My Dad has been charged with Driving Without Due Care and Attention - Please Help!

[Wheat_Wheel]

Hi there,

I'm really needing a bit of advice. My dad is 83 years old and still drives. He is one of the most opinionated and cantankerous people I know and he is as stubborn as a mule. I've been hoping for years that he might give up driving, but he refuses, blaming my 79 year old mother because she likes to get out of the house (my mum is disabled and can't get on a bus easily as she uses a wheelchair).

Anyway, he has told me he has been charged with Driving without Due Care and Attention. Apparently he had stopped at a T-Junction intending to turn right. He said that he was waiting for a space in the traffic on the road he was turning into. As he turned he felt a bump but didn't know what it was, so stopped the car. Basically there was a motorcyclist on his right hand side that came up the waiting queue of traffic and my dad hadn't seen the person. Thankfully he was not badly injured - just bruising. My dad intends to plead Not Guilty as the motorcyclist cut up the queue of traffic and my dad didn't see him while he was waiting at the head of the queue. I've told him to plead Guilty because regardless of what the motorcyclist was doing beforehand, my dad ended up hitting him, so he wasn't paying enough attention - am I right?

Also I've read that he could be fined and have 3-9 points on his license or a discretionary ban. What is the likelihood that the Court will take his driving license away and that will be an end to his stubborn refusal to give up when he is really not fit to drive? :-( He has no previous convictions (but has hit many walls , etc who obviously can't call the Police or claim his insurance).

I've seriously had enough of all of this worry and would love for his license to go, however selfish that might sound. He is not fit to be on the road.

[jake-the-peg]

My father was also forced to stop driving a few years back even so he wouldn't give up his driving license. I said I'd post the renewal for him and then "lost" it.

I think you'll probably get a better reposnse if you repost this in the law section.

Best of luck

[boxtops]

I can't say what the result of the charge will be, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they ask him to retake his driving test. This happened to an elderly friend of ours - small accident, but due to age he'd never taken a driving test at all (it didn't come in until the 1930s). When they told him that, he made the decision not to go through all that, just to stop driving.

[Bigfellah]

When you state: "Basically there was a motorcyclist on his right hand side that came up the waiting queue of traffic and my dad hadn't seen the person. " are you meaning that the motor cyclist was overtaking a queue of stationary cars at a junction?

Some motor cyclists are so impatient that they think they own the roads. It is therefore possible that he was travelling too fast and thus hit your dad's car as he turned. In this case the motorcyclist is more than likely at fault.

Were there any independent witnesses to say what actually happened?

[Wheat_Wheel]

Thanks to all of you for your answers. I really appreciate it. I hope you are right and the Court either take his license away or force him to take an extended driving test. That way, the problem is solved without the constant headache I've had over the past 15 or so years from trying, but failing, to persuade him to stop driving.

My mum already gets High Rate Mobility DLA, but they use it as cash. My dad used to be a racing cyclist and wouldn't get a mobility car to suit my mum as he couldn't get his bikes in it, so he's bought a big people carrier thing and removed the seats. My dad has a free bus pass to get out and about when he wants, with only a little less convenience than driving. There are no excuses - he just has to accept it and alter his lifestyle.

I don't suppose anyone knows what the timescale is for this coming to court? I will have to get time off my work to accompany him and my nerves aren't great at the best of times, so this is a real nightmare for me, as well as him. I just want it to be over.

My biggest relief is that the motorcyclist he hit has not been badly injured, because I've feared something like this for a long time now.

Thanks again to those who have replied :-)

[Wheat_Wheel]

Bigfellah,

My dad wasn't making much sense. As I understand it, he was waiting at the front of a queue to turn right, although witnesses have stated he was not signalling that he intended to turn right. The motorcyclist cut up the front of the queue and must have taken the decision that without my dad signalling, he must be turning left and he moved alongside my dad on the right hand side, signalling to turn right. My dad didn't see him there and when there was a break in the traffic he moved forward and started to turn right, then felt a bump.

I still think it is my dad's fault, both for not signalling, so not making his intentions clear - but also for not double checking that there was clear space all around him before making his manouvre.

[Old_Geezer]

I'm unsure you have made a case for your suggestion that he is not fit to be on the road. Unless I misread your post it seems he had taken enough care and attention to be aware of all folk who were acting responsibly but not to think of someone who had sneaked up on his right where they had no right to be. He was already at the head of the queue waiting to turn right, and any reasonable due diligence issues should expect him to just be considering the traffic he was waiting for at that point, not others with an apparent death wish. Maybe I am being cynical but these things usually work out such that if the authorities can see a way to blame the motorist, not matter how unreasonably, then they will. See what the legal eagles have to say though.

