A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Hertfordshire Police apologise to cyclist



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 11th 20, 07:45 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Mason[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,244
Default Hertfordshire Police apologise to cyclist

QUOTE:
Hertfordshire Police have apologised to a cyclist involved in a collision caused by a brake-checking motorist for ‘prematurely finalising the case’. The force said the motorist should have been questioned and that case officers had therefore been ‘given advice’ regarding collision investigation. However, the case cannot now be reopened unless new evidence comes to light.

On January 12, road.cc reader John was involved in an incident with the driver of a Ford Fusion on Melbourn Road, Royston, which we reported on here.

The video appears to show the driver clipping John while overtaking – knocking his car’s wing (SIC) mirror back in the process – before sharply hitting the brakes in the middle of an empty roundabout. That second manoeuvre resulted in John riding into the back of the vehicle..

After viewing the footage, Hertfordshire Constabulary wrote to inform John, “the weight of evidence to prove that any offences have been committed is not sufficient for a prosecution to take place.”

That came following a whole saga attempting to report the incident in the first place, as detailed in our original article.

Dissatisfied with the decision, John made an official complaint to the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

Explaining how officers decided to close the case, complaints investigator Kevin Bennett told John that the motorist had returned a notice confirming that he was driver of the car at the time and providing his account of what happened, “which does differ from yours.”

However, Bennett concludes that “there appear to be offences that should have been investigated further by way of interviewing the driver” – although he adds that a request for an interview would have been on a voluntary basis with no guarantee the driver would have participated.

Bennett continues: “All I am able to do is apologise on behalf of the Collisions Unit that they have not given you the level of service that you would have expected and I can assure you that all the Case Officers in the Collisions Unit have been given advice regarding collision investigation..

“As I have mentioned previously, as both parties have been informed that the case has been filed as ‘no further action’, the case is now officially closed and cannot be re-opened, however this does not prevent you taking out a private prosecution in a Civil Court where the burden of proof is set at a lower level as they work on the balance of probabilities, rather than beyond all reasonable doubt.”

Elsewhere in his response, Bennett seems to question some of John’s riding, including his decision to overtake a slower moving cyclist when the motorist was behind him.

“You are stating that the car was so close that the mirror hit you, whereas the driver of the Fusion has stated that as he sounded his horn as he passed you that you kicked the mirror in temper as he sounded his horn, causing damage to his car.

“It also raises the point that whilst approaching the slower moving cyclist and being aware that the Ford Fusion was close behind you, that it may have been advisable to have stayed back behind the slower cyclist until the Fusion has gone past you, therefore eliminating that hazard.

“That’s not to say I believe that you are at fault, it’s just that the evidence is inconclusive to prove one way beyond all reasonable doubt and sometimes it may be prudent to stay back and stay safe..”

Bennett also makes a reference to John looking down to clip back into his pedals after losing balance following the initial contact.

“It is clear from the footage that you were not expecting the Fusion to stop as there is no indication that you have attempted to swerve out of the way or brake and I note from your statement that you had been distracted as you were re-engaging your cleats into your pedals.

“Again, I am not suggesting that you were at fault, but merely pointing out that had you not been re-engaging your cleats that you may have been able to stop, which would also have been the case had you been travelling at a more appropriate distance behind the Fusion; a point that could be exposed by the defence if the matter was heard in court.”

John said he was “extremely disheartened” with several of Bennett’s conclusions.

“In parts it flat out contradicts the video,” he said. “For example the driver claims that he sounded his horn as he passed and that I kicked his wing (SIC) mirror. The video clearly shows (you can see the shadow) that my response to the horn was to give a clear and unambiguous arm signal that I intended to complete my overtake of the slower cyclist.
Ads
  #2  
Old April 11th 20, 07:54 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mr Pounder Esquire
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,896
Default Hertfordshire Police apologise to cyclist



Simon Mason wrote:
QUOTE:
Hertfordshire Police have apologised to a cyclist involved in a
collision caused by a brake-checking motorist for 'prematurely
finalising the case'. The force said the motorist should have been
questioned and that case officers had therefore been 'given advice'
regarding collision investigation. However, the case cannot now be
reopened unless new evidence comes to light.

On January 12, road.cc reader John was involved in an incident with
the driver of a Ford Fusion on Melbourn Road, Royston, which we
reported on here.

The video appears to show the driver clipping John while overtaking -
knocking his car's wing (SIC) mirror back in the process - before
sharply hitting the brakes in the middle of an empty roundabout. That
second manoeuvre resulted in John riding into the back of the
vehicle.

After viewing the footage, Hertfordshire Constabulary wrote to inform
John, "the weight of evidence to prove that any offences have been
committed is not sufficient for a prosecution to take place."

That came following a whole saga attempting to report the incident in
the first place, as detailed in our original article.

Dissatisfied with the decision, John made an official complaint to
the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

Explaining how officers decided to close the case, complaints
investigator Kevin Bennett told John that the motorist had returned a
notice confirming that he was driver of the car at the time and
providing his account of what happened, "which does differ from
yours."

However, Bennett concludes that "there appear to be offences that
should have been investigated further by way of interviewing the
driver" - although he adds that a request for an interview would have
been on a voluntary basis with no guarantee the driver would have
participated.

Bennett continues: "All I am able to do is apologise on behalf of the
Collisions Unit that they have not given you the level of service
that you would have expected and I can assure you that all the Case
Officers in the Collisions Unit have been given advice regarding
collision investigation.

"As I have mentioned previously, as both parties have been informed
that the case has been filed as 'no further action', the case is now
officially closed and cannot be re-opened, however this does not
prevent you taking out a private prosecution in a Civil Court where
the burden of proof is set at a lower level as they work on the
balance of probabilities, rather than beyond all reasonable doubt."

Elsewhere in his response, Bennett seems to question some of John's
riding, including his decision to overtake a slower moving cyclist
when the motorist was behind him.

"You are stating that the car was so close that the mirror hit you,
whereas the driver of the Fusion has stated that as he sounded his
horn as he passed you that you kicked the mirror in temper as he
sounded his horn, causing damage to his car.

"It also raises the point that whilst approaching the slower moving
cyclist and being aware that the Ford Fusion was close behind you,
that it may have been advisable to have stayed back behind the slower
cyclist until the Fusion has gone past you, therefore eliminating
that hazard.

"That's not to say I believe that you are at fault, it's just that
the evidence is inconclusive to prove one way beyond all reasonable
doubt and sometimes it may be prudent to stay back and stay safe."

Bennett also makes a reference to John looking down to clip back into
his pedals after losing balance following the initial contact.

"It is clear from the footage that you were not expecting the Fusion
to stop as there is no indication that you have attempted to swerve
out of the way or brake and I note from your statement that you had
been distracted as you were re-engaging your cleats into your pedals.

"Again, I am not suggesting that you were at fault, but merely
pointing out that had you not been re-engaging your cleats that you
may have been able to stop, which would also have been the case had
you been travelling at a more appropriate distance behind the Fusion;
a point that could be exposed by the defence if the matter was heard
in court."

John said he was "extremely disheartened" with several of Bennett's
conclusions.

"In parts it flat out contradicts the video," he said. "For example
the driver claims that he sounded his horn as he passed and that I
kicked his wing (SIC) mirror. The video clearly shows (you can see
the shadow) that my response to the horn was to give a clear and
unambiguous arm signal that I intended to complete my overtake of the
slower cyclist.

"I was already overtaking when the horn was sounded, my exit from the
roundabout was already taking into account that overtake and I'm
moving about twice the speed of the other cyclist.

"Despite the clear and unambiguous video evidence, it appears that
the driver's account is given equal credence to what actually
happened."

Reflecting on the collision on the roundabout, John added: "The car
was well ahead and pulling away when I glanced down as I was having
trouble re-engaging my cleat and was caught out by the brake check.
Frankly it was totally unexpected.

"I'll know different in future, but in over 35 years of driving,
motorcycling and cycling as an adult I HAVE NEVER had that manoeuvre
performed on me before. It is incredibly dangerous and is considered
by most police forces in the UK and abroad as a serious moving
traffic offence."

https://road.cc/content/news/brake-c...stioned-272667


Nobody gives a ****. Get a life.


  #3  
Old April 11th 20, 08:07 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Mason[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,244
Default Hertfordshire Police apologise to cyclist

On Saturday, April 11, 2020 at 7:55:07 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:

https://road.cc/content/news/brake-c...stioned-272667


Nobody gives a ****. Get a life.


Why did you comment then?
  #4  
Old April 11th 20, 08:31 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mr Pounder Esquire
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,896
Default Hertfordshire Police apologise to cyclist

Simon Mason wrote:
On Saturday, April 11, 2020 at 7:55:07 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:

https://road.cc/content/news/brake-c...stioned-272667


Nobody gives a ****. Get a life.


Why did you comment then?


This group is for entertaining the silly cyclists, the silly cyclists who
reply. It is fun taking the slash out of cyclists.


  #5  
Old April 12th 20, 07:29 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
MrCheerful
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,757
Default Hertfordshire Police apologise to cyclist

On 11/04/2020 19:54, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Simon Mason wrote:
QUOTE:
He
the driver's account is given equal credence to what actually
happened."

Reflecting on the collision on the roundabout, John added: "The car
was well ahead and pulling away when I glanced down as I was having
trouble re-engaging my cleat and was caught out by the brake check.
Frankly it was totally unexpected.

"I'll know different in future, but in over 35 years of driving,
motorcycling and cycling as an adult I HAVE NEVER had that manoeuvre
performed on me before. It is incredibly dangerous and is considered
by most police forces in the UK and abroad as a serious moving
traffic offence."

https://road.cc/content/news/brake-c...stioned-272667


Nobody gives a ****. Get a life.



So a cyclist admits that he was not looking where he was going and was
not in proper control and as a result ran into a vehicle that had
stopped in front of him, that sounds very like careless riding at the least.

  #6  
Old April 12th 20, 09:54 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Kelly[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 269
Default Hertfordshire Police apologise to cyclist

MrCheerful wrote:

So a cyclist admits that he was not looking where he was going and was
not in proper control and as a result ran into a vehicle that had
stopped in front of him, that sounds very like careless riding at the least.


If you read the full text of the letter sent to the cyclist, John, by
the complaints investigator, Kevin Bennett, (printed at the end of the
report) you will see that this incident is more complicated than
initially indicated by the journalist's report.

The driver appeared to perform an 'abrupt' stop on the roundabout (he
has given, nor been asked to give, an explanation for this) and the
cyclist rode into the back of the drivers car. At which point the
driver moves off again and does not stop at the scene to exchange
details with the cyclist. The cyclist then reports the incident to the
police and it was eventually agreed that the cyclist not been injured
in the incident but it would be passed onto the correct department to
deal with.

Kevin Bennett, the investigator, then goes on to explain:
QUOTE: "...it was noted by the Case Officer that you had considered
the incident not to have been a road traffic collision, but you made
reference to it being an 'assault' and that the 'weapon used in the
assault was a motor vehicle'. You have also stated that the 'car
driver clearly aware of my presence & deliberately caused this
incident'. Therefore, having read your comments the Case Officer quite
rightly took the decision that this should not be recorded as a road
traffic collision, but as an assault, which is the first point where
the system has let you down, because from there on the report was sent
for crime recording, but was returned saying that it was not a crime
but a collision. ...both parties have been informed that the case has
been filed as no further action, the case is now officially closed and
cannot be re-opened, however this does not prevent you taking out a
private prosecution in a Civil Court where the burden of proof is set
at a lower level as they work on the balance of probabilities, rather
than beyond all reasonable doubt." ENDQUOTE

Both cyclist and driver look a bit culpable in this whole incident to
me. But if the cyclist is unhappy with the way he was dealt with, it
is up to him to decide whether it would be wise of him or not to take
out a private prosecution.

  #7  
Old April 12th 20, 10:01 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Peter Keller[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,736
Default Hertfordshire Police apologise to cyclist

On 12/04/2020 07:31, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Simon Mason wrote:
On Saturday, April 11, 2020 at 7:55:07 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:

https://road.cc/content/news/brake-c...stioned-272667

Nobody gives a ****. Get a life.


Why did you comment then?


This group is for entertaining the silly cyclists, the silly cyclists who
reply. It is fun taking the slash out of cyclists.



Pounder is a slime-emitting ocean-dweller that's remained unchanged for
300 million years--and it shows. It has a skull (but no spine), velvet
smooth skin, and a terrifying pit of a mouth that’s lined with rows of
razor-sharp teeth.
  #8  
Old April 12th 20, 10:10 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
MrCheerful
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,757
Default Hertfordshire Police apologise to cyclist

On 12/04/2020 09:54, Kelly wrote:
MrCheerful wrote:

So a cyclist admits that he was not looking where he was going and was
not in proper control and as a result ran into a vehicle that had
stopped in front of him, that sounds very like careless riding at the least.


If you read the full text of the letter sent to the cyclist, John, by
the complaints investigator, Kevin Bennett, (printed at the end of the
report) you will see that this incident is more complicated than
initially indicated by the journalist's report.

The driver appeared to perform an 'abrupt' stop on the roundabout (he
has given, nor been asked to give, an explanation for this) and the
cyclist rode into the back of the drivers car. At which point the
driver moves off again and does not stop at the scene to exchange
details with the cyclist. The cyclist then reports the incident to the
police and it was eventually agreed that the cyclist not been injured
in the incident but it would be passed onto the correct department to
deal with.

Kevin Bennett, the investigator, then goes on to explain:
QUOTE: "...it was noted by the Case Officer that you had considered
the incident not to have been a road traffic collision, but you made
reference to it being an 'assault' and that the 'weapon used in the
assault was a motor vehicle'. You have also stated that the 'car
driver clearly aware of my presence & deliberately caused this
incident'. Therefore, having read your comments the Case Officer quite
rightly took the decision that this should not be recorded as a road
traffic collision, but as an assault, which is the first point where
the system has let you down, because from there on the report was sent
for crime recording, but was returned saying that it was not a crime
but a collision. ...both parties have been informed that the case has
been filed as no further action, the case is now officially closed and
cannot be re-opened, however this does not prevent you taking out a
private prosecution in a Civil Court where the burden of proof is set
at a lower level as they work on the balance of probabilities, rather
than beyond all reasonable doubt." ENDQUOTE

Both cyclist and driver look a bit culpable in this whole incident to
me. But if the cyclist is unhappy with the way he was dealt with, it
is up to him to decide whether it would be wise of him or not to take
out a private prosecution.



If you run into the back of someone it means you were travelling too
closely to be able to stop in time. Not looking where you are going is
a reason for this happening.

What may or may not have happened earlier is irrelevant.

A cyclist with his feet jammed onto pedals that are unsuitable for road
use has run into the back of a clearly visible object while the cyclist
was looking at his feet.

If the car had suddenly reversed into the cyclist then the collision
would likely be the car driver's fault, but from the cyclist's own words
the fault is by the cyclist.
  #9  
Old April 12th 20, 10:22 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mr Pounder Esquire
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,896
Default Hertfordshire Police apologise to cyclist

Peter Keller wrote:
On 12/04/2020 07:31, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Simon Mason wrote:
On Saturday, April 11, 2020 at 7:55:07 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:

https://road.cc/content/news/brake-c...stioned-272667

Nobody gives a ****. Get a life.

Why did you comment then?


This group is for entertaining the silly cyclists, the silly
cyclists who reply. It is fun taking the slash out of cyclists.



Pounder is a slime-emitting ocean-dweller that's remained unchanged
for 300 million years--and it shows. It has a skull (but no spine),
velvet smooth skin, and a terrifying pit of a mouth that's lined with
rows of razor-sharp teeth.


It is fun taking the slash out of silly cyclists.
Another **** take.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ29fYDm9DM




  #10  
Old April 12th 20, 10:35 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Kelly[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 269
Default Hertfordshire Police apologise to cyclist

MrCheerful wrote:

On 12/04/2020 09:54, Kelly wrote:
MrCheerful wrote:

So a cyclist admits that he was not looking where he was going and was
not in proper control and as a result ran into a vehicle that had
stopped in front of him, that sounds very like careless riding at the least.


If you read the full text of the letter sent to the cyclist, John, by
the complaints investigator, Kevin Bennett, (printed at the end of the
report) you will see that this incident is more complicated than
initially indicated by the journalist's report.

The driver appeared to perform an 'abrupt' stop on the roundabout (he
has given, nor been asked to give, an explanation for this) and the
cyclist rode into the back of the drivers car. At which point the
driver moves off again and does not stop at the scene to exchange
details with the cyclist. The cyclist then reports the incident to the
police and it was eventually agreed that the cyclist not been injured
in the incident but it would be passed onto the correct department to
deal with.

Kevin Bennett, the investigator, then goes on to explain:
QUOTE: "...it was noted by the Case Officer that you had considered
the incident not to have been a road traffic collision, but you made
reference to it being an 'assault' and that the 'weapon used in the
assault was a motor vehicle'. You have also stated that the 'car
driver clearly aware of my presence & deliberately caused this
incident'. Therefore, having read your comments the Case Officer quite
rightly took the decision that this should not be recorded as a road
traffic collision, but as an assault, which is the first point where
the system has let you down, because from there on the report was sent
for crime recording, but was returned saying that it was not a crime
but a collision. ...both parties have been informed that the case has
been filed as no further action, the case is now officially closed and
cannot be re-opened, however this does not prevent you taking out a
private prosecution in a Civil Court where the burden of proof is set
at a lower level as they work on the balance of probabilities, rather
than beyond all reasonable doubt." ENDQUOTE

Both cyclist and driver look a bit culpable in this whole incident to
me. But if the cyclist is unhappy with the way he was dealt with, it
is up to him to decide whether it would be wise of him or not to take
out a private prosecution.



If you run into the back of someone it means you were travelling too
closely to be able to stop in time.


The general rule is undoubtedly that, if you are in a vehicle and run
into the back of someone else's vehicle, it will be your fault and you
will not be able to make a claim against anyone else. But what if the
driver in front behaved unreasonably?

Not looking where you are going is a reason for this happening.

What may or may not have happened earlier is irrelevant.


Not sure about that one, what about if you were looking to establish
someone else's unreasonable behaviour?

A cyclist with his feet jammed onto pedals that are unsuitable for road
use has run into the back of a clearly visible object while the cyclist
was looking at his feet.

If the car had suddenly reversed into the cyclist then the collision
would likely be the car driver's fault, but from the cyclist's own words
the fault is by the cyclist.


As a general principle, though, if you drive your vehicle into the
back of another one but believed the other driver had behaved
unreasonably, would you not cosider taking legal advice from a
personal injury lawyer such as:

https://morayclaims.co.uk/if-someone...s-their-fault/

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
'Cyclist did this and he didn't apologise' Mr Pounder Esquire UK 0 March 27th 17 09:42 PM
Cyclist badly injured in crash wants to APOLOGISE to Good Samaritanwho rescued her Bod[_5_] UK 12 January 13th 17 10:50 PM
Police hunt cyclist that robbed a 90 year old lady cyclist MrCheerful UK 4 August 4th 16 06:26 PM
Driver kills cyclist, cops apologise for delays. spindrift UK 149 May 16th 09 03:01 PM
Uni Jousting in Hertfordshire samia Unicycling 8 July 14th 06 12:27 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.