Does anyone know much about law? Need some advice please

[tawelfryn]

Hi all,
Need some advice on the following if anyone is up on their law:-

My father (71) had his first "accident" in his 54 year driving career about 6 months ago.
He was leaving a slip road from a dual carriage way, on a roundabout, it was a cold dark dreary day and drizzling.
He proceeded to pull off and there was a bump to his side, and a young girl on a scooter went into his wing, and came off. The police turned up, took statements etc, and the girl went to hospital, with bruises. Thank god she wasn't seriously injured. Insurances exchanged etc. and that was it.
Although I know my father was totally to blame, conditions were very poor, the motorcyclist was dressed all in black with no light on, so even someone half his age could make this mistake of not seeing her.
He received an "option" from the police, of driver rehabilitation, costing £140, if he didn't the case may be brought to court for "driving without due care and attention"
He decided not to go on the driver rehabilitation as he said he's been driving 54 years and doesn't plan on driving that long before he hangs his keys up.
Today he has received the court date for May 3, and now he has to send in the reply slip, "guilty i will not be attending" "guilty I will be attending" or "not guilty" and the date will be set for further proceedings.
Im wondering if anyone has advice on this case and what to do on the reply slip?
And to be honest I think it seems a little unfair to bring these charges on an accident that happened in this way, surely the Oxford english dictionary may have to delete the word " accident" as it seems there aren't any in this day and age!
Are we fighting a loosing battle and just take the consequences? Or is there a chance?
Any advice will be greatly recieved
Thanks all

 

[pitbull]

Borren da, I think youv'e answered your own question tawelfryn (Although I know my father was totally to blame). He'll just have to grin and bear it unfortunately.

 

[hermes]

If it was me I would tick 'guilty and will not be attending' unless he wants to go and explain that the motorcyclist was in black with no lights, and that this was his first accident etc etc in order to try to reduce the penalty. Probably not worth the bother.

Legally I would guess that he wouldn't have a chance of getting off, because the rider was not breaking the law but your dad did by not giving way.

It's a common accident, drivers don't look for bikers before pulling out from a junction. If it had been someone on a bigger bike going faster it could have been fatal. Having said that, bikers really should try to make themselves visible, and also to ride defensively in these situations.

 

[superspark]

surely the biker was in the wrong for not having lights on?

 

[tawelfryn]

Yeah thanks Pitbull and Hermes.
I am a biker myself and I totally agree with you, about riding defensivley, Just wish there was a way of beating the money grabbers!, Forgot to mention too, that the girls helmet came off! (I know that an offence)

 

[tawelfryn]

No unfortunately its not law superspark, I think it should be, as whenever I ride I have my headlight on

 

[Steve]

A bloke caused an accident with my car a while ago, october 05 - he pulled out of a side road into my path, causing my car to be written off and dad is still having back problems. (search for thread "rip my beloved punto" i think, dated oct 05)

Anyhow, the guy was given a similar option to your dad - driver rehabilitation, or a fine and points. I'm not sure which he chose - the police only informed us of the options, but i know for a fact that his insurance company haven't heard from him since december, which was about the time the police sent this letter to him and proved his liability for the crash! And so my family's personal injury claims are being held up until he picks his phone up (we were all in my car - 4 of us) . Might send my sister's boyfriend round his house - he's build like a brick ****house

A couple of months ago, I caused an accident similar to your dad, with a scooter - just damaged the cars wing, but the police attended and didn't take statements or anything - I called them, because this biker was running around like a madman, threatening me with his dad (who turned out to be a small balding bloke in his 50's ) and all sorts, i wouldn't have got any sense out of him until the police got there. Again, the visibility was poor (a car was parked to my right, i was looking through it to check the road was clear, so i didn't see this scooter )

 

[tawelfryn]

Don't get me wrong, however much personal injury the young girl puts in for I hope she gets and some. After all thats what insurance is for, we would all claim in the same circumstances.I don't know whether my dads insurance has paid out yet or not.
Its just Even though everything can be sorted out through insurances, and thank god she didn't die, I get annoyed at the police, suing for more money, and charging "driving without due care and attention", like I say in my first post, is there any such thing as an "accident " any more?

 

[Nige F]

surely the biker was in the wrong for not having lights on?

I ride bikes and have done since 1970........I`m saying nothing PS I`m a BIG bloke in my 50`s with all my hair and smell like a ---house.

 

[Diyisfun]

Light on or not the court will say, he should have seen, but the penalty will probably less severe, but it will be 3points a fine . insurance increase & hastle going to court.. So a tick for guilty attend why not if there is nothing else to do..You make the choice

 

[keyplayer]

Sit him down, stare into his eyes and whilst nodding and giving him a double thumbs up say very loudly"WOULD YOU LIKE A CUP OF TEA". Then get him to return guilty not present verdict.

 

[Thermo]

Unfortunatley the blame is squarley on the shoulders of your father. He could plead guilty at court and plead the mitigating circumstances, which may help reduce the level of the sentance, but to be honest hes pretty much on a sticky wicket. If he wanted to avoid the court action then the driver course would have been the sensible option. (hope the advice helps, used to be a copper!)

As for the definition of accident, most police forces now refer to them as crashs, as there is usually someone to blame for some reason, so its a bit daft to call them accidents.

 

[dg123]

It looks as though your father is responsible for the collision but I think he possibly has grounds for mitigating this. If the weather conditions were such that visibility was reduced then dipped headlights should be displayed irrespective of the vehicle type. I ride a bike and ride defensively, I always assume that drivers have not seen me and anticipate that I will have to take avoiding action - even though I am not at fault. I have the headlight on even in good conditions but this is not a legal requirement.

An accident is something which is unavoidable, most incidents on the road are avoidable so 'accident' is not really an accurate description.