Police caution for simple accident

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

GDAWG10

Active Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2012
Messages
238
Location
London
Car
C Class Sports Coupe
Mum was in an accident the other day. She was turning right from a main road into a residential road and collided with a moped going in the other direction which cut across her path. The guy came off the bike and someone shouted to call a ambulance which she did. The police then turned up. The guy wasn't injured but was asked to stay on the floor so it looked worse than what it was. When she phoned me afterwards she was upset and said "I just knocked someone off their bike". Everyone handles things differently and she assumed all responsibility and was probably in shock. After my questioning, she saw some sense and realised if anything the bike came out of nowhere, was probably going too fast etc...because she was already turned going into the road but who knows who's at fault if anyone and could have been both. She said she didn't see a bike when she was turning in.

Anyway, the police said to her that they have to caution her to take a statement, read her her rights and took a statement. They were going to breathalyse but said it was too far away and didn't need to. Insurance etc been informed. Could the police have not taken a statement without a caution which now stays on her DBS and record. I don't think it affects travel anywhere because the USA ESTA question is about arrested and convicted but is this usual practice and will having the caution affect anything? (If anyone aware of issues travelling etc). Thanks.
 
Mum was in an accident the other day. She was turning right from a main road into a residential road and collided with a moped going in the other direction which cut across her path. The guy came off the bike and someone shouted to call a ambulance which she did. The police then turned up. The guy wasn't injured but was asked to stay on the floor so it looked worse than what it was. When she phoned me afterwards she was upset and said "I just knocked someone off their bike". Everyone handles things differently and she assumed all responsibility and was probably in shock. After my questioning, she saw some sense and realised if anything the bike came out of nowhere, was probably going too fast etc...because she was already turned going into the road but who knows who's at fault if anyone and could have been both. She said she didn't see a bike when she was turning in.

Anyway, the police said to her that they have to caution her to take a statement, read her her rights and took a statement. They were going to breathalyse but said it was too far away and didn't need to. Insurance etc been informed. Could the police have not taken a statement without a caution which now stays on her DBS and record. I don't think it affects travel anywhere because the USA ESTA question is about arrested and convicted but is this usual practice and will having the caution affect anything? (If anyone aware of issues travelling etc). Thanks.
Your mum has not received a police caution.

She will have been interviewed at the roadside (standard procedure) and will have been cautioned, as in read her rights, to all the interview to be admissible. A legal necessity. She has not given a statement.

Nothing has gone on your mum's. "record" as such so no issue re FBS or travel. The worst that might happen is that she's reported for due care. That's not a criminal issue.

The officers were correct to leave the casualty on the floor. Level of injury unknown, take no chances in making things worse by moving him.
 
Thank you.

From what she told me, I assumed she received an official caution as in on her record. I thought that was strange.
 
I strongly suspect the moped rider was told to stay on the ground is because (I assume) the police officer wasn't a doctor and therefore couldn't declare the rider had no injuries.

Also, I know it's a figure of speech but the rider didn't 'come out of nowhere'. Ten yards before the collision he was ten yards away, twenty yards before the collision he was twenty yards away and so on.
 
A lawyer once told me that when you're involved in a crash, the sights and the stress can make things look quite horrific, but if it gets to a courtroom then 'in the cold day of light' events will look completely different.

The biker lying in the road, the ambulance crew, the police, all these are irrelevant. The biker will either have an injury, or not - and that's a matter for professional medical assessment. If he does have an injury, it will be either minor or more serious etc. That's all that will go into the police record, and none of the drama of day.

(The biker may successfully claim off your mother's insurance for 'personal injury', but that's irrelevant for the police and the CPS - from the legal perspective, an injury has to be proven to a much higher threshold)

If the biker does not have an injury, than from the legal perspective it is a 'damage only' accident, and in most cases the police will not follow it up (again, even if the biker later successfully claims off your insurer for an injury that can
not be independently verified).

If the biker does have an injury, then the police action will depend on the severity of the injury.

As for liability... given that it's a minor accident, no one will look into the particular circumstances in any great detail (e.g. checking CCTV in the area of dashcam footage from passing cars etc). Most likely, your mother's liability will simply be taken for granted by her insurer given the circumstances.

If your mother has protected NCD, then the increase on next year's premium will be small.

So ultimately, overall the implications for your mother will be minimal.
 
Thank you.

From what she told me, I assumed she received an official caution as in on her record. I thought that was strange.

Under what circumstances would you need to report having received a police caution? I don't think it will show up on a DBS, possibly on an Enhanced DBS - but even so what role will be affected by having received a police caution for a road traffic accident?

And, a police caution will be given in writing.

A verbal caution... does it get recorded anywhere?
 
Sounds like a classic motorcycle accident where the car driver was turning right and looked but didn't see the motorcycle. The motorcycle didn't come out of nowhere, it's a vision thing due to the size and shape of a motorcycle. Happens all the time and the only thing a motorcyclist can do is make themselves as conspicuous as possible and ride defensively.

If above is correct then on the face of it I'm afraid it sounds like your mum was at fault.
 
Mopeds don't come out of nowhere.

Nothing matters unless she is charged with an offence
 
If anyone is interested in why motorcycles are not seen, this is the best explanation I've read. Bear with the language due to the fact it's from a motorcyclists perspective and from the US !

43% of all motorcycle accidents occur as a result of an oncoming vehicle turning across the path of a rider. Drivers simply fail to recognize the motorcyclist's right of way. Their typical lament is "I just didn't see him". You might lament "How the hell is that possible, you were looking right at me, you zoned-out space cadet!"

Some motorcyclists may feel that drivers deliberately choose not to see us. They feel that drivers resent us because of our agility, acceleration, or designer leathers. Others suspect that some car drivers must be anally retentive psychopaths who compensate for their fear of flying by driving to kill.

In the urban rain forests of LA or New York, that may be true. But elsewhere, most drivers really don't see motorcycles. Well yes, their eyes see us, but the image doesn't register in the brain. Why is that?

Some intelligent doctor types have postulated that the brain is an organ which rejects, rather than gathers information. They believe that if all the information collected by the senses were to register, the brain would experience sensory overload and blow its fuses.

For example, all the billboards, signs and other visual messages along the road can't possibly register in the brains of car drivers. That would cause sensory overload. To prevent that, the brain tends to organize the world into systems; those which are important to the activity at hand, and those which aren't. The car driver's brain has learned to exclude the non-essentials, and to focus only on those objects which are a threat to survival. On the road, those objects are predominantly other cars. Because cars are much wider than they are tall, the brain systematizes threats as objects characterized by horizontal lines.

Things characterized by vertical lines are eliminated from consciousness as non-threatening, extraneous information. Trees, lamp standards, sign posts, bridge abutments, buildings; none of these vertical objects are liable to jump out in front of the driver to threaten his existence.

Along comes a motorcycle. The driver's eyes give it a quick visual scan and the brain determines that this too is a vertical object. No threat. No further focus required. Zone out. Continue replay of last nights debauchery.

The next thing you know, the driver turns left across your lane even though you can see him looking right at you!
 
Sounds like a classic motorcycle accident where the car driver was turning right and looked but didn't see the motorcycle. The motorcycle didn't come out of nowhere, it's a vision thing due to the size and shape of a motorcycle. Happens all the time and the only thing a motorcyclist can do is make themselves as conspicuous as possible and ride defensively.

If above is correct then on the face of it I'm afraid it sounds like your mum was at fault.

My thoughts also. AFAIK mopeds are restricted to 30 mph or so, in which case it's unlikely it was going too fast (on a main road). Glad to hear the rider was OK and hope it all gets sorted without too much hassle.
 
If anyone is interested in why motorcycles are not seen, this is the best explanation I've read. Bear with the language due to the fact it's from a motorcyclists perspective and from the US !

43% of all motorcycle accidents occur as a result of an oncoming vehicle turning across the path of a rider. Drivers simply fail to recognize the motorcyclist's right of way. Their typical lament is "I just didn't see him". You might lament "How the hell is that possible, you were looking right at me, you zoned-out space cadet!"

Some motorcyclists may feel that drivers deliberately choose not to see us. They feel that drivers resent us because of our agility, acceleration, or designer leathers. Others suspect that some car drivers must be anally retentive psychopaths who compensate for their fear of flying by driving to kill.

In the urban rain forests of LA or New York, that may be true. But elsewhere, most drivers really don't see motorcycles. Well yes, their eyes see us, but the image doesn't register in the brain. Why is that?

Some intelligent doctor types have postulated that the brain is an organ which rejects, rather than gathers information. They believe that if all the information collected by the senses were to register, the brain would experience sensory overload and blow its fuses.

For example, all the billboards, signs and other visual messages along the road can't possibly register in the brains of car drivers. That would cause sensory overload. To prevent that, the brain tends to organize the world into systems; those which are important to the activity at hand, and those which aren't. The car driver's brain has learned to exclude the non-essentials, and to focus only on those objects which are a threat to survival. On the road, those objects are predominantly other cars. Because cars are much wider than they are tall, the brain systematizes threats as objects characterized by horizontal lines.

Things characterized by vertical lines are eliminated from consciousness as non-threatening, extraneous information. Trees, lamp standards, sign posts, bridge abutments, buildings; none of these vertical objects are liable to jump out in front of the driver to threaten his existence.

Along comes a motorcycle. The driver's eyes give it a quick visual scan and the brain determines that this too is a vertical object. No threat. No further focus required. Zone out. Continue replay of last nights debauchery.

The next thing you know, the driver turns left across your lane even though you can see him looking right at you!


What a load of boll0cks.

Its just general lack of attention, nothing deliberate or scientific.

Some people just try and make excuses to keep their jobs, the above quoted is a fine example.

Bikes are small so sometimes you don't see them, that is an unfortunate part of riding bikes.

I ride bikes.
 
For example, all the billboards, signs and other visual messages along the road can't possibly register in the brains of car drivers. That would cause sensory overload. To prevent that, the brain tends to organize the world into systems; those which are important to the activity at hand, and those which aren't.

Things characterized by vertical lines are eliminated from consciousness as non-threatening, extraneous information. Trees, lamp standards, sign posts, bridge abutments, buildings; none of these vertical objects are liable to jump out in front of the driver to threaten his existence.

Along comes a motorcycle. The driver's eyes give it a quick visual scan and the brain determines that this too is a vertical object. No threat[/I]


Sorry officer I thought it was(insert vertical object here) so I didn't see a threat.


As a car driver do you accept that?
 
My own pet theory (i used to ride motor bikes) is that drivers see an 'unboxed' (not in a car , van etc.) human and the brain files it as 'pedestrian', therefore not on the road and safe to proceed.
 
As a car driver do you accept that?

No and I don't accept it as a motorcyclist either. But it's a fact that car drivers sometimes "look but don't see" otherwise 43% of motorcycle accidents wouldn't be due to cars turning right. I don't accept that car drivers do it deliberately. There has to be an explanation which I've attempted to provide. At least consider it as the unconscious reason behind "lack of due care and attention"

If you don't accept my explanation then consider why it is that cars don't as often turn right in front of other cars.
 
If you don't accept my explanation then consider why it is that cars don't as often turn right in front of other cars.

Because cars are approximately 2+m wide, and 5+m long, where as a bike is about 1½ foot wide and 2m long.

Where as billboards,trees and Bridge abutments are huge!

Really?
 
You just don't see bikers sometimes because you don't see them, it's unfortunate.

I've been on the receiving end numerous times, but fortunately they haven't hit me, I dont blame them, but I don't think they mistook me for a tree or a lamp post!

I've also nearly took a biker out, I didn't see him, I didn't think it was a bridge abutment or other vertical object that was no threat....I didn't see them.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom