• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Roundabouts and other driving pet peeves

Bada-Bing! said:
www.bbc.co.uk

Wimbledon school crash: Woman faces no charges over girls' deaths

Nuria Sajjad and Selena Lau were hit by a Land Rover after the driver suffered an epileptic seizure.
www.bbc.co.uk

Gutting for the parents. So she gets to drive again? Or just declare her condition to DVLA. No mention of this.
Click to expand...
Neither epilepsy, nor other types of seizure / blackout are new. There are laws and protocols around this.
How long her license is re!oved for will depend on the diagnosis, treatment regime, her response to treatment etc.
IIRC the minimum is about a year without an seizure (less for a blackout as they're less likely to reccur) before you can get the license back.

Remember folks, having a medical condition isn't illegal. It can be tragic, but it's not illegal.
 
She should certainly never drive again. So sad for the parents though. Can't imagine what they are going through.
 
I think what some people don't believe is that she had an epileptic incident for the first time with no prior history or symptoms at all and she ended up killing two girls. It seems too convenient. However, as long as it's been confirmed by independent doctors then you can't argue against it.
 
Bada-Bing! said:
In case she has another seizure whilst driving. But that's up to the DVLA. No doubt she will have PTSD after knowing what she has done as well, so she may choose not to drive again.
Click to expand...
What are the risks of that? Are you a neurologist / her specific neurologist? Do you think that ll people who have ever had a seizure, or a blackout should have lifetime bans from driving? Or is it just this lady because this incident had a tragic outcome?
Kinda up to the DVLA, but it'll be her neurologist that makes the actual decision, based on guidelines laid down by the DVLA (and written by neurologists).
No doubt, and she may very well choose not to drive again; but that decision shouldn't be based on random people on the internet having an uninformed opinion.
 
Which Tyler said:
What are the risks of that? Are you a neurologist / her specific neurologist? Do you think that ll people who have ever had a seizure, or a blackout should have lifetime bans from driving? Or is it just this lady because this incident had a tragic outcome?
Kinda up to the DVLA, but it'll be her neurologist that makes the actual decision, based on guidelines laid down by the DVLA (and written by neurologists).
No doubt, and she may very well choose not to drive again; but that decision shouldn't be based on random people on the internet having an uninformed opinion.
Click to expand...
If you took all the random uniformed people off the Internet. This forum would be all that remains.
 
Which Tyler said:
What are the risks of that? Are you a neurologist / her specific neurologist? Do you think that ll people who have ever had a seizure, or a blackout should have lifetime bans from driving? Or is it just this lady because this incident had a tragic outcome?
Kinda up to the DVLA, but it'll be her neurologist that makes the actual decision, based on guidelines laid down by the DVLA (and written by neurologists).
No doubt, and she may very well choose not to drive again; but that decision shouldn't be based on random people on the internet having an uninformed opinion.
Click to expand...
No I am not and neither are you. Just one small chance of an epileptic seizure and she just happened to crash through a school killing two kids - who had their whole lives in front of them. And end of the day nothing can be done. Just feel for the parents really. Nothing is going to bring those two back.

Yes it was tragic consequences, but there's a lack Of compassion here - like yeh **** happens, just get on with it- at least it wasn't my kids because there's nothing legally that can be done in this situation.
 
Bada-Bing! said:
No I am not and neither are you. Just one small chance of an epileptic seizure and she just happened to crash through a school killing two kids - who had their whole lives in front of them. And end of the day nothing can be done. Just feel for the parents really. Nothing is going to bring those two back.

Yes it was tragic consequences, but there's a lack Of compassion here - like yeh **** happens, just get on with it- at least it wasn't my kids because there's nothing legally that can be done in this situation.
Click to expand...
Correct, I'm not. I'm not the one calling for punishment of an innocent, however.
Nor am I claiming that my opinion holds more weight than a whole bunch of experts in the subject, and several decades of incidents. I have, however, seen enough of exactly that through Covid to call it out when I see it.
Now, do precedures need a look at, and potential overhaul? I've no idea, I'm not qualified to comment on that - and nor are you. I do know though, that an uninformed knee-jerk reaction to a tragedy does not make good policy.

Where's the lack of compassion? I've not made any comment on the victims, compassion for them and their entire family goes without saying.
 
My cousins in law.

When we have the kids for a week or 3, they're absolutely great, and I love it. They chat with us, and I get to practice.my french, they help out around the house and are fully functioning members of our household.

When they're parents are also here, then A] we lose the living rooms, as we've only the 1 spare bedroom. But mostly, they sit on the sofa being waited on for everything, won't even make their own coffee, won't cook, won't wash up etc etc.
I make sure we have French subtitles for most of our films, and plenty of straight french language options with English subtitles for me.
And they watch the same 3 on repeat, for 2 weeks. Which they don't even watch as they're on their phones.
Whilst the kids hide in their bedroom and don't lift a finger either.
And the constantly facetime with other family members, and by constant, I mean that they start the facetime, and pretty much ignore it, and it lasts from when they get up in the morning until beyond when I've gone to bed. And they were doing the same 15 years ago when our internet was limited to X gigabits per month.

It's been 8 days now. They arrived the day after Ali was able to return to work after COVID. And she's tired and hasn't been in the mood for it yet.
 
www.bbc.co.uk

A55: Watch as lorry driver crashes while distracted by phone

Raymond Catterall, 44, hit a car and almost hit group of people as he swerved off the A55.
www.bbc.co.uk



Video footage shows the moment a lorry driver crashed in north Wales after being distracted by his mobile phone.

The dashcam and CCTV images show Raymond Catterall, 44, looking down at his phone before swerving the vehicle off the A55 at Tal-y-Bont, Gwynedd, and crashing in adjacent bushes.

He almost hits a stationary broken down car, as well as three people and a dog stood on the grassy verge.

Catterall pleaded guilty to dangerous driving and using a handheld mobile phone whilst driving. He was given an eight-month suspended prison sentence, 150 hours of unpaid work, a three-month curfew and a 12-month driving disqualification at Caernarfon Crown Court on Friday.
Click to expand...
 
I was supposed to attend court tomorrow but thankfully it got cancelled. Basically submitted a video evidence of a mobile phone driving offence I witnessed last year but this young lady decided to plead not guilty at her initial hearing - presumably because she knew getting 6 points would mean her getting banned either under totting up or she only passed her test 2 years prior.

CPS must have then provided her with the video today and notified her I was willing to attend, so changed her plea. Would have saved a whole lot of hassle had she been provided it at her hearing.

I know she'll also get a £200 fine to go with it and higher insurance costs, which I suppose is also what she was trying to avoid. But anyone know if she gets higher costs for not pleading guilty earlier?

It just all appears a massive game to someone like her - especially when peep's lives are at risk.
 
Bada-Bing! said:
I was supposed to attend court tomorrow but thankfully it got cancelled. Basically submitted a video evidence of a mobile phone driving offence I witnessed last year but this young lady decided to plead not guilty at her initial hearing - presumably because she knew getting 6 points would mean her getting banned either under totting up or she only passed her test 2 years prior.

CPS must have then provided her with the video today and notified her I was willing to attend, so changed her plea. Would have saved a whole lot of hassle had she been provided it at her hearing.

I know she'll also get a £200 fine to go with it and higher insurance costs, which I suppose is also what she was trying to avoid. But anyone know if she gets higher costs for not pleading guilty earlier?

It just all appears a massive game to someone like her - especially when peep's lives are at risk.
Click to expand...
Just got this from the police:

The above incident involving using mobile phone whilst driving was dealt with at court on the 01/10/2024.

The defendant pleaded guilty on the day and received the following penalty.

Fine and costs £295

Licence endorsed with 6 penalty points.

Thank you for your support in relation to this matter.
Click to expand...
 

Similar threads

Ticklishchap
“The Indian Rugby” - and other Rugby-like sports
Replies
3
Views
282
Amiga500
A
Ragey Erasmus
Mountains and hiking
Replies
13
Views
2K
The Seeker
The Seeker
Ticklishchap
Loud and Proud versus Silent But Deadly
Replies
0
Views
5K
Ticklishchap
Ticklishchap
Bada-Bing!
The Merry Xmas and New year thread
2 3
Replies
48
Views
8K
Bada-Bing!
Bada-Bing!
GarethGriffiths
Pet Hates
Replies
16
Views
2K
GarethGriffiths
GarethGriffiths

Latest posts

Top