Slid into a car at intersection - Careless Driving.

My son was making a right turn at the intersection he had a green so slowed down looked and proceeded into the turn. It was pouring rain and the was a big pool of water as he got arround the curb. He tried to keep the car going sharp right however it slid into the car making a left turn. the lane he was turning into is very narrow and at a very busy corner. He paniced and left the scene only to return to it when he drove arround the block to collect himself, when he got back the scene was all gone. An officer came to the house and said our son just fled an accident. we called his cell and he said he was on his way to the staion and the officer left to meet him there. Charge with careless driving he is 18. Can we beat this charge?

With a charge like careless driving, I'd recommend discussing this with a paralegal. If he bumped or broadsided a car that was stopped while he made the turn, particularly with rainy road conditions, a careless driving charge is not surprising. The consequences of a careless driving conviction are quite severe, particularly with respect to insurance. As far as being able to beat it... it's really difficult to tell.

Radar Identified wrote:

With a charge like careless driving, I'd recommend discussing this with a paralegal. If he bumped or broadsided a car that was stopped while he made the turn, particularly with rainy road conditions, a careless driving charge is not surprising. The consequences of a careless driving conviction are quite severe, particularly with respect to insurance. As far as being able to beat it... it's really difficult to tell.

X2

You can get a free, no-obligation quote for a paralegal service by filling out a form at the bottom of this page.

A little more details can help us deal with this ticket. the post in not 100% clear with respect to what has actually happened.

He was making a right and hydoplaned just before he was able to make the right. The car swerved right and he tried to not hit the car waiting to make the left, however was unable to.

Getting a paralegal for this, for sure.

It doesnt sound like Careless Driving to me,

Sounds like it should have been "Improper Turn" which would be a 2 point ticket, instead of a 6 point ticket that will dramatically affect the insurance for your son.

Thank you Chris. Thats what I thought, even the lady who he hit said he was not driving carelessly at all. Cops were called after my son left so the cop charged based on I don't know. We are paying the damages for the car privately. I think we will plead NOT GUILTY and try for a withdraw. I have been looking on www.canlii.ca but have a hard time finding a similar case, I think my use of that site is bad. Anyone find a case I can cite will be a tremendous help! Thank you.

sounds like a good careless to me. Making a turn into the closest lane and then hyrdoplaning into the other lane Even the deepest of water rut would not make a vehicle go into another lane when turning at an appropriate speed.....this was caused by going way tooooooo fast, failing to adapt to weather conditions.

Would have also added fail to remain/report accident charge on top.

He says he had no control of the front steerin as much as he tried to get control about 20 feet from where he was to turn right, no speeding even for the conditions based on the other driver, loke slow motion slide into her. The car swerved right more than he turned right..

Jerazo wrote:

He says he had no control ..

I know you understand what he says, but stand back and look at the picture from a different angle...

18 = very little experience

wet roads = road traction reduced

raining = less visibility

Do not think anyone has mentioned "speeding". However we have mentioned speed toooooooooo fast for conditions which this is.

if the limit is 50km and he was travelling 40km....it is still too fast for conditions if the vehicle was unable to stop, turn etc. If the speed was say reduced to 20km this could have been avoided.

another perspective....it is in February and I'm driving 60-65km/hr on the 401 due to blowing snow, and someone drives by me at 95km/hr, watch them lose it and pooch into the ditch......the person was not "speeding" according to the posted speed limit, however they were driving "too fast for conditions".

there are also factors for hydroplaning

- depth of tread

- width of tire (wider is worse)

- tire pressure

Lots of water and leaves and hitting it at 20-30km in a small cavalier. Could have happened to anyone. Did not blow by anyone and was not speeding for the condition. Lady who was hit is a drivers ed instructor and says she will write a letter or be a witness to my son to attest his driving was what anyone would do at that time.

This sounds like careless driving to me as well. "I slowed down and turned the wheel all the way to the right" could satisfy due diligence for an improper turn, couldn't it? That's my thinking. Careless fits a bit better and also leaves room for plea bargaining.

I do about 50% of my driving in a Ford Escort and it has never hydroplaned in the 9 years I've driven it. If he really was going a reasonable speed, then you need to look at your equipment (tires). Tread depth does not have to be at the legal minimum to require replacement. Tires are also only good for 10 years if properly cared for, 5 years otherwise. Tire pressures should be set to the vehicle recommendation, not the sidewall maximum (this changes if you stray from the original load rating).

I spun out on the 401 in my SUV when I was 18. I was keeping up with traffic and doing "what anyone else would do," but the accident was still completely my fault for going faster than my equipment could handle, due to inexperience. I was lucky that it was a single-vehicle crash and I could learn from that experience.

Guess I need to sit and ask him exactly what happened step by step.. Being 18 hard to get alot of dialog from him for the details of when he turned the wheel, was it hydroplane or slide he does not know what the difference is.. Maybe he slid at 20km as he was slowing into the turn and when the tires turned they lost traction.. I dunno.. I will get a paralegal to represent him on this.

Thanks.

It's possible that he tried to slow down and turn at the same time. That's a big no-no when driving near the limit of traction. All necessary speed should be shaved off while the wheels are pointing straight, as you then use all four wheels equally for braking. Once you start to turn, in your case, only the front driver's side wheel would be doing much of the braking while the other wheels are struggling to keep the car pointed where you are steering. Much easier to lose traction that way.

Squishy wrote:

I was lucky that it was a single-vehicle crash and I could learn from that experience.

Bang on Squishy!!!

Rather than denial, making excuses and blaming anything else other than the person who has their hands on the wheel and foot on the pedal!

You accepted responsibility for your actions, gained experience and learned from it.

That sounds more like it.. I will still get into his head and see exactly what happened. He is pleasding not guilty, and I will post the outcome..

hwybear wrote:

Squishy wrote:

I was lucky that it was a single-vehicle crash and I could learn from that experience.

Bang on Squishy!!!

Rather than denial, making excuses and blaming anything else other than the person who has their hands on the wheel and foot on the pedal!

You accepted responsibility for your actions, gained experience and learned from it.

I feel "LUV" in the room................

Jerazo wrote:

Guess I need to sit and ask him exactly what happened step by step.. Being 18 hard to get alot of dialog from him for the details of when he turned the wheel, was it hydroplane or slide he does not know what the difference is.. Maybe he slid at 20km as he was slowing into the turn and when the tires turned they lost traction.. I dunno.. I will get a paralegal to represent him on this.

Thanks.

Sitting down is an excellent idea. Maybe have him draw a little sketch for you. Then maybe ask once he gives you a speed of "X", ask what if you would have went speed "y", what would the result be? Was he answering on a phone? eating? radio adjusting? friends in vehicle? late to get somewhere? All little items that could distract a inexperienced person more than others? More less, you have to get him to know some error was made and what can he do to improve in the future (so you are turning the negative into the positive by the end)

do check you tires on your vehicle....tread bar indicators, uneven wear, tire pressure.

A paralegal is a good idea, as "careless driving" is "high stakes" (i think) in the minds of insurance companies.

Just too bad he panicked and left cause it all could have been dealt with, without a charge. He is paying for the repair and the lady of the other vehicle is writting a letter on my sons behalf to say that he was not driving in a careless manner.. Hope that the judge can take it into consideration when the time comes.

My son felt bad and spoke the lady to apologize as well.

A favourable witness statement can go a long way to help fight this charge.

Also, here's a question - why was there such a deep pool of water? Sounds like someone in the city is not doing their job right.

There was lots of water 30' or more approaching the intersection, the drain was clogging with leaves and guess it was flooding the area..

That makes more sense. Leafs ruining the day.

Not a fan?

I'm growing a TML losing beard for 2 weeks now

racer wrote:

I'm growing a TML losing beard for 2 weeks now

here is your future....

hwybear wrote:

racer wrote:

I'm growing a TML losing beard for 2 weeks now

here is your future....

Hmm, most people said i'd look like this

Quite frankly, the season ends in April, and by that time...

Well, hey, they now have a 4 point lead on the top prospect

What's the difference between the Leafs defence and a pylon?

The pylon is orange and probably plays better hockey.

How do you keep leafs off of your lawn?

Put a hockey net on it.

Why did the dodgeball player retire?

He was afraid Brian Burke was going to offer him a contract as a Leafs goalie.

Why doesn't Hamilton have an NHL team?

Because then Toronto would want one.

Sorry... couldn't resist.

Back to the topic at hand...

Jerazo wrote:

Guess I need to sit and ask him exactly what happened step by step.. Being 18 hard to get alot of dialog from him for the details of when he turned the wheel, was it hydroplane or slide he does not know what the difference is.. Maybe he slid at 20km as he was slowing into the turn and when the tires turned they lost traction.. I dunno.. I will get a paralegal to represent him on this.

As hwybear was saying, probably a good idea. The last time I lost control of a car like that was when I was... 18. Trying to merge onto the Ottawa River Parkway in a snowstorm, I took the curve too fast, skidded, went off the roadway and ended up marooned on top of a concrete median between the merge lane and the road. First car that came by... was the RCMP. Cop got out, walked up to me, asked if I was okay, we managed to get the car dislodged and back on the road, then he asked me: "So what did you learn from this?" After a lecture about driving appropriately for the road conditions, he went on his way. It stuck. I haven't gone off the road since. Maybe this could be a similar life lesson for your son?

Paralegal will be well worth the money. The most likely outcome is that they will get the charge reduced to improper turn or right turn - not in safety, but either way, that's a lot less serious than careless driving. They might be able to get "not guilty," but don't get your hopes up for that.

Jerazo wrote:

Just too bad he panicked and left cause it all could have been dealt with, without a charge. He is paying for the repair and the lady of the other vehicle is writting a letter on my sons behalf to say that he was not driving in a careless manner.. Hope that the judge can take it into consideration when the time comes.

My son felt bad and spoke the lady to apologize as well.

Now somebody correct me if I'm wrong but because the officer didn't witness the collision the woman who was hit would have to testify in court in order for the crown to have a case. Otherwise the officer is just presenting hearsay evidence correct? Now what if the woman who was hit "forgot" to show up on the court date? Does the crown actually subpeona her as a witness or is it more of a voluntary thing for her to show up?

Squishy wrote:

Tire pressures should be set to the vehicle recommendation, not the sidewall maximum (this changes if you stray from the original load rating).

Hmmm, when I took a skid control course (part of a plea bargain), the course instructor was very adamant that your tires should be set at their maximum pressure. Otherwise, if you need to swerve to avoid something going at fast enough speeds you run the risk of your tires actually ripping off the rim. He also stated how the "recommended" PSI for your car not only decreases the lifespan of your tires but also has few positive benefits you'll really notice. He also explained during the session that he has served as an expert witness in court on the subject.

Plenderzoosh wrote:

Now somebody correct me if I'm wrong but because the officer didn't witness the collision the woman who was hit would have to testify in court in order for the crown to have a case. Otherwise the officer is just presenting hearsay evidence correct? Now what if the woman who was hit "forgot" to show up on the court date? Does the crown actually subpeona her as a witness or is it more of a voluntary thing for her to show up?.

correction....where to start

If it would go to trial the witness would be given a subpoena, issued by the Crown.

Officer would be able to say driver "X" was operating this vehicle, on this road, and this direction. Would also be able to say that driver "Y" was operating this vehicle, on this road and this direction. Would also be able to give road, weather conditions and damage to vehicles.

The officer just can not say a statement given by either driver....that would then be hearsay!

clear a mud?

Plenderzoosh wrote:

Hmmm, when I took a skid control course (part of a plea bargain), the course instructor was very adamant that your tires should be set at their maximum pressure. Otherwise, if you need to swerve to avoid something going at fast enough speeds you run the risk of your tires actually ripping off the rim. He also stated how the "recommended" PSI for your car not only decreases the lifespan of your tires but also has few positive benefits you'll really notice. He also explained during the session that he has served as an expert witness in court on the subject.

While there is a slight benefit to max pressure tires in the wet (perhaps an extra foot off your stopping distance), it increases your dry stopping distances by a slightly larger amount. The wet benefits are seen because the pressures within the contact patch are now concentrated right down the centre, making it easier to push water out. It also makes it more likely to activate ABS when you hit a pothole while braking because the harsher impact can lift your wheel from the ground. The effects are nowhere near as drastic as what you get when you underinflate, but the effect is still there. The NHTSA deemed it insignificant when recommending TPMS system designs, but I have seen studies clearly show a "sweet spot" for tire pressures that was usually close to the OEM placard. I tried to dig up those studies last month for another post, but I've lost them, sorry. Now it is highly unlikely for a tire to unseat from the rim unless you are under 20 PSI, and it's been a while since I've seen such low pressures recommended. Lifespan is actually less for a tire at max pressure than one at recommended pressure, but you do get better fuel economy. An overinflated tire will wear down the centre of the tread instead of evenly across the contact patch, so your shoulder tread may have 30% life left while the centre is already down to the wear bars. Rolling resistance is decreased as a consequence, which gets you better gas mileage.

A high-performance driver might want max pressure in his tires for a daily driver, but I still think the OEM recommended is safest for the average driver, as well as the most comfortable and less harsh on suspension components.

hwybear wrote:

If it would go to trial the witness would be given a subpoena, issued by the Crown.

Ah okay, wasn't sure if it was a summons or subpoena they would be issued, disregard my suggestion unless the lady who was hit doesn't mind potentially getting into big trouble.