Disposable cyclists/Police paperwork phobia or fair enough?

superkenners

Wondering if anyone had any thoughts/experience on how the Police treat people driving into cyclists, my wife was recently smashed into on a roundabout after a car failed to give way and Police seem to think as he admitted liability all they should do is send him on a driving course and not prosecute :x .

Reasoning seems to be he didn't do enough damage (which is not true in my view), victim was not in hospital for long enough and/or not killed.

While accidents happen one would think that admission of error is not a let off. Are they just too lazy to deal with the paperwork, are certain Tory ministers correct in their criticism of how the Police treat cyclists!!!

jeepie

I agree the police don't seem to understand the challenges faced by cyclists. I asked a member of traffic police what to do in the event of an accident and he said "we [the police] can't do anything without an independent witness". Quite how you are supposed to get an independent witness when you are scraping yourself off the tarmac I don't know!

Perhaps join British Cycling and lend your support for their campaign to have a review of sentencing when cyclists are injured. See http://road.cc/content/news/69130-justi ... ing-review

Headhuunter

IME the police never prosecute drivers who hit cyclists. I was talking to someone at work about this the other day, he said that he got hit for driving 10mph over the limit yet I've had 2 accidents on my bike, both considered the driver at fault, the second the driver drove aggressively behind me before hitting me and running over my bike and then driving off, yet he simply got sent on a course... No prosecution...

jay197

Jeepie wrote:

Perhaps join British Cycling and lend your support for their campaign to have a review of sentencing when cyclists are injured. See http://road.cc/content/news/69130-justi ... ing-review

+1 thats what I did

superkenners

It's a shame, particularly as it seems that there are more accidents happening. Of course this is largely due to more people cycling but it shows there needs to be more support provided, both to motorists, cyclists and the police (in terms of resources).

I find the concept of only prosecuting based on injury level as very counterproductive, feels as if the Police just give the offending motorist an arm round the shoulder saying "unlucky, accidents do happen" when the offender has been totally negligent.

On the positive side if there is anyone you need to reap revenge on just wait for them to get on their bike and enjoy the carte blanche!

Thanks for the link btw Jeepie

bails87

When I was (last) hit I was happy enough to go with the driving awareness course. I'd rather someone relearns how to drive safely, rather than gets points on their licence and carries on driving but with a grudge. In my case I was given the option. They said "we're sending them on the course and they have to reach a certain standard to pass, but if you don't think that's appropriate you can choose to push for prosecution instead". There should be an option for both though.

superkenners

@ bails87, I'm skeptical a driving course has much of an effect, the few people I know who have gone on them (for speeding mostly) have just taken it as the easy option to avoid points and thought they were a bit of a joke, more of a money maker for those running it than any real attempt to teach/reform. Kind of a win win actually as they avoided paying higher insurance premiums which covered the cost of the course.

Difficult one I suppose as one persons standards are somewhat different to anothers, also I'm not sure if the courses are focused specifically on dealing with cyclists and how they approach it or if its a one size fits all thing, the police certainly don't elaborate on this which makes me suspect the latter.

bails87

http://www.drivesafe.org.uk/index.php/h ... mprovement
vs
http://www.drivesafe.org.uk/index.php/h ... -awareness

The driver alertness/awareness course is very different (apparently) to the speeding course.

In my case I genuinely believe it was stupidity rather than 'not giving a F' or malice that caused the collision. I'd rather her driving was improved to stop it happening to anyone else. I've been in other situations where the driver has known full well what they're doing and (if there had been a collision) I'd push for prosecution.

symo

Having been knocked off my motorbike at 70mph, by a fat old twat whose neck was too fat to turn to check his mirror. He was given the driving course despite having nearly killed me. It is nothing to do with the police but the laws in this country which are set to give people no responsibility for the injuries they cause once they are behind the wheel of a vehicle.

Here is a thought experiment. A man needs a key witness killed to stop him testifying. He approaches a car driver who is a complete stranger, millions to do it. Do you think that would be an easy case to prove if the money was untraced.

geebus

Jeepie wrote:

I agree the police don't seem to understand the challenges faced by cyclists. I asked a member of traffic police what to do in the event of an accident and he said "we [the police] can't do anything without an independent witness". Quite how you are supposed to get an independent witness when you are scraping yourself off the tarmac I don't know!

Not really cycling specific.
Police no doubt see a lot of cyclists performing risky manoeuvres who then claim it's all the car driver's fault - without some 'real' evidence it seems quite reasonable to not want to prosecute.