Driving without due care - Advice please
Discussion
Hi all.
Would like to know from a law enforcer what sort of trouble I am in?
Was driving last week and accidently bumped into the car in front at a set of traffic lights. Very low speed (less than 5mph.) Anyhow, no damage to my car, but made a small crack to bumper on the car in front. Exchange phone numbers as we were both local and I said I would be away on business for a few days and we will talk after. Anyhow, in the interim, I get a letter from Surrey police alledging I was DWDC and to name the driver within 28 days. I was very surprised by this, as it was very minimal to say the least. Calling the Police, I was told the other party had trouble getting hold of me, but I had called them up on my return to follow up. I have since agreed the repair which is just a couple hundred pounds and would like to know what the process is now? Will I be prosecuted automatically or will it be up to the other party to be asked if they wish to press charges? Why would the Police want to do me for something so minor and affect my lielyhood, it has all been sorted and was just a bump?
So I name myself as the driver, they then ask me to produce my docs, what next?
Many thanks for your advice.
Would like to know from a law enforcer what sort of trouble I am in?
Was driving last week and accidently bumped into the car in front at a set of traffic lights. Very low speed (less than 5mph.) Anyhow, no damage to my car, but made a small crack to bumper on the car in front. Exchange phone numbers as we were both local and I said I would be away on business for a few days and we will talk after. Anyhow, in the interim, I get a letter from Surrey police alledging I was DWDC and to name the driver within 28 days. I was very surprised by this, as it was very minimal to say the least. Calling the Police, I was told the other party had trouble getting hold of me, but I had called them up on my return to follow up. I have since agreed the repair which is just a couple hundred pounds and would like to know what the process is now? Will I be prosecuted automatically or will it be up to the other party to be asked if they wish to press charges? Why would the Police want to do me for something so minor and affect my lielyhood, it has all been sorted and was just a bump?
So I name myself as the driver, they then ask me to produce my docs, what next?
Many thanks for your advice.
www.pepipoo.com might be the place to ask.
As far as the police is concerned you have a right to silence. At pepipoo check out the situ with PACE.
As far as the police is concerned you have a right to silence. At pepipoo check out the situ with PACE.
Why were the police involved?
Did you exchange names and addresses at time of accident?
Seems very odd.
I can only assume the other driver wants to press charges for whatever reason.
Can't see this going all the way to court.
Low speed rear end shunt is the most common type of accident, so doubt the police are going to be charging every motorist for this.
Did you exchange names and addresses at time of accident?
Seems very odd.
I can only assume the other driver wants to press charges for whatever reason.
Can't see this going all the way to court.
Low speed rear end shunt is the most common type of accident, so doubt the police are going to be charging every motorist for this.
The other driver appears to have made a report to the police about the accident and said something that has led to it becoming a 'recordable' accident - i.e. one that an officer will investigate in one way or another (they may simply record the details on their system and close it). We don't record all accidents as there are too many (and in particular minor damage RTCs).
To prosecute for an offence of driving without due care & attention a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) must have been issued within 14 days of the alleged offence - though for an RTC if you were aware it had happened that requirement no longer applies.
My bet is Surrey automatically issue an NIP and S172 requirement to name driver whenever an RTC is recorded on the system and certain boxes are ticked, in order to cover the bases in the event they did decide to prosecute. The fact the NIP has been issued does not mean they will definitely prosecute. In any case, if they were going to, they would at some stage arrange a date to interview you regarding the incident, and that would normally be sooner rather than later while its fresh in your memory.
These kinds of RTC happen so frequently (and don't get recorded) I would be surprised if anything came of it - though don't hold me to that!
To prosecute for an offence of driving without due care & attention a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) must have been issued within 14 days of the alleged offence - though for an RTC if you were aware it had happened that requirement no longer applies.
