Initial thoughts after deciphering the post is that either there had been an accident or there may be an ‘Asian whiplash scam’ event where a false report is made for monetary gain but I see no mention of injury.
OK so as far as accidents are concerned then under section 170 Road Traffic Act 1988 (google it) owing to the presence of a motor vehicle on a road an accident occurs whereby damage is caused to another vehicle the driver MUST STOP – offence not to do so. In this incident this was complied with. The second leg is that having stopped, the driver MUST GIVE to any person having reasonable grounds his name and address, the name and address of the owner of the vehicle and its details. Failure to do so is an offence. But this can be negated in that if not given at the time then it is given to the Police as soon as reasonably practicable and in any case within 24 hrs. No mention these were given and bus driver admits aware of damage to wheel arch of car.
If injury is involved Insurance details must be given. None mentioned.
If there was no damage to the bus but only the car then it is the onus of the bus driver to comply with above. Conversely damage to the car none to the bus – the car driver has to comply.
Case law has dictated that a driver must be aware of the accident for the offence of fail to stop/exchange details to be committed (Harding v Price [1948] cannot be claimed in this incident?
Not sure what details exchanged but car driver has obviously reported this to the Police.
Police have now received an allegation of possible careless driving and failure to give details. In the investigation procedure they have within 14 days of the incident (date of incident not included) to send to the Registered Keeper (or driver if known) a Notice of Intended Prosecution to the effect that proceedings are contemplated (not that there actually will be at this stage) for careless driving. They would also send a request under Section 172 Road Traffic Act 1988 (google it) to name the driver – failure to do so within 28 days offence. From the post seems this complied with and which can be used if necessary at Court to prove ‘driver’.
So Police now have an allegation statement and proof of other driver and it seems they have offered the bus driver a chance to give his version of the events after which they will decide if there is sufficient evidence to submit a file to CPS for them to decide on a prosecution. This will obviously depend on the number of witnesses (bus driver 0 car at least 2?) If they say yes then summons will be issued.
Normal procedure is for police to interview personally but in today’s stretched blue line trying to save time/manpower?
In relation to the statement of the bus driver it may be before submitting same, whilst not a requirement, it may be prudent to submit same through firms solicitor/insurance company/or private solicitor.
If the account of the bus driver is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth then I cannot see a case of careless driving can be made out. I am not privy to all the facts, likewise the fail to exchange details.
Finally just a thought, seems incident occurred in a town and as such there may be LA/Private CCTV that may have captured the incident but passage of time may have erased
dvd
|