[SDP]

Originally Posted by shivshanker

Please What's a DUI .?, can u kindly elaborate.

Crime / No Crime, I think we should leave that classification to the courts and the learned.

We love our rides, we should protect our monetary interests, In my humble opinion.

if WE at TEAM BHP are so concerned about crimes (pertaining to ROAD and transport) being committed, let us stop;

1. The over crowding of school Buses.
2. Most school buses ply with old worn out tyres.
3. none of the heavy vehicles have their rear & brake lights in working conditions.
4. some of the heavy vehicles moving construction material, have the worst kind of worn out tyres.
5. Signal Jumping, driving on the left most lane, which is equivalent ot the hard shoulder.

The list can go on and on, Are these all not crimes being committed my friend, the crimes committed by these are as heinous as that of the poor doctor. (God only knows why he drinks and drives.)

In summary your first part is correct, it was an accident, but for a crime.. I have outlined my view point of a crime.

anyway what's a DUI

DUI = Driving Under Influence

Also, let's not generalize the crime part and go off-topic.

Property damage is a crime that has happened in this case and members are sharing ideas about what best can be done in this scenario for the hapless victim.

[mayankk]

Originally Posted by shivshanker

Please What's a DUI .?, can u kindly elaborate.

Crime / No Crime, I think we should leave that classification to the courts and the learned.

We love our rides, we should protect our monetary interests, In my humble opinion.

if WE at TEAM BHP are so concerned about crimes (pertaining to ROAD and transport) being committed, let us stop;

1. The over crowding of school Buses.
2. Most school buses ply with old worn out tyres.
3. none of the heavy vehicles have their rear & brake lights in working conditions.
4. some of the heavy vehicles moving construction material, have the worst kind of worn out tyres.
5. Signal Jumping, driving on the left most lane, which is equivalent ot the hard shoulder.

The list can go on and on, Are these all not crimes being committed my friend, the crimes committed by these are as heinous as that of the poor doctor. (God only knows why he drinks and drives.)

In summary your first part is correct, it was an accident, but for a crime.. I have outlined my view point of a crime.

anyway what's a DUI

driving under the influence.
what would be your take if it was your car?
I think going after the guy to compensate would have taken precedence over that list.


EDIT:
@shiv :your post below, are you serious????

[shivshanker]

Originally Posted by Iluvcars

@shivshanker: Committing a mistake by negligence or carelessness is entirely different from causing an accident because you were drunk when behind the wheel. In the latter case, any person would know (unless one is that drunk) that one is prone to cause an accident when one drives under the influence. The person in question is a doctor who should well be aware of what he was up to. Condoning such acts only emboldens such trouble-makers.

@iLuvCars,

At the outset let me clarify, I am not the Doc, I am not related to him, he is not my father in law, nor have I ever met him.

I am not supporting the Doc's Drunken Driving offense, but I would like to state it was an accident and that that he is willing to make monetary amends, we should call it chapter closed. He was stopped and a case has been registered, yet most of us are flogging the poor Doc for committing a CRIME.

God only knows what his predicament was to drive under the influence of alcohol and meet with an accident.

I am completely with you on the accident part, condoning such acts as a good Samaritan is also acceptable to me. I would call it an offense and not a crime, maybe it just me.

As a person who also travels the streets of Bombay on a daily basis, it makes my blood boil to see some of the crimes being committed on a daily basis by heavy vehicles and public transport providers, who in my opinion are bigger offenders, yet they go scott free.

my appeal to netfreak was these are real road crimes, that was an accident.

[NetfreakBombay]

Originally Posted by shivshanker

Please What's a DUI .?, can u kindly elaborate.

let me google that for you : Let me google that for you

Very first hit is : Driving under the influence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by shivshanker

Crime / No Crime, I think we should leave that classification to the courts and the learned.

DUI being a crime is a fact established by every body of law.

[adisag]

Originally Posted by shivshanker

Hall of shame is a bit too far fetched

Come on what's a car without an accident

Originally Posted by NetfreakBombay

Accident might have been a mistake, but DUI is a crime.

Originally Posted by shivshanker

Please What's a DUI .?, can u kindly elaborate.

The Hall of Shame Idea came up in a discussion regarding road rage - which I hope you agree is quite different from an accident and something that can be considered a crime. (Disclaimer - I'm not aware of the actual law in the matter, but IMHO it should be classified as a crime)

DUI stands for Driving Under Influence - and again in my opinion it differs significantly from a straightforward accident (and should be considered a crime) especially when the other vehicle is parked and you manage to do such serious damage - I mean the guy must have been like really sloshed...

[shivshanker]

Originally Posted by mayankk

driving under the influence.
what would be your take if it was your car?
I think going after the guy to compensate would have taken precedence over that list.

good question MayanKK, I will let the photo's do the talking, without hijacking the thread/discussion.

I am preaching a more practical solution, have the paper work ready and talk sense to the Doc.

An accident has happened, the Doc. knows it is a hassle for him to have this matter drag along for a new months, it would be a hassle for our fellow Team Bhp'ian/his Fiancee to be without a ride for a few days.

The best is settle before reaching the courts. B'cos in this once it goes to the courts, the both parties will have to suffer;

1. Monetary losses,
2. inconvenience without a ride
3. At the hands of the cops too, they will want their share to
4., Insurance Company

and so on.

At best we are talking abt a monetary compensation of around a lakh here, to cover damages.

Yes coming down to my Car, what you see is when my car was 2 months old, in 2005 something similar had happened, I spoke to the guy, he admitted he was drunk, he paid up. Case closed. My brand new car was banged from behind and notice the tree in the front, there was damage to the front of the car too.

I practice what I preach

If our judiciary system was efficient as that of the western world, we can then talk about suing the guy, etc. etc. But in India, it is best settled out of courts and mind you, the car belongs to his fiancee, a visit to a courts and police stations can be a nerve racking experience for some.

[suhaas307]

Originally Posted by SDP

#1> State v/s the person who caused the accident
#2> The victim of the accident v/s the person who caused the accident and his/her insurance company (if third-party-insurance is taken)

State v/s the person suggests that it is a criminal offense, where as,

victim v/s accused suggests that it's a Tort, or a civil offense.

Third party insurance should cover damages, but if it's proved that the driver was drunk at the time of the accident, the insurance company might flatly object payment. So you're in a catch-22 situation here.

Either way, I'd suggest you approach the police and file a complaint immediately, before the whole thing is turned against you.

Do you have pictures of the incident? Are you aware of anyone who witnessed the incident? Get to them before the Doc gets to them.

Get some more concrete information of the Doc and if all else fails, threaten to damage his reputation if he doesn't comply.

Originally Posted by shivshanker

I am not supporting the Doc's Drunken Driving offense, but I would like to state it was an accident and that that he is willing to make monetary amends, we should call it chapter closed. He was stopped and a case has been registered, yet most of us are flogging the poor Doc for committing a CRIME.

Unfortunately, playing 'the-good-Samaritan' will get you no where in this country full of two-faced people. Hell, why should I say this Country? It happens all over the World! Never take anyone's word in such situations. And if you must, get it in writing and get it signed in the presence of cops or some higher authority.

[NetfreakBombay]

Originally Posted by shivshanker

I spoke to the guy, he admitted he was drunk, he paid up. Case closed. My brand new car was banged from behind and notice the tree in the front, there was damage to the front of the car too.

That was a decision you made and circumstances might be different. Not sure if blood samples were taken for that guy (in OP's case this was done).

Starting from 2007, these samples should be collected for each such case.

Originally Posted by shivshanker

If our judiciary system was efficient as that of the western world, we can then talk about suing the guy, etc. etc. But in India, it is best settled out of courts and mind you, the car belongs to his fiancee, a visit to a courts and police stations can be a nerve racking experience for some.

At least in Mumbai, system is effective "enough" for the driver to do the rounds of court (rather than you have to keep doing that).

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/indian...ight-jail.html

So, the doc has to spend AT LEAST 1 day in lockup if chargesheet can be filed based on blood tests alone. This is something that can be leveraged to make him buy the card "As is".

You are correct, for insurance you need to go to Motor Tribunals and that takes lot of work. But since this offense can easily send him to jail, this might not even be required.

[shivshanker]

@NetFreak,

what is more practical,

1. be without a ride for atleast 2-6 months
2. pay a lawyer atleast 5-15K Rs for filing the case
3. other misc Expenses of 5-10K for greasing
4. Atleast 2-6 visits to the courtroom and the Lawyer's office
5. Loss of productivity for two people Frankmehta and his fiancee for atleast 5-10 days

and in the end expect compensation in the range of 25-50K Rs. from the judge.

Or settle out of court, in a week's time for the entire damage value and move on with life.

By seeing the doctor in Jail, what objective are you achieving..?? In a real court case if the oppsite party wants to delay, for a simple hearing and submission of evidence, the matter can easily take 2-3 years and with clever lawyers can be easily prolonged to 4-5 years.

The maximum penalty the judge levies in such matters is Rs 100/- for people who repeatedly do not show up for hearings.

MayanKK asked me this question, what would I do if it was my car, I answered him.

[Iluvcars]

Originally Posted by shivshanker

@iLuvCars,

At the outset let me clarify, I am not the Doc, I am not related to him, he is not my father in law, nor have I ever met him.

Thanks for the clarification; However, neither did I think so nor did I suggest that.

Originally Posted by shivshanker

I am not supporting the Doc's Drunken Driving offense, but I would like to state it was an accident and that that he is willing to make monetary amends, we should call it chapter closed. He was stopped and a case has been registered, yet most of us are flogging the poor Doc for committing a CRIME.

I didn't say you're supporting the doc. But your statements - "Come on what's a car without an accident, everybody makes mistakes, if the Doc is willing to make amends, let him pay for it and both parties can and should move on with life." - equates drunken driving with an ordinary traffic accident. Ordinary traffic accidents have several causes but one of the chief causes is human negligence or carelessness. Drunken driving is in a separate league altogether because the drunken person getting behind the wheel should be aware of the potential consequences. Life and limb of every road users' that shares the road with him / her and that of him / her to is at serious risk. The vehicle becomes a dangerous weapon then. Is drunken driven legally prohibited in India? - Yes. Please let me know if I'm wrong. If I'm not, going by the definition of crime, drunken driving is indeed one. However, I'm not sure if it's a crime, a misdemeanor or a felony or anything else by a law book.
What does that adjective "poor" denote? If the perpetrator deserves that adjective what do the victims get?

Originally Posted by shivshanker

God only knows what his predicament was to drive under the influence of alcohol and meet with an accident.

Any drunken driver is a potential murderer for obvious reasons. Does anyone care for such persons' predicament?

Originally Posted by shivshanker

I am completely with you on the accident part, condoning such acts as a good Samaritan is also acceptable to me. I would call it an offense and not a crime, maybe it just me.

In my opinion, a good Samaritan should not condone such accidents because they are not accidents to begin with. Condoning accidents for what they mean, I'm with you, provided the damage doesn't signify otherwise.

Originally Posted by shivshanker

As a person who also travels the streets of Bombay on a daily basis, it makes my blood boil to see some of the crimes being committed on a daily basis by heavy vehicles and public transport providers, who in my opinion are bigger offenders, yet they go scott free.

I share your anger or frustration here. A crime is one and should be looked at absolutely not comparatively. Just because the "bigger offenders" (borrowing your term) go scot-free do you suggest the doctor's act should be condoned? If yes, I don't get the logic.

Originally Posted by shivshanker

my appeal to netfreak was these are real road crimes, that was an accident.

No it was not an accident! He ended up doing what he did primarily because he was drunk; had he not been drunk the term accident applies.

[shivshanker]

@iLuvcars,

Please read post #54 above, I am trying to take a more practical approach to solve some the Frank's current predicament.

You have been preaching what is crime and why drunken driving should be punished as a crime, equating it to murder.

By calling the Doc a murderer and putting him behind bars, I do not see how Frank's problem is being solved, we are adding to his problems.

I am taking a more pragmatic approach to the whole problem and looking for a "win win" solution for all. Remember Stephen Covey and his 7 Habits.?!

I am sorry to state, every individual has, either greased some palm or the other, cheated in exams, bought liquor from a liquor store with out a permit, smoked when we were legal underage, shared porn cd/DVD, jumped red lights after 10.00 pm, driven on the hard shoulder, smoked pot in college, ticket less travel, falsification of Income, paying one's own father rent, cash payment to the builder, the list can go on.

How many times have u made a cash payment, for a discount without proper bill/invoice.?, how many times have u paid more than 14Rs/- for bottle of Bisleri when u were travelling in India, do u know it is a crime to sell above the published MRP and to buy good without paying proper Sales taxes.?

Every offence listed above can be related or extrapolated to some financial or other kind of losses to the Indian exchequer which is affecting our society.
Some child is dying some where in India of hunger, b'cos we failed at the above list.

Being a party to such offenses also makes us offenders and we most of us are repeat offenders.

Does this mean all are criminals equating to murderers.?

I have stood up against one such injustice, have a court case registered for the past 4 years and believe me, I do not like it when my wife has to travel to the court time and again, the opposite party has showed up twice in the past 4 years and have been fined twice, but they are still continuing the same delaying tactics.

I rest my case.

[mayankk]

Originally Posted by shivshanker

@iLuvcars,

Please read post #54 above, I am trying to take a more practical approach to solve some the Frank's current predicament.

You have been preaching what is crime and why drunken driving should be punished as a crime, equating it to murder.

By calling the Doc a murderer and putting him behind bars, I do not see how Frank's problem is being solved, we are adding to his problems.

I am taking a more pragmatic approach to the whole problem and looking for a "win win" solution for all. Remember Stephen Covey and his 7 Habits.?!

I am sorry to state, every individual has, either greased some palm or the other, cheated in exams, bought liquor from a liquor store with out a permit, smoked when we were legal underage, shared porn cd/DVD, jumped red lights after 10.00 pm, driven on the hard shoulder, smoked pot in college, ticket less travel, falsification of Income, paying one's own father rent, cash payment to the builder, the list can go on.

How many times have u made a cash payment, for a discount without proper bill/invoice.?, how many times have u paid more than 14Rs/- for bottle of Bisleri when u were travelling in India, do u know it is a crime to sell above the published MRP and to buy good without paying proper Sales taxes.?

Every offence listed above can be related or extrapolated to some financial or other kind of losses to the Indian exchequer which is affecting our society.
Some child is dying some where in India of hunger, b'cos we failed at the above list.

Being a party to such offenses also makes us offenders and we most of us are repeat offenders.

Does this mean all are criminals equating to murderers.?

I have stood up against one such injustice, have a court case registered for the past 4 years and believe me, I do not like it when my wife has to travel to the court time and again, the opposite party has showed up twice in the past 4 years and have been fined twice, but they are still continuing the same delaying tactics.

I rest my case.

Shiv, at a base level, this pragmatism is what frank should practise, agreed.
But what everyone here is against is the condoning of the drunkard, as a wayward incident.

Equating bigger crimes, and crimes injustices dont matter a hoot.
Its his car, it has been bashed up, and so I expect him to get resolution in this situation first, and not go about a list of things like
1.remove corruption, 2.Resolve political deadlocks, 3. remove poverty...........X. fix car.

[Iluvcars]

@shivshanker:
May I request you to please re-read my post? I've not called the doc a murderer and I've not asked anyone to put him behind bars.
I've only said that a drunken person behind the wheel is a potential murderer and I still stand by that.
Firstly, why do you bring the profession of a drunken driver in this case? A driver is one no matter what he does otherwise for living. If he happens to be a doc or an IPS officer or a priest so be it.
"Does this mean all are criminals equating to murderers.? " - Why do you ask that? Did I say or imply that? A crime is a broad term and encompasses various offenses / crimes within it. Drunken driving happens to be one among them. Parrot being a bird doesn't mean all birds are parrots. I hope I made it clear.
I don't want to comment on whether I've ever committed any of the crimes / misdemeanors that you mentioned in your post. For an argument, even if I had done ALL of them, should it have any bearing on what the incident we discuss or the gravity of it? Or does it even mean that I don't qualify to call drunken driving a crime which, in fact, is what it is?

[benzinblut]

I have been through the entire thread. I feel that the culprit (whoever it may be) must be punished and the victim must get his full compensation. But if the intention is to teach someone a lesson then it will defeat the whole purpose. Focus should be on settling the matter rather than pushing it too far. Luckily the damage was only to property in this case. This is my opinion.

EDIT: I never bought the idea that 'Doctor Owned' cars should demand a premium in the used car market. This case clearly proves that logic wrong.

[shivshanker]

But what everyone here is against is the condoning of the drunkard, as a wayward incident.

In the process of condoning the drunkard, demanding legal action etc., we might end up painting the wrong picture for FrankMehta, remember he asked us for suggestions.