Failing to stop advice required
Discussion
Will pleading not guilty in a Welsh magistrates court be better or worse?
My Grandmother has just received a court summons for failing to stop after an accident. I do not believe this to be a prosecution that has enough evidence to prove valid.
What are your thoughts?
It was a 10mph collision with a stationary, empty car on a quite country road with the car not outside a house. On inspecting the vehicle there appeared to be no visible damage so it was not felt there was any need to report this or to leave a note under the windscreen.
She was seen and reported. Is it for the court to decide if there is a case to answer based on the ability of a 78 year old woman to assess hidden damage behind a bumper?
My Grandmother has just received a court summons for failing to stop after an accident. I do not believe this to be a prosecution that has enough evidence to prove valid.
What are your thoughts?
It was a 10mph collision with a stationary, empty car on a quite country road with the car not outside a house. On inspecting the vehicle there appeared to be no visible damage so it was not felt there was any need to report this or to leave a note under the windscreen.
She was seen and reported. Is it for the court to decide if there is a case to answer based on the ability of a 78 year old woman to assess hidden damage behind a bumper?
Medic-one said:
softtop said:
based on the ability of a 78 year old woman to assess hidden damage behind a bumper?
I'm no lawyer but my guess is that you always have to leave your details just in case there is any damage you can't see straight away, and age doesn't matter in that case.Hit a Lotus Elise with its fibreglass body at 10mph and the tiny scratch you see could spread over a month or two and cost a cool 500+ more to repair.
The law is rightly wooden on this. You hit someone else's car, you leave your details. You have made a fundamental error, you don't then decide to be judge and jury at the scene. Leave that to others.
By failing to do the decent thing, you also show a lack of respect which, rightly in my opinion, must be challenged by the courts.
I'm sure the courts will go easy on your grandmother, not least financially.
But as said, to the poor Lotus owner above it matters not who damaged his car, only that he, as a 100% innocent party, does not have to pay for someone else's carelessness.
This time, the law is not an ass.
I agree, some old lady scuffed my brand new XKR's door whilst I was shopping. I came back to discover the damage and was so incensed at someone's total lack of respect that I waited for her to return. She could not comprehend that the damage to me was major and to her trivial.
Anyway, gran should have left her details.
Anyway, gran should have left her details.
Edited by Triple7 on Thursday 17th January 08:00
softtop said:
My Grandmother has just received a court summons for failing to stop after an accident.
What are your thoughts?
It was a 10mph collision with a stationary, empty car on a quite country road
78 year old woman
Most bumper supports are designed to start deforming at between 4-6mph...What are your thoughts?
It was a 10mph collision with a stationary, empty car on a quite country road
78 year old woman
Based on the above: My thoughts are that she shouldn't be driving. Does she have the ability/strength/mental agility to carry out an emergency stop if a child ran out or the car in front did an emergency stop? We had this challenge with my Nan at 79 and in the end we asked her Doctor to advise her not to drive and DVLA subsequently withdrew her licence. She then got a little electric buggy and could legally terrify pedestrians as well as road users!
softtop said:
Will pleading not guilty in a Welsh magistrates court be better or worse?
My Grandmother has just received a court summons for failing to stop after an accident. I do not believe this to be a prosecution that has enough evidence to prove valid.
What are your thoughts?
It was a 10mph collision with a stationary, empty car on a quite country road with the car not outside a house. On inspecting the vehicle there appeared to be no visible damage so it was not felt there was any need to report this or to leave a note under the windscreen.
She was seen and reported. Is it for the court to decide if there is a case to answer based on the ability of a 78 year old woman to assess hidden damage behind a bumper?
I can't advise on whether she should plead guilty or not guilty. However, on the charge of failing to report (a subtle difference to failing to stop) I would suggest seeing a brief as, on the face of it, she has a total defence.My Grandmother has just received a court summons for failing to stop after an accident. I do not believe this to be a prosecution that has enough evidence to prove valid.
What are your thoughts?
It was a 10mph collision with a stationary, empty car on a quite country road with the car not outside a house. On inspecting the vehicle there appeared to be no visible damage so it was not felt there was any need to report this or to leave a note under the windscreen.
She was seen and reported. Is it for the court to decide if there is a case to answer based on the ability of a 78 year old woman to assess hidden damage behind a bumper?
