Accident car and child riding on pavement, opinions & le

Beechy1

I went for a ride today with my 6 year old on his bike and 3 year old in the child seat. It was nearly all on cycle paths but there is a stretch of busy connecting road where I chose to ride slowly on the pavement. (I reasoned it was safer for my family but I know we should have got off and walked here, and will next time.) On this stretch my six year old was hit by a car coming out of a driveway.

He was okay, not hurt, only a bit shocked. After making sure my boy was okay I was amazed to find the driver ignoring us, after she clearly saw what had happened. She made no attempt to communicate with us and pulled away once the road was clear.

It was an unfortunate accident but what incenses me is that she effectively failed to stop. I’ll happily pay a £30 fixed penalty for riding on the pavement but should I bother reporting the incident? I’m pretty sure I won’t as I don’t think its worth the hassle and aggravation but am interested in others’ opinions, especially from a legal point of view.

Thanks in advance.

suzyb

Report it. I'm sure the police will be more interested in her failing to stop than you cycling along a pavement with your two kids. And if they aren't I'd be making sure the press knew about it.

She hit a kid ffs. Regardless of whether you (or a hospitals worth or doctors) were there to make sure he was OK she should have stopped.

Slightly ironic though, you cycle along the pavement to be safer and your kid ends up getting hit anyway.

Tusher

I have no legal experience, Beechy, but I'm shocked that the driver did not even stop. If she failed to see a 6 year old on a bike, then she would have failed to see a pedestrian.

I hope your boy is feeling ok, but I would also take him along to your local A&E (not a great place to be on a Sat night certainly) or phone NHS 24 to have him checked out.


I would report the incident to the Police anyway. At worse, you'll be £30 poorer, but surely common sense will prevail- I would also have taken to the pavement in those conditions.

Good luck.

always_tyred

Well, the age of criminal responsibility is 10 and the only salient point is that she hit a 6 year old riding a bicycle on a pavement.

It doesn't seem to me to make much difference whether or not the child was on a bicycle, running, on a toy tricycle, or on the road, for that matter.

Nothing will come of it, but it might give the driver pause for thought the next time, if she gets a phone call or a visit from the rozzers.

fnegroni

My son has recently started riding a bit quicker.
On the pavement, that can be a problem because he might be hit by a car exiting a driveway.
I have recently switched to let him ride on the road especially in areas with many driveways with little visibility between them.
In busy areas, I prefer the pavement for him, but I will be on the road, slightly ahead of him, so I can yell or at least drivers will hopefully see me before him.
The problem is that riding on the pavement is, counter intuitively, safer for experienced riders, who have the ability to anticipate danger and are able to stop quickly and don't panic.
My personal opinion, is that we need more cycle tracks, segregated from traffic, for exactly those reasons.
But someone here things the roads are safe enough. Yet don't have kids... :roll:

prj45

Seriously report it.

Was the driver drunk? Uninsured? Unlicensed?

Why else would she drive away if she didn't have something to hide?

She also left the scene of a crash.

Report it.

deptfordmarmoset

Any person who knocks down a 6-year-old child on the pavement with a vehicle, be it car or bike, and then drives or rides off is not safe to be on the road. In fact they're not even worthy of the title ''person.'' If she'd do that on her own doorstep to a young child, what would she do away from home in a more serious accident? I think I would report it to the police, even though you were both on bikes on the pavement because you were on the pavement (ironically) to protect your children from car traffic. In an incident where an adult knocks down a child or a car knocks down a bike, it mustn't be the weaker that suffers while the stronger drives away scott-free.

Obviously, this isn't from a legal point of view, but the measure of a good legal system for me is whether it matches my own sense of justice and proportionality.

thelawnet

report her to the police. Failing to stop is a serious criminal offence. Riding on the pavement certainly is not.

kelsen

This woman needs to be taught a harsh lessons in the responsibility of owning and driving a motor vehicle; and her obligation to show care and attention to other road users. It's irrelevant that you were cycling on the pavement. The bottom line is she hit a child whilst coming out of the driveway. A low speed manoeuvre that should have allowed her to avoid colliding with anything or anyone within the vicinity of the vehicle. Then she proceeded to drive away without stopping to check that the child was okay.

Ok, so nobody got hurt this time. What about next time? If this woman were to seriously injure or even kill someone due to her carelessness, would she just drive away again pretending nothing had happened?

Report it.

Phicon

You can get the non emergency number for your local station and report it. It strikes a chord with me as i ride with my 6 yr old at least twice a week and get a lump in throat when i read your story, lucky little chap.

Would appreciate your update if you decide to take it further, see what the police make of it.

roger_merriman

fnegroni wrote:

My son has recently started riding a bit quicker.
On the pavement, that can be a problem because he might be hit by a car exiting a driveway.
I have recently switched to let him ride on the road especially in areas with many driveways with little visibility between them.
In busy areas, I prefer the pavement for him, but I will be on the road, slightly ahead of him, so I can yell or at least drivers will hopefully see me before him.
The problem is that riding on the pavement is, counter intuitively, safer for experienced riders, who have the ability to anticipate danger and are able to stop quickly and don't panic.
My personal opinion, is that we need more cycle tracks, segregated from traffic, for exactly those reasons.
But someone here things the roads are safe enough. Yet don't have kids... :roll:

I use the quiet and wide pavements/quiet roads and the royal parks for kiddy learning to ride to bike.

really does depend on the road, it has to be a judgment call.

N0bodyOfTheGoat

I was led to believe that kids can legally ride on the pavement, due to the wheel size being less than 20"... Providing they are not budding Cavendishs at the stage finish?

prj45

NitrousOxide wrote:

I was led to believe that kids can legally ride on the pavement, due to the wheel size being less than 20"... Providing they are not budding Cavendishs at the stage finish?

It's always illegal IIRC, prosecution guidelines say children under 16 must never be prosecuted for it though.

merkin

Report her for it definitely.
I ride slowly and carefully on the pavements with my similar aged kids in quiet residential areas sometimes where there are hardly any pedestrians but lots of driveways and generally speaking if she hit a kid on a bike, she would just as easily hit a kid not on a bike, running ahead, on a scooter etc. If she had stopped,then fine. No harm done and valuable lessons learnt both for your son and the driver. Driving off is unforgivable. :evil:
Best of luck and let us know how you get on.

spen666

prj45 wrote:

NitrousOxide wrote:

I was led to believe that kids can legally ride on the pavement, due to the wheel size being less than 20"... Providing they are not budding Cavendishs at the stage finish?

It's always illegal IIRC, prosecution guidelines say children under 16 must never be prosecuted for it though.

There is nothing in legislation to prevent any child 10 or above ( in Eng & Wales) being prosecuted for riding on the pavement.

your reference to the age of 16 has no legal basis at all.


As a matter of policy, it is unlikely that a child being supervised by a parent would be prosecuted

spen666

NitrousOxide wrote:

I was led to believe that kids can legally ride on the pavement, due to the wheel size being less than 20"... Providing they are not budding Cavendishs at the stage finish?

This is another myth- nothing in legislation re wheel size allowing bikes to be ridden on pavement

spen666

I would make a complaint to the police alleging the drive failed to stop and exchange details at the scene of the accident.

I suspect it will also transpire she failed to report the accident to the police either

kelsen

kelsen wrote:

This woman needs to be taught a harsh lessons in the responsibility of owning and driving a motor vehicle; and her obligation to show care and attention to other road users. It's irrelevant that you were cycling on the pavement. The bottom line is she hit a child whilst coming out of the driveway. A low speed manoeuvre that should have allowed her to avoid colliding with anything or anyone within the vicinity of the vehicle. Then she proceeded to drive away without stopping to check that the child was okay.

Ok, so nobody got hurt this time. What about next time? If this woman were to seriously injure or even kill someone due to her carelessness, would she just drive away again pretending nothing had happened?

Report it.

Having re-read the post. There's a strong assumption that the driver was to blame for the collision, but we only have the OP's version of the event here. It's also possible that the woman in the car had stopped, and the child accidentally cycled into the car. Seeing that it was only a minor bump and the child appeared ok, the woman drove off, annoyed that a parent hadn't been supervising their child more closely.

Just considering this as a possibility but not condoning the fact that she failed to stop to check the boy was ok.

The Chingford Skinhead

kelsen wrote:

Having re-read the post. There's a strong assumption that the driver was to blame for the collision, but we only have the OP's version of the event here. It's also possible that the woman in the car had stopped, and the child accidentally cycled into the car. Seeing that it was only a minor bump and the child appeared ok, the woman drove off, annoyed that a parent hadn't been supervising their child more closely.

Just considering this as a possibility but not condoning the fact that she failed to stop to check the boy was ok.

I don't agree. The OP said "On this stretch my six year old was hit by a car coming out of a driveway." so the child was hit by the car, not the other way around. Even if the child had hit the car, the driver should at least check that the child was OK. Report it. Not only may she be a careless driver but she is certainly a poor human being.

spen666

kelsen wrote:

kelsen wrote:

This woman needs to be taught a harsh lessons in the responsibility of owning and driving a motor vehicle; and her obligation to show care and attention to other road users. It's irrelevant that you were cycling on the pavement. The bottom line is she hit a child whilst coming out of the driveway. A low speed manoeuvre that should have allowed her to avoid colliding with anything or anyone within the vicinity of the vehicle. Then she proceeded to drive away without stopping to check that the child was okay.

Ok, so nobody got hurt this time. What about next time? If this woman were to seriously injure or even kill someone due to her carelessness, would she just drive away again pretending nothing had happened?

Report it.

Having re-read the post. There's a strong assumption that the driver was to blame for the collision, but we only have the OP's version of the event here. It's also possible that the woman in the car had stopped, and the child accidentally cycled into the car. Seeing that it was only a minor bump and the child appeared ok, the woman drove off, annoyed that a parent hadn't been supervising their child more closely.

Just considering this as a possibility but not condoning the fact that she failed to stop to check the boy was ok.

The offence of failing to stop and provide insurance detasils arrises irrespective of blame. Every driver of a motor vehicle where an accident occurs as a result ofd the use of that vehicle on the highway( including pavement) has to stop and provide details to anyone reasonable reuiring the same

spen666

The Chingford Skinhead wrote:

....I don't agree. The OP said "On this stretch my six year old was hit by a car coming out of a driveway." so the child was hit by the car, not the other way around. Even if the child had hit the car, the driver should at least check that the child was OK. Report it. Not only may she be a careless driver but she is certainly a poor human being.

Who hit who is not conclusive evidence of liability.

for example- driver a is proceeding down road at 20mph, when child runs out from behind a parked car and into the path of car who has absolutely no opportunity to slow down/ stop before hitting child.

car hit child, but liability would not be on driver

kelsen

The Chingford Skinhead wrote:

I don't agree. The OP said "On this stretch my six year old was hit by a car coming out of a driveway." so the child was hit by the car, not the other way around.

You're right, that's what the OP said, but is that what actually happened?

Eau Rouge

kelsen wrote:

The Chingford Skinhead wrote:

I don't agree. The OP said "On this stretch my six year old was hit by a car coming out of a driveway." so the child was hit by the car, not the other way around.

You're right, that's what the OP said, but is that what actually happened?

Whatever happened, it's not up to the woman in the car to decide for herself that it was irrelevant and not worth stopping for or reporting. Fault for the actual collision is a different matter again.

djrock

Eau Rouge wrote:

Whatever happened, it's not up to the woman in the car to decide for herself that it was irrelevant and not worth stopping for or reporting. Fault for the actual collision is a different matter again.

QFA
Report Her! The next person she hits might not be so lucky!!

Tom Butcher

Glad they weren't hurt - one of mine was nearly hit by a car in similar circumstances - except he was running along the pavement not riding a bike. A kid was actually killed in one of the villages round here whilst riding to school on the pavement the other year.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Now I love a good necktie party as much as the next person. And this has it all: a rope with a knot, a tree, and an Angry Mob with sticks and flaming torches.

However, I'm curious. How did this happen, and how did the driver know what had happened?

"On this stretch my six year old was hit by a car coming out of a driveway."

If I cross a pavement in a straight line in a car, whether forwards or in reverse, then hitting something and not stopping means that something goes under my wheels or car. That plainly didn't happen here.

If I reverse out into the road, I need to turn. When I do that, one of my front wings will swing out. Turn too soon, and I clip the gatepost. So perhaps if someone or some part of a bike was in the space that my front wing swung into, maybe I would knock over that thing or person. But unless I'm a lunatic, I'll be concentrating at this point on the road I'm reversing into, using my mirrors.

When I look forward again, I see a kid on the floor with his bike. I didn't feel contact, and assume that he's one of about a gazillion kids who's fallen off his bike for no good reason. So off I go.

And in case anyone thinks I'm being too much of a dove on this, I'd expect any policeman who followed up a report to ask the OP the basic question: "So, tell me, how *exactly* did this happen?"

petejuk

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

Any person who knocks down a 6-year-old child on the pavement with a vehicle, be it car or bike, and then drives or rides off is not safe to be on the road. In fact they're not even worthy of the title ''person.''

+1. Absolutely despicable.
Tell the Police and explain all. like others have said, irrespective of the whose fault, the motorist has a legal requirement to stop and exchange details (name and address - not insurance details) at the time of the accident.
Only reasons for not stopping are not realising you've had an accident and not safe to do so (in which case you must report to Police within 24 hrs).

Mr_Cellophane

Two rules ofthe Highway Code relevant here

201
Do not reverse from a side road into a main road. When using a driveway, reverse in and drive out if you can.

202
Look carefully before you start reversing. You should

use all your mirrors
check the ‘blind spot’ behind you (the part of the road you cannot see easily in the mirrors)
check there are no pedestrians (particularly children), cyclists, other road users or obstructions in the road behind you

Greg: you are breaking one of those rules which exists because it is easier and safer to reverse into a small space, than out of it.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Mr_Cellophane wrote:

Two rules ofthe Highway Code relevant here

201
Do not reverse from a side road into a main road. When using a driveway, reverse in and drive out if you can.

202
Look carefully before you start reversing. You should

use all your mirrors
check the ‘blind spot’ behind you (the part of the road you cannot see easily in the mirrors)
check there are no pedestrians (particularly children), cyclists, other road users or obstructions in the road behind you

Greg: you are breaking one of those rules which exists because it is easier and safer to reverse into a small space, than out of it.

The second clause of 201 is, on its wording, a recommendation, and not a rule.

But that doesn't go to my point in any event: how do we know that the driver knew she'd made contact?

kelsen

Mr_Cellophane wrote:

Two rules ofthe Highway Code relevant here

201
Do not reverse from a side road into a main road. When using a driveway, reverse in and drive out if you can.

202
Look carefully before you start reversing. You should

use all your mirrors
check the ‘blind spot’ behind you (the part of the road you cannot see easily in the mirrors)
check there are no pedestrians (particularly children), cyclists, other road users or obstructions in the road behind you

Greg: you are breaking one of those rules which exists because it is easier and safer to reverse into a small space, than out of it.

Assuming you are also applying this to the driver in question, there is no mention from the OP that she was driving forward or reversing backward

merkin

Because if you are reversing across a pavement and your view is restricted, you should be doing so at <2mph. That leaves you time to keep close obs on all angles. Of course she knows her car made contact with the kid. Normally on this site I tend to side with the driver as there is a lot of anti car bias and I (unfortunately) drive way more than I ride. But this time she is clearly in the wrong, not necessarily in the accident but certainly in the driving off.
edited to say I am a slow typist and was replying to 2 posts earlier. (I also assumed she was reversing) Quite how she would collide with a kid going forwards and not notice though...