Thursday 16 October 2014

What Grinds My Gears - Update

On 24th June I published a post that reported an incident between a bus and a pushchair wielding hysterical woman in Leiston. If you haven't read the post, or forgotten it I implore to click here and familiarise yourself with the events before reading on. It's important.

Now I would imagine that like me you would have expected the incident to be quickly forgotten, just a mother not concentrating on what was going on around her. Dear God she's not alone is she - take a walk down any High St and see just how many buggies are apparently being operated on autopilot while Facebook pages are being updated etc. Oh I'm sure I had a toddler with me when I left home!!

But no. While in Ipswich yesterday I saw the driver, who to be blunt looked terrified. It turns out the case is going to Court, although as yet I am unaware if it is a civil or criminal case. Luckily I was talking to a Supervisor at he time who was aware of the incident, although not of the developments, then realised who I was and that I had previously offered to defend the driver. It transpired that the driver was not a Union member and as such was trying to fight this on his own, despite English not being his first language, and I imagine knowledge of English Law quite minimal. I am confident that with the help of that Supervisor he IS now a Union member and will be receiving legal assistance and representation as a matter of urgency.

I would like to make one thing quite clear;


I'll keep you updated.


  1. Steve,i had a strange thing happen to me,i was driving up to the railway station from Ranelaugh road in Ipswich,i stopped at the lights at the station waiting to go across towards Burrell road and round by the docks,i then saw this man leave the station walking towards the lights,in his had a mobile or tablet needless to say he was more interested in that,the lights changed,i started to pull away and he walked into the midlle of the road still looking at his whatever,i honked he looked up,and realised what he had done,he actually thanked me and returned back to the lights,he wasn't anywhere near the paths provided,he has just drifted of course due to being totally engaged with what ever he was doing,the other thing is cyclist with head phones on oblivious to what is going on behing them,real madness..

    1. I've done it myself, Jim - taking pics at certain places is a particular hazzard, but mate if I was in charge of a baby and toddler my phone would be firmly in my pocket and I would make a gazelle look unaware of its surroundings and potential threat.

    2. Steve,there is not a day go by that i see at least 6-10 young ladies with buggies doing exactly that,paying more attention to their phone than their precious??? children,when i think back,i had a transistor radio glued to my ear,listening to Luxenburg,but i knew what was going on around me,only because it was a crap signal,lol.... what would they do without those phones,bring back the telephone box,that always ended up being vandalised,not in my day though,or even the blue police box with a phone in it..ha ha ..

  2. At a guess I suspect it's civil, criminal proceedings almost inevitably involve the police and the courts will often want legal representation. Of course with the civil stuff, never ignore the proper official court correspondence, respond as requested and don't admit liability unless you know what you're doing, deny if there is any uncertainty. But I'm a bit suspicious, there are plenty of less scrupulous around who issue "letters before action" and often appear as "official" correspondence, threatening various things, and often designed to instill fear. You can almost buy them "off the peg". As you say the Union is best for members, but other options are Citizens Advice free legal service. What the heck is the claim, on the basis no-one was injured and nothing was damaged? A claim has to be proved, not just asserted (which is why nothing should be admitted, of course). BTW glad you took the block off!!

  3. Just one further point Steve, unless it is a road traffic offence, and that's proof beyond reasonable doubt and nothing to do with alleged damage or injury, then it's a First company matter. The driver was acting in the course of his employment, so for any claim First are vicariously liable. They (or their insurers) should deal with it. Not the driver on his own. What are they playing at?

  4. Sorry for third post, but correction it's more than just First (or their insurers) should deal with it. They have to be given all the correspondence to deal with it, and promptly. As they darned well should!! (They don't have to as long as they have the option, but if they don't then we'll all want to know what the heck they're playing at. It's almost inconceivable).

  5. I tend to agree with much you say, Smurf, but if I'm likely to be a witness in this case I'd better not comment too much on the intricacies while the case is ongoing. When it's over you'll really hear what i think of things!