You are only required to report an accident if (among other things not applicable in these circumstances) damage was caused to the other vehicle. You gran stopped, checked the vehicle and, as it was apparant to her that no damage had been done, there was no legal requirement for her to report the accident.
Her age is a factor to a degree as the bit that the court will be interested in is whether she believed she had not damaged the other vehicle. She would not, one assumes, be aware of hidden damage and the ability of modern man-made mineral fibres to deform, transfer forces, and then reform. Unless, of course, the old girl is reading physics and chemistry at university in some mature student scheme.
Afraid I have no sympathy here. My car is currently scraped and dented due to someone side swiping it and not leaving any details behind - repair bill - £600+ on a £1000 car!! I can't afford to have that done or for it to go on my insurance so i've had to live with it.
No matter how bad the damage is - it should always be reported! Friend (with company Z4C) had his car scraped in a carpark - no details left and is now looking at a £200 excess to get it fixed before handing the car back!!
No matter how bad the damage is - it should always be reported! Friend (with company Z4C) had his car scraped in a carpark - no details left and is now looking at a £200 excess to get it fixed before handing the car back!!
softtop said:
Will pleading not guilty in a Welsh magistrates court be better or worse?
My Grandmother has just received a court summons for failing to stop after an accident. I do not believe this to be a prosecution that has enough evidence to prove valid.
What are your thoughts?
Your barrister will give you the best advice, but IMHO pleading NG when you are G is not a good idea. As Mr Smith says, what is the actual offence? Failing to stop, or failing to report? My Grandmother has just received a court summons for failing to stop after an accident. I do not believe this to be a prosecution that has enough evidence to prove valid.
What are your thoughts?
Did she physically get out of her car to have a look?
Have you seen any evidence of damage from the vehicle she hit?
Hmm, how have they traced her? Must have been people around that took her numberplate and report it to BiB which unfortunately to me doesn't sound very much like the low speed, no damage impact that you describe? Did she get out of her car?
What does the legislation say (you can google it)is it about not stopping after an accident or where an accident causes damage?
Thanks for the advice, it is helpful to get a rounded view.
In answer to one question:-
1.She reversed afer the impact and viewed the damage from inside the car since it was raining hard, not right I know but it happened. There were three people all in the car together and they all agreed, maybe they would?
2. What is the charge, I don't know, I will find out tonight.
3. Since I was not there you tend to get the details drip fed as you probe so all the fact given are based on the information shared.
4. There has been a claim made on the insurance company so I need to see what it is says to understand the claim.(good point)
In answer to one question:-
1.She reversed afer the impact and viewed the damage from inside the car since it was raining hard, not right I know but it happened. There were three people all in the car together and they all agreed, maybe they would?
2. What is the charge, I don't know, I will find out tonight.
3. Since I was not there you tend to get the details drip fed as you probe so all the fact given are based on the information shared.
4. There has been a claim made on the insurance company so I need to see what it is says to understand the claim.(good point)
Edited by softtop on Thursday 17th January 13:07
softtop said:
Thanks for the advice, it is helpful to get a rounded view.
In answer to one question:-
1.She reversed afer the impact and viewed the damage from inside the car since it was raining hard, not right I know but it happened. There were three people all in the car together and they all agreed, maybe they would?
2. What is the charge, I don't know, I will find out tonight.
3. Since I was not there you tend to get the details drip fed as you probe so all the fact given are based on the information shared.
4. There has been a claim made on the insurance company so I need to see what it is says to understand the claim.(good point)
This makes things a bit more sticky.In answer to one question:-
1.She reversed afer the impact and viewed the damage from inside the car since it was raining hard, not right I know but it happened. There were three people all in the car together and they all agreed, maybe they would?
2. What is the charge, I don't know, I will find out tonight.
3. Since I was not there you tend to get the details drip fed as you probe so all the fact given are based on the information shared.
4. There has been a claim made on the insurance company so I need to see what it is says to understand the claim.(good point)
Edited by softtop on Thursday 17th January 13:07
It seems obvious that the accident was viewed from someones house - and they get the number plate of someone reversing into their car, pausing for a second but not getting out and then driving off.
