Did I deserve to get banned?
Discussion
I think drivers are prosecuted for their actions, but punished (partially) on the consequences of those actions. Taking Gary Hart as an example - he fell asleep (allegedly), which was considered dangerous driving, but his actions led to the crash causing death, which was used as mitigation for the sentenced he received.
tvrslag
I find your thinking on this pretty worrying. You seem to be of the opinion that it is up to the authorities to somehow fix the fact that Dan needs to up his driving skill level. Whatever happened to individual responsibility?
Simply taking additional tuition in order to get a reduced ban is a ridiculous situation. Take the tuition because you recognise that your skill level isn't up to scratch. At least that way, you might actually learn something rather than simply going through the motions.
This is the type of driver behaviuor that I do want to see the authorities crack down on.
How is it that I can find the time and the money to do additional driver training, but others can't?[/quote]
CA
Lets look at the situation more closely.
Besides many of us on this forum who have have undertaken some form of further driving training wheather its in the form of a skid pan, advanced driver training or even trying to put into practise things read about in an advanced drivers manual. It shows a will to improve skills we have already gained.
I think that most of us here would agree that the current driving test does not appropriately prepare the learning driver for life on our roads. For 99%of the driving population as soon as the test has passed, the initial learning curve stops and a whole new learning curve begins they are simply not interested in improving their abilities as they believe they are equipped with the correct abilities already. We need to remember not everybody in the driving public shares our love of driving and our views with regards to being prepared with the correct abilities to do the Job in hand, namely drive. As such would it not seem prudent that at a very grass roots level every person who is charged with a driving offence should be provided with some form of retraining, and I'm not talking about simply re-passing the current test either? Surely it is therefore better to provide an incentive to re-train, in the hope of making sure that driving offence ofenders are better prepared for and will understand the consequences of any such actions rather than to just punish them for the offence?
CA I share your passion concerning the level of competance shown by many drivers on our roads today, and wholheartedly agree that the current test is poor, as many have said it teaches you to pass a test not to drive.
Unfortunately not everybody shares our enthusiasm and as such is not willing to give up their limited time and funds in order to improve an area of skill they already think they are proficient in.
redline dan said:The day that I think that nobody in the world can teach me anything more about driving and that I have nothing left to learn is the day that I win the F1 World Driver's Championship and the World Rally Championship in the same year. And even then I wouldn't be sure.
As arrogant as it may sound I can't see that driver training will have any use. I didn't have a crash because I didn't know what I was doing, I crashed because I made a mistake.
"The wise man knows that he knows almost nothing but the fool thinks that he knows everything"
redline dan said:Why do you say you couldn't afford not to? Yes there's a risk attached, but how much worse could it have been?
It was the arresting officer who made the decision to go for a DD charge. I pleaded guilty (Couldn't afford not to) even though the police statement was incorrect and made the incident out to be far more reckless than it actually was.
Surely you should have plead Not Guilty, especially if you could show the police statement was incorrect.
I agree with tvrslag's stance and suggest that the requirement to undertake further driver training, at own cost, in place of paying a fine, would be a great improvement on the current system. It would at least make people feel less scammed, as well as improving their awareness of what they can do and what they should be doing.
Two things though:
(i) It should be the case that voluntary driver training be able at a lower cost than would be the case if it were undertaken after a driving offence, in order to provide an incentive to train rather than an incentive to offend(!); and
(ii) It would be great (though is probably pie in the sky) if it were possible to reduce 3 points to 2 or 1, or reduce the length of a ban, if, at the start of the post-offence driver training session, the (police?) instructor were to assess the driver's ability, awareness and safety consciousness as superior.
I doubt that any of us who has been stopped for (uncongested) motorway speeds in the 85-110mph region would begrudge the training and most would welcome the opportunity to have our driving assessed as well as, potentially, improved. And we wouldn't feel so scammed.
Two things though:
(i) It should be the case that voluntary driver training be able at a lower cost than would be the case if it were undertaken after a driving offence, in order to provide an incentive to train rather than an incentive to offend(!); and
(ii) It would be great (though is probably pie in the sky) if it were possible to reduce 3 points to 2 or 1, or reduce the length of a ban, if, at the start of the post-offence driver training session, the (police?) instructor were to assess the driver's ability, awareness and safety consciousness as superior.
I doubt that any of us who has been stopped for (uncongested) motorway speeds in the 85-110mph region would begrudge the training and most would welcome the opportunity to have our driving assessed as well as, potentially, improved. And we wouldn't feel so scammed.
Hi Dan - you do at least have my sympathy. I got charged with Dangerous Driving about three years ago, which I also felt was unjustified and an example of the CPS 'having a go'. My brief told me to plead not-guilty, and also to opt for Crown Court. He said that magistrates just believe whatever the police tell them, and even though there's a slight risk of a worse sentence, he reckoned that a proper Judge would at least will have regard for the professional standing of the defendant (i.e. I don't look like a scrote and can afford a good brief) and will actually listen to the facts of the case. As it happened, the one witness on which the CPS were relying on for the DD charge was a complete tw@t and clearly didn't see any of the things which were on his statement (right down to the colour of my car plus some other details). Result? The case was thrown out and I was awarded my costs. It's well documented that witnesses instantly jump to the sensational conclusions when faced with accidents involving blokes in sports cars, regardless of the obvious truth. This guy that was testifying against me was a case in point, and was so desperate to see a 'Rich boy racer' sent down that he was willing to effectively lie under oath! Even funnier, this 'witness' was a member of the IAM and was self-righteous and pompous....until my barrister made him look like an arse.
Clearly Dan will learn a lesson from this - it's silly not to. But to all of those who are harshly berating Dan, remember 'There, but for the grace of God go us all'.
Best wishes all,
J.
Clearly Dan will learn a lesson from this - it's silly not to. But to all of those who are harshly berating Dan, remember 'There, but for the grace of God go us all'.
Best wishes all,
J.
CraigAlsop said:
Why do you say you couldn't afford not to? Yes there's a risk attached, but how much worse could it have been?
Surely you should have plead Not Guilty, especially if you could show the police statement was incorrect.
Rightly or wrongly my brief advised me to plead guilty. He stated that the fine was likely to be much higher, and there was the possibility of community service and a longer ban if they reached a guilty verdict after I'd pleaded 'not'. It became more about damage limitation, and about minimising the disruption to my family. I don't know if I made the right decision - but the choice is made now, so speculation is largely irrelevant
Regarding the 'learn how to overtake properly' comments. I've practised the correct method of overtaking for quite a few years, but must confess to lapsing when the car in question doesn't have the power to complete the overtake the 'proper' way. It was a 1.6 MX5, nippy but hardly fast.
I know it's not a good idea to rush up behind, but (wrongly) felt it outweighed the risks of overtaking more slowly. I now know that to be very wrong, and paid the price. I will not be doing it again, and unless I'm in the right car at the right place I will not consider an overtake. And even when the circumstances are in place for a safe overtake I'm much more likely to question if there is really any need to get past the car at all.
I've taken all the comments everyone's made on board, and while some have been genuinely useful and thought provoking, others have been 'baiting' in their tone. For those of you who have failed to grasp the basics of tuition - offering comments constructively is far more beneficial than offering the same comments critically.
Hopefully the next person who comes on here who you feel needs 'help' recieves more in the way of positive encouragement and less unnecessarily negative preaching...
Dan
Dan
redline dan said:Dan, leaving aside ones point of view, the title of your post asks for this doesn't it? After all, it doesn't exactly say "consolation required". Rich...
Hopefully the next person who comes on here who you feel needs 'help' recieves more in the way of positive encouragement and less unnecessarily negative preaching...Dan
RichB said:
Hopefully the next person who comes on here who you feel needs 'help' recieves more in the way of positive encouragement and less unnecessarily negative preaching...Dan
Dan, leaving aside ones point of view, the title of your post asks for this doesn't it? After all, it doesn't exactly say "consolation required". Rich...
I quite agree. The thread title asks 'DID I DESERVE TO GET BANNED'
The following opinions arrived.
If you wanted sympathetic posts, the title shuld have been different (although I'm not so sure you wouldn't have received similar answers from some
).gone said:
If you wanted sympathetic posts, the title shuld have been different.
Who's chasing sympathy? I believe "Did I deserve to get banned?" elicits a "yes you did!" or a "no you didn't" response. If you believe that I did deserve to get banned and that I should seek further training/guidance/spiritual healing then by all menas comment - But aggressively worded comments from the holier than thou brigade are not going to have the same degress of usefulness as constructive comments, that's all.
Dan
"Yes you did" IMHO.
I couldn't, completely and utterly, 100% guarantee that it'll never happen to me though, despite considering myself a safe driver.
Prison I'd have though harsh, not a driving ban. Considering the very real accident, it seems a lot more reasonable (to me) than banning someone short term (as does happen) for, say, driving >30mph over the motorway limit in no traffic, or longer term for doing the same thing a small handful of times with no other consequences whatsoever.
I couldn't, completely and utterly, 100% guarantee that it'll never happen to me though, despite considering myself a safe driver.
Prison I'd have though harsh, not a driving ban. Considering the very real accident, it seems a lot more reasonable (to me) than banning someone short term (as does happen) for, say, driving >30mph over the motorway limit in no traffic, or longer term for doing the same thing a small handful of times with no other consequences whatsoever.
redline dan said:
Regarding the 'learn how to overtake properly' comments. I've practised the correct method of overtaking for quite a few years, but must confess to lapsing when the car in question doesn't have the power to complete the overtake the 'proper' way. It was a 1.6 MX5, nippy but hardly fast.
I know it's not a good idea to rush up behind, but (wrongly) felt it outweighed the risks of overtaking more slowly. I now know that to be very wrong, and paid the price.
The reason for my replies is that to me it was "obvious" that the critical foundation error was the technique employed.
You didn't mention the possibility until now.
What are we supposed to think? I for one was genuinely trying to help and based my response accurately on the information presented.
I think Dan has a raised a good point regarding the correct overtaking method.
Most modern cars a re quite capable of 100+ MPH without to much trouble but its in gear acceleration that counts when overtaking, especially if you are to overtake in the correct manner.
I think that all cars should have an automatic Nitrous system for full overboost when overtaking, Imagine the increase in road safety with everbody completing their overtaking manouveres in the shortest possible time.
Most modern cars a re quite capable of 100+ MPH without to much trouble but its in gear acceleration that counts when overtaking, especially if you are to overtake in the correct manner.
I think that all cars should have an automatic Nitrous system for full overboost when overtaking, Imagine the increase in road safety with everbody completing their overtaking manouveres in the shortest possible time.
redline dan said:
Why do you say you couldn't afford not to? Yes there's a risk attached, but how much worse could it have been?
Surely you should have plead Not Guilty, especially if you could show the police statement was incorrect.
Rightly or wrongly my brief advised me to plead guilty. He stated that the fine was likely to be much higher, and there was the possibility of community service and a longer ban if they reached a guilty verdict after I'd pleaded 'not'. It became more about damage limitation, and about minimising the disruption to my family. I don't know if I made the right decision - but the choice is made now, so speculation is largely irrelevant
Regarding the 'learn how to overtake properly' comments. I've practised the correct method of overtaking for quite a few years, but must confess to lapsing when the car in question doesn't have the power to complete the overtake the 'proper' way. It was a 1.6 MX5, nippy but hardly fast.
I know it's not a good idea to rush up behind, but (wrongly) felt it outweighed the risks of overtaking more slowly. I now know that to be very wrong, and paid the price. I will not be doing it again, and unless I'm in the right car at the right place I will not consider an overtake. And even when the circumstances are in place for a safe overtake I'm much more likely to question if there is really any need to get past the car at all.
I've taken all the comments everyone's made on board, and while some have been genuinely useful and thought provoking, others have been 'baiting' in their tone. For those of you who have failed to grasp the basics of tuition - offering comments constructively is far more beneficial than offering the same comments critically.
Hopefully the next person who comes on here who you feel needs 'help' recieves more in the way of positive encouragement and less unnecessarily negative preaching...
Dan
Dan
Welcome to PH Dan!!
Read this topic with some enthusiasm. The diversity of comments is wide. I thought the original question was "Did I deserve this ban ?". Yet we seem to be criticizing Dan's ability to drive. I may be a member of IAM but do on no account believe I can judge Dan's driving. From what he say's he made an error, that's thing that makes us human. He probably had local knowledge of the area and had done this before. No one here ever made a non-fatal mistake because they were confident of the road ahead due to familiarity?
Do I think he got what deserved? Yes partially, he turned a convertible over and luckily did not die, it affected his wife and child as well. Did he deserve to lose his license for 12 months? Definitely not. The only people he hurt were himself and family. Can't see why a judge could not see how he had already paid dearly for his human error.
Dan you sound like a very capable driver with the experience you say you have. I have never been on a skidpan or been taught to drive at high speeds, I have done the IAM course & test which is a great experience and very useful. It also made me realize how crap a driver I was, I still keep learning. I used to travel 184 mile a day round trip which meant driving along the A590 in Cumbria. Over 18 months I attained 6 points (2 x SP30's), the last 3 I was caught with VASCAR, which to this day I don’t believe, was correct. This was before I did the IAM training. However I can't thank the Cumbria traffic cops enough for stopping me, issuing the points and giving me a thorough b********g.
I wonder to this day what I might have done had I not got this last 3 points (it was in a Volvo 340, which isn’t safe at any speed in the wet!). The point I am making is that this made me do the IAM training and test as I realised I needed tuition. £70 including Roadcraft was extremely cheap. You should really consider this Dan.
As far as the ban I will tell you why I think it is an injustice. Last November my wife was approaching a set of traffic lights on red in my old Honda Accord, a JP was following her on a dual carriage way with a 70mph limit. As she was 100 yards from the lights she started to speed up from about 30mph as they went to green (she had been prepared to stop). As she went through the lights a transit van appeared right across her path blatantly through a red right filter from the opposite carriageway. She hit him in the side and wrote my Accord off. She was badly shaken, has had treatment for shoulder pain and we are still awaiting compensation. The Driver had had a drink the police were called, he had two bald tyres was over the limit on a breathalyser at the scene. About an hour and a half later was tested at the police station and found to be just under the limit.
He never told his insurance company. He never produced documents. We went to court in May this year he never turned up, a warrant for his arrest was issued. He had missed previous court dates. Point is that he was charged with WDC and not producing (something like that). I was told if they ever caught him he might be imprisoned, partially due to not attending court I think. We had the J of P and another driver (behind the van) who saw the red light as witnesses. He ran a red light nearly killed my wife, wrote my car off and would of got Driving Without Due Care and attention (if he'd bother to produce and accept the charge). He said apparently the lights were on green. He possibly (due to his incapacitated state) saw the green light for straight ahead and thought it was a green filter light.
Dan gets 12 months for scaring the hell out of himself and wrecking his wife's car. Glad you survived Dan and am sorry you got 12 months, but do consider the advanced training it really is well worth it. Apart from the few traffic cops on this topic I don't believe anyone else is really qualified to judge you just because they are IAM or Rospa!!
I know someone is going to say “What if your wife was coming the other way?”. The driver and his car in Dan’s case were OK and Dan was not drunk. Why is Dan’s case treated harsher than the idiot that caused damage to my wife and my car?
>> Edited by toolman on Friday 5th November 12:54
>> Edited by toolman on Friday 5th November 13:17
Do I think he got what deserved? Yes partially, he turned a convertible over and luckily did not die, it affected his wife and child as well. Did he deserve to lose his license for 12 months? Definitely not. The only people he hurt were himself and family. Can't see why a judge could not see how he had already paid dearly for his human error.
Dan you sound like a very capable driver with the experience you say you have. I have never been on a skidpan or been taught to drive at high speeds, I have done the IAM course & test which is a great experience and very useful. It also made me realize how crap a driver I was, I still keep learning. I used to travel 184 mile a day round trip which meant driving along the A590 in Cumbria. Over 18 months I attained 6 points (2 x SP30's), the last 3 I was caught with VASCAR, which to this day I don’t believe, was correct. This was before I did the IAM training. However I can't thank the Cumbria traffic cops enough for stopping me, issuing the points and giving me a thorough b********g.
I wonder to this day what I might have done had I not got this last 3 points (it was in a Volvo 340, which isn’t safe at any speed in the wet!). The point I am making is that this made me do the IAM training and test as I realised I needed tuition. £70 including Roadcraft was extremely cheap. You should really consider this Dan.
As far as the ban I will tell you why I think it is an injustice. Last November my wife was approaching a set of traffic lights on red in my old Honda Accord, a JP was following her on a dual carriage way with a 70mph limit. As she was 100 yards from the lights she started to speed up from about 30mph as they went to green (she had been prepared to stop). As she went through the lights a transit van appeared right across her path blatantly through a red right filter from the opposite carriageway. She hit him in the side and wrote my Accord off. She was badly shaken, has had treatment for shoulder pain and we are still awaiting compensation. The Driver had had a drink the police were called, he had two bald tyres was over the limit on a breathalyser at the scene. About an hour and a half later was tested at the police station and found to be just under the limit.
He never told his insurance company. He never produced documents. We went to court in May this year he never turned up, a warrant for his arrest was issued. He had missed previous court dates. Point is that he was charged with WDC and not producing (something like that). I was told if they ever caught him he might be imprisoned, partially due to not attending court I think. We had the J of P and another driver (behind the van) who saw the red light as witnesses. He ran a red light nearly killed my wife, wrote my car off and would of got Driving Without Due Care and attention (if he'd bother to produce and accept the charge). He said apparently the lights were on green. He possibly (due to his incapacitated state) saw the green light for straight ahead and thought it was a green filter light.
Dan gets 12 months for scaring the hell out of himself and wrecking his wife's car. Glad you survived Dan and am sorry you got 12 months, but do consider the advanced training it really is well worth it. Apart from the few traffic cops on this topic I don't believe anyone else is really qualified to judge you just because they are IAM or Rospa!!
I know someone is going to say “What if your wife was coming the other way?”. The driver and his car in Dan’s case were OK and Dan was not drunk. Why is Dan’s case treated harsher than the idiot that caused damage to my wife and my car?
>> Edited by toolman on Friday 5th November 12:54
>> Edited by toolman on Friday 5th November 13:17
SteveCallaghan said:
I would welcome Dan back to the roads after 12 months as the ban seems to have done the job. Do we really think that a slapped wrist or a £200 fine would have done the same? I don't think so.
I'm pretty sure rolling a 'vert at speed will do more for the "never do that again" thoughts than any ban ever will.....
Jeez, I'm reminded why my car has a roof....
As for the sentance, it does seem a little disproportionate.
And yes, I've overtaken (in Cumbria actually) in the dark and had an oncoming car come out of a dip that I simply didn't see.
It wasn't close, and I had ample room to brake and abort, but only because reading articles on PH had taught me to employ the correct overtaking method.
ca092003 said:
ca092003 said:
So let's not address the cause of the problem (i.e. bad driving) but just focus on how unfair it is that Dan got banned.
Bad driving? Know that for sure do you, you were there and you saw it all?
>> Edited by Plotloss on Thursday 4th November 14:46
I think if you re-read Dan's post, you will see that when it comes to executing that particular overtake, it *was* bad driving.
You really are the biggest plonker on this site aren't you.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff