R v Webber Bournemouth Magistrates Court 24th April 2012

Our opinion formed during our investigation was that this was a case of over-charging the offence. Despite the defence offering to plead to a Construction and Use offence instead of the dangerous driving charge, the CPS persisted with the original charge.
 
However, on arrival at court today it was suggested that both our Roly Hockenhull and the Crown Expert have a discussion with regards to the case.  During that discussion it was agreed that the Crown could not prove that the condition of the windscreen had not deteriorated further from its state immediately post impact with the pedestrian. 
 
The Crown Expert then reported back to the CPS lawyer who repaired to a further discussion with a higher authority within the CPS. The crown then agreed to draft an alternative charge of driving with a defective windscreen to replace the charge of dangerous driving.
 
Mr Webber had already entered a plea of guilty to the charge of Failing to Stop following an RTC.  For that offence he was given 9 points on his licence, Fined £260, and ordered to pay costs of £130, and a victim surcharge of £15, making a total of £405. Most importantly the magistrates gave no further penalty for the offence of driving with a defective windscreen. 
 
However as Mr Webber already had 7 points on his licence he was disqualified for 6 months under the totting up rules.
Despite that he was very pleased with how it turned out and thanked his defence and our expert.  The defence solicitor Mr I Daly of JM Law also offered his thanks and added he would be pleased to provide a testimonial which will follow in due course.

Mr Daly was keen to express that he liked the way the report was set out and also found the DVD and photographs very useful.  He said that he has used Wayman's in the past when he was working on his own before joining JMLaw, and that he will continue to use our services in the future.

R v Dawson 17th November 2011 Ipswich Crown Court

Mr Dawson was initially charged with dangerous driving (s.2 RTA 1988) namely that he drove through a red light on a railway crossing causing significant damage and also placing passengers on board the train at risk. He did not accept that his driving was dangerous but did offer a plea of Guilty to the lesser charge of “Driving without due care and attention”.  His offer was initially declined by the CPS; however after having been served with a copy of our report, the CPS agreed it to be incapable of challenge and were then happy to accept a Guilty Plea to the lesser charge of “Driving without due care and attention”.
Consequently sentencing was as indicated.
There was no trial, hence he was not “found” guilty.

He received the following;

4 points and a fine of £250
He was awarded all his costs both Crown and Magistrates Courts.

To view the testimonial we received for this case click here

R v Mensah 7th September 2011

In summing up the chairman of the bench made comment that our experts report had been very helpful in this case. He then went on to say that they considered the actions of the cyclist were a major contributory factor in this collision.(i.e. riding across the pelican crossing when the green man was flashing and pulling into Mr Mensah’s path without giving any signals)

They also accepted that Mr Mensah was not speeding or rapidly accelerating away from the traffic lights as had been suggested by some witnesses and they also accepted that he stopped his car in a reasonable distance following the collision with the cyclist.

However they also stated that Mr Mensah particularly when driving in London should expect the unexpected. Accordingly Mr Mensah was found guilty of driving without due care and attention.

They considered it to be on the lower scale of seriousness for this type of offence and imposed a fine of £50 with 3 penalty points on his licence. They also ordered him to pay costs of £350 and a £15 victim surcharge, which is levied in all cases where a fine is imposed at that court.