Person down Oval 29/06/09

chrizzzfosho
The collection of what was written by this 'Julie' person is all linked here:

http://crapwalthamforest.blogspot.com/2010/11/catriona-patel-death-driver-trial.html

The driver was found guilty and convicted today. He has been sent to prison for 7 years and banned from driving for life.

Whilst I don't want to revel in someone's personal demise I have no qualms about saying "good riddance". I hope this brings some sense of justice and closure to Catriona's family.

Oliver, Charlie et al you might know more about this but I think this is one of the strongest punishments dished out in such circumstances for a very long time?

Let's hope it sends out a message that driving drunk, driving on your mobile, and not looking out for cyclists is totally, utterly unnacceptable.

Road.cc were at the trial:
http://road.cc/node/27511

That's a huge step-forward, in fact it should deserve it's own topic.

thanks for the update.

it should be pointed out that it is only half the maximum 14 years’ sentence provided by law for that offence.

Oliver, Charlie et al you might know more about this but I think this is one of the strongest punishments dished out in such circumstances for a very long time?

Charlie will know more, but it clearly seemed like a very serious case.

thanks for the update.[QUOTE=road.cc]although it should be pointed out that it is only half the maximum 14 years’ sentence provided by law for that offence.
[/QUOTE]

Well, how often is the maximum sentence given in non-lorry/cyclist circumstances?

Indeed, as I understand it actually sending someone to prison has to be demonstrated to be in the public interest.

Regardless, I'm pleased that they pushed for the higher charge and that he was sentenced at all - more than can be said for other recent lorry vs cyclist trials.

Sentencing is performed along fairly rigorous guidelines (available here). Magistrates must follow these, and they would give a reasonable indication of why 7 of a possible 14 years was passed.

Just for clarity - Tiswas is totally spot on - the Mag's Court guidelines can be found here, with the driving at the back:

http://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/docs/web_sgc_magistrates_guidelines_including_update_1__2__3_web.pdf

Magistrates only able to sentence to a max of 12 months, beyond that it's Crown Court

The definitive Dangerous Driving Guidelines are here, and although a long document explains how the guidelines are reached and the things that need to be taken into consideration:

http://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/docs/web_causing_death_by_driving_definitive_guideline.pdf

If a judge/magistrate deviates from the guidelines they need to explain in open court why.

NOTE - i have not been following this case, so the above is just general info from t'interweb - not sure exactly what the guy was charged with.

The local rag were covering the Court Case and have revealled that Putz had 20 (TWENTY!) previous disqualifications, three drink drive convictions and three previous convictions for reckless driving.

http://bit.ly/9BkjT6

...as well as being drunk and on the phone when he ran over Catriona. Sounds to me he should have been banned from driving years ago.

I don't know what motivated her to act, but 'Julie' the lady purporting to be Putz' wife who came to this thread shortly after the collision and tried to paint her husband's actions as merely part of an innocent accident would have known this when she wrote to us here. I am shocked.

How many disqualifications can you get before they take your license away FFS?!

RIP Catriona Patel, my heart goes out to your family and friends who will have had to have sat through a gruelling, emotional trial. I hope they feel that Justice has been served on your behalf.

The local rag were covering the Court Case and have revealled that Putz had 20 (TWENTY!) previous disqualifications, three drink drive convictions and three previous convictions for reckless driving.

...

How many disqualifications can you get before they take your license away FFS?!

That is fucking insane. I had thought that this was a bit of a result inasmuch as a life ban had resulted for once, but as it turns out it was about 18 offences too late.

The local rag were covering the Court Case and have revealled that Putz had 20 (TWENTY!) previous disqualifications, three drink drive convictions and three previous convictions for reckless driving.

http://bit.ly/9BkjT6

...as well as being drunk and on the phone when he ran over Catriona. Sounds to me he should have been banned from driving years ago.

I don't know what motivated her to act, but 'Julie' the lady purporting to be Putz' wife who came to this thread shortly after the collision and tried to paint her husband's actions as merely part of an innocent accident would have known this when she wrote to us here. I am shocked.

How many disqualifications can you get before they take your license away FFS?!

RIP Catriona Patel, my heart goes out to your family and friends who will have had to have sat through a gruelling, emotional trial. I hope they feel that Justice has been served on your behalf.

For FUCK'S SAKE!

if julie is his partner or not, they can fuck right off.

Okay that definitely explain why he finally got a lifetime ban and 7 years in prison.

The local rag were covering the Court Case and have revealled that Putz had 20 (TWENTY!) previous disqualifications, three drink drive convictions and three previous convictions for reckless driving.

..................

reading that i bizzarely felt a sickening knot being tied in the pit of my stomach and tear came to my eye.

RIP

Cos driving is seen as a right NOT a privilege, innit.

Wrong though it sounds I really want the next victim of a RTA to be the son or daughter of a policy maker/someone in Westminster/ sod it Kate 'new queeen of the people' Middleton®.

not kate middleton, just think of the china industry.

There is also the question as to why any company would employ a person with such a terrible record. I think this is a question that needs answering. Did they know? If not, why not? Could other equally bad drivers still be being employed?
Does anyone know the name of the company he was working for? Or was he self-employed?

I think it was these people - http://www.thamesmaterials.com/

I assume they relied on "julie" for his reference.

There is also the question as to why any company would employ a person with such a terrible record. I think this is a question that needs answering. Did they know? If not, why not? Could other equally bad drivers still be being employed?
Does anyone know the name of the company he was working for? Or was he self-employed?

Will, until these company bosses know they will be hit in the pockets why the f*** would they care?

The financial industry had the FSA who proved to be bloody toothless. Look at where we are now.

Who has been charged with monitoring the haulage industry? What power do/would they have?

Well, Festus, maybe the change needed can start here?
We need to know more details - such as how recent was his most recent drink driving conviction. What* is* the law as regards keeping an HGV licence? Are some companies more rigorous than others?
It must be possible to change this situation. It must be.

Will, you're right there does need to be change and serious questions asked of the haulege firm who employed the driver. The H&SE should be all over these cases - they would be if the lorry hit someone on a building site but 'cos it's out on the open road it somehow is deemed less serious (when in fact it's worse, imo) I also agree that change can and should happen, there just needs to be plenty of loud voices on it.

As a start, has everyone signed Ufrasia's MEP motion to force safe lorry design to be adopted, over here?

Incidentally, I'm sure there must be some kind of legal precedent that could be set here in Catriona's case by pursuing the company that employed this awful driver. Would this have to come from the family as 'victims'? I'm no expert, am sure Road Peace et al with have more on this? Am sure the company are panicking and checking their HR and references files as we speak.

I think it is vital to report as many misdemeanours as possible to the companies involved so that rogue drivers can be rooted out before they kill someone. After I reported 5 HGV drivers from the same company (for reading/mobile use etc) I was passed to their accident claims advisor and they started to take notice.

I also received this reply from another company when I reported excellent driving:

I am always delighted to receive such a commendation from members of the public, as it shows our policy, procedures and efforts to improve road safety are having a positive impact on the communities within which we operate. As a company, we have been working with Transport for London and the Freight Operator Recognition Scheme (www.tfl.gov.uk/fors) for a couple of years, and the safety of cyclists and other vulnerable road users is always at the forefront of our plans.

Please rest assured, we have identified the driver concerned, and shall be rewarding his driving skills and attitude. Thank you for taking the time to bring the matter to our attention. We, as a Company, are proud to be associated with such drivers.

(PHS Datashred)

I'm stunned that a man with his record of convictions and disqualifications was (a) still in possession of a licence and (b) paid to drive a lorry around London, until he finally, and inevitably, killed someone.

I did a bit of googling and turned up this report from the Transport Tribunal into a 2002 case involving Thames Materials: http://www.transporttribunal.gov.uk/Aspx/view.aspx?id=60

The judgement seems mainly to do with a (successful) appeal on procedural grounds against a decision to revoke the firm's license, but the preamble contains a long list of reasons why that original decision was taken, i.e. 'unsatisfactory maintenance and convictions', an inquiry in 1999 due to 'concerns following examination of the company’s tachograph sheets', 'unsatisfactory fleet inspections', 'failure to record brake performance results' and 'further convictions' in 2001.

There doesn't seem to be any way I can see of finding out what they might have got up to since 2002, however.

Julie - just to echo what others have said, that was a very brave post. My sympathies for you and your partner as well as the friends and loved ones of the cyclist. May the truth come out.

Well the truth certainly came out... 34 years after he was first disqualified from driving, the guy finally murdered a cyclist.

"Putz had previously been disqualified 20 times as well as three convictions for drink driving and three convictions for reckless driving".

Rot in jail, you selfish murdering bastard.

I hope the poor victim's family bring some kind of civil action against the company (Thames Materials) that employed this KNOWN dangerous imbecile.