# Summons following road traffic accident.



## Red2 (1 Jul 2009)

Hi All,I've been summoned to go to court for driving without due care and attention,and am anxious to know what penalty I can expect.

I was turning right from minor to major road,stationary position with my right indicator on,as traffic was coming from left.On the right in the distance I noticed a motorbike coming.By the time my left was clear,the bike coming from my right was closer.It had its left indicator on and was coming slowly but had not commenced the left turn.I started to turn and the motorcyclist braked,skidded and collided with my car.I discovered subsequently that he had forgotten to turn off his indicator following a left turn he made onto the major road and intended going straight on.

He was injured(minor injuries) and taken to hospital.

This happened in an urban area and I had 2 penalty points on my licence for speeding which came off my licence 3 months after the accident.
Anyone know what I should expect please as someone told me I could be disqualified!!! Thanks.


----------



## JonG (1 Jul 2009)

From [broken link removed]
looks like 5 points added to your license.


----------



## j26 (1 Jul 2009)

While I have some sympathy for you, as a biker I do hope you are penalised harshly for this.  I presume that at the very least your insurance has sorted out repairs and medical bills etc for the poor biker.

You were aware that a bike was coming and yet you still pulled into his path?  That's ludicrous driving, and imo goes beyond careless, verging on dangerous.  *Bikes (motorised or pedal) are vulnerable road users* - it is your duty to pay particular attention to them on the road.  We don't have the protection you do in your shiny metal box, and rely on you doing your job properly to survive on a daily basis.  I'm sure we've all seen the ads telling bikers to slow down, but the ad doesn't mention that in the vast majority of motorcycle fatalities involving a collision with a car, it's the cars fault.  

As regards what might happen, you'd better hope the Judge is in a good mood.  The evidence you have presented yourself is that you saw a motorbike, but pulled out regardless.  The bike was travelling slowly (in your own words), but still didn't have enough time to take evasive action, suggesting that the bike was very close to you when you pulled out.  If that's presented in similar form in Court, a  Judge in bad form might be inclined to throw the book at you for that level of disregard for anothers safety.


----------



## Romulan (1 Jul 2009)

Did you miss the part about the motor bike indicating to turn left?
Or do motor bikes have no responsibility?

I sympathise with the driver and while I tend to wait until those indicating commence their turn, I would attribute some blame to the motor bike.


----------



## j26 (1 Jul 2009)

Romulan said:


> Did you miss the part about the motor bike indicating to turn left?
> Or do motor bikes have no responsibility?



I remember the basic driving lesson was that you never trust an indicator on a car or bike.  There's very limited defence to be had from that.


----------



## mathepac (1 Jul 2009)

Romulan said:


> ... Or do motor bikes have no responsibility? ...


You'll probably discover that he's had charges threatened - failure to stop in time to avoid a collision, riding without due care & attention, etc.

BTW,  I'm not taking sides.


----------



## DeeFox (2 Jul 2009)

Romulan said:


> I sympathise with the driver and while I tend to wait until those indicating commence their turn, I would attribute some blame to the motor bike.


 
+1.  
I hate when drivers leave indicator lights on. How can they not see or hear the flashing indicator?
(Although maybe this is not as applicable in the case of a motorbike).


----------



## Mpsox (2 Jul 2009)

j26 said:


> While I have some sympathy for you, as a biker I do hope you are penalised harshly for this. I presume that at the very least your insurance has sorted out repairs and medical bills etc for the poor biker.
> 
> You were aware that a bike was coming and yet you still pulled into his path? That's ludicrous driving, and imo goes beyond careless, verging on dangerous. *Bikes (motorised or pedal) are vulnerable road users* - it is your duty to pay particular attention to them on the road. We don't have the protection you do in your shiny metal box, and rely on you doing your job properly to survive on a daily basis. I'm sure we've all seen the ads telling bikers to slow down, but the ad doesn't mention that in the vast majority of motorcycle fatalities involving a collision with a car, it's the cars fault.
> 
> As regards what might happen, you'd better hope the Judge is in a good mood. The evidence you have presented yourself is that you saw a motorbike, but pulled out regardless. The bike was travelling slowly (in your own words), but still didn't have enough time to take evasive action, suggesting that the bike was very close to you when you pulled out. If that's presented in similar form in Court, a Judge in bad form might be inclined to throw the book at you for that level of disregard for anothers safety.


