Horse riders hit by chelsea tractor on wrong side of road

[The utility cyclist]

FPNs down from 1.84 million to 1.02 million (2010-2015) diversionary courses up from 0.47 million to 1.4million. This was noted as a concern in House of Commons Transport committee report; Road Traffic Enforcement 2015-16.
That this was downgraded to a course is utterly disgusting, that in itself is a crime against society letting this and other criminals off so lightly.
it is in part a reason why it happens so frequently, the police and CPS are complicit in this state of affairs

[MikeF]

What a surprise that the driver elected to take the 'driver alertness course' rather than face prosecution. Anyway, I hope the riders and horses are healing well.

There shouldn't be a choice of "either or", it should always be both.

[Vorpal]

What a surprise that the driver elected to take the 'driver alertness course' rather than face prosecution. Anyway, I hope the riders and horses are healing well.

There shouldn't be a choice of "either or", it should always be both.

Then what is the motivation to do well in the course?

[[XAP]Bob]

What a surprise that the driver elected to take the 'driver alertness course' rather than face prosecution. Anyway, I hope the riders and horses are healing well.

There shouldn't be a choice of "either or", it should always be both.

Then what is the motivation to do well in the course?

To avoid killing or injuring another person (and to be allowed to resit your test to get a license back)

[Vorpal]

Both would require change in the current law and sentencing guidelines. Either could be okay. There is some research out there about what sorts of things are the most effective. I haven't gone to read it recently, but as I recall, re-training is more effective than punishment for most drivers. There are a small minority of habitually bad drivers who cannot be helped by re-training OR punishment.

Frankly, I think it's more important that drivers are reformed than punished, if they are capable.

[MikeF]

What a surprise that the driver elected to take the 'driver alertness course' rather than face prosecution. Anyway, I hope the riders and horses are healing well.

There shouldn't be a choice of "either or", it should always be both.

Then what is the motivation to do well in the course?

I'm not sure there is a requirement to "pass". Anyone know?
Attending a course is less expensive and points aren't added to your licence, but insurance companies should still be told.

Many people find the inconvenience of attending a course is worth more than paying a fine and points on their licence. Courses aren't free.

[LollyKat]

From the BBC report linked above - my emphases:

The Driver Alertness Course is one of a number of "awareness" programmes offered under the National Driver Offender Retraining Scheme (NDORS) covering "low level moving traffic offences".

Aimed at motorists who have been involved in a minor collision - where the driving is careless or inconsiderate - the course lasts for one day and involves a mixture of classroom and on-road driving.

Um...

[reohn2]

From the BBC report linked above - my emphases:

The Driver Alertness Course is one of a number of "awareness" programmes offered under the National Driver Offender Retraining Scheme (NDORS) covering "low level moving traffic offences".

Aimed at motorists who have been involved in a minor collision - where the driving is careless or inconsiderate - the course lasts for one day and involves a mixture of classroom and on-road driving.

Um...

Says it all about how vehicle related crime is treated in 21ct UK

[Lance Dopestrong]

I wonder if the driver believed the myth that 4x4 means better road holding ability. Taller cars handle worse than lower cars. And of course the speed of the car was way too high for a wet road. Probably too high for a dry road. I can't tell, but i wonder if the driver also panick
ed on seeing the horses and braked hard, making the car slide sideways even more. Very poor driving whichever way you look at it. I'm surprised the horses came out of it okay.

Its not a 4x4. Its an on demand AWD with very limited ability to feed a small proportion of power to the rear axle when the lack of grip requires it.

I actually owned an identical model (notwithstanding we don't know which engine this one had) and it was a stable, grippy, neutral handling vehicle. In this case the driver was simply TFF, and the outcome would likely have been the same in a Mondeo, Mini or Rolls Royce.

[pwa]

I wonder if the driver believed the myth that 4x4 means better road holding ability. Taller cars handle worse than lower cars. And of course the speed of the car was way too high for a wet road. Probably too high for a dry road. I can't tell, but i wonder if the driver also panick
ed on seeing the horses and braked hard, making the car slide sideways even more. Very poor driving whichever way you look at it. I'm surprised the horses came out of it okay.

Its not a 4x4. Its an on demand AWD with very limited ability to feed a small proportion of power to the rear axle when the lack of grip requires it.

I actually owned an identical model (notwithstanding we don't know which engine this one had) and it was a stable, grippy, neutral handling vehicle. In this case the driver was simply TFF, and the outcome would likely have been the same in a Mondeo, Mini or Rolls Royce.

Not as tall as some 4x4s / SUVs, so handling is presumably like a normal car. I used to drive along a particular country lane, on a regular basis, that suffered more than most from ice in winter. It went along the bottom edge of a ridge of hills that had a lot of boggy ground and chucked water over the road. Every winter I would see the aftermath of cars exiting the road and going through a hedge, and it seemed to me that most were 4x4 / SUV.

On another road I sat in a pick-up truck I was using for work one day as snow fell heavily and cars went past as people tried to get home before the road became impassable. Car after car went past, around a bend, slowly and carefully. No problems. Then a bloke in the Audi TT Quattro arrived, going at least 6 or 7 mph quicker than everyone else. He lost it at the apex of the bend, had to go wide and two of his wheels went bumpingly over a raised grass verge. I did allow myself a little laugh. But my impression from these experiences and from driving a 4x4 pick-up truck is that 4x4 does not allow you to defy the laws of physics and is of most use at low speeds on muddy climbs. And the taller your vehicle, the lower the speed at which you can get around a corner without losing control.

[Lance Dopestrong]

I recall Autocar did an experiment. They obtained 2 Audi A6's, identical in every way except one was 2wd and the other a Quattro. They put them through all sorts of performance tests and both cars performed within hundredths of a second of one another. The only performance difference between the two was accelerating on simulated wet ice, and the Quattro edged ahead. That aside they performed identically in all conditions.

[meic]

I have seen another "experiment" where they compared a 4WD with its ordinary tyres against a 2wd with winter tyres (not spiked, just winter tyres) and the 2wd out performed by a clear margin.
They tested them on snow of course.

[Lance Dopestrong]

I'm always dubious of that. When I used to shoot I ran an L200 on mud tyres and that was unstoppable - well, a 29" snow drift eventually defeated it. FWD cars on snows couldn't come close. It was a different magnitude of ability.

In addition, its like comparing the performance of a cooker to a fridge. Perhaps the car magazine could repeat the experiment, but this time on a proper 4x4 (low range, various locking diff combinations etc), and then try that with Winter boots too.

Proper, almost agricultural 4x4s are very, very capable in the slime. However, this road biased stuff like Quattros and CRVs etc is a different kettle of fish, and people think that because Bear Gryls climbed Everest in a tricked out Defender they're equally unstoppable in rubbish like a CRV, Kuga or Tiguan. Well, I've got news for them - you've wasted your money.

[pwa]

I have seen another "experiment" where they compared a 4WD with its ordinary tyres against a 2wd with winter tyres (not spiked, just winter tyres) and the 2wd out performed by a clear margin.
They tested them on snow of course.

I have done a lot off off-roading for work purposes, and one of the best "off roaders" I drove was an aged transit van with double rear wheels. Driven carefully I could get across moorland on tracks that were barely visible with no problems. Two wheel drive. The 4x4 pick-up trucks I drove were also good, as might expect, but I kept the 4x4 option for situations that really required it. Most of the time, even off-road, two wheel drive worked well. I went for 4x4 when i thought two wheel drive would result in wheel spin and end up cutting up the ground. 4x4 left less damage to the turf. On road the 4x4 option was useless 99% of the time. But off-road the tyres count for a lot and a 4x4 with slick tyres will get stuck PDQ.

[Lance Dopestrong]

I know a chap who does Motorsport recovery, retrieving rally cars from ravines, that sort of thing. He swears blind that a 4x4 Mercedes Sprinter is the best off the shelf fourbie still available.

People with Tigauns and the like need to remember that driving one of them no more makes them Ranulph Fiennes than riding my bike makes me Bradley Wiggins. However, in this sad example, I believe had the driver been ipdriving like that in any other type of car the result would be the same - the fact that the car was a CRV isn't relevant, and it certainly isn't a Chelsea tractor. The thread title is alarmist and misleading, worthy of the Daily Mail.