13yr old killed in F50
Discussion
TTmonkey said:
The seat belts law bit is interesting. I raised this earlier in the thread and the response was that it was a minor traffic issue, 3 points and a fine.
But that's punishment for being caught by the police not wearing a seatbelt. Its not for being in charge of a vehicle in which a young passenger dies.
In the same way that doing 45mph in a 30 limit if caught would be points, a fine and a slap on the wrist.But that's punishment for being caught by the police not wearing a seatbelt. Its not for being in charge of a vehicle in which a young passenger dies.
If you're doing 45mph and mow someone down because you're going too fast to be able to stop, and they subsequently die, then your speed will go against you in a death by careless driving charge, even though it might have been the pedestrian that stepped out in front of you.
TooMany2cvs said:
...to which the public has access. If this was behind gates, without any expectation of general public access, then that probably wouldn't apply...
Wrong.One of the neighbouring firms on our industrial estate had a fork lift accident. Fortunately, the guy was okay, but an ambulance had to attend (no one left rude notes on it) and take him to A&E.
Because the accident was with a motorised vehicle, and even though the forklift was not on the road, or road registered, the police had to attend to make a report. There was no case for them to prosecute, but it had to be done even though everything happened on private land, because it was classed as a vehicle accident and was therefore 'reportable'.
Digga said:
TooMany2cvs said:
...to which the public has access. If this was behind gates, without any expectation of general public access, then that probably wouldn't apply...
Wrong.One of the neighbouring firms on our industrial estate had a fork lift accident. Fortunately, the guy was okay, but an ambulance had to attend (no one left rude notes on it) and take him to A&E.
Because the accident was with a motorised vehicle, and even though the forklift was not on the road, or road registered, the police had to attend to make a report. There was no case for them to prosecute, but it had to be done even though everything happened on private land, because it was classed as a vehicle accident and was therefore 'reportable'.
Digga said:
TooMany2cvs said:
...to which the public has access. If this was behind gates, without any expectation of general public access, then that probably wouldn't apply...
Wrong.One of the neighbouring firms on our industrial estate had a fork lift accident. Fortunately, the guy was okay, but an ambulance had to attend (no one left rude notes on it) and take him to A&E.
Because the accident was with a motorised vehicle, and even though the forklift was not on the road, or road registered, the police had to attend to make a report. There was no case for them to prosecute, but it had to be done even though everything happened on private land, because it was classed as a vehicle accident and was therefore 'reportable'.
tigerkoi said:
Makes sense (or did) as an adjacent business consideration for Girardo. Somewhere to keep the stock of cars (particularly private client sales) rather than in a pokey Victorian converted shopfront for Girardo & Co. My understanding though is Max isn’t directly involved with the business anymore and has listed out. Happy to be corrected.
The whole story is a depressing read though isn’t it? A cautionary tale.
Everyone was probably enjoying a lovely August afternoon. A young lad enraptured. A mother and her partner happy to see the kid enjoying himself. A man with a niche but sturdy business merrily ready to put a deeper smile on the lad’s face. Cobden’s dad bouncing friendly conversation around as they all stood by and listened to the sound of a lovely car starting up.
How things can go so wrong, so quickly.
I can’t speculate on Cobden’s defence. But in his heart of hearts if he knows it wasn’t down to any mechanical issue with the F50, then the best thing he could do is just say he made a mistake. If that’s the case. A (brief) custodial, and he’ll be back with his family, picking up the remnants of his business whilst he’s still a young man. It’ll be easier to look in the mirror as the years go by, as much as the wish to turn the clock back every single day doesn’t dissipate.
No one could have envisaged a summers afternoon ending in utter disaster from such innocuous beginnings. But it did.
As John Bradford may have said, “....there but for the grace of God...”
My thoughts exactly. The whole story is a depressing read though isn’t it? A cautionary tale.
Everyone was probably enjoying a lovely August afternoon. A young lad enraptured. A mother and her partner happy to see the kid enjoying himself. A man with a niche but sturdy business merrily ready to put a deeper smile on the lad’s face. Cobden’s dad bouncing friendly conversation around as they all stood by and listened to the sound of a lovely car starting up.
How things can go so wrong, so quickly.
I can’t speculate on Cobden’s defence. But in his heart of hearts if he knows it wasn’t down to any mechanical issue with the F50, then the best thing he could do is just say he made a mistake. If that’s the case. A (brief) custodial, and he’ll be back with his family, picking up the remnants of his business whilst he’s still a young man. It’ll be easier to look in the mirror as the years go by, as much as the wish to turn the clock back every single day doesn’t dissipate.
No one could have envisaged a summers afternoon ending in utter disaster from such innocuous beginnings. But it did.
As John Bradford may have said, “....there but for the grace of God...”
A tragic accident and the outcome for all concerned is beyond terrible.
TooMany2cvs said:
Digga said:
TooMany2cvs said:
...to which the public has access. If this was behind gates, without any expectation of general public access, then that probably wouldn't apply...
Wrong.One of the neighbouring firms on our industrial estate had a fork lift accident. Fortunately, the guy was okay, but an ambulance had to attend (no one left rude notes on it) and take him to A&E.
Because the accident was with a motorised vehicle, and even though the forklift was not on the road, or road registered, the police had to attend to make a report. There was no case for them to prosecute, but it had to be done even though everything happened on private land, because it was classed as a vehicle accident and was therefore 'reportable'.
Dan_1981 said:
Digga said:
TooMany2cvs said:
...to which the public has access. If this was behind gates, without any expectation of general public access, then that probably wouldn't apply...
Wrong.One of the neighbouring firms on our industrial estate had a fork lift accident. Fortunately, the guy was okay, but an ambulance had to attend (no one left rude notes on it) and take him to A&E.
Because the accident was with a motorised vehicle, and even though the forklift was not on the road, or road registered, the police had to attend to make a report. There was no case for them to prosecute, but it had to be done even though everything happened on private land, because it was classed as a vehicle accident and was therefore 'reportable'.
Example from HSE site.
Q. Two of our staff received major injuries when one, driving our delivery truck, collided with a lift truck the other was driving. The accident happened on the private road around our site. Is this reportable?
A. Yes. The exemption for reporting road traffic accidents only applies to vehicles on a ‘road’, as defined in s192 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. If the site road is genuinely ‘private’, and the public do not normally have access, it is not within this definition and you must report the accident.
So has to be reported under RIDDOR, if it was on a public accessible road, RIDDOR doesn't apply and the RTA does.
When I'm shift manager at our station, I'm responsible for the whole site and we have an inch thick book on the various reporting requirements and bodies things need to be reported to, it's a nightmare.
Only had to report to the environment agency so far, fingers crossed.
Edited by Gary C on Wednesday 21st February 12:23
Edited by Gary C on Wednesday 21st February 12:26
Edited by Gary C on Wednesday 21st February 12:29
Vaud said:
Galsia said:
Was the F50 written off or rebuilt?
Given their scarcity, like a McLaren F1 I would guess that it would take a lot to write off.TooMany2cvs said:
A fatality would normally be straight to Cat A, do not pass go, do not even look at rebuild value - but I suspect that's for the future, since Ruction's almost certainly bob-on.
Where is that defined? I thought a Cat A was " a car cannot return to the road, even if it’s been repaired. The damage is so severe that the car must be crushed, and not even parts can be salvaged."fblm said:
TooMany2cvs said:
A fatality would normally be straight to Cat A, do not pass go, do not even look at rebuild value....
There are a number of rebuilt 'death crash' cars kicking about. Presumably at these values the wreck is exported, rebuilt and re-registered abroad.Vaud said:
fblm said:
TooMany2cvs said:
A fatality would normally be straight to Cat A, do not pass go, do not even look at rebuild value....
There are a number of rebuilt 'death crash' cars kicking about. Presumably at these values the wreck is exported, rebuilt and re-registered abroad.For your run of the mill car the insurer would just plough on but for a car like that there would likely be some serious discussion between the owners and the insurers as to how they deal with the vehicle if it's deemed repairable. There are many different things to consider in this case in addition to the vehicle being a painful reminder to the family of their sons death, it's not difficult to imagine if the car was to return to the road that it may cross their path in the future as these vehicles become more valuable and coveted (news stories, motoring forums etc)
Granted the plates could change and it would be no different to any other red F50..
fblm said:
ZOLLAR said:
...likely be some serious discussion between the owners and the insurers as to how they deal with the vehicle if it's deemed repairable.
Given the fatality what is there to discuss other than cash? The owner is hardly going to accept a repair. As I said though, this isn't a run of the mill type vehicle so it's entirely plausible the insurer will agree to write it off but it's not such a black and white decision and if there the repair cost is substantially less than the vehicle it's possible a repair could go ahead.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff