Police Taking No Action - Advice Please

robert-sb

Two weeks ago, Thurs 25th Nov, I was knocked off by a car. I was coming up on the left hand side of the car as he moved across to the left trapping me between him and a wall. I went over the bars and cracked my head on the wall causing a deep gash which needed gluing and stitching at A&E. The driver was more concerned with a scratch on the car caused when he turned into my pedal.

I was dazed by the accident and so didn't get his details although he got my mobile phone number. Later that day I went to the police station and reported the accident. I didn't expect to hear any more as I didn't expect him to report it.

I have now received a letter from the police saying that

Enquiries in relation to your case have been undertaken and the collision report reviewed with careful consideration of the circumstances and any available evidence for court purposes. As a result of there not being sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction for an offence at court, the decision has been made to take no official police action at this time.

Our decision in no way precludes you from pursuing the matter through your insurers or legal advisor and does not prevent insurance companiesfrom dealing with the claims, establishing whom if anyone is at fault and settling liability.


For your information the particulars of the other parties involved are as follows : Vehicle 2 xxxxxxxxxx



My concern is the following; does this mean he is trying to pursue me ? As far as I am concerned it is cut and dried - he turned into me. Anybody know what this letter means ?

The Rookie

He can only pursue you through a civil claim and that is nothing to do with the Police, they have said they are not taking any action.

Whether you or he take civil action is up to you, if he was moving when you went to pass him then arguably you were undertaking, and that is what he may try and claim, of course there are many more facts to it, but it doesn't sound (from what you say) cut and dried in any way!

Simon

robert-sb

Thanks for the reply Simon, but from what I have seen, a cyclist has the option of using either side; is this not true ?

aldric

robert-sb wrote:

For your information the particulars of the other parties involved are as follows : Vehicle 2 xxxxxxxxxx


My concern is the following; does this mean he is trying to pursue me ? As far as I am concerned it is cut and dried - he turned into me. Anybody know what this letter means ?

The fact that the other vehicle, namely the car is being named as VEHICLE 2 indicates that it is not at fault as in police reports VEHICLE 1 is always at fault.

Or in this case, bike 1 I guess.

Berk Bonebonce

It is the police saying that they have no evidence of anyone involved in the collision committing an offence - the police only deal with criminal offences. But if you have a different story, and think that the driver committed some kind of offence that day, go back and tell the police. Driving offences include 'dangerous driving' and 'driving without due care and attention'.

However, if you get knocked off by a driver and it is the fault of their bad driving, then it doesn't mean to say that a criminal offence has been committed. If you think the collision was the fault of the driver, and if you think you should be compensated for injuries received/time off work/damage to bike, then seek some legal advice from a firm that deals with personal injury claims.

There are cases aplenty where drivers have even killed cyclists and not faced any type of prosecution. The "I just didn't see him/her Guv" usually gets them off.

Mr Plum

Glad to hear that the injuries were not more severe and that you're ok. This seems like a 50/50 to me; he should have had a look in his left wing mirror before cutting to the left and you should have picked a better place to over take if you were coming up to a 'pinch point' - maybe I've misunderstood the incident? Was it that he changed lanes and cut to the left, or just moved in towards the left of the lane he was in, in effect closing in on the wall? Either way this sounds like a painful lesson to learn; be cautious when going up the inside of traffic, moving or otherwise.

waddlie

aldric wrote:

robert-sb wrote:

For your information the particulars of the other parties involved are as follows : Vehicle 2 xxxxxxxxxx


My concern is the following; does this mean he is trying to pursue me ? As far as I am concerned it is cut and dried - he turned into me. Anybody know what this letter means ?

The fact that the other vehicle, namely the car is being named as VEHICLE 2 indicates that it is not at fault as in police reports VEHICLE 1 is always at fault.

Or in this case, bike 1 I guess.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3y3QoFnqZc

snailracer

If you review civil cases involving filtering accidents, the blame/liability is usually attributed to both parties. By extension, it would seem unreasonable for the police to criminally prosecute one side and not the other, so in the OP's case they decided to prosecute nobody.

http://www.access-legal.co.uk/legal-new ... u-2811.htm

aldric

Waddlie wrote:

aldric wrote:

robert-sb wrote:

For your information the particulars of the other parties involved are as follows : Vehicle 2 xxxxxxxxxx


My concern is the following; does this mean he is trying to pursue me ? As far as I am concerned it is cut and dried - he turned into me. Anybody know what this letter means ?

The fact that the other vehicle, namely the car is being named as VEHICLE 2 indicates that it is not at fault as in police reports VEHICLE 1 is always at fault.

Or in this case, bike 1 I guess.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3y3QoFnqZc

Fancy explaining how I am wrong? For the purposes of Police road accidents reports as stated VEHICLE 1 is deemed to be at fault.

d87heaven

From a claims company interweb page.

The Police Report can be a complex document to read and time should be spent on digesting its contents. When reading the report, be aware:

•The first party shown in the Report is usually the one the Police believe is at fault.
•The statements given at the time can be at odds with what was supplied in later statements.
•The diagram of the locus could reveal skids marks, indicating speed or where there was debris following the impact.
•The Police summary of circumstances usually gives the attending officer’s ‘gut feel’ as to who is at fault

aldric

Thanks d87heaven. Significantly better than I could have explained it.

robert-sb

If it is the case as aldric suggests, then I am guessing that the driver gave only his side of the story i.e. completely missing out the action that he took that cause the crash and just saying that I ran into him. I reported the incident within an hour or two of being stitched up in hospital and as the police officer didn't ask me to elaborate other than 'I was hit by a car' I wasn't together enough to expand.

My big concern is that he is trying to tell his insurance company that I was to blame so they will claim costs of repair to his car from me.

I was, at the time, cycling with another guy who I had met on the road a couple of minutes earlier. He concurred with me that the driver was to blame and so my energies are now focussed on trying to track him down (if anyone knows somebody who commutes through Halberton to Tiverton please pm me) in order to back me up. I did sit on the route for 20 mins this morning to try and locate him but unfortunately he did not come past - still will keep trying.

aldric

Robert,

This is a reportable road accident because of the injury to yourself. Just because the driver reported it to the police I wouldn't necessarily worry about him going to his insurance company looking to make a claim against you.

In reality Police don't decide who is to blame, they get a report of the facts and from that they have an 'idea' of what happened and they report it as such (V1, V" etc etc). At the end of the day they weren't there and didn't witness it.

If an insurance company is contacted for a claim then they can contact you and ask for a written explanation of what happened - you will get your opportunity to explain then.

They can also contact the police and ask for a copy of the police report, this however will cost them money to do.

Good luck.

Berk Bonebonce

I would not be too worried that you will be made to pay up for damage to the vehicle involved in this collision. This is exactly why drivers have insurance; the driver will claim under his/her insurance policy. It would just be like a driver claiming if he/she that day had collided with a lampost. Cyclists in the UK do not to have insurance.

captainfly

Rule 151 of the Highway code is your friend here "be aware of cyclists and motorcyclists who may be passing on either side." unless the driver can prove that he looked in his mirror and did not see you (in blind spot) then I think he may well be up for careless driving. There is no reason why the driver moved over into you unless he wasn't looking in his mirrors, you should be making a claim against him

legin

being a police officer it just means that as there were no independant witnesses it would be your word against that of the other driver.therfor a court could not be able to aportion blame and therfor persue the matter.the driver would have had the same letter as you did.you can ask them to review the case however without indeoendant witnesses its likely they will say the same.you could try the local newspaper and ask if anyone saw the collission.
or try a civil action where the ballance of probability is the standard rather than beyond all reasonable doubt.

Drysuitdiver

aldric wrote:

Waddlie wrote:

aldric wrote:

robert-sb wrote:

For your information the particulars of the other parties involved are as follows : Vehicle 2 xxxxxxxxxx


My concern is the following; does this mean he is trying to pursue me ? As far as I am concerned it is cut and dried - he turned into me. Anybody know what this letter means ?

The fact that the other vehicle, namely the car is being named as VEHICLE 2 indicates that it is not at fault as in police reports VEHICLE 1 is always at fault.

Or in this case, bike 1 I guess.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3y3QoFnqZc

Fancy explaining how I am wrong? For the purposes of Police road accidents reports as stated VEHICLE 1 is deemed to be at fault.

USUALLY is the operative word.


when the old bat in a volvo drove into my van I, my van was classed as Vehicle 1 as it was me who repoted it to the police. the only reason i reported is that she tried to say i drove into her when i stopped to see what damage had been done ( none )