Agreed. Dispite what my views in a criminal sense are, being left out of pocket is wrong. You should be compensated, no question.

as per
 

Surely if you have a legal protection in your policy your insurance co. is suing for discomfort/pain loss of pleasure time and all the other things involved. If not I would be looking to one of the companys that take these cases on as a No win/No fee basis. At least that way you get some recompense,even if it is only financial, because it seems to me you have a rock solid case given the[ piddly] sentence that the courts have passed
against the offender

I really shouldnt drink and post :lol:

but a number of points:

1. what exactly would going to mp/press achieve? nothing. Its not going to change how people drive.

2. points/fine alone as Ive said in the other thread are not sufficient. As some have said this doesnt feel like justice. Especially in comparison to speeding offences. Yes consider a range of sentences but fine/points alone is not sufficient deterrant.

3. ok, so sue the guy personally. So lets make his family suffer too by depriving him of his income for a "genuine mistake" :?

4. this country is becoming too blame culture orientated where there has to be something/one else responsible. People are unable to accept responsiblity for their actions. Most accidents are avoidable but are caused by speeding, inattention and carelessness. Sentences as above are not sufficient deterrent.

People try and deflect the causes between deliberate/not deliberate, genuine mistakes etc. But the fact is these are rare. Inattention is the number one cause of accidents. That is an offence by law and should be punishable with sentences for those convicted to learn from. This guys laughing really. The sentence is a joke for the amount of pain and suffering his inattention caused.

5. There is no easy answer to solving this and weve gone round and round about ways to do it in the other thread. But the be all and end all is that its not justice that what happened to Tim has been treated more lightly than speeding offences where no-one is injured. And its just plain wrong imho.

in 1997 i was caught doing 75 mph in a 60 limit on an empty duel carriagway in northern ireland. i was summonsed and fined £680. no victims, no dangerous driving, so yes that sounds about right!!!!! :roll:

I guess the reason for the relative punishments for careless driving/speeding is that careless driving could be argued to be an accident, where as it's much more a concious decision to speed.

Of course that's stupid, because although intent is certainly relavent, the chances of causing an accident are alot higher if you're careless than if you're speeding - I just think that's the way the authorities must see things.

Yeah, I think it's time to drag Eastbourne's courts to the public eye. Get some examples of other prosecutions, penalties etc for a wide range of offenses.

Absolutely :!:

I think we've found some agreement!

Not that it will make you feel much better, but...

Just wait outside the house of the person who hit you. In a car.

When they come out, select first gear.

Run them down at high speed.

Calmly call police and explain there's been a terrible accident.

Sob and explain how he just "appeared"/you had a blackout/whatever.
Get off scot free, maybe losing your licence, but so long as you make a crude stab at remorse and being an innocent victim of your own stupidity, nothing worse will happen.

Hey, why not, it works for all the other cage drivers!

Re: as per
 

Errr, is that meant how it sounds??

It would increase the pressure on the powers that be to take more notice of the real cause of accidents, not just speed. It would have been better if they'd made the guy do his advanced driving test rather than just a tiny fine and points.[/img]