My bet is Surrey automatically issue an NIP and S172 requirement to name driver whenever an RTC is recorded on the system and certain boxes are ticked, in order to cover the bases in the event they did decide to prosecute. The fact the NIP has been issued does not mean they will definitely prosecute. In any case, if they were going to, they would at some stage arrange a date to interview you regarding the incident, and that would normally be sooner rather than later while its fresh in your memory.
These kinds of RTC happen so frequently (and don't get recorded) I would be surprised if anything came of it - though don't hold me to that!
Triple7 said:
Why would the Police want to do me for something so minor and affect my lielyhood
Millions of speeders have asked that question every year. The difference being of course that they didn't cause any accidents. I think you're being treated harshly but, TBH, if they stopped the mass prosecutions for speeding and started clamping down hard on shunts like yours, it would be fairer than the status quo. Of course the best thing would be to prevent accidents in the first place.As already said, www.pepipoo.com is your friend. From what I have heard when a relative of mine was knocked off his bike, it will indeed be up to the other party whether you are charged. There may also be an option for you to go on a course instead. DWDC wouldn't do wonders for your insurance. If people are going to be charged for minor incidents like these, perhaps it would be fairer to create a lesser offence.
In the meantime, try not to worry; that won't really help!
Well 777 it appears you did not fully comply with the law.
In this case as a result of the accident where damage is caused to any other vehicle then there is an obligation to
(1) Stop - which you did. AND
(2) If requested by other driver (or any person having reasonable grounds) shall give:
(a) his name and address - (not done phone number only) and
(b) name and address of the owner of the vehicle - (not done)
(c) details of the vehicle - (presumed taken by other as Plod
has it to send 172)
(3) If above not complied with then as soon as practicable and in any case within 24 hrs report matter to Police.
Failure to do so - offence 6 months impr and/ or fine up to £5000, 5 - 10 points, discretionary disqualification. (S 170 RTA 88)
Generally running into the rear of the vehicle in front is considered to be driving without due care and attention...remember that bit in the Highway Code " drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear" .
Due care is an offence attracting max fine of £2,500, discretionary disq, 3 - 11 points. (S 3 RTA 1988)
How you now stand in all this now will be down to Plod/CPS. Once having established you as the driver through 172 they will/should interview you to get your side of the story in a statement under caution. It will then depend on the weight of the evidence through witnesses whether the file submitted to CPS (if it goes that far) is marked up for prosecution, summons issued and Court case.
Nowadays it would seem that non injury accidents are not pursued with vigour by Plod and especially where they are happy details (as above) have been exchanged unless there are blatant offences committed. CPS also do not like one against one minor bumps either.
dvd
Ps Offence not to complete, sign and return Form 172 within 28 days of receipt.
Max fine £1000, 3 points, discretionary disqualification.(S 172 RTA 88)
In this case as a result of the accident where damage is caused to any other vehicle then there is an obligation to
(1) Stop - which you did. AND
(2) If requested by other driver (or any person having reasonable grounds) shall give:
(a) his name and address - (not done phone number only) and
(b) name and address of the owner of the vehicle - (not done)
(c) details of the vehicle - (presumed taken by other as Plod
has it to send 172)
(3) If above not complied with then as soon as practicable and in any case within 24 hrs report matter to Police.
Failure to do so - offence 6 months impr and/ or fine up to £5000, 5 - 10 points, discretionary disqualification. (S 170 RTA 88)
Generally running into the rear of the vehicle in front is considered to be driving without due care and attention...remember that bit in the Highway Code " drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear" .
Due care is an offence attracting max fine of £2,500, discretionary disq, 3 - 11 points. (S 3 RTA 1988)
How you now stand in all this now will be down to Plod/CPS. Once having established you as the driver through 172 they will/should interview you to get your side of the story in a statement under caution. It will then depend on the weight of the evidence through witnesses whether the file submitted to CPS (if it goes that far) is marked up for prosecution, summons issued and Court case.
Nowadays it would seem that non injury accidents are not pursued with vigour by Plod and especially where they are happy details (as above) have been exchanged unless there are blatant offences committed. CPS also do not like one against one minor bumps either.
dvd
Ps Offence not to complete, sign and return Form 172 within 28 days of receipt.
Max fine £1000, 3 points, discretionary disqualification.(S 172 RTA 88)
Just because they write to you and want to know who was driving doesn't mean they will prosecute - if it is as you say then I imagine it may be suitable for a warning letter.
Ultimately running into the back of someone is normally WDC but not one that is pursued; particularly where no injury is involved. Nothing, unfortunately, is certain in this strange world though
Ultimately running into the back of someone is normally WDC but not one that is pursued; particularly where no injury is involved. Nothing, unfortunately, is certain in this strange world though
We did only exchange phone numbers, with my full name and as we were on a busy intersection and suggested we call to speak to each other later. I stated at the time I would be going abroad and not to be concerned, subsequently called them upon my return and we exchanged details. Calling the Police it turns out they were unable to get hold of me on the number provided, hence them contacting the Police, which is what I would have done, I guess.
It seems I have not fully understood the seriousness of the 'nudge' as it has stood.
I shall then return the request for driver details and await the outcome, the car goes in this week to have the bumper re-sprayed, I was going to wait until the matter was resolved before sending back my details. I take it this would not be the best course?
Thanks chaps.
It seems I have not fully understood the seriousness of the 'nudge' as it has stood.
I shall then return the request for driver details and await the outcome, the car goes in this week to have the bumper re-sprayed, I was going to wait until the matter was resolved before sending back my details. I take it this would not be the best course?
Thanks chaps.
Edited by Triple7 on Sunday 10th June 23:23
Heebeegeetee said:
If your car is registered at your home address, you haven't concealed your identity in any way. It could be argued that you knew he had your address.
It doesn't have to be that though.The other driver may have alleged without due care, the other driver may have claimed whiplash injuries etc.
I have spoken to the drivers husband and asked if all are ok and he said yes (doesn't mean much!) The other party have not asked for my insurance details, just sent me the quote for the repair and I have told them to go ahead and get the repair done and I will settle the account (been to arrange with bodyshop already.)
So I have been open and honest at all counts. I'm sorry if I failed to provided the correct details at the time of the incident (nor did they) but thats history now, something I can't change. And them transposing a number has caused all this. Incidently they can look me up in the phone book. I guess my definition of a 'accident' was not a bump at a set of lights.
So I have been open and honest at all counts. I'm sorry if I failed to provided the correct details at the time of the incident (nor did they) but thats history now, something I can't change. And them transposing a number has caused all this. Incidently they can look me up in the phone book. I guess my definition of a 'accident' was not a bump at a set of lights.
Edited by Triple7 on Sunday 10th June 23:53
vonhosen said:
Heebeegeetee said:
If your car is registered at your home address, you haven't concealed your identity in any way. It could be argued that you knew he had your address.
It doesn't have to be that though.The other driver may have alleged without due care, the other driver may have claimed whiplash injuries etc.
Heebeegeetee said:
vonhosen said:
Heebeegeetee said:
If your car is registered at your home address, you haven't concealed your identity in any way. It could be argued that you knew he had your address.
It doesn't have to be that though.The other driver may have alleged without due care, the other driver may have claimed whiplash injuries etc.
vonhosen said:
Says who ?
As in what? Says who as in you can't leave the scene, or as in who says they're injured?If you mean as in who says they're injured, its a good point 'cos who can say whether they're injured or not? But then do you call the police for every tiny incident, every car park bump etc in case someone is injured even if they believe they're not?
Heebeegeetee said:
vonhosen said:
Says who ?
As in what? Says who as in you can't leave the scene, or as in who says they're injured?If you mean as in who says they're injured, its a good point 'cos who can say whether they're injured or not? But then do you call the police for every tiny incident, every car park bump etc in case someone is injured even if they believe they're not?
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff