Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

"Careless" driver banned for a year after breaking cyclist's leg in bike lane crash

Driver denied causing serious injury by careless or inconsiderate driving over incident which left cyclist with two breaks to left leg

A driver who hit a cyclist as they cycled along a painted bike lane in Warrington, breaking the rider's left leg in two places, has been banned from driving for 12 months and ordered to complete 150 hours of unpaid work.

The victim, a 35-year-old woman, suffered a broken tibia and fibula in the incident which happened at around 10.25pm on Thursday 2 November 2023 as the cyclist travelled along Hawleys Lane away from the A49.

At the junction with Longshaw Lane the rider was using the painted cycle lane [pictured in the photo illustrating this article] which was not protected from traffic and consisted of painted lines and a blue strip marking the infrastructure.

A reporter from the Chester Standard was at Warrington Magistrates' Court to hear how Laya Koussa pulled out in front of the cyclist, causing the victim to collide with the side of the Nissan Qashqai the 30-year-old was driving. The victim suffered a broken tibia and fibula in her left leg and was treated by paramedics at the scene before being taken to Warrington Hospital for further treatment.

Koussa denied she had caused serious injury by careless or inconsiderate driving. She was ultimately deemed to have been driving without due care and attention, the driver sentenced to a 12-month community order and ordered to carry out 150 hours of unpaid work. 

She has been banned from driving for 12 months and ordered to pay court costs of £650 and a victim surcharge of £114. An application was approved for the funds to be deducted from her benefits.

The case serves as a further example of why many cyclists do not feel safe using painted bike lanes, the infrastructure offering no physical protection from traffic.

A 2020 study found that painted advisory cycle lanes actually increase the risk of cyclist casualties, with the authors urging highways authorities to cease installing lanes of that type and to convert existing ones into protected cycle lanes.

Another common complaint is that painted cycle lanes can encourage close passes from other road users, that because people see the infrastructure as permission to overtake regardless of if they have sufficient space.

A 2019 study supported this, finding that painted cycle lanes are likely to result in closer passes from motorists.

The researchers from Melbourne concluded that when a cyclist is in a bike lane, a passing motorist has a clear lane ahead and is therefore less likely to carry out a proper overtaking manoeuvre. Passing events that occurred on a road with a painted bike lane and a parked car had an average passing distance that was 40cm less than on a road without a bike lane or parked car.

Dan is the road.cc news editor and joined in 2020 having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for The Non-League Paper. Dan has been at road.cc for four years and mainly writes news and tech articles as well as the occasional feature. He has hopefully kept you entertained on the live blog too.

Never fast enough to take things on the bike too seriously, when he's not working you'll find him exploring the south of England by two wheels at a leisurely weekend pace, or enjoying his favourite Scottish roads when visiting family. Sometimes he'll even load up the bags and ride up the whole way, he's a bit strange like that.

Add new comment

7 comments

Avatar
whosatthewheel | 8 hours ago
1 like

On benefits, but can afford to own a car... 

I live in Warrington and pulling out right in front of an approaching cyclist seems to be the favourite sport of the motorised locals. Along with the overtake, cut up and brake check manoeuvre. I have been getting so many of the former that I have grown accustomed to instinctively slowing down and getting ready to stop entirely each time I am approaching a side road with a car pulling up.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to whosatthewheel | 7 hours ago
1 like

whosatthewheel wrote:

On benefits, but can afford to own a car...

Ah ... but of course she has to drive!  Perhaps she is disabled (hence benefits), and/or is doing some dire job (in-home care support?) which pays starvation wages (on part-time hours) but requires you have a car to get round people on time / because that is your "staff room"?

As a slight aside it's interesting that you get push-back to any restrictions on motoring not just from the rich but strongly from the poor.  One might naively think that running a car was outside the reach of some folks - or at best a financial trap for them.

But ... cars are important.  People will find a way to get one and run it.  They're not solely a transport tool - if they ever were.  They're now bound up in our identity / social status / how we want to project ourselves.

Plus ... you can sleep in your car - not so much in a bike.  If you have to get out of a place fast (with say some of your stuff and a pet and a child or two) a car can make that happen.  (Sometimes possible on a bike - but planning and time are required).

And you can generally sell it for a several hundred quid (perhaps even if not actually fully yours...).  Entry level bikes you'd struggle to get 50 for.

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to whosatthewheel | 6 hours ago
1 like

whosatthewheel wrote:

On benefits, but can afford to own a car... 

She may have a disability and have the car through Motability. She may have recently lost her job and the car dates from more prosperous times. For all we know it might not even have been her car, perhaps she had borrowed it from a friend or family member. Judge her for her poor driving and her unwillingness to take responsibility for it, definitely, but don't just assume, as your comment clearly implies, that somebody on benefits must be fiddling the system.

Avatar
eburtthebike | 11 hours ago
2 likes

It was only a cyclist, I don't know what all the fuss is about.

Motornormativity: if those injuries had happened to a pedestrian and were caused by the driver mounting the pavement, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have got just a slapped wrist.

Avatar
cmedred | 11 hours ago
0 likes

What would the penalty be if someone took a baseball bat and used it to break a strangers leg in two places? More or less than a total of £764? The driving ban seems rather meaningless, given the number of people who just ignore those. https://news.sky.com/story/thousands-of-drivers-brazenly-ignoring-bans-w...

Avatar
brooksby | 15 hours ago
9 likes

She had demonstrably caused serious injury so that's not up for debate (or shouldn't be).

But does Laya Koussa really think that pulling out in front of an oncoming road user (causing a broken leg, or creating a situation where that became unavoidable) is not careless or inconsiderate?  Hmm…

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to brooksby | 14 hours ago
5 likes

Think this line of argument * is almost a default and not just for collisions involving cyclists. e.g. "They ran into me ergo it's their fault".

Add to that "well if they're choosing to ride then it's not my fault if they get hurt falling off their bike or hitting things - it'd only be bumper damage and scratches if they were in a car".

I'm actually a bit surprised judgement went against the driver (tried to review the article but it wanted subscription or ads).

* Assuming it's not just the lawyers saying "no - don't 'fess up, there's every chance you'll get off if they do take it to court".

Latest Comments