Criminal and Civil

Just putting this up because of some comments in a recent Rider Down thread and it's a bit of a subject that is common in that sub-forum. Caveated that IANAL and this is just my interpretation of these the current system functions.

Thread here:http://www.lfgss.com/thread119901.html

In that thread the partner of the victim has updated that the driver has been convicted and given five points on their license and a fine. As part of their update they said that the law is an ass in response to the relatively low value of the fine compared to the extent of the injuries that were incurred by the victim. I'm somewhat inclined to agree but, to me, it's a bit of a yes and no situation. Partly this is because of how thing get divided between criminal prosecutions and civil prosecutions. This perhaps particularly affects vulnerable road users because driving offences aren't really treated and perceived in the same way other criminal convictions are.

For the points and fine that has been handed out, this doesn't really relate to the severity of the injuries that have been incurred by the victim. This is simply the punishment for having failed to observe the rules of the road and is regardless of the consequences of their actions. In theory (rarely in practice) they should have received the same penalty even if no injuries had occured. This then leaves the victim, or in worse circumstances, to pursue damages through civil prosecution.

To me, this isn't ideal, but there are some pros and cons compared to having damages tied in with the criminal prosecution. Whilst the victim does now have to go through court again in a potentially protracted claim, it can mean that they have a better chance of success. If the two were tied together then the criminal defence would be less likely to enter a guilty plea and perhaps more vigourous in trying to absolve the defendant of any blame because they would have more to lose at that stage. It could also significantly protract criminal hearings which isn't likely to be in the best public interest.

Whilst I agree that it can be preferable to handle damages seperately, I also agree that the fine handed out is paltry. It's one of those situations where we should be campaigning to make penalties more meaningful and hold drivers to better account.

I read this as ...

You get smashed off your bike by a vehicle.
The driver accepts liability/is prosecuted because they have broken the law e.g. careless/dangerous driving.
They get a fine/ban/training course.

The resultant cost to life/limb/livelihood is dealt with separately by your lawyer in a compensation case.

Something like that ?