Roundabouts: Driving without due care and attention?
Discussion
Question: Driving fast, below the speed limit, around an empty roundabout, perhaps even inducing a slight drift. Is that driving without due care and attention if you have the car under control?
Copied from the CPS website:
Driving without due care and attention
The offence of driving without due care and attention (careless driving) under section 3 of the RTA 1988 is committed when the defendants driving falls below the standard expected of a competent and careful driver - section 3ZA(2) of the RTA 1988.
The maximum penalty is a level 5 fine. The court must also either endorse the drivers licence with between 3 and 9 penalty points (unless there are "special reasons" not to do so), or impose disqualification for a fixed period and/or until a driving test has been passed.
In determining what is to be expected of a competent and careful driver, the prosecutor must take into account not only the circumstances of which the driver could be expected to be aware, but also any circumstances shown to have been within the drivers knowledge.
The test of whether the standard of driving has fallen below the required standard is objective. It applies both when the manner of driving in question is deliberate and when it occurs as a result of incompetence, inadvertence or inexperience.
So, anyone had experience of this?
Copied from the CPS website:
Driving without due care and attention
The offence of driving without due care and attention (careless driving) under section 3 of the RTA 1988 is committed when the defendants driving falls below the standard expected of a competent and careful driver - section 3ZA(2) of the RTA 1988.
The maximum penalty is a level 5 fine. The court must also either endorse the drivers licence with between 3 and 9 penalty points (unless there are "special reasons" not to do so), or impose disqualification for a fixed period and/or until a driving test has been passed.
In determining what is to be expected of a competent and careful driver, the prosecutor must take into account not only the circumstances of which the driver could be expected to be aware, but also any circumstances shown to have been within the drivers knowledge.
The test of whether the standard of driving has fallen below the required standard is objective. It applies both when the manner of driving in question is deliberate and when it occurs as a result of incompetence, inadvertence or inexperience.
So, anyone had experience of this?
Not for a roundabout, but something similarish. Only with the police and not a judge
Last year someone women reported me to the police for my driving.
The police came around about 4 weeks later to ask me about the event. They put the words "so you were driving without due care and attention" into my mouth about 10 times. I denied each time and said exactly that about no where near falling under the expectations of a competent driver. In fact, it was quite the opposite and I had a witness report, maps and diagrams of the event, and my description of it all. I argued if anything, I was paying far more attention, which my evidence suggests.
They couldn't give a damm to be fair, as had already made their minds up. However, without any evidence or a confession they tried to force, they couldn't charge me with it. Instead, they just issued a section 59 against me as there's no appeal; although it is like the micky mouse award for motoring crime (which is designed for anti social behaviour driving i.e. loud exhausts).
It's a hard one to argue unless the law clearly depicts what a competent and careful driver is.
Last year someone women reported me to the police for my driving.
The police came around about 4 weeks later to ask me about the event. They put the words "so you were driving without due care and attention" into my mouth about 10 times. I denied each time and said exactly that about no where near falling under the expectations of a competent driver. In fact, it was quite the opposite and I had a witness report, maps and diagrams of the event, and my description of it all. I argued if anything, I was paying far more attention, which my evidence suggests.
They couldn't give a damm to be fair, as had already made their minds up. However, without any evidence or a confession they tried to force, they couldn't charge me with it. Instead, they just issued a section 59 against me as there's no appeal; although it is like the micky mouse award for motoring crime (which is designed for anti social behaviour driving i.e. loud exhausts).
It's a hard one to argue unless the law clearly depicts what a competent and careful driver is.
Edited by Snollygoster on Monday 29th September 19:16
OK, so forget the drift. You can still be very rapid around a roundabout without the drift and still be way under the speed limit. There seem to be numerous lawyer website advertising that this is a highly contestable area so it certainly seems worth being informed if plod decides to pressure you into agreeing with their "undue care and attention" accusation.
In the rather (paraphrased) opinion of the magistrate who found me not guilty of DWDCA (for "pulling a wheelie" on a bike), he comparing it to the back end of a powerful rwd car stepping out and the driver controlling it and bringing it back into line/control. In his mind that was not DWDCA but doing it on purpose would be.
Fastdruid said:
In the rather (paraphrased) opinion of the magistrate who found me not guilty of DWDCA (for "pulling a wheelie" on a bike), he comparing it to the back end of a powerful rwd car stepping out and the driver controlling it and bringing it back into line/control. In his mind that was not DWDCA but doing it on purpose would be.
For me though, I would argue that the former of the judges example is worse, because it almost suggest the driver couldn't initially handle the power of the RWD car.At least the latter knew intentionally what he was doing, and thus one would hope would have more control as wasn't caught drifting unexpectedly.
Snollygoster said:
Fastdruid said:
In the rather (paraphrased) opinion of the magistrate who found me not guilty of DWDCA (for "pulling a wheelie" on a bike), he comparing it to the back end of a powerful rwd car stepping out and the driver controlling it and bringing it back into line/control. In his mind that was not DWDCA but doing it on purpose would be.
For me though, I would argue that the former of the judges example is worse, because it almost suggest the driver couldn't initially handle the power of the RWD car.At least the latter knew intentionally what he was doing, and thus one would hope would have more control as wasn't expected.
The test is not "Are you a driving god able to handle a powerful RWD car?" It's have you done something that a safe and competent driver would consider "wrong".
Fastdruid said:
Really? You have never ever ever had your 235i step out unless planned? Try driving it mid-winter with the traction control turned off (actually probably even turned on).
The test is not "Are you a driving god able to handle a powerful RWD car?" It's have you done something that a safe and competent driver would consider "wrong".
The test is not "Are you a driving god able to handle a powerful RWD car?" It's have you done something that a safe and competent driver would consider "wrong".
Only 2 months old. Never had a RWD in the winter so only time will tell.Don't get me wrong, I don't think example A is a case of DWDCA, but if you're going to attempt a manoeuvre knowingly full well what you plan to do, I would have said you are paying attention, rather than going round a roundabout listening the radio minding you own business and suddenly you have to correct it.
And again, it comes down to the ambiguous of what is deemed as "wrong". Just out of curiosity, was the wheelie intentionally and controlled? If so, that would be similar to example B, but is fine as was controlled.
I was stopped for similar.
I saw the Police car and slowed to 30 (It's a dual carriageway that should be a 50 IMO) I then went around the island at 30 too.
Cue the blue lights.
I pointed out that I wasn't speeding
He said it was a MAXIMUM and that it wasn't appropriate for the island
He mentioned DWDCAA and I pointed out that as I had got around the island without an issue and hadn't affected any other drivers how could it possibly be an offence.
He gave up and drove off.
I saw the Police car and slowed to 30 (It's a dual carriageway that should be a 50 IMO) I then went around the island at 30 too.
Cue the blue lights.
I pointed out that I wasn't speeding
He said it was a MAXIMUM and that it wasn't appropriate for the island
He mentioned DWDCAA and I pointed out that as I had got around the island without an issue and hadn't affected any other drivers how could it possibly be an offence.
He gave up and drove off.
Snollygoster said:
Only 2 months old. Never had a RWD in the winter so only time will tell.Don't get me wrong, I don't think example A is a case of DWDCA, but if you're going to attempt a manoeuvre knowingly full well what you plan to do, I would have said you are paying attention, rather than going round a roundabout listening the radio minding you own business and suddenly you have to correct it.
And again, it comes down to the ambiguous of what is deemed as "wrong". Just out of curiosity, was the wheelie intentionally and controlled? If so, that would be similar to example B, but is fine as was controlled.
Snollygoster said:
Only 2 months old. Never had a RWD in the winter so only time will tell.
I had the RX-8 with the traction control left fully on step out on part throttle while driving carefully many times. While everyone says the RX-8 has no torque they're wrong but regardless the 235i has much more torque.
Snollygoster said:
Don't get me wrong, I don't think example A is a case of DWDCA, but if you're going to attempt a manoeuvre knowingly full well what you plan to do, I would have said you are paying attention, rather than going round a roundabout listening the radio minding you own business and suddenly you have to correct it.
Again that's not the "test", it's not about planning to do something or how skilful you are it's that the standard of driving falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.A competent and careful driver may be caught out by road conditions causing the tail of the car to step out and then regain control.
A competent and careful driver does not plan to "drift".
Snollygoster said:
Instead, they just issued a section 59 against me as there's no appeal; although it is like the micky mouse award for motoring crime (which is designed for anti social behaviour driving i.e. loud exhausts).
It's not very micky mouse when they decide that you've breached that s59 - and impound the car.hmmm this is a very subjective subject.
If one chooses to go round the occasional roundabout enthusiastically surely it is quite the opposite to DWODCAA.
i.e if you feel there may be a chance that you may be approaching the limit of adhesion round a bend (this could be 23mph in a 1991 nissan micra, or 55 mph round the same bend in something more exotic ) then isnt the following true and could be argued in court as follows:
1. Due care. Compared to the growing masses of people who use the phone, text, look at navigation etc, if you compared the level of care and awareness to these other road user activities it would be at a maximum versus perhaps 50%?
2. Attention. Again, surely a driver is never more attentive when the risk to either them-self, vehicle and other road users is increasing. Something according to the highway code we should do as speed increases.
I have asked this question to an officer friend of mine. I am currently waiting for his reply to my argument and will report back when I know. My view is that a logical magistrate may just sometimes find in favour of the enthusiastic driver....
Basically be sensible and take care of others, yourself and know the limits of your vehicle... i feel this one is going to run for a while!
If one chooses to go round the occasional roundabout enthusiastically surely it is quite the opposite to DWODCAA.
i.e if you feel there may be a chance that you may be approaching the limit of adhesion round a bend (this could be 23mph in a 1991 nissan micra, or 55 mph round the same bend in something more exotic ) then isnt the following true and could be argued in court as follows:
1. Due care. Compared to the growing masses of people who use the phone, text, look at navigation etc, if you compared the level of care and awareness to these other road user activities it would be at a maximum versus perhaps 50%?
2. Attention. Again, surely a driver is never more attentive when the risk to either them-self, vehicle and other road users is increasing. Something according to the highway code we should do as speed increases.
I have asked this question to an officer friend of mine. I am currently waiting for his reply to my argument and will report back when I know. My view is that a logical magistrate may just sometimes find in favour of the enthusiastic driver....
Basically be sensible and take care of others, yourself and know the limits of your vehicle... i feel this one is going to run for a while!
Clearly drifting a car around a roundabout requires a certain level of competence. Easily equal to or better than a reasonably competent driver.
Would anyone expect drifting round a roundabout from a reasonable careful driver though? No. A careful driver would call you a d
head for that.
Would anyone expect drifting round a roundabout from a reasonable careful driver though? No. A careful driver would call you a d
head for that.chutneymunch said:
hmmm this is a very subjective subject.
If one chooses to go round the occasional roundabout enthusiastically surely it is quite the opposite to DWODCAA.
i.e if you feel there may be a chance that you may be approaching the limit of adhesion round a bend (this could be 23mph in a 1991 nissan micra, or 55 mph round the same bend in something more exotic ) then isnt the following true and could be argued in court as follows:
1. Due care. Compared to the growing masses of people who use the phone, text, look at navigation etc, if you compared the level of care and awareness to these other road user activities it would be at a maximum versus perhaps 50%?
2. Attention. Again, surely a driver is never more attentive when the risk to either them-self, vehicle and other road users is increasing. Something according to the highway code we should do as speed increases.
I have asked this question to an officer friend of mine. I am currently waiting for his reply to my argument and will report back when I know. My view is that a logical magistrate may just sometimes find in favour of the enthusiastic driver....
Basically be sensible and take care of others, yourself and know the limits of your vehicle... i feel this one is going to run for a while!
I don't think the fact that some people do even more careless things vindicates drifting round roundabouts. They'd all fail the careful driver test. If one chooses to go round the occasional roundabout enthusiastically surely it is quite the opposite to DWODCAA.
i.e if you feel there may be a chance that you may be approaching the limit of adhesion round a bend (this could be 23mph in a 1991 nissan micra, or 55 mph round the same bend in something more exotic ) then isnt the following true and could be argued in court as follows:
1. Due care. Compared to the growing masses of people who use the phone, text, look at navigation etc, if you compared the level of care and awareness to these other road user activities it would be at a maximum versus perhaps 50%?
2. Attention. Again, surely a driver is never more attentive when the risk to either them-self, vehicle and other road users is increasing. Something according to the highway code we should do as speed increases.
I have asked this question to an officer friend of mine. I am currently waiting for his reply to my argument and will report back when I know. My view is that a logical magistrate may just sometimes find in favour of the enthusiastic driver....
Basically be sensible and take care of others, yourself and know the limits of your vehicle... i feel this one is going to run for a while!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff