motoringlawyers, Author at Forrest Williams - Page 11 of 14 Archive - Forrest Williams - page 11 motoringlawyers, Author at Forrest Williams - Page 11 of 14

Freephone: 0800 1933 999
Mobile Freephone: 01623 397 200

Chat Online

Motoring Advice Blog

Author Archive

Car drivers to be blamed for all crashes with cyclists

This is not an early april fools joke, it is the latest idea from the government.

Phil Darnton Chief Executive of Cycling England, an agency funded by the Department for Transport presented proposals to the Government.

Government advisors are looking to introduce a law that states that for insurance purposes the owner of the most powerful vehicle will always be at fault for any collision. So if a cyclist jumps a red light, cycles into you because he wasn’t looking or is practicing riding no handed along the High Street whilst standing on his cross bar – it’s the car drivers fault!

Cyclists are not immune in all of this, if they knock over a pedestrian then they are to blame because their ‘vehicle’ is more powerful.

Most drivers would agree that cyclists need prtotection, they are of course more vulnerable. Most car drivers do make allowances for this but does it make sense to make car drivers automatically at fault for any accident? Anyone who has been an a main road in Central London is only too aware of the crazy antics of some of the despatch riders, weaving in and out of traffic at speed. Should they be encouraged by making the driver responsible regardless of the clyclists actions?

Many drivers see this as yet another attack by the government on the car driver, the majority of whom are law abiding. Is this just another attempt by the governemt to get more money from the already squeezed motorist?

Drink Driving – failing to provide a specimen

As a motoring Solicitor one of the offences I get asked about often is drink driving

No one would condone drink driving, it is rightly considered one of the most serious motoring offences and certainly something that you would need advice from a specialist Motoring Solicitor.

There are a number of misconceptions about drink driving and in particular about failing to provide a sample.

It is one of the few offences (along with terrorism) that the police can take action in the police station before a solicitor arrives. You are not entitled to wait for a solicitor to arrive, or to give advice over the phone before you give a breath sample.

If you fail to provide a sample then unless you have a reasonable excuse you will be guilty of a offence. This offence carries a disqualification – just like drink driving and the sentencing guidelines for failing to provide are more serious than drink driving.

A lot of people make the mistake of thinking that because they were not drunk or were not driving then they do not have to give a sample. This is plainly wrong. If you were not driving it is essential that you provide a sample, even if you are over the limit you have a defence to drink driving – namely that you weren’t drink driving. If you don’t give a sample because you were not driving then you are guilty of failing to provide a sample and the fact that you weren’t driving is no defence at all.

What counts as a reasonable excuse? Generally it has to be a medical defence and one that can be supported by a doctors report at a later date. The fact that you have a cold and a tight chest is not going to be enough. It is not hard to blow long enough on the machine to get a sample, I have done it often (for research only obviously!)  If you suffer from asthma or a chest complaint then that may be a defence and you need to mention it to the police at the time.

If you think that you may have a defence to failing to provide a specimen or drink drive it is essential that you contact a specialist Drink Driving Solicitor as soon as possible.

How to reply to a motoring summons if you are not guilty

So you have received a summons for a motoring offence and you deny it, what do you do from here?

The summons will include a form asking various questions. The most important of these is in relation to the 3 options you get for your plea. Either – Plead Guilty by post, Plead guilty at court or plead not guilty.

The summons will normally tell you whether you need to attend court. Normally for a motoring summons it can be dealt with in your absence. This can be an advantage because it avoids taking more time off work.

The aim of returning the form when you deny it is two fold. Firstly you want to avoid any extra court hearings and secondly you want to try and get the matter dropped as soon as possible. This is the best stage to instruct a specialist motoring solicitor.

I see lots of advice from non lawyers online suggesting that you keep your cards close to your chest in relation to your defence.

I disagree with this, if you have a strong defence then let the court and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) know. The CPS will probably not have even seen the file until a not guilty plea is entered. The matter is dealt with as an admin function until a not guilty plea is entered. The CPS have a duty to review cases and see whether there is a realistic prospect of success and whether it is in the public interest.

You may be tempted to follow the advice of a non motoring solicitor and give very few details. The reality is that if you just fill the form in with no details of your defence the matter will be listed for a case management hearing when you will need to attend and explain your defence. This defeats the object of having as few hearings as possible. I would advise that you go through the matter with a motoring solicitor, get advice on what you should put in here, if they won’t give you this advice for free try someone who will (me ;-)) In brief I would suggest you need to give details of your defence,what witnesses you have and  tell the court how long you think the case will take (assume about 30 minutes per witness) I would also suggest you tell the court if there are any witnesses for the Prosecution that you don’t neet to give live evidence – in other words if there is a witness whose ‘evidence’ is not contested then you can allow their evidence to be read out rather than them attend court. An example of this may be a Police Counter clerk who simply says she checked your documents when you produced them at the police station.

An example of the advantage of doing it this way happened to me only last week. I had been consulted by a client who was charged with failing to furnish details of the driver. His defence was that he never receieved the paperwork. We completed the form and told the court of our defence, we also told them the names of 8 witnesses who would give evidence that they have had postal difficulties at that address. The result? It was dropped by the CPS at this first hearing without the need for my client to ever attend. Bear in mind this was the first time the CPS had seen the case, by setting out a full and strong defence they took the view there was not a reasonable prospect of success for them and dropped it.

Forrest Williams TV