Incident with child running out at junction - NIP
Discussion
Hi had this from my brother this morning.
"I had a near miss with a kid running in front of my car at a junction. I managed to stop but child fell over, mum came running across cuddling child, I did check if he was ok and got a load of abuse but checked and said sorry etc etc. Had a police letter yesterday saying notice to prosecute checking I was the driver, due care and attention and failing to stop and report accident. Totally stressed about it"
Me : Bugger what a pain. Did you hit the child / were there any injuries?
"No I don’t think I hit the child I stopped straight away and he fell towards the pavement, was unaccompanied so started to get out car but mum arrived, hung around for a couple of minutes checked he was ok got a mouthful of abuse so left, it was a near miss, two weeks ago.
Primary school age around 8, just ran out, should have reported it but it was a very near miss and I was shook up. No witnesses "
I suppose the first thing to check if NIP within 2 weeks - car is owned by him / not moved house recently.
If so then what are the potential outcomes - mother of child will presumably have a different version of events as she presumably reported to the police.
Thoughts ?
"I had a near miss with a kid running in front of my car at a junction. I managed to stop but child fell over, mum came running across cuddling child, I did check if he was ok and got a load of abuse but checked and said sorry etc etc. Had a police letter yesterday saying notice to prosecute checking I was the driver, due care and attention and failing to stop and report accident. Totally stressed about it"
Me : Bugger what a pain. Did you hit the child / were there any injuries?
"No I don’t think I hit the child I stopped straight away and he fell towards the pavement, was unaccompanied so started to get out car but mum arrived, hung around for a couple of minutes checked he was ok got a mouthful of abuse so left, it was a near miss, two weeks ago.
Primary school age around 8, just ran out, should have reported it but it was a very near miss and I was shook up. No witnesses "
I suppose the first thing to check if NIP within 2 weeks - car is owned by him / not moved house recently.
If so then what are the potential outcomes - mother of child will presumably have a different version of events as she presumably reported to the police.
Thoughts ?
The fact he is saying he doesn't think he hit the child would probably not go down in his favour.
Unless it was the lightest of brushes he should know if he did hit the child, and if that is the case then he probably should have reported it.
Hopefully he has a clean licence which could be seen to be a positive.
He would be wise to get some proper legal advice under the circumstance rather than rely on advice from all and sundry on PH
Unless it was the lightest of brushes he should know if he did hit the child, and if that is the case then he probably should have reported it.
Hopefully he has a clean licence which could be seen to be a positive.
He would be wise to get some proper legal advice under the circumstance rather than rely on advice from all and sundry on PH
He didn’t hit the child, but the child fell over. Surely that would be construed as an accident (that’s what children do when they see impending danger, they attempt, often with failure, to run away from it and so trip and fall).
(Remember: Land Rover didn’t hit cyclist, but cyclist fell over?). Did driver see the child approach the junction? Did the driver consider the child may run across? Did driver sound the horn? Did driver ease off and cover the brake? I imagine these questions would be asked. This is the exact scenario that the ‘hierarchy of vulnerability’ that the Highway Code now purports to encompass.
(Remember: Land Rover didn’t hit cyclist, but cyclist fell over?). Did driver see the child approach the junction? Did the driver consider the child may run across? Did driver sound the horn? Did driver ease off and cover the brake? I imagine these questions would be asked. This is the exact scenario that the ‘hierarchy of vulnerability’ that the Highway Code now purports to encompass.
Probably two versions of events.
Driver says car didn't make contact with child, mother saying it did.
BUT - and it sounds like a promotion exam question - would the child falling & injuring themselves avoiding the car even though there is no contact fall under:
170Duty of driver to stop, report accident and give information or documents
(1)This section applies in a case where, owing to the presence of a motor vehicle on a road, an accident occurs by which—
(a)personal injury is caused to a person other than the driver of that motor vehicle,
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/170/e...
There are a few circumstances where an NIP can be outside the 14 days & still be valid.
Plus:
"Section 2 RTOA 1988 states that the prosecution does not have to comply with s.1 RTOA 1988 if, owing to the presence on a road of a vehicle in respect of which the offence was committed, an accident occurred at the time of the offence or immediately afterwards. However, a notice is still required if the defendant was unaware that there had been an accident: see Bentley v Dickinson [1983] RTR 356."
www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic-summary...
Be interested in agtlaw's view.
Driver says car didn't make contact with child, mother saying it did.
BUT - and it sounds like a promotion exam question - would the child falling & injuring themselves avoiding the car even though there is no contact fall under:
170Duty of driver to stop, report accident and give information or documents
(1)This section applies in a case where, owing to the presence of a motor vehicle on a road, an accident occurs by which—
(a)personal injury is caused to a person other than the driver of that motor vehicle,
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/170/e...
There are a few circumstances where an NIP can be outside the 14 days & still be valid.
Plus:
"Section 2 RTOA 1988 states that the prosecution does not have to comply with s.1 RTOA 1988 if, owing to the presence on a road of a vehicle in respect of which the offence was committed, an accident occurred at the time of the offence or immediately afterwards. However, a notice is still required if the defendant was unaware that there had been an accident: see Bentley v Dickinson [1983] RTR 356."
www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic-summary...
Be interested in agtlaw's view.
|The NIP needs to be complied with within a set period of time so I would advise sending that back with driver details on.
Personally I would say sending additional letters with a version of events is not advisable at this stage, as that would be held and potentially used as evidence at a later stage, I would recommend getting legal advice first before giving any account, including sending letters in, if the driver sends a letter and then a Solicitor advises a different approach its creating an issue which need not be there.
Likely the parent has reported it to the Police stating there was a connection between the child and car.
I would suggest the driver seeks proper legal advice, and notifies their insurer if not already done.
Personally I would say sending additional letters with a version of events is not advisable at this stage, as that would be held and potentially used as evidence at a later stage, I would recommend getting legal advice first before giving any account, including sending letters in, if the driver sends a letter and then a Solicitor advises a different approach its creating an issue which need not be there.
Likely the parent has reported it to the Police stating there was a connection between the child and car.
I would suggest the driver seeks proper legal advice, and notifies their insurer if not already done.
If mother gave a load of abuse then it seems likely that the OP’s brother was either driving too fast for the situation, or he actually hit the child, or both. “Didn’t think I hit” is telling, I think. It ought to be obvious if there was any contact and the fact there might have been is ominous.
Durzel said:
If mother gave a load of abuse then it seems likely that the OP’s brother was either driving too fast for the situation, or he actually hit the child, or both. “Didn’t think I hit” is telling, I think. It ought to be obvious if there was any contact and the fact there might have been is ominous.
The abuse is a non story.People often give abuse to distract from their own fault because they're embarrassed by their failures.
There's the classic video of the slag who blasts through a give way cross roads and writes off both cars and jumps out and the first thing she does is start abusing the innocent party.
SmoothCriminal said:
The abuse is a non story.
People often give abuse to distract from their own fault because they're embarrassed by their failures.
There's the classic video of the slag who blasts through a give way cross roads and writes off both cars and jumps out and the first thing she does is start abusing the innocent party.
Perhaps, but taken in context with the brother being uncertain as to whether he hit the child suggests a more negative outlook imo. Without a dashcam if the mother is suggesting he hit the child I don’t know how he’s going to refute that.People often give abuse to distract from their own fault because they're embarrassed by their failures.
There's the classic video of the slag who blasts through a give way cross roads and writes off both cars and jumps out and the first thing she does is start abusing the innocent party.
Durzel said:
SmoothCriminal said:
The abuse is a non story.
People often give abuse to distract from their own fault because they're embarrassed by their failures.
There's the classic video of the slag who blasts through a give way cross roads and writes off both cars and jumps out and the first thing she does is start abusing the innocent party.
Perhaps, but taken in context with the brother being uncertain as to whether he hit the child suggests a more negative outlook imo. Without a dashcam if the mother is suggesting he hit the child I don’t know how he’s going to refute that.People often give abuse to distract from their own fault because they're embarrassed by their failures.
There's the classic video of the slag who blasts through a give way cross roads and writes off both cars and jumps out and the first thing she does is start abusing the innocent party.
Surely it works both ways?
How can you get a NIP for an accident that probably didn't even happen, just because some Karen, who can't be bothered to look after their own child, sees £ notes in their eyes?
Have we really got to the state whereby the police, as well as having to cope with dashcam warriors, now have to react to every person who contacts them with some cock & bull story so as they can claim some coompeensaation?
Hopefully the NIP is just going through the motions and the whole thing will be forgotten about, UNLESS, of course, the OPs brother did hit the kid, in which case he deserves everything he gets.
Have we really got to the state whereby the police, as well as having to cope with dashcam warriors, now have to react to every person who contacts them with some cock & bull story so as they can claim some coompeensaation?
Hopefully the NIP is just going through the motions and the whole thing will be forgotten about, UNLESS, of course, the OPs brother did hit the kid, in which case he deserves everything he gets.
If the child doesn't have significant injuries consistent with touching the car, it doesn't necessarily make a big difference if they contacted or not.
Child runs into road, car stops, child stumbles onto road/child stumbles onto car.
The question is, was the driver at fault. The driver can be at fault without touching the child, contact can occur without the driver being at fault.
Probably makes a difference regarding reporting the incident though.
Some witnesses would be useful.
Child runs into road, car stops, child stumbles onto road/child stumbles onto car.
The question is, was the driver at fault. The driver can be at fault without touching the child, contact can occur without the driver being at fault.
Probably makes a difference regarding reporting the incident though.
Some witnesses would be useful.
Terminator X said:
IJWS15 said:
The reason I have a dash cam
He has to provide details of driver and an interview may follow. If they don’t and just start the offer of improvement course/fixed penalty process then he can opt for his day in court.
2 weeks later though would you still have footage?He has to provide details of driver and an interview may follow. If they don’t and just start the offer of improvement course/fixed penalty process then he can opt for his day in court.
TX.
Check the 'protected' folder if you did a full on emergency stop, it may have self triggered an incident to save.
There's been some changes to the highway code around priority at junctions that mean drivers have to anticipate pedestrians crossing and give way. Depending on the exact layout and direction of child may also be a factor in NIP issued, maybe to make an example. Didn't think they hit the child? Lots of people don't think they were speeding when caught, not a good sign either.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff