Injustice - Cyclist runover, police not prosecuting

G

gtru55

New Member
Jan 4, 2011
5
0
0
Hi

My first post so apologies if it's a little rusty :)

My partner was involved in an RTA on 7th Dec 2010, she was pulling out from a T junction on her cycle and the car waiting behind her (at the T junction) also pulled out and knocked her off the cycle from behind and then proceeded to run over her ankle.

Needless to say 3 police cars and 1 ambulance arrived at the scene within 7 minutes, a nearby publandlord came out and covered her over with a duvet, she was nearly unconcious (through shock) but did not pass out.

I received a call at work from my partners mobile and a memeber of the public told me that she had been run over. I raced to the scene (28 miles away) and when I arrived everyone was still on the scene.

The policeman we spoke to assured me and my partner that the police will be prosecuting (without prompting I might add)

We went home and I eventually persuded my partner to go to the hospital (she didn't go in the ambulance) where she was examined and the doctor decided nothing was broken. Although the damage to her ankle was considerable and meant she had 7 days off work, her £400 bike was demolished in the accident.

Several days later she received a letter from the police force who informed her that they would not be prosecuting the driver, she called the station on the landline and was astonished to find that although the driver had written in his statement "I didn't see her, the sun was in my eyes" the police were claiming they didn't have enough evidence to prosecute and it was even suggested by the police that "the driver seemed like a nice chap and didn't do it intentionally"

So far the whole debarkle has cost her £1000 in losses and copious amounts of suffering (to this day she cannot wear certain shoes and has a hole in her ankle and is nervous of riding on the road (now using my bike)

Can anyone shed any light on the approach of the police, they have the drivers statement claiming he didn't see her which I would have thought is evidence enough of driving without due care and attention.

To put this all into perspective and shed light on the title of this post, my partner was snapped doing 34mph in a 30mph zone in June of 2010 and was consequently prosecuted with a £60 fine and 3 points, which when you put thinking to it is fair play after all she broke the law and could have injured someone through speeding.

Until that is when you examine the facts of the accident in December where someone WAS injured and suffered losses etc but the police seem to let this person off as " the driver seemed like a nice chap"

An absolute travesty of justice if you ask me, we are now in contact with a no win no fee solicitor who has asked if we have contents insurance that covers legal fees if we lose (contradiction there!) and I can't help thinking as they asked twice whether the police were prosecuting the driver that the lack of prosecution now makes it harder for my partner to recover her losses.

My partner has rang the police force again this afternoon asking for contact details to make an official complaint but I'm not sure whether this is a matter for the IPCC or the police force concerned, can anyone shed some light?

Also, is it me or is this a complete cop out from the police, my understanding of their role is that they keep the peace and collect evidence for presentation to the courts or the DPP and considering they had lots of witnesses on the scene it seems to me they failed in their duty.

I apologise if the post is a bit of a rant but we really cannot afford to lose £1000, not only that as a tax payer we feel the police have failed in their duty.

Any help/suggestions would be greatfully received.

Many thanks
 
T

T.C

New Member
Jan 5, 2011
29
0
0
Firstly, I am sorry to hear about your partner, I hope that he makes a full and speedy recovery.

As a retired traffic policeman, it is often common practice to lay the blame for non prosecution at the doorstep of the Police, and in some cases it is fully justified, however, there are other issues to take into consideration as to why no prosecution has occured.

1 Evidence. To obtain a successfull prosecution there has to be sufficient eveidence to convince a court that the individual is guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. In the abscence of any independent witnesses, then physical evidence such as that recovered as a result of an accident investigation, and to be honest, unless there is a liklihood of it turning fatal, this is unlikely to happen.

If there are witnesses, then it has to be independent, as friends and relatives for obvious reasons can be deemed as biased.

2. The Police may well have decided that there was sufficient evidence to prosecute and may have been prepared to run with it. However, the final decision rests with the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), and it is not unusual for them to go against the recommendations of the investigating officer.

However, that does not preclude your partner from making a personal injury claim for their injuries and any ongoing losses as the requirement of proof is on the balance of probability of 51% rather than beyond reasonable doubt used in criminal law.

I understand what people say about speed cameras and the like, but try to avoid clouding the issue. Speed cameras are usually run by civillian staff whilst road accidents are dealt with by regular Police officers.

Have you considered writing to ask how they came about the decision not to prosecute?

On ther other side of the coin, I am now a civillian accident investigator and I look at police accident reports on a regular basis, and the quality of the reports and levels of investigation are in all honesty not worth the paper they are written on in many cases.

As far as a no win no fee solicitor is concerned, the majority of law firms use no win no fee (or a Conditional Fee Agreement to give it its proper name) which allows access to legal representation for all. The reason they will have asked whether you had insurance is because if you have Legal Expenses Insurance, under Law Society rules they have to approach the LEI providers first, and if they refuse, they can then enter into a CFA.

However, the LEI is not there to protect you if you lose as the law firm will take out what is called an after the event insurance which will protect you from some nasty costs in the unlikely event that you do lose. The law firm would only get paid their disbursments if they were to lose, but if they win, they then claim their costs from the other side which also includes an uplift called a success fee. You keep 100% of your award.

Just be careful though that you have not been contacted by an accident management firm as they are quite different to solicitors as they are unregulated, often make a real cock up of gathering the initial evidence and information, and then sell your case to the highest bidder. :mad:

Choose a law firm of your choosing which can be local, they will still offer you a no win no fee, as management firms will often pass it to someone at the other end of the country and you lose the personal touch.

Hope this has been of some help to you?
 
G

gtru55

New Member
Jan 4, 2011
5
0
0
Many thanks for the concise reply!

My partner is back on her feet and even back to work which is quite amazing considering the injury etc.

I understand what you are saying about the speed cameras, it just boils the blood!

We have contacted a TV advertised company (not sure if I can mention the name) who have sold the case to a solicitor (not too far away, 50 miles) and we have our first appointment next Saturday. Is this the type of thing you were advising against?

The Police force have claimed not enough evidence to prosecute which would seem to fit into your point 1, isn't the fact that the perpetrator statement details phrases such as "Didn't see you" and "Sun in my eyes" enough to secure a conviction? I wold have though it amounts to an admission of due care and attention?

Once again may thanks for the information, it's been a real help as it's difficult to know where to turn for impartial advice nowadays.

Thank you.
 
T

T.C

New Member
Jan 5, 2011
29
0
0
On your first point, yes they are the very sort of firms I referred to. The firm you are seeing will have paid a fee to take on your case, and they are obliged to advise you that they paid a referral fee.

I will be happy to give you some advice via a PM as to what to look for when you go to see them and the sort of questions to ask.

In respect of evidence, to prove careless driving which is an offence under section 3 of the 1988 Road Traffic Act, the prosecution has to show that the standard of driving fell below the standard expected of a reasonably competent driver.

Now the old chesnut of sorry mate I didn't see you (motorcycle term) on its own may have been sufficient, but if the sun was low in the sky, then that could be deemed as mitigation and therefore not unreasonable, given that the low sun in the sky at this time of year can be blinding.

An admission of not seeing your partner is not in itself sufficient to convict, there has to be other evidence, and it may have been decided that the low sun in the sky was a reasonable excuse and they could therefore not guarantee a conviction so it is probably not in the public interest to go to court.

Whilst it may seem harsh against your partner, it all comes down to evidence, and without evidence (or sufficient evidence to be more accurate) any prosecution would be doomed to fail as a reasonably competent defence lawyer would drive a bus through what evidence there was, create sufficient doubt for an aquittal which in the meantime would cost thousands of pounds to the tax payer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom