- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
forum
Child Hit on Cycle Crossing 40MPH- Red Light Runner Gets Driver Improvement Course
I've followed the forums a long while, but never needed to post...
Welcoming any opinion and advice on the following:
My 11 year old son was cycling to school last Friday along a cycle route in Southend & crossed the A127 at a recognised controlled cycle crossing.
As he does every day, he pressed the button & once he got the green he checked that the cars had stopped (I'd previously warned him to double check people actually stopped).
He said that the car in the lane closest stopped & he started to cycle across past the car stopped in lane 1 & was hit by a driver in lane 2 of this two lane 40MPH limit road that had not slowed at all- he said he simply hadn't seen her coming at all. There were several witnesses that agreed that the lady driving had gone through a very solidly red light at speed , passed a stationary car in lane 1 & hit the front of my son's bike, sending him cartwheeling down the road. One of the witnesses said that her two children had to drag my son out of the road afterwards, which she informed me traumatised them. The Essex air ambulance was dispatched, along with paramedics & an Ambulance Operational Commander; the police were on scene quickly & shut the road for investigation & they took statements from witnesses.
A witness called my son's school, who in turn called us- we got there within about 15 min.
The lady driving maintained that she had gone through on a green light & the policeman that shut the road said it would come down to my son's statements & those of the witnesses.
When the (white hat) traffic collision investigator arrived he quickly explained that the course of action would be determined by the severity of my son's injuries & that they had a unit waiting at Southend A&E for a verdict. He swiftly told me that the lady had only passed her driving test a couple of weeks ago & that he himself had knocked a child over by accident not long after passing his test.
They had me wait on the verdict from the hospital before they would let me take his bike, as it would be evidence if there was the possibility of a fatality resulting from his injuries.
The woman's car had a smashed near side head light, the entire mirror assembly had been smashed off & the almost flush indicator light had been ripped out, with marks & scratches all down the side of the nearside of the car so it was a heavy impact, but thankfully my son did not make it out onto the front of that car. That fraction of a second saved his life.
He was also wearing a fairly new cycle helmet & that was comprehensively trashed, with scuffs all over the left hand side of it, creases where it had deformed & a tear right through the polystyrene liner on the left side.
The paramedics, A&E doctors & the police all emphasised that it definitely prevented him suffering serious head injuries.
It seems that the most serious injury he suffered was a broken right wrist. He's got an appointment to see a consultant today to find out recovery time, but mum bought a lottery ticket for the first time in 25 years. He has bruises & cuts all over his body, a very painful chest & ribs & he couldn't walk unaided for a couple of days. He has been waking up at night suddenly & he asks for his door to be left open in case he needs us, but seems happy to settle himself back to sleep.
He's a very keen & competent skier & we've got a trip in just under a month, where he was going to do a week of slalom and ski cross training. That's so physical that I cancelled that straight away.
He also races motocross & he's supposed to have his first race for his championship in just over five weeks- he's never going to be strong enough for that with a broken throttle wrist, so he scores zero for the first one at least.
There's also the question of what this does to his confidence cycling to & from school- we work shifts & walking takes him about 40 minutes, compared to 10 mins gentle cycling.
He had a really good bike that he was very proud & careful with- a Specialized Sirrus 3.0, which now has scratches all over the frame & forks & so much play in the headstock that I doubt it can be repaired. I can't find the receipt, but I'm hoping that we can just ask the driver's insurers to repair or replace the bike until it's usable again.
So the positives: he's alive, not in a coma & actually lasted a whole day of school today, where he had to walk by himself; the driver actually had insurance & didn't leave the scene.
Negatives: we got a call from Essex Police today & they've decided to offer the woman a driver improvement course. Apparently, faced with several witness statements contrary to her own she amended it, admitting to going through an amber light. The police mentioned again that she had only passed her driving test a couple of weeks ago & they said that she hadn't been drinking or been on her phone. They reasoned that the greatest benefit would be a driver's improvement course, rather than points. I believe that the standard would be 6 points & as a new driver she would have to retake an extended test, which I believe would be more beneficial & appropriate. But I also believe that Essex Police know that she's highly likely to contest this in court, costing them time for at least two of their officiers to attend.
I'm very unhappy at the outcome & I think it is completely inappropriate, but we feel that we are up against the system.
My aunt that retired from being a traffic cop a good twenty years ago found out about this driver improvement course outcome & rang us up tonight saying she wanted to write a letter of complaint- that in her day it would have been 6 points, end of story.
I have been trying to call my Union's legal team to initiate a claim for his bike & injuries, but not got through yet. His mum's union will also take on personal injury claims for family members, but are there other options?
I'm interested in what anyone thinks we should do? I'm keen on not learning the hard way, having never done this before, so if anyone has experience they don't mind sharing to avoid pitfalls, please do.
I have been really upset by the whole thing, but I do have a thick skin- if people think we need to just accept it, I'm happy to hear why.
If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.
Latest Forum Topics
Latest Comments
- kingleo 2 sec ago
They left out The Telegraph and The Daily Mail.
- brooksby 4 min 4 sec ago
Or from ANY car park.
- brooksby 5 min 9 sec ago
Seeing the headline about the BBC article on "e-bikes" tonight reminds me of this beauty, seen at lunchtime…...
- Hirsute 42 min 49 sec ago
13 vehicles crashed through my wall. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyvegw54e5o Time for some proper bollards!
- chrisonabike 44 min 58 sec ago
Perhaps it was one of those terrible military "accidents" where bio-weapons were released and went further than intended or lingered for too long? ...
- RoubaixCube 56 min 20 sec ago
I dont think it should be that narrow. I used to use an older Moon Meteor Vortex Pro - It was a great light for what it was but then I switched to...
- Jbnuts 3 hours 9 min ago
I have one of these and it's a nice bike. It went together well and was of good quality (as far as one can tell such things). It was all faced...
- MinardiM189 3 hours 32 min ago
I think it is time to start a thread about what other Fantasy Cycling Games are out there.
- Secret_squirrel 4 hours 34 min ago
Does ISP mean integrated seat post? Surely the stiffness is irrelevant when the bike is on gravel with fat low pressure rubber? Not that aero...
Add new comment
45 comments
I think that most bases have been covered, but if this ends up with an unsatisfactory result, do follow up with a formal complaint. It is quite wearing to follow up on these incidents and complaints processes can be all consuming if you are not careful, but for the good of the whole community - pedestrians, cyclists and even motorists are put at risk by people who fail to respond to red lights, accidentally or on purpose - these decisions need to be challenged.
In fact, I would suggest that in any lobbying or communication you avoid talking about the cycling aspect, I am afraid there is a clear anti-cycling bias in the community. Simply emphasise that your son was run over on a pelican crossing by a motorist that did not slow or stop for a red light.
Perhaps RoSPA might be interested to help?
"he himself had knocked a child over by accident not long after passing his test."
Why is this guy not disqualified from the case? Straight away he is empathising with the perpetrator, simultaneously subscribing to the view that these things are "accidents". In that short sentence he has already dismissed the case.
I completely agree- my already pounding heart sank when I heard those sentiments.
He's a traffic collision investigator.
They have a huge amount of autonomy & are considered professionals who's judgement, experience & knowledge is to be trusted, pretty much implicitly.
When I was hit on the clockhouse roundabout, Farnborough, the investigating officer came to see me after I had got out of several nights in hospital, traffic officer I believe, he said that he knew how I felt as he had run over a kid on the roundabout outside the Farnborough police station...
If anyone has a kid that they've got an ongoing battle with to wear a helmet, I've uploaded a photo of my boy's hat.
Police, paramedics & A&E all emphasised that this pathetic £30 piece of plastic & polystyrene saved him from "a serious head injury"
Mum's too cool for school & she's had me dig out the helmet I've been trying to get her to wear for years, after seeing the light.
Thanks everyone that's taken their time to respond. I've read all the contributions & we have some serious decisions to make, so thanks everyone for all the carefully thought out opinion & useful links.
I'm also hugely greatful for the empathy evident throughout. I guess as cyclists we are all acutely aware of our own vulnerability.
I'll find out how much my union will take, but I'll ring our home insurer too (mum's nursing union passes on 70% for injury claims for dependents, so mine will likely be similar). I do think that offering a driver's improvement course when she passed her test weeks ago is absolutely not what the scheme was intended for (to update & refresh seasoned drivers that have adopted bad habits & attitudes)- it's an abuse of that alternative for the convenience of the police & courts.
A broken wrist & having the absolute shit beaten out of your 11 year old child is gut sickeningly no where near the definition of serious injury:
https://www.birchallblackburn.co.uk/what-do-you-mean-by-serious-injury/
I like the idea of approaching CyclingUK- we'll give that a go. I've got a deep seated feeling that the traffic collision officer's empathy for the driver's need for a license wrongly found itself above the safety of an extremely vulnerable road user that was following the Highway Code to the letter.
We will carefully consider complaining to the police about the decision made- we already gave it serious thought before I came to the forum & concluded that we don't have the time to take on Essex Police and lose, but you guys have made me rethink that. Don't think we'll win, but I think it's the right thing to do. Then bring it to the attention of our MP.
You shouldn't be giving any percentage of what you manage to claim to the lawyers. They can claim their costs separately from the drivers insurance too
I'd definitely look into getting specialist representation
Leaving aside the appalling decision from the police ...
Do you have legal cover on your household insurance?
I know you've said about going through the Union, but if you have legal cover, then talk to them; you will probably need their support in dealing with the insurance company.
I take it you're submitting a claim on the other person's insurance?
There maybe some tooing and froing, and probably mutterings about contributory negligence - that's why you need to get legal support.
Get the claim in as soon as possible ... You'll probably have more success with that than fighting the police, and it'll have the added bonus of putting the other person's insurance up for the next five years or so.
This is appalling from the police. It makes you wonder if the driver knows someone in the force. To offer a driver improvement course for this monumental failure to operate a vehicle safely, and the consequences that are every parents worst nightmare, is a dereliction of duty in my opinion.
I would try and discuss with the inspector overseeing the case the options for a charge. There is a charge of causing serious injury by dangerous driving. A broken wrist would meet the threshold for serious injury (GBH) and passing a car stopped on zig-zags at speed could be dangerous driving (although only momentary, it can still be considered dangerous). This would need CPS backing to proceed to court.
A lesser option would be careless driving. This can be a police led prosecution, they do not need to involve the CPS, but it will need to go to court to have a chance of the maximum 6 points (I think this warrants more than the 3 points and £100 of a FPN).
Failing that, you could contact the Essex PCC (although there's a limit to what they might do), and also raise a complaint via IOPC (the admission of the collision investigator that he had done the same, could be seen as bias). Good luck and a speedy recovery to your son.
All would be good options, except as I understand it the police have already offered the driver the course option; unless the driver turns that down (and if she has any sense she will grab it with both hands) I assume that some form of double jeopardy applies and she can't be sanctioned twice for the same offence?
It sounded to me like the driver course was the police's opening gambit and there might still be time to challenge it.
When I got close passed, the police wanted to send a warning letter. I was livid! I asked to escalate and got up to an inspector, who then offered a driver course. I then spent 30mins on the phone convincing him that this warranted more than that. Eventually, it went to court, police-led careless driving and the driver got 5 points and a hefty fine.
Good result – not one I could expect in London, where one receives notification that an NIP is being sent along with the information that this may lead to a warning letter, the offer of a course, a fine and points or court prosecution but you will not be told which of these, nor the outcome of any action, unless you are called as a witness.
yep, it's not the norm. I had to do quite a lot of polite pestering.
I just can't believe they think a driver awareness course is appropriate. If the driver really did just pass their test 2 weeks ago, they've literally just completed an intense period of driver training. How on earth can a 'refresher' course be deemed any benefit, can they really have forgotten how to drive after 2 weeks!
It makes a mockery of the 6 point limit for new drivers. People lose their licences for using a mobile phone when driving in the first 2 years, which is a serious offence, but not as bad as failing to stop (or even slow) for a pedestrian crossing.
I wonder whether there is a perverse element of reverse logic at work, where someone in the decision making reasons, "we can't give her six points since that would mean she loses her licence, just because she is a new driver - its not her fault she's a new driver."
Sadly I think that's more than likely, it wouldn't be the first time the police have made decisions about who deserves what: some years ago a friend of mine was threatened with violence in a pub, when the police came the perpetrator was sent away with a warning, she was told by the attending officer that they knew he was on probation and, "He's not a bad lad really and doesn't deserve to go back to prison." On top of such value judgments there is the natural desire (with which I can somewhat sympathise without excusing) to go down the route of least paperwork…
Yes, they do consider the impact of the charge on the perpetrator before deciding what the charge will be. In the case I refer to, eventually the police were of the opinion it was upper-end careless and lower-end dangerous driving. They said getting a conviction for dangerous is really difficult as it's an automatic 12 month ban, plus it would mean CPS involvement. So they went for the easier careless charge. I do also wonder if the driver already had points, as they only gave him 5 points rather than 6, was that tactical so he just missed the 12 point ban?
Perhaps they should be offering the 'improvement course' to the driver's instructor and examiner?
They reasoned that the greatest benefit would be a driver's improvement course, rather than points
Bollocks!- just like the joke online driving course which she does from home if Essex is like Lancashire. They will use any excuse they think they can get away with in order to avoid any effort. It wouldn't have been any different if they had video proving that the light was red, they would just have changed the excuse to 'she was distracted by something, something' or another obvious fiction. The police are accustomed to rejecting any evidence they don't like- such as these witness statements, but if there was just one witness saying the light was green when she crossed the line they would accept it as gospel and issue the standard monumentally insincere 'our thoughts are with...'
When the police and the driver's legal team are working together to get the driver off, justice has had it! I have shown this before, but Audi Q5 T90 JDT towing a large caravan at 50+ mph was way behind me when these lights turned red but still hammered across anyway. How much more illegal can you get?The police couldn't dispute this so they went for the default plan: NFA by not responding at all and then refusing to tell me what the outcome was (although I knew, obviously, as I know LC's methods well by now) for over 7 months and then claiming they were too busy to look at online incident reports
Do you just have a remote camera set up at those lights, wtjs?
Do you just have a remote camera set up at those lights, wtjs?
I could probably set one up in the hedge and trigger from over the road, but it wouldn't solve the problem of Lancashire Constabulary coming to bent agreements with the offenders to ignore the case! As a reward for tongue-in-cheek questioning:
Just checking my understanding here...
The driver drove through a red light controlling a crossing, and struck someone legally using that crossing?
Is that right?
And for that, a driver awareness course is deemed appropriate? How can anyone see that being right? Resourcing shortages have seemingly completely broken any sense of reasoned perception amongst this police force.
Taking the details of this case out of the equation for a second.
Someone has been seriously injured (do the injuries warrant a serious injury title, I don't know?), by the actions of a motorist driving without due care and attention. Is there seriously no defined charge for that?
I'd be inclined to reach out to you local MP to make sure they are aware of this. Love to get their opinion.
The definition for serious injury as in Causing serious injury by dangerous driving is the same as for GBH. It would be up to a jury to decide if a particular injury was serious, but typically you'd be looking at "life-changing injuries" or "significant or sustained medical treatment (for instance, intensive care or a blood transfusion)". For injuries that don't meet the threshold the driver could be charged with assault.
There's no specific offence of Causing serious injury by careless driving and to Assault someone your actions have to be deliberate or reckless (i.e. dangerous).
I really can't understand why the driver has been given a course instead of being charged with Driving Without Due Care and Attention (at the very least).
I am a parent of cycling children and this sort of scenario is my nightmare. I'm so sorry it happened to your son and wish him a speedy recovery. I also hope it doesn't put him off cycling for too long.
If my understanding of your description of the collision is correct, then I think the driver's comments about whether the lights were red, green or amber are irrelevent. It is an offence to overtake ("pass in front of the foremost part of...") the moving or stationary vehicle nearest a crossing, regardless of the state of the lights (Highway code Rule 191, a Must rule, and The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997, Provision 24).
As many others have said below, and if you can bear the stress, I would consider getting a lawyer and pursuing a claim against the driver in the civil courts.
A horrible experience for you all, but sadly typical police reaction.
When I retired I took a job as a lollipop man, several near misses and drivers refusing to stop, including someone driving along the pavement to pass stationary vehicles, a 7 year old was clipped on the arm by a car that refused to stop. I took statements from several witnesses but the police refused to take action. This was in the same area where a lollipop lady had been killed and a child run over in a separate incident not so long before.
I hope you are able to achieve an appropriate conclusion.
This is awful. I'm so glad your son wasn't more seriously injured, and I'm horrified that someone who did this (even by accident) would even contemplate challenging the penalty in court. If I hit a child while driving, a suspension, an additional course of supervised driving lessons and a retest would be the absolute minimum before I would even consider getting behind the wheel again.
I don't have specific expertise or personal experience, but from what I have read online, my suggestions would be:
You sound like great parents who are doing the right thing and being emotionally available and supportive for your son. I imagine there is a balance between trying to listen if he wants to talk about it and is dealing with the trauma, but on the other hand if he hasn't realised how serious it was you might not want to prod too much. Good luck and best wishes.
This is shocking. Best wishes to you and your son.
I'd say a few things:
-get CyclingUK involved if you are a member. And maybe if you aren't a member. They are the best in the business at getting the police to take things seriously, but they aren't miracle workers
-submit a complaint. If you do, make sure you are meticulous in your notes. I've had too many experiences of phone calls with the supposedly independent complaints team where they have said that I'm absolutely right, then two weeks later sending an email saying that there is no case for the police to answer and that you agreed to drop the complaint. So if you do speak to the police, make sure you email the relevant person back after the call, with a few bullet points of what your interpretation of the call was, what both parties said. That way they can't backtrack
I'm sorry to say this, but the police are generally terrible when it comes to dealing with bad driving and cyclists as victims. There is deep seated prejudice that cyclists were asking for it, and the driver was just momentarily distracted, which could happen to anyone. Only by complaining do things change.
I'm sorry to hear of this. The driver improvement course is not appropriate. Going through a red at a crossing should be treated far more seriously. I hope your child recovers from this physically and mentally. If I were you, I'd be considering a legal case although of course that'd come with associated costs and risks.
I'm so sorry to hear this, an awful experience for your family. Some good advice in the comments which I won't repeat.
If your son is up for it at some point following recovery, he might want to visit his PCC in person. It's one thing shooting off platitudes by email. It's quite another when looking a child in the eye to explain why they are responsible for insufficient justice for their injuries
https://saferessexroads.org/visionzero/
In addition, an interim target of reducing deaths and serious injuries by 50% has also been adopted by 2030.
Very sorry to hear about this - must be incredibly traumatic for you and your son, and the police response can't be helping.
I am certainly disappointed by the response of the police and the traffic collision investigator. The driver apparently deliberately drove through a red light and nearly caused a fatal accident and personally I don't think the police have dealt with it appropriately. If the driver had made a genuine mistake I might be more inclined to agree with a driver improvement course - I remember as a new driver there can be a lot going on which is not yet "automatic" and therefore requires more concentration, and I appreciate it can be possible to simply not notice a red light. However, by claiming initially that the light was green it certainly comes across to me that this driver knew exactly what she was doing and is now trying to shirk responsibility for her actions. Given the severity of this incident, I would certainly be inclined to put in a formal complaint about the police's response. I wouldn't count on anything changing regarding the result of this incident (indeed by the time the complaint has been processed, there might be legal restrictions on reviewing the driver's charge) but I do think in the long run it might help change the police's attitudes.
Possibly a more productive route to go down would be compensation for damages. You could certainly be looking at the cost of repairs to the bike, a new helmet, and compensation for the physical injury and trauma caused to your son by the incident. I assume your son is not a member of Cycling UK or British Cycling as both those include legal support? Do you have legal cover as part of your home insurance? Whilst you could claim directly from the driver's insurance, I would very much be inclined to go through a reputable solicitor - even if you don't have cover provided through any of the routes listed above, I would say the solicitor's fees are likely to be worth it compared to going it alone. For reference, I believe Cycling UK's legal cover is Slater and Gordon whilst British Cycling is provided by Leigh Day - this is not a recommendation and I have no personal experience of either but given they are used by cycling organisations they might be viable options.
Pages