am sure I saw this term there, tho insurers didn’t seem to try to rely on it.

Edit- a bit of googling shows that prudent uninsured is about something completely different

Let’s hope not

There might be terms about reasonable care that apply to damaging your own car, but I don’t think third party liability can be limited in that way. As cynic-al says, it’s for the innocent party.

It’s at times like these that I’m fully in favour of an Inglorious Basterds style squad who would pay a little visit to the driver…

Wonder if his age cane into it? Courts are often extremely lenient on older people. An event I was working on a few years ago had a fatality (driver overtook, pulled in too soon, clipped the rider – she died in hospital that night) and very little happened to him cos he was about 80. Small fine and a short ban.

bit of a tabloid headline you are using there.

Wonder why they didn’t charge them with dangerous driving (would attract a prison sentence).

Whilst the article may well be a fair description of what happened, its not necessarily what was said in court (there are very few court reporters now, and even fewer in covid times). IF the actions has been unambiguously intentional I’d expect them to be prosecuted as Dangerous Driving (or possibly causing serious injury by Dangerous Driving) as well. So, I am assuming that the driver’s statement cast some doubt on the intent of the braking. “Oh sorry officer, I had overtaken her but accelerated hard to do so, and realised I was about to break the speed limit and braked to bring my speed under control”.

Isn’t this because almost no-one gets convicted of this charge so its a safer bet to go for a lesser charge in the knowledge it might stick. It’s disgusting either way.

No because when its charged as Dangerous there is invariably an option for the Judge/Jury to say it wasn’t Dangerous but was Careless. So most likely the CPS (rightly or wrongly) didn’t believe it would meat the legal test or the defence lawyer offered the CPS an easy guilty plea for Careless.

Must have got points for failing to stop as well.

No, points are only added for the “most serious offence” when multiple offences are committed on one occasion. e.g. Invalid license (3-6), No Insurance (6-8), and Parking on Zig Zag (3) usually means points for the no-insurance only (the other offences may be aggravating and push it towards the top end, or swing the sentencer to disqualify) but they cant add them all up and impose 12-17 points for offences on one occasion. If you don’t like that – don’t blame the person on the bench – they have to follow the law, ask your MP to show that the government is though on crime by revising the Road Traffic Offenders Act.

Failing to stop at the scene of an accident alone carries a potential penalty of 6 months. It’s the whole ‘there but for the grace of God go I’ thing that gets people off lightly for this, IMO.

Yes if they were distracted / didn’t look properly etc then that must be at least a subconscious factor – but if the intentional punishment pass/break was believed then surely not?

I pointed out that I had more evidence of assault (mashed bike) than the usual outside-a-pub assault that people (occasionally) go to jail for.

Don’t kid yourself that a typical assault outside a pub would result in a first offender actually going to jail; especially if that first offender was 73. Its actually remarkably hard to send someone to jail for a short period – you need background reports (and those reports would need to read like there are no alternatives), you need to justify the decision etc. Much more likely that it would be a suspended prison sentence. Especially if there were any personal circumstances (there’s often a story about an infirm partner who needs care etc!).

Now to put a different perspective on the 10 points. A disqualification for a first offence in England would often be 6 months or less (it could be longer but if the facts the judge heard were that compelling we wouldn’t be having this debate). Now consider that 6 months later they get back behind the wheel and are driving again with a clean license – usually with no need to retake a test. In contrast by imposing 10 points he is in the position where any offence, no matter how trivial (45 in dual c/way 40, going through an amber light, a bulb out) means he’ll be totting up and should get a 6 month ban; and that threat hangs over him for the next 3 years.

Of course it could be that the sentencer was held up by some lycra clad cyclist on the way to court that morning and had way more sympathy for the defendant than they should have.

The complete disdain and ignorance shown towards cyclist by motorists unfortunately is just so widespread.

I read a thread started by a local policeman who had observed a close pass and posted to ask motorists to be considerate of the cyclists safety and remember the 1.5m rule.

This resulted in hundreds of posts of all types of bile and bullcrap but basically showed a complete ignorance of the highway code. Overall a feeling that motorists can do what they want as the cyclists are just in the way and font even pay road tax. complete bell ends.

Could we please stop talking about “bans”? The correct term is surely “removal of the privilege of driving”.

The complete disdain and ignorance shown towards cyclist by motorists unfortunately is just so widespread.

I’d say less than half the drivers behave like this. Way too many, but I don’t think it’s even a majority.

This resulted in hundreds of posts of all types of bile and bullcrap but basically showed a complete ignorance of the highway code.

This pisses me off, get a lot of posts on Police FB pages, not just cycling related issues. Breaking Rule 1 on social media and displaying a complete lack of understanding of the rules of the road needs to carry 3 points and a £250 fine

I’d say less than half the drivers behave like this. Way too many, but I don’t think it’s even a majority.

Yay – you mean I need to worry about my wellbeing less than once every 2 passes ? Magic !

Could we please stop talking about “bans”? The correct term is surely “removal of the privilege of driving”.

Consider it implied, life’s too short to keep typing “removal of the privilege of driving”. But that is what most people mean…