“I accept on your part it should not be described as road rage.”

[glenn forger]

There is no evidence that the rider kicked the car, the evidence about the damage that cost £300 was not submitted. In a court case where two people tell different stories one must be lying.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

And how's he gone and earned £600 out of it?

not to disagree with any of your post but pedant hat on, fines totalled £600, not compensation. but yeah, if he'd got money it would have been very odd unless it was immediately deducted the value of the damage caused.

*edit - cross post with cd365*

 

[mr messy]

Kicked car to let driver know cyclist was there and about to be runover...just saying

 

[Tanis8472]

So she's on the road...and she's in a rage...and she's harrassing the man...and then feels the need to knock him off his bike...doesn't that fit the definition?

And how's he gone and earned £600 out of it?

And how's she still got a licence?

Didn't even have an MOT, so her insurance can't have been valid either?!?


Puzzled.

Not having an MOT or Tax for that matter does not invalidate the insurance.

The CPS won't usually prosecute for MOT document offences if the vehicle subsequently passes and earns a ticket within 7 days. Don't ask me why, no other type of criminal gets 7 days Grace to put their offending right.

Technically, the MOT test is only valid for the day it is issued.

 

[Drago]

It's only 'valid' while the car is on the testers premises. It's.possible to have a perfect car with no MOT, or an old knacker with Fred Flintstone floors and 6 months MOT. It's a document, nothing more.

Kicked car to let driver know cyclist was there and about to be runover...just saying

If things are that desperate the effort is better invested in trying to say save one's bacon , not kicking the vehicle. It's simply an act of thuggery.

Just saying.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

How is that not criminal damage for him and assault using a car as a weapon for her?

Because the court/judge says so.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Are you sure about that?

Think so unless it goes to appeal

 

[glenn forger]

The court don't decide the charges.

 

[CopperCyclist]

How is that not criminal damage for him and assault using a car as a weapon for her?

It is, and it would (or perhaps I had better say *should*) under home office crime recording rules be recorded exactly as that.

However, what crime is committed and recorded and what CPS actually run with at court are more often different than similar.

 

[Ganymede]

There we have it. Deliberately hitting a cyclist with your car, and admitting it, isn't dangerous.

Dear Lord almighty. This sucks.

 

[glenn forger]

She seems to cater for a different market, Katie Price was her model.

 

[Tanis8472]

AFAIK the CPS will go with a charge/charges that they think will get a conviction.
Sometimes seem that the punishment doesnt fit the crime, but I think I'd rather have someone convicted on a lesser charge than not being convicted on a greater charge and getting off.

 

[Pale Rider]

An ebiker who kicked the door of an Audi was chased and run over, but not seriously injured.

The Audi driver admitted careless driving after the more serious charge of dangerous driving was dropped.

A case of six and two threes?

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crim...ike-after-he-kicked-her-audi-tt-10145932.html

 

[Turbo Rider]

She was fined £600, he doesn't get that.

not to disagree with any of your post but pedant hat on, fines totalled £600, not compensation.

Not having an MOT or Tax for that matter does not invalidate the insurance.



Technically, the MOT test is only valid for the day it is issued.

Ah, ok, ta. That's three new things learned in one outing.

The outcome on the whole though seems an odd way of running things. All sorts of wrong messages going out.

 

[Tanis8472]

Yeah, its a catch 22 i know
If they did the greater charge and that failed but could then be proved on a lesser charge i'd be a lot happier.