Now my car was reversed into in a car park scuffing up the bumper and pushing it out of alignment. When we got back to the car we saw a car speeding away, but thought nothing of it until we saw the damage. I even spent an hour with the owner of the car park going over the CCTV footage to try and get the plate of the culprit I was so annoyed - as they knew they hit the car and just drove off. If I could have got a plate I would have gone straight to the police.
This may be pretty close to what has actually happened. The owner of the car might not have seen a little old lady, but someone driving off after knowingly driving into their pride and joy. The police also have a duty to follow up the report - and the CPS see the case as an easy win for their records so they will certainly be happy with a piece of the pie.
As to legal advice, I shouldnt replace a solicitor, but I would think hard before employing one. The cost is likely to be in the region of £500 or so, and if the case is lost then so is this money. Indeed, if the magistrates see a solicitor defending a case that also tells them that the defendant can afford a solicitor which also impacts on their ability to pay a potentially large fine!
The other option would be to plead guilty and explain the situation in mitigation and put herself at the mercy of the court. As has been said though, a situation where someone who is reasonably elderly who has firstly been in an accident and secondly has not reported it might be a perfect candidate for them to err on the side of caution and require a retest.
Derek Smith
I think if you look at Section 170 RTA 88 then if damage has been sustained to the other vehicle the obligations kick in irrespective of the fact that she did not know of any damage. The coming together of two vehicle will almost automatically incur damage. If one looks at the intention of the section this would support this. Damage is not defined so a mere scratch applies.
This is different from Harding v Price where lack of knowledge of an accident occuring is a let off. In this case, she saw and was aware.
She dis stop (no offence there) but she seems not to have alighted to see if there was anybody to give her details to present, then drove off and failed to report in 24 hrs or as reasonably practicable (offence).
dvd
I think if you look at Section 170 RTA 88 then if damage has been sustained to the other vehicle the obligations kick in irrespective of the fact that she did not know of any damage. The coming together of two vehicle will almost automatically incur damage. If one looks at the intention of the section this would support this. Damage is not defined so a mere scratch applies.
This is different from Harding v Price where lack of knowledge of an accident occuring is a let off. In this case, she saw and was aware.
She dis stop (no offence there) but she seems not to have alighted to see if there was anybody to give her details to present, then drove off and failed to report in 24 hrs or as reasonably practicable (offence).
dvd
Dwight VanDriver said:
This is different from Harding v Price where lack of knowledge of an accident occuring is a let off. In this case, she saw and was aware.
My understanding of Harding is that it indicated that mens rea is required and that the section, then 25, was not an absolute offence. The definition of a reportable accident, i.e. one where obligations are placed on drivers, whether innocent or not, is one where damage occurs. If no damage does occur then no obligation is placed on any party. If one driver does not think damage did occur then, from my reading, there's no requirement. The classic case is two wing mirrors colliding at walking pace and they spring back in place with no permanent damage. An accident (an untoward occurrence having an adverse physical effect) has occurred but, if as damage is sustained, then it is not a reportable one.
My interpretation could, of course, be way off beam. However, I can't see CPS being too pleased if I'd sent such a file as this through to them. I can see the green ink - EXPLAIN THIS! - which indicated I hadn't read the file properly.
(I don't mean to patronise, dvd, but I just wanted to make myself clear.)
Edited by Derek Smith on Thursday 17th January 21:59
Further:
Further, I’ve just been thinking about the green-pen wielding CPS lawyer. I feel that, when she got to the bit in the file where it stipulated what damage had occurred as a result of the accident, she would have written, in caps with an exclamation mark:
SAYS WHO!
The defence could argue that, as the damage was not apparent to the woman at the time, then it could have happened before the collision and our 78 year old granny was not the cause.
Dwight VanDriver said:
She did stop (no offence there) but she seems not to have alighted
softtop said:
On inspecting the vehicle there appeared to be no visible damage so it was not felt there was any need to report this or to leave a note under the windscreen.
That would tend to indicate, in the mind of a defence brief at least, that there was an intent to report if any damage had been sustained. That’s what I’d say anyway.Further, I’ve just been thinking about the green-pen wielding CPS lawyer. I feel that, when she got to the bit in the file where it stipulated what damage had occurred as a result of the accident, she would have written, in caps with an exclamation mark:
SAYS WHO!
The defence could argue that, as the damage was not apparent to the woman at the time, then it could have happened before the collision and our 78 year old granny was not the cause.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff