cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Should have gone to specsavers!

Devonian
Grafter
Posts: 1,854
Registered: 01-05-2011

Should have gone to specsavers!

An elderly woman was hit by a car in Tesco's car park.
The lady driver stopped, told the old lady she was a doctor, she checked her over and left after the old lady said she was ok.
Hardly a police matter I would have thought.
However!
The police are now trying to trace the Doctor for leave the scene of an accident.. presumably after the elderly lady received 'advice' no doubt about compensation.
On the face of it, it appears an old lady was knocked down, the motorist was to blame, the Police want to prosecute.
However... the old lady has poor eye sight.  SO poor in fact that she can not describe the lady, who was stood just 2 feet away.
She also can not describe the car, that was also 2 feet away.
Fair enough, she's old, and maybe registered blind.
So why was she walking to her CAR to drive home!
And WHY are the police trying to find the Doctor who stopped, and made sure the old woman was ok before driving off, instead of investigating the old dear for driving quite literally blind!
http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/Police-appeal-doctor-left-elderly-woman-South/story-20789385-d...
9 REPLIES
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 16,521
Thanks: 1,778
Fixes: 123
Registered: 06-04-2007

Re: Should have gone to specsavers!

I agree that it seems remiss of the police not to investigate the old lady but, I suppose, at the time she didn't commit any offence.
Under the Road Traffic Act 1988 Section 170 if the driver didn't leave her details to someone at the scene of the accident she has to report it to the police which, it seems, she didn't do.

Forum Moderator and Customer
Courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear, not absence of fear - Mark Twain
He who feared he would not succeed sat still

Devonian
Grafter
Posts: 1,854
Registered: 01-05-2011

Re: Should have gone to specsavers!

I agree.
But she stopped, she spoke with the lady, she made sure she was ok, so I can't see any reason for police involvement. 
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 16,521
Thanks: 1,778
Fixes: 123
Registered: 06-04-2007

Re: Should have gone to specsavers!

Because of injury it had to be reported and wasn't.
What is worrying, though, is that will the old lady get back in her car and drive again or has this made her realise that she isn't fit to.

Forum Moderator and Customer
Courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear, not absence of fear - Mark Twain
He who feared he would not succeed sat still

Devonian
Grafter
Posts: 1,854
Registered: 01-05-2011

Re: Should have gone to specsavers!

Well surely the moment she told her story to the police, it would place a duty of care on the officer to report her to the DVLA at the very least?
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,894
Thanks: 3
Registered: 20-10-2012

Re: Should have gone to specsavers!

How and when were the Police involved? I can't see reference to them being called in the article.
But, I agree that if her sight is really that bad, then plod should be acting!
Unless, she was a passenger and not a driver!  Roll eyes
Geoff,
York.
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,671
Thanks: 108
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: Should have gone to specsavers!

Quote from: Mav
I agree that it seems remiss of the police not to investigate the old lady but, I suppose, at the time she didn't commit any offence.
Under the Road Traffic Act 1988 Section 170 if the driver didn't leave her details to someone at the scene of the accident she has to report it to the police which, it seems, she didn't do.

and if it was a public road then the law would indeed apply however as Tesco's like to point out quite regularly the land is private and is opened for limited public access use not a completely public area and as such the road traffic act doesn't apply (because you cant be done for traffic offences when not in state owned car parks or on public highways which specifically excludes any private car parks)
the blindness however could of been caused by shock or indeed the vehicular assault which could quite feasibly have caused a brain injury (especially in some doddery old bird) hence why they are trying to get in touch with the "doctor"  although to be honest I'm surprised that the Tesco's cctv wasn't able to tell them exactly who/what/when/where including customer I.D. after all they give out club cards just so they can track customers ....
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
TORPC
Grafter
Posts: 5,163
Registered: 08-12-2013

Re: Should have gone to specsavers!

Whenever there is an incident that does not involve their staff / stakeholders / shareholders etc, they are always useless at protecting the public in their car parks etc.
Ever noticed the signs that say
Quote
You park walk here at your own risk, any harm or damage then we are not responsible or liable
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,671
Thanks: 108
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: Should have gone to specsavers!

indeed and the local one even mentions that its private land that is being provided at the risk of the user for ease of accessing the shop........
I know someone who got away with a drunk drive charge purely because his journey started and stopped inside the supermarket car park consisting of traversing 3 parking bays because the plod stopped him before letting him get onto an actual highway......
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
Devonian
Grafter
Posts: 1,854
Registered: 01-05-2011

Re: Should have gone to specsavers!

It was reported in the Express and Echo, although I can't find a link, that a member of her family called the police.
It also says in this piece that she was walking to her car, it then later says she took a taxi home, which of course if she was a passenger, then a taxi wouldn't be required.
It also says she had a sore leg, no mention of a bump on the head.  Wink
The elderly woman, who has failing eyesight That would suggest she has been suffering with bad eyes for a while.