Likely Outcome Causing Severe Injury by Careless Driving?
Discussion
Scotty2 said:
It seems that there is 12 month automatic ban.
If someone is charged with "Causing severe injury by careless driving" for a momentary lapse of concentration, is there any way to mitigate retention of licence when the third party may be partially responsible ?
Obligatory disqualification of at least 12 months. The disqualification period could be substantially longer than the minimum. There is also a discretionary retest, although that power is not often exercised for this particular offence. If someone is charged with "Causing severe injury by careless driving" for a momentary lapse of concentration, is there any way to mitigate retention of licence when the third party may be partially responsible ?
An obligatory disqualification can be avoided if there are Special Reasons.
The offence guideline is here: https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magi...
One of the factors listed which reduces seriousness is - "Actions of the victim or a third party contributed significantly to collision or injury."
If guilt is accepted then there may be scope for a Basis of Plea.
Scotty2 said:
England. Licence for > 30 years.
No previous convictions.
No Drink or Drugs.
"Momentary lapse in concentration"
Third party may have been speeding.
(Pulled out at a junction and was hit by a Motorbike which had just overtaken a car...)
Thanks for the input. I'll update after the Hearing.
I’d add that “pulled out of a junction and was hit by a motorbike” doesn’t read very well at all and I’m sure wouldn’t with a magistrate either.No previous convictions.
No Drink or Drugs.
"Momentary lapse in concentration"
Third party may have been speeding.
(Pulled out at a junction and was hit by a Motorbike which had just overtaken a car...)
Thanks for the input. I'll update after the Hearing.
The defendant pulled out of a junction into the path of a motorbike and caused a collision is without doubt far more accurate and truthful.
If serious injury has been caused, it’s a safe bet the Police conducted an investigation and if as you claim the biker was over the speed limit, they’ll know that and should be included in any evidence.
Same thing happened to a colleague about 10 years ago.
Pulled out on to a dual carriageway, 50mph limit, and a motorbike doing around 65mph made contact. Rider was injured which required hospital treatment and outpatient follow ups. Rider also claimed lasting damage which was the basis of a significant injury insurance claim. Colleague's car (company car) was written off although visually the damage seemed quite minor.
A witness in a car behind my colleague sided with the biker and said colleague pulled out when there wasn't sufficient gap in traffic.
Colleague was charged with careless driving and got 6 points and a fine. I don't know if he pleaded guilty or not but he may have as the outcome for him arrived quite quickly. Suppose he was lucky the charge didn't include 'serious injury' despite the rider claiming significant damages for long term damage and claiming being unable to work.
Pulled out on to a dual carriageway, 50mph limit, and a motorbike doing around 65mph made contact. Rider was injured which required hospital treatment and outpatient follow ups. Rider also claimed lasting damage which was the basis of a significant injury insurance claim. Colleague's car (company car) was written off although visually the damage seemed quite minor.
A witness in a car behind my colleague sided with the biker and said colleague pulled out when there wasn't sufficient gap in traffic.
Colleague was charged with careless driving and got 6 points and a fine. I don't know if he pleaded guilty or not but he may have as the outcome for him arrived quite quickly. Suppose he was lucky the charge didn't include 'serious injury' despite the rider claiming significant damages for long term damage and claiming being unable to work.
xx99xx said:
Same thing happened to a colleague about 10 years ago.
Pulled out on to a dual carriageway, 50mph limit, and a motorbike doing around 65mph made contact. Rider was injured which required hospital treatment and outpatient follow ups. Rider also claimed lasting damage which was the basis of a significant injury insurance claim. Colleague's car (company car) was written off although visually the damage seemed quite minor.
A witness in a car behind my colleague sided with the biker and said colleague pulled out when there wasn't sufficient gap in traffic.
Colleague was charged with careless driving and got 6 points and a fine. I don't know if he pleaded guilty or not but he may have as the outcome for him arrived quite quickly. Suppose he was lucky the charge didn't include 'serious injury' despite the rider claiming significant damages for long term damage and claiming being unable to work.
Nothing to do with luck. Causing serious injury by careless driving has only been a specific offence since 2022. Before then it was just careless driving, injury or not.Pulled out on to a dual carriageway, 50mph limit, and a motorbike doing around 65mph made contact. Rider was injured which required hospital treatment and outpatient follow ups. Rider also claimed lasting damage which was the basis of a significant injury insurance claim. Colleague's car (company car) was written off although visually the damage seemed quite minor.
A witness in a car behind my colleague sided with the biker and said colleague pulled out when there wasn't sufficient gap in traffic.
Colleague was charged with careless driving and got 6 points and a fine. I don't know if he pleaded guilty or not but he may have as the outcome for him arrived quite quickly. Suppose he was lucky the charge didn't include 'serious injury' despite the rider claiming significant damages for long term damage and claiming being unable to work.
xx99xx said:
Same thing happened to a colleague about 10 years ago.
Pulled out on to a dual carriageway, 50mph limit, and a motorbike doing around 65mph made contact. Rider was injured which required hospital treatment and outpatient follow ups. Rider also claimed lasting damage which was the basis of a significant injury insurance claim. Colleague's car (company car) was written off although visually the damage seemed quite minor.
A witness in a car behind my colleague sided with the biker and said colleague pulled out when there wasn't sufficient gap in traffic.
Colleague was charged with careless driving and got 6 points and a fine. I don't know if he pleaded guilty or not but he may have as the outcome for him arrived quite quickly. Suppose he was lucky the charge didn't include 'serious injury' despite the rider claiming significant damages for long term damage and claiming being unable to work.
The offence charged did not exist before June 2022.Pulled out on to a dual carriageway, 50mph limit, and a motorbike doing around 65mph made contact. Rider was injured which required hospital treatment and outpatient follow ups. Rider also claimed lasting damage which was the basis of a significant injury insurance claim. Colleague's car (company car) was written off although visually the damage seemed quite minor.
A witness in a car behind my colleague sided with the biker and said colleague pulled out when there wasn't sufficient gap in traffic.
Colleague was charged with careless driving and got 6 points and a fine. I don't know if he pleaded guilty or not but he may have as the outcome for him arrived quite quickly. Suppose he was lucky the charge didn't include 'serious injury' despite the rider claiming significant damages for long term damage and claiming being unable to work.
davek_964 said:
Pulled out in front of a motorcycle, caused lasting damage.
'Momentary lapse of concentration' and the motorcycle 'might' have been speeding.
Hmm
Why don't you say what you mean, instead of insinuating. 'Momentary lapse of concentration' and the motorcycle 'might' have been speeding.
Hmm
As we don't have the full scenario, let's leave our high horses back at base for now aye.
EmailAddress said:
davek_964 said:
Pulled out in front of a motorcycle, caused lasting damage.
'Momentary lapse of concentration' and the motorcycle 'might' have been speeding.
Hmm
Why don't you say what you mean, instead of insinuating. 'Momentary lapse of concentration' and the motorcycle 'might' have been speeding.
Hmm
As we don't have the full scenario, let's leave our high horses back at base for now aye.
People don't generally pull out in front of motorcycles intentionally. So - common as this kind of accident is - at least 90% of them are a 'momentary lapse in concentration'.
That lapse was enough to not notice the motorcycle, and pull out in front of them. So seems unlikely they were on a position to comment on the motorcycle speed.
Finally - having f
ked up somebody's life, I'd hope the person was more concerned about that than making excuses.As somebody who's ridden bikes for years, I hope they throw the book at them.
Hope that's clear enough for you
EmailAddress said:
davek_964 said:
Pulled out in front of a motorcycle, caused lasting damage.
'Momentary lapse of concentration' and the motorcycle 'might' have been speeding.
Hmm
Why don't you say what you mean, instead of insinuating. 'Momentary lapse of concentration' and the motorcycle 'might' have been speeding.
Hmm
As we don't have the full scenario, let's leave our high horses back at base for now aye.
If Op is going to start insinuating blame on the motorcyclist they deserve all the high horses which come their way. It’s clear they only care about the driver from the post.
davek_964 said:
EmailAddress said:
davek_964 said:
Pulled out in front of a motorcycle, caused lasting damage.
'Momentary lapse of concentration' and the motorcycle 'might' have been speeding.
Hmm
Why don't you say what you mean, instead of insinuating. 'Momentary lapse of concentration' and the motorcycle 'might' have been speeding.
Hmm
As we don't have the full scenario, let's leave our high horses back at base for now aye.
People don't generally pull out in front of motorcycles intentionally. So - common as this kind of accident is - at least 90% of them are a 'momentary lapse in concentration'.
That lapse was enough to not notice the motorcycle, and pull out in front of them. So seems unlikely they were on a position to comment on the motorcycle speed.
Finally - having f
ked up somebody's life, I'd hope the person was more concerned about that than making excuses.As somebody who's ridden bikes for years, I hope they throw the book at them.
Hope that's clear enough for you
Still pointless and presumptive though. As we know barely anything about the incident, and the OP did not request judgement.
'As somebody who's ridden bikes for years, I hope they throw the book at them.'
This sort of patronising knee-jerk trial by text is unnecessary. What does that statement do to better understand, educate, or illicit constructive discussion.
EmailAddress said:
Thank you.
Still pointless and presumptive though. As we know barely anything about the incident, and the OP did not request judgement.
'As somebody who's ridden bikes for years, I hope they throw the book at them.'
This sort of patronising knee-jerk trial by text is unnecessary. What does that statement do to better understand, educate, or illicit constructive discussion.
It's not presumptive. 'Momentary lapse in judgement' is exactly 'I didn't notice the bike and pulled out in front of them'.Still pointless and presumptive though. As we know barely anything about the incident, and the OP did not request judgement.
'As somebody who's ridden bikes for years, I hope they throw the book at them.'
This sort of patronising knee-jerk trial by text is unnecessary. What does that statement do to better understand, educate, or illicit constructive discussion.
The OPs posts are entirely how the car driver might mitigate the sentence and don't give even an ounce of sympathy for the bike rider.
I really couldn't care less whether they asked for judgment, and I don't really care much about your opinion either.
The driver made life changing injuries to somebody by pulling out in front of them without looking properly. But the post is very much 'what excuses can I make?'
My sympathy is with the person who suffered a tad more than a fine and points.
Good God ! You lot have no idea of the circumstances and quick to judge.
I am also an owner and rider of a motorbike so am well aware of SMIDSY issues.
The person involved is riddled with guilt and suffering every day for a mistake. How many times have you nearly been hit or made a mistake?
I can add that the bike had just overtaken a car in the 30 limit approaching the junction.
I'll now shut up and wait to comment until after the Hearing but this place is very quick to judge without info that I don't want to make public.
At least there are still a few decent people in here.
I am also an owner and rider of a motorbike so am well aware of SMIDSY issues.
The person involved is riddled with guilt and suffering every day for a mistake. How many times have you nearly been hit or made a mistake?
I can add that the bike had just overtaken a car in the 30 limit approaching the junction.
I'll now shut up and wait to comment until after the Hearing but this place is very quick to judge without info that I don't want to make public.
At least there are still a few decent people in here.
davek_964 said:
EmailAddress said:
Thank you.
Still pointless and presumptive though. As we know barely anything about the incident, and the OP did not request judgement.
'As somebody who's ridden bikes for years, I hope they throw the book at them.'
This sort of patronising knee-jerk trial by text is unnecessary. What does that statement do to better understand, educate, or illicit constructive discussion.
It's not presumptive. 'Momentary lapse in judgement' is exactly 'I didn't notice the bike and pulled out in front of them'.Still pointless and presumptive though. As we know barely anything about the incident, and the OP did not request judgement.
'As somebody who's ridden bikes for years, I hope they throw the book at them.'
This sort of patronising knee-jerk trial by text is unnecessary. What does that statement do to better understand, educate, or illicit constructive discussion.
The OPs posts are entirely how the car driver might mitigate the sentence and don't give even an ounce of sympathy for the bike rider.
I really couldn't care less whether they asked for judgment, and I don't really care much about your opinion either.
The driver made life changing injuries to somebody by pulling out in front of them without looking properly. But the post is very much 'what excuses can I make?'
My sympathy is with the person who suffered a tad more than a fine and points.
It's not the Citizens Advice centre.
If you don't want discussion on an internet discussion board, then don't post.
But please don't come on and ask people not to express their opinions - how arrogant.
To the OP's question. I am aware of a similar sounding accident that went to court last December. I have only the motorcyclists account. The outcome was the car driver was treated quite harshly. 20 month ban. Compulsory retest and a fine . The fine was a substantial amount albeit I don't know how much it was . The car driver went in with a strong defence and mitigation and was rebuked equally strongly .
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff