Drunk cyclist

redvee

From Bristol Evening Post:

CRASH CYCLIST: 'I WAS DRUNK'
A Cyclist who peddled through a stop sign without stopping and crashed head-on with a Mercedes car, causing damage estimated at £2,000, admitted he was drunk at the time.Terry Hurse went head-first over the handlebars of his bike and landed on the bonnet of the car before smashing into the windscreen.

North Avon magistrates were told the Mercedes needed a new bonnet, windscreen and other repairs to the bumper, number plate and lights which totalled £2,000.

Hurse, 20, of Ledbury Road, Fishponds, admitted a charge of careless cycling when he appeared before the court at Yate.

Prosecutor Jeremy Oliver said the taxi driver at the wheel of the Mercedes was driving along Downend Road and was approaching Castle Road at about 7pm on the evening of July 1 when the collision happened. In his statement to police the taxi driver said: "I suddenly saw the cyclist shoot out in front of me. His head hit the windscreen and he smashed it.

"In my opinion the cyclist never even looked to see if there was any traffic ahead."

Hurse was knocked unconscious by the impact of the collision and was taken to Frenchay Hospital with a head injury.

Hurse told the court: "I had been to the pub on the day because it was my birthday and I admitted at the time I had had too much to drink and I was drunk.

"I don't remember the crash or much else about that day to be honest.

"I was released from hospital the next day but had to be readmitted because I was suffering from concussion.

"I had about six weeks off work all in all because I had damaged my arm as well."

The court was told the taxi driver had to pay a £500 excess payment on his insurance policy to cover the damage to his vehicle.

The magistrates ordered Hurse to pay £500 compensation to the Mercedes owner and pay £35 towards the court's legal costs.

No separate penalty was imposed by the magistrates for the charge of careless cycling.

bryanm

If a cyclist damaged my car, he'd be paying the full bill - not just the excess!

spen666

bryanm wrote:

If a cyclist damaged my car, he'd be paying the full bill - not just the excess!

The Magistrates have no power to award anything other than the excess payment.

The car driver can recover the cost of the repairs in a civil court. this was a criminal case in a criminal court

pneumatic

I'm surprised they didn't do him for careless cycling.

Imagine if the circumstances had been reversed. Drunk taxi driver runs red light and hits cyclist. This thread would be about 12 pages long with outraged contributors.

Somewhere out there on the interweb, I suspect extremist petrolheads are reinforcing their hatred of us as they type.

spen666

pneumatic wrote:

I'm surprised they didn't do him for careless cycling.

Imagine if the circumstances had been reversed. Drunk taxi driver runs red light and hits cyclist. This thread would be about 12 pages long with outraged contributors.

Somewhere out there on the interweb, I suspect extremist petrolheads are reinforcing their hatred of us as they type.

Erm- I have a sneaking feeling they did do him for this. If you read the report quoted there is a line that says...

Hurse, 20, of Ledbury Road, Fishponds, admitted a charge of careless cycling when he appeared before the court at Yate.

That makes me think the prosecutor may have considered a charge of carelss driving might be appropriate
:oops: :oops: :oops:

pneumatic

redvee wrote:

From Bristol Evening Post:

CRASH CYCLIST: 'I WAS DRUNK'

No separate penalty was imposed by the magistrates for the charge of careless cycling.

I was referring to that bit. Even if he admitted to it, he seems not to have been penalised for that particular offence, just for the damage he caused.

That said, I am no legal eagle!

spen666

pneumatic wrote:

redvee wrote:

From Bristol Evening Post:

CRASH CYCLIST: 'I WAS DRUNK'

No separate penalty was imposed by the magistrates for the charge of careless cycling.

I was referring to that bit. Even if he admitted to it, he seems not to have been penalised for that particular offence, just for the damage he caused.

That said, I am no legal eagle!

Right, I see your confusion.


He was "done for" careless cycling.

When a court sentence someone that have to take into account the totality of the sentence. Here they felt £500 was the toitality of the sentence- so as compensation comes first, it was that it was ordered against.

If damage was say £200, then it could have been say £300 fine for careless cycling & £200 compensation to injured party.

It is wrong to take the fine before compensation as that means victim loses out to the state.

He WAS convicted it seems of one offence- namely careless cycling. A compensation order on its own can be the penalty for an offence