[hc4361]

I had an accident in identical circumstances, waiting in a queue of traffic to turn right in to a cul de sac.
The motorcyclist was charged, not me. He had come whizzing up the offside of the traffic queue and hit me as I took the turn.

[Keleez]

As much as i do agree that bikers think they own the roads and im not surprised at the accidents ive witnessed over the years as a car driver, (ive also had a few near misses due to stupid bikers) your father did not signal, so it doesnt matter what the biker did, that becomes irrelevant, he also wasnt aware the biker was there...why not...if he was close enough to hit the biker then your father wasnt using his mirrors, nor did he check his surroundings before moving off, you yourself can contact DVLA and tell them of your concerns, it sounds like your father wont give up his licence without a fight, but hes just proved hes a danger to other road users, if he pleads not guilty and is found guilty then maybe the courts will order him to retake his test, these days driving licenses are only issued to the age of 75 so hes long over due...my advice...let him plead not guilty, because theres no doubt he is guilty, let the court punish him...but also get in touch with the DVLA as next time he may kill someone..goodluck

[Wheat_Wheel]

I suppose that maybe my dad might have had some better form of comeback if he had been signalling to show other road users which direction he intended to go. In some ways that would have put the blame firmly at the door of the motorcyclist.

I'm just going by what my dad says, but the Police told him there were witnesses who have given statements to say my dad was at fault and so I don't think that can be turned around.

[Wheat_Wheel]

Keleez, thats exactly what I'm afraid of :-(

I'm of the opinion that when people reach retirement age (i.e. 65), they should have regular medicals/eytests etc to prove that they are still fit to drive, and a driving retest every few years to check their reaction times, etc.

My dad doesn't see how impaired his judgement now is. I believe, like you said, that my dad started off the chain of events by not signalling. Maybe the biker was also at fault, but I believe that other drivers would not have made the errors that led to the collision.

[Old_Geezer]

No indication is a problem. But IMO (which I admit has no experience of law) if a driver is at the junction, clearly can not go straight on, and like as not to have taken a position to the right of his lane, then the intention should already be clear. And even if it is not, why would another person choose to make an assumption that the driver's going left, and take a chance of putting themselves in danger? But as mentioned, I believe that if they can blame the motorist for being human rather than superman, then they will.

[jackthehat]

I think Wheat_wheel appreciates that there are two separate, if combined, issues here.

Whether her father was 'responsible' for the accident, or not, and quite how that issue is dealt with by the courts, is one matter.

The other is that she has concerns about her father's driving abilities.

I believe the fact that this, thankfully, minor incident may prompt her father into ending his driving days will, actually, be of considerable relief to her.
Even better that the courts may take the decision away from the family thereby satisfying honour all round.

[Old_Geezer]

From your description I think a lot of drivers would have got caught in exactly the same way your father has. So far the only thing he seems to be guilty of is not indicating at a junction where it was already clear he would need to turn. He seems to be given the responsibility for another's foolish action. I have to say I feel sorry for him, which is why I've posted here more than once, even though I know I can not really help, mere state opinion. But maybe I'm not aware of all the facts.

[Wheat_Wheel]

jackthehat, that's it exactly. I'm sorry the whole thing had to happen. It's clear that my dad didn't lose control of his car with his foot on the accelerator like some previous horror stories of older people who are not fit to be on the road. The biker appears to have been at fault too - but driving tests teach you to expect the unexpected in order to remain saf and in control. My dad sat his driving test in the mid 1940s. There's a heck of a lot more traffic on the road now than there was then, and so many more dangers due to that.

As I've said, his car is covered in scrapes and dents from misjudging walls, etc, but a wall can't claim his insurance!

I do hope that the court takes the decision out of his hands. It's so frustrating trying to get through to him and that would make it easier for everyone.

[LoftyLottie]

Personally, although I think your Dad should have been indicating, I think that the Motorcyclist is more in the wrong than your Dad. He should not have come alongside your Dad on his right hand side. When you are turning right you will be observing the traffic on the road you are pulling out onto and if something comes alongside you on the right unexpectedly it is hardly your fault. I wish motorcyclists would obey road rules. A car could not have come alongside your Dad, motorcyclists should act the same as car drivers. The rules are not different.

Probably your Dad would be best to give up driving, but I don't think on this occasion he was actually the one to blame. The motorcyclist made an assumption - something none of us should do.

Unless of course your Dad was turning out onto a road from a road that had been specifically marked out for those turning lefti or right.

Great Shame.