Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Cyclist who swerved to avoid out-of-control driver questions if £500 fine for "driving without due care" an "appropriate" punishment

Many have suggested the police should have pursued the more serious offence of dangerous driving, the motorist instead accepting six penalty points and ordered to pay £750 for the lesser offence

A cyclist has recalled how he narrowly avoided a collision with a driver who lost control on a bend, the motorist almost smashing into the rider and another vehicle having rounded the corner on the verge of the wrong side of a Somerset road. The images of the incident have also prompted questions about how it was dealt with by Avon & Somerset Police, the driver accepting a fine, penalty points and costs for driving "without due care", some arguing that the motorist should have faced the more severe offence of dangerous driving.

The roads policing unit reported that the incident happened in October, in Ilminster, the driver pleading guilty in court last month to driving without due care, and subsequently being given six penalty points on his driving licence, a £480 fine and ordered to pay costs and victim surcharge totalling £277.

Recalling the incident to road.cc, the cyclist Steve Western said despite the dramatic images "funnily enough it felt as though I had all the time in the world to decide when to swerve".

"I heard the tyre noise before I actually saw it, so had some warning that something was wrong, the guy didn't even get out of the car, he manoeuvred around the car and drove off. I hadn't realised the lady driving had reported it."

Steve had earlier replied to Avon & Somerset Police's social media post about the incident and court result: "Dear @ASPRoadSafety. Not sure [driving without] due care was appropriate for that incident which could have ended so differently. Love from the cyclist in the pictures."

Others joined him in questioning why a more serious dangerous driving offence was not applied here, Robin Pickering saying: "Surely, due care is failing to look properly at a junction causing someone else to have to brake, or maybe close passing a cyclist at a moderate 1-1.5m distance. That looks like clear S2 RTA: driving which falls 'far below the expected standard' and which could easily have had fatal consequences. Why the downgrade?"

Another called it a "pathetically weak sentence" and "hilarious that the social media manager thought this was worth boasting about".

Others suggested that part of the concern for the police might have been the driver avoiding punishment completely had they been unable to prove the more serious "dangerous driving" offence.

> Undertaking motorist's claim that he mounted grass verge "in panic" to avoid crash "utter bollocks", says cyclist "lucky to be alive"

As mentioned in an earlier quote, dangerous driving "is when driving falls far below the minimum standard expected of a competent and careful driver, and includes behaviour that could potentially endanger yourself or other drivers", and may involve speeding, racing, or driving aggressively, ignoring traffic lights, road signs or warnings from passengers, overtaking dangerously, or driving while under the influence.

The lesser offence of driving without due care and attention (careless driving) refers to when "driving falls below the minimum standard expected of a competent and careful driver, and includes driving without reasonable consideration for other road users".

It may involve "overtaking on the inside, driving too close to another vehicle, driving through a red light by mistake, turning into the path of another vehicle, the driver being avoidably distracted by tuning the radio, lighting a cigarette etc., flashing lights to force other drivers to give way, misusing lanes to gain advantage over other drivers, unnecessarily staying in an overtaking lane, unnecessarily slow driving or braking, dazzling other drivers with un-dipped headlights".

It was far from the first time Steve has been on the receiving end of driving that put his safety in danger, and he suggested that Avon & Somerset Police "seem unwilling to do anything" in two other stand-out cases from the past 12 months, both times when his flat bars were clipped by a passing motorist.

"Once by the door mirror and once by the front wing," he explained. "Both occasions by elderly drivers who seemed to think that I shouldn't be riding on the road adjacent to a shared path. Avon and Somerset police seem unwilling to do anything about those though. The joys of cycling..."

In May 2022, we reported that the county's police force had shared a similar social media post featuring a court result, that time after a bus driver hit a cyclist, pushing them into a hedge as they overtook.

Avon and Somerset Police close pass (Avon and Somerset Police)

Again, the driver pleaded guilty to driving without due care and attention and was fined £256 and given five penalty points.

(Avon and Somerset Police) bus driver knocks cyclist into hedge

In 2020, the force was accused of incompetence by a cyclist after they failed to track down a driver he said was responsible for a hit and run – even though he had provided them with footage of the incident. 

A police spokesperson said: "Footage the victim provided to us showed he was not struck by the vehicle but does show the poor manner of driving and failing to stop. However, we were unable to track down the driver of the vehicle, despite making exhaustive searches using the Police National Computer and other intelligence databases available to us, which meant that we were unable to prosecute the suspect.

"Regrettably, because of the time taken to make appropriate and necessary checks, the time period we legally have available to us to make those enquires – six months – had elapsed."

Dan is the road.cc news editor and joined in 2020 having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for The Non-League Paper. Dan has been at road.cc for four years and mainly writes news and tech articles as well as the occasional feature. He has hopefully kept you entertained on the live blog too.

Never fast enough to take things on the bike too seriously, when he's not working you'll find him exploring the south of England by two wheels at a leisurely weekend pace, or enjoying his favourite Scottish roads when visiting family. Sometimes he'll even load up the bags and ride up the whole way, he's a bit strange like that.

Add new comment

42 comments

Avatar
brooksby replied to aussiecyclist | 6 months ago
1 like
aussiecyclist wrote:

IANAL but as I understand, if the CPS decides to prosecute as dangerous, but the jury or judges don't find it meets the minimum criteria to be guilty of that, it can't be revised down to careless. They're either guilty or not-guilty of the charges that were brought.

Which is why the CPS often opts for the lesser charge of careless driving, which has a lower burden of proof and is more likely to be successful.

Well, that's a bit rubbish!

Avatar
mattw replied to brooksby | 6 months ago
3 likes

Dangerous requires proof of motive; careless does not.

Plus a defendant may offer to plead guilty to careless, and that saves everyone lots of time.

Personally I think the definitions need rewriting, but that Reckless Driving should be used more.

There's also an extensive nest of caselaw around the actual definition of Dangerous Driving, so outcomes can be unpredictable. Lawyers such as Mr Poophole exist to create and exploit such ambiguity.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to mattw | 6 months ago
1 like

Where do you get proof of motive from? The legislation refers to the standard of driving

(a)the way he drives falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver, and

(b)it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.

Don't see how the why comes into demontrating the standard they were driving at.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to Hirsute | 6 months ago
1 like

Agree - I thought the whole point of careless / dangerous was to drain the drama and try to make it all more "objective" rather than "did they intend to..."

Unfortunately it does seem in practice that "intent" still creeps in ("but it was an accident!  But they had an unblemished record and Mrs. Miggins says they always drive very carefully!")

And the definitions are hopelessly subjective especially where we have a measure (the driving test).  Essentially "how long is a piece of string" vs. "how long is a long piece of string".

I know the legal system wants to be free to adjust for human circumstances and interrogate evidence - but I can't see why (apart from cost / logistics) why you couldn't just call a driving test examiner as an expert witness - you can always cross-examine them if you're a defence barrister?

Avatar
tigersnapper | 6 months ago
9 likes

I suspect this is a simple case of 'the driver will plead guilty to the lesser charge' so go with that, it'll save court time and money and man power hours for the Force.  Simple case of money before lives.

Avatar
Surreyrider replied to tigersnapper | 6 months ago
0 likes

Because the experience won't change that driver's behaviour on the roads. And I very much doubt it is just cyclists on the receiving end.

Avatar
morgoth985 replied to tigersnapper | 6 months ago
1 like

I'm sure you are right, but it's still not appropriate.

Avatar
tigersnapper replied to tigersnapper | 6 months ago
2 likes

Sorry, should have made it clear.  It is appaling driving and should have been prosecuted as dangerous.  Just putting forward a cynics view as to why it wasn't.  The application of the law in this country generally and especially on the roads has fallen way below the standards we should expect as a population.

Avatar
Hirsute | 6 months ago
8 likes

"Cyclist isn’t very visible is he"

"Not relevant in view of the crap driving"

"It may have helped tho"

"Not sure it would have helped the driver not losing control of his 2.5 tonne car. I suppose he might have seen the cyclist just before he ran him over"

Avatar
Patrick9-32 replied to Hirsute | 6 months ago
9 likes
Hirsute wrote:

"It may have helped tho"

"I will find literally any excuse to blame the victim."

Avatar
eburtthebike | 6 months ago
3 likes

Begs the question of which police the driver knows.

Avatar
morgoth985 replied to eburtthebike | 6 months ago
2 likes

Sadly I wouldn't even think that.  Just any old road criminal gets away with it, not just the well connected ones.

Pages

Latest Comments