Gran drove car into her neighbour’s legs in row over £100
A GRANDMOTHER drove into her neighbour’s legs “at least six times” in a row over £100, a court has heard.
Jane Williams, 62, left Helen Wingstedt bruised by repeatedly “nudging” her with a black Jaguar car, Cardiff Crown Court heard yesterday.
The gran-of-seven had flown into a rage with Ms Wingstedt over an alleged unpaid debt of £100 to Williams’ husband, a mechanic who had done some work on the victim’s car.
Williams, of West Street, Llantwit Major, pleaded guilty to dangerous driving. Wearing a leather jacket and hoop earrings to court, she told WalesOnline she is “deeply remorseful” over the offence, which took place at 3.40pm on February 18 last year.
Prosecutor Sophie Kenny said: “The crown say the defendant shunted Ms Wingstedt along a road in Llantwit Major. The parties had known each other for six months, having been neighbours. Ms Wingstedt’s car had been damaged in a collision, and she mentioned that to the defendant, who said her husband could look at the car to perform repairs as he is a qualified mechanic.
“A quote of £500 was given – the company responsible for the damage would pay £400 and Ms Wingstedt would pay the difference. But unfortunately it took two months for the work to be completed. There was disagreement and dispute over the completion of those works.
“When the vehicle was returned by Mr Williams to Ms Wingstedt, an outstanding balance of £100 was discussed. It was quite an acrimonious conversation and the complainant ultimately didn’t pay the £100.”
On the day of the offence, Ms Wingstedt took her dog for a walk on Church Lane and saw a black Jaguar parked at a junction, facing in her direction. She recognised it as Williams’ car.
“She saw the defendant in the driver’s seat, who alighted from the car shouting, ‘You owe us money’,” Ms Kenny told the court.
“Ms Wingstedt said, ‘I’m not arguing in the street’. She walked along Church Lane, but the defendant had driven round the other way and stopped in the junction, effectively causing an obstruction in the road.
“The defendant started shouting through the open window. Ms Wingstedt continued walking along the lane, having to go around the defendant’s car, then described feeling a sudden strike to both legs.
“She realised she had been struck by the vehicle, causing her to stagger and feel pain. She put her hands on the bonnet and shouted ‘stop’. The defendant could be seen through the windscreen and appeared to be angry.”
The prosecutor said Williams continued to “shunt” the victim and drove into her legs “at least six times”, prompting Ms Wingstedt to shout: “Stop or you’ll hurt the dog.”
Williams – who worked as a dog walker at the time – reversed and drove off shortly after a witness approached shouting: “What the hell are you doing?”
The former nurse and estate agent initially denied the offence, telling police the victim had “made up” the allegation. She pleaded not guilty and preparations were made for a trial, before she entered a guilty plea last month.
In a statement read to the court, Ms Wingstedt said: “The result of Jane Williams driving into me is my selfconfidence has waned significantly to the point I’m considering moving from the area to avoid future confrontations with Jane.
“I no longer walk the route where the collisions took place, and when I do venture out, I feel I am constantly looking over my shoulder. Before I leave home, I check along the road to make sure Jane’s not about.
“I feel Jane knows almost everyone in the area and is trying to get people to make me feel uncomfortable when I’m out walking. The situation has made me feel like an outsider in my own village.”
Although the only injury was bruising to Ms Wingstedt’s legs, the prosecutor argued there was “potential for far greater harm”.
Nick Gedge, mitigating, said: “This is a 62-year-old lady of not just clean character, but positively good character over a very long period. What happened on that day very nearly two years ago is completely out of character and much regretted.
“She has a business as a dog walker, which as a result of the conviction and inevitable driving disqualification, will no longer be able to be continued, because she has to drive to pick up dogs.
“She was driving to the ordinary place where she