 
Do you not think the biker has some responsibility on this occassion, after all he was driving around with his indicator flashing and not noticing it. Surely he too should be prosecuted for driving without due care and attention. 

Incidentally, I've no arguement that we should pay attention for motorbike users, but motor bike users also have a responsibility not to ride their bike like a complete and utter plonker. I'm fed up being passed out by bikers who seem to think speed limits and basic rules of the road don't apply to them


----------



## LS400 (2 Jul 2009)

As I have the use of both car and bike, I am concerned at the attitude of j26, as you cant see the danger brought on by the motor bike. I have left the indicator on having completed a turn as I am use to self cancelling in the car and I can see what danger I could cause. So should you as a bike user.


----------



## billythefish (2 Jul 2009)

I agree with Mpsox. Bikers really frustrate me sometimes. They're terrible for tailgaiting. When traffic is stopped, the want to weave in and out to get to the front and then on the open road, they want to be treated like a car. Then, apprently J26 would have us believe that their safety is the responsibility of us car drivers in our "shiny metal boxes"...

I do believe though that an indicator is only a promise of turning. If you pull out before the vehicle reaches you, you take your chances.


----------



## j26 (2 Jul 2009)

Interesting that so many here are quick to rush to the defence of a poor car user and blame the biker.

I'm going on what the OP said - s/he was stationery and pulled straight into oncoming moving traffic, hitting a bike that the OP admits was going slowly.  The OP was aware of the bike on the road, seeing it twice, but discounted it, thereby injuring a person.  The only (very limited) defence is that the bike had an indicator flashing, but anyone who has had driving lessons knows that a flashing indicator means nothing more than the fact that the indicators work.  The OP specifically states that the bike had not commenced any turning manoever.  It's a clearcut case of careless driving, verging on dangerous because of the fact that the OP was aware of the bike, but discounted it.

And yet, somehow people are saying it's the bikers fault 


To billythefish - yes, you may be surprised to learn that you do indeed have particular duties towards other road users


			
				Rules of the Road said:
			
		

> Never put a cyclist or motorcyclist at risk and know your duty to be aware of       them. They are especially vulnerable if there is a crash.
> In particular, watch for cyclists and motorcyclists:
> 
> 
> at junctions...



To the others ranting on about how frustrating bikers can be
Yes there are bad bikers out there - but that's not an excuse in this case.


To the OP,
Your best option is to plead guilty, admit that it was an error of judgement, mention the indicator, but that of course you are aware you should not have relied on it, and that you have learned a very valuable lesson.
I'd get a solicitor if I were you - it is a serious charge.


----------



## jhegarty (2 Jul 2009)

j26 said:


> Interesting that so many here are quick to rush to the defence of a poor car user and blame the biker.



The only posts I see are from people who saying they were both at fault.


----------



## Mpsox (2 Jul 2009)

j26 said:


> Interesting that so many here are quick to rush to the defence of a poor car user and blame the biker.
> 
> I'm going on what the OP said - s/he was stationery and pulled straight into oncoming moving traffic, hitting a bike that the OP admits was going slowly. The OP was aware of the bike on the road, seeing it twice, but discounted it, thereby injuring a person. The only (very limited) defence is that the bike had an indicator flashing, but anyone who has had driving lessons knows that a flashing indicator means nothing more than the fact that the indicators work. The OP specifically states that the bike had not commenced any turning manoever. It's a clearcut case of careless driving, verging on dangerous because of the fact that the OP was aware of the bike, but discounted it.
> 
> ...


 
I'm not saying that it's the bikers fault, it's both of their fault and from what the OP said, both were driving without due care


----------



## billythefish (2 Jul 2009)

J26, I think the only one ranting is your goodself. Of course i'm aware that I have a responsibility to other road users. My point is that bikers tend to transgress against me much much more often than I might do against them.

What about the biker's duties towards me? This is my point. I don't think you understood my post properly from up there on your soapbox...


----------



## j26 (2 Jul 2009)

billythefish said:


> What about the biker's duties towards me? This is my point. I don't think you understood my post properly from up there on your soapbox...



As someone who was nearly killed this very morning by a car pulling into a roundabout on me (I was indicating correctly btw),  I feel entitled to climb up there the odd time .  I won't excuse bad biking, but the simple fact is that bikers are more vulnerable than car drivers, and accordingly car drivers should take more care.


----------



## J.Daniels (2 Jul 2009)

You're in big big trouble if the biker's version of events (ie. signaling) don't tally with yours. 

Off the road I would imagine.


----------



## billythefish (2 Jul 2009)

j26 said:


> As someone who was nearly killed this very morning by a car pulling into a roundabout on me (I was indicating correctly btw),  I feel entitled to climb up there the odd time .  I won't excuse bad biking, but the simple fact is that bikers are more vulnerable than car drivers, and accordingly car drivers should take more care.



Bikers use bikes at their own risk. To suggest that they should be allowed to take a lesser level of care than a car driver is just preposterous IMHO. All road users should take no less than the utmost care. Yes, J26, that includes you bikers!


----------



## j26 (2 Jul 2009)

billythefish said:


> To suggest that they should be allowed to take a lesser level of care than a car driver is just proposterous IMHO.



Where did I even intimate that in the least?


----------



## mathepac (2 Jul 2009)

j26 said:


> ... but the simple fact is that bikers are more vulnerable than car drivers, and accordingly car drivers should take more care.


I don't agree j26. If bikers, as mature, voting adults, voluntarily forego the relative safety of being surrounded by a tonne of metal in their automotive pursuits, then they need to 'take more care' IMHO. They cannot transfer responsibility for their safety to other road-users; their behaviour needs to  acknowledge their vulnerability, often IME, it does not.


----------



## billythefish (2 Jul 2009)

j26 said:


> Where did I even intimate that in the least?



Here..... "the simple fact is that bikers are more vulnerable than car drivers, and accordingly car drivers should take *more care*".


----------



## jaycen (2 Jul 2009)

I'm a bit shocked by some of the attitude, I do ride motorbikes and drive cars, I'm always more careful around bikers, cyclists and pedestrians. 
Each to their own but I wouldn't have it on my conscious if I hurt someone through my own negligence.

BTW it doesn't matter about the indicator, you're supposed to wait until they've turned, an indicator is only signaling intention.


----------



## chrisboy (2 Jul 2009)

The fact is the op is being taken to court by the guards. They obviously believe the op was wrong. I agree with j26, the op seen the bike, which was driving slowly and then decided to pull out in front of it. Guilty as charged. Your only hope for a bit of leniency is the fact the bike had its indicator on.


----------



## UptheDeise (2 Jul 2009)

The driver and not the motor biker is totally responsible for this accident. Yes, the motor briker had his indicator on but the driver was impatient and pulled out in from of him. Two wrongs don't make a right.


----------



## Red2 (2 Jul 2009)

Thank you all for your contributions.My intention was not to have a bike versus car argument,but simply to ask what penalty is usually imposed if the Judge rules that I'm guilty of the offence as I have never seen the inside of a courtroom in my half a century+ of life.

The motorcyclist is not being summoned for anything and the indicator was still flashing on the bike when the Gardai arrived.All my documents were in order as they should be,and were presented to the Gardai at the scene and I'm fully insured as I should be,so the motorcyclist has no worries in that regard.

I will contact my solicitor. Once again thank you all.


----------



## Sconhome (2 Jul 2009)

WOW!!
Looking at both sides. I am a car, van & truck driver who loved his motorbike and cycles regularily. You need a different head on you driving a 'caged' vehicle as opposed to a bike.
On the bike (of any kind) you are intensely aware of how vunerable you are to other road users' actions and should behave accordingly. 
We all see stupid people acting stupid on bikes: under/ over taking, up hardshoulders, weaving, speeding etc. cycling through lights, cycling on motorways etc. There are just an many stupid & dangerous people in hard shell vehicles, under/ over taking, speeding etc.
We all have a duty of care to each other and should be aware of all roadusers.
Red I am sorry for your situation and hope both you and the biker are ok after the accident. The biker should have cancelled his signal, some bikes do cancel like a car, but the biker should be aware of his / her bikes habits. So there may have been a lapse of their behalf, mitigating for you but not substantiated as your word against theirs etc.
On the other side, the bike's road positioning should have told you something is off. 

On another day the bike or car could have left you sittting there and made the turn without indication leaving you just as frustrated but no-one hurt.


----------



## enol (3 Jul 2009)

Red2 said:


> Thank you all for your contributions.My intention was not to have a bike versus car argument,but simply to ask what penalty is usually imposed if the Judge rules that I'm guilty of the offence as I have never seen the inside of a courtroom in my half a century+ of life.
> 
> The motorcyclist is not being summoned for anything and the indicator was still flashing on the bike when the Gardai arrived.All my documents were in order as they should be,and were presented to the Gardai at the scene and I'm fully insured as I should be,so the motorcyclist has no worries in that regard.
> 
> I will contact my solicitor. Once again thank you all.


wow, what a biker/car driver war!! 
From what I've seen in courts regarding road traffic offences, you will be deemed to be responsible for this accident in the eyes of the law, so should probably plead guilty, as pleading innocent when you are not 100% innocent could antagonize the judge. 
However, a reasonable judge (there are all sorts and they have their moods!) should take into consideration the following:
1. The other motorist caused confusion by driving on a straight, approaching a left turn, indicating to turn left, with no intention to turn.
2. You are, as you said, 50+ with no previous convictions and a low number of penalty points.
3. You will have a solicitor with you (I presume, as you said you will be contacting them) and bringing representation in the form of barrister/solicitor shows you are taking the matter seriously & believe you have a case worth good representation.

Best of Luck, and by the way, 'Driving Without Consideration For Other Road Users' is the lowest offence of its type you can be charged for, Undue Care & Attention is only the next one up, so try not to think of it as a "very serious offence" as someone else here called it.


----------



## sparkeee (3 Jul 2009)

your totally at fault you should not have pulled out,it wouldnt have killed you to wait but it did nearly kill the biker.


----------



## WorkingClass (3 Jul 2009)

So, I drive both a car and a Bike.

So, I can see this from both sides. The bike was indicating with no intention of turning. Regardless of the legal situation, this is clearly confusing and certainly contributed to the accident. Had the biker not been indicating, the driver almost certainly would not have pulled out. Simple as. The judge would have to take this into account. I suspect he will be fairly lenient. 

Most bike indicators do not self cancel. You have to press a button to turn them both on and off. (Most car drivers don't realize this). Every biker has forgotten to cancel their indicator at some point. 

The biker also probably slowed down as he approached the intersection as he may have suspected the car was going to pull out. I do this regularly if I see a car at an intersection and their wheels are moving or if they give the slightest indication that they may pull out. 

If the car does not see me and pulls out, I might die. So I slow down. I like being alive. It does not matter that the car would be in "the wrong" if it pulled out. Being in "the right" would not make me any less dead or permanently injured. Being in "the right" would be very little comfort to my wife and kids when they put me in the ground.

However, the car driver pulled out in front of the bike. The biker was lucky. He survived. Had he been unlucky, he'd be dead now and I suspect a few penalty points would be the least of your worries. 

The biker certainly contributed to the confusing situation, sure. But the car driver pulled out in front of him based on a faulty assumption (that the biker was going to turn). The car driver caused the accident and is lucky that someone was not seriously injured or killed. 

There is a simple lesson to learn here. If you are about to do something in a car and there is a bike, bicycle or pedestrian in the situation make 100% sure you are not going to hit them. If you are not 100% sure, wait until you are.


----------



## LS400 (3 Jul 2009)

sparkeee said:


> your totally at fault you should not have pulled out,it wouldnt have killed you to wait but it did nearly kill the biker.


 

The op never asked the question,     Am I at fault!!!!


----------

