driving without undue care and attention

[14jackdaniels]

I dont know whether anyone can help, but here we go.
28th september 2011. 3rd time i had used my motorbike that year driving to work, stopped at the petrol staion to check tyre pressures and to fill up. Continued on my journey, on a sheltered road traveling at 50mph, went to ride over a blind summit to be blinded by the sun, then to be confronted by 3 stationary cars 20 yards infront of me. The front vehicle was waiting to cross the road to enter his consealed drive.Knowing i could not stop before hitting the first of the vechiles I swerved to avoid them aproaching on the other side of the road to gain more distance to stop but unfortunately the first of the vehicles turned to approach his drive and I went through the back window.. (And woke up in hospita.l)
I have travelled the same road for 5 years and never knew there was a consealed driveway.
5 months later police knock on my door and charge me with driving with undue care and attention and take my statement.
2 months later I go to court to plead not guilty. It has been adjourned twice because the police cannot come up with the evidence. I have to go back to court in september 2012 and i really dont know whats going to happen..
The insurance company has paid out the driver of the vehicle i hit, he does not want to prosecute me it is the police.

[dotty.]

were you riding your bike at 50mph over the blind summit? are there any warning signs before the hill advising you to slow down?

[ChuckFickens]

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news... but your statement of

"went to ride over a blind summit to be blinded by the sun, then to be confronted by 3 stationary cars 20 yards infront of me. "

Means you were driving without due car and attention. if you had of been driving with due care and attention then you wouldn't have rode over a blind summit at a speed you couldn't of stopped in time to deal with anything you encountered.

(I'm not passing judgement... I probably would have done the same.... but that's the law)

[14jackdaniels]

I slowed to 45mph before the brow of the hill. There are no warning signs stating there is a blind summit, and there are no signs stating there is a consealed entrance to to right. There is a split second before you can react. The bloke i hit is a really nice bloke and has been concerned about his entrance ever since he has moved in. The parish council have been trying to get the strecth of road made to 40mph for the past two years. Thanks for reply

[ChuckFickens]

sorry to say, but you should always drive (or ride) so you can stop within the distance you can see.

It wouldn't matter if somebody decided to build a brick wall across a road after a blind summit, the law says you should not be going so fast that you couldn't stop in the time it was visible for.... "I didn't have time to stop" is never a valid defence.

[ChuckFickens]

Again.... I'm not having a go.... it's a "there but the grace of god situation"... I've been there and done it.

[factor-fiction]

Sorry but I don't think it matters that you were within the speed limit. (It's a limit not a target.) A driver needs to leave an appropriate stopping distance and you didn't do that and this resulted in the accident

[factor-fiction]

Sorry chuck- yours wasn't there when I started typing my answer

[twix123]

"I have travelled the same road for 5 years and never knew there was a consealed (sic) driveway."

Although there may be no warning signs if you have been using the same road for 5 years you should know that there is a blind summit and, unless the driveway is really concealed, you should also have knowledge of the driveway (dropped kerbs etc.).

Rule 93 of the Highway Code states "Slow down, and if necessary stop, if you are dazzled by bright sunlight."

I agree that you were guilty of driving without due care and attention

[EDDIE51]

Sorry, but I have to agree with the others, you were traveling too fast for the conditions so you are guilty . The fact that you say you have been driving that road for 5 years and did not know of the driveway just makes your guilt more obvious as you have not been paying enough attention to memorising possible hazards. I am very sympathetic and can understand how it happened but that does not mean you are not guilty.
It is not up to the driver you hit as to if you are prosecuted or not, that is down to the police. I don't see that the police need more evidence than the fact that you hit the rear of a car that was in front of you for the prosecution to succed.
The offence is 'driving without due care and attention' (not 'without undue care and attention' ).

[MoonRocker]

It's "without due care and attention" - anyway, sorry mate, I have a lot of motorcycling experience and this is a good example of driving WDCAA. The best thing is to plead guilty asap and take the rap. Oddly enough this is just the sort of thing that is covered very well in suplimentary motorcycle training. The basics being that if you can't see, ie blind summit, then approach with caution, especially when the sun is in front and low in the sky. You should have been approaching that summit knowing 2 things a) the sun is in front and b) that you cannot see past the summit, 30mph max and you'd not have hit them.

[cathfromsaron]

pay the fine and take the points!

cath x

[hc4361]

The other driver's opinion has nothing to do with it - he can neither force nor stop a prosecution. That's for the police and CPS to decide.

[New Judge]

An extract from the Road Traffic Act 1988:

Meaning of careless, or inconsiderate, driving:

“...A person is to be regarded as driving without due care and attention if (and only if) the way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.

In determining for the purposes of subsection above what would be expected of a careful and competent driver in a particular case, regard shall be had not only to the circumstances of which he could be expected to be aware but also to any circumstances shown to have been within the knowledge of the accused.

The next bit of my answer is not a judgment on you, but just a bit of commentary to help you understand how a court will apply the law.

Competent and careful drivers do not collide with stationary objects or vehicles so by that definition alone you are guilty of careless driving. Also note the section which says

“...regard shall be had not only to the circumstances of which he could be expected to be aware but also to any circumstances shown to have been within the knowledge of the accused.”

You have driven that road daily for five years. You knew of the blind brow. You knew of the possibility of being dazzled. You should have been aware that a hazard could be present beyond the brow and should have adjusted your driving so as to be able to stop safely if such a hazard was present.

So, to move on to what is likely to happen. If you maintain a Not Guilty plea you will almost certainly be convicted following a trial. From your description of events you have no defence that is likely to succeed. The prosecution will not have any trouble at all proving your guilt beyond reasonable doubt (bearing in mind the definition of careless driving I have provided above).

This event will probably be viewed as in the middle of the seriousness range for careless driving. ) Magistrates’ sentencing guideline for such an example of the offence suggest a fine of one week’s net income and five or six penalty points. If you were to seek legal advice you would probably be advised to plead guilty at the next opportunity. This will reduce your fine (a one third discount is available for an early guilty plea. You will probably lose some of that entitlement because of your delayed plea). The number of penalty points will not be discounted. But most importantly you will also have to pay a contribution towards prosecution costs. This is usually about £85 for a guilty plea, but in the region of £500 if the matter goes to trial. So my advice (for what it’s worth) is to inform the court asap of your intention to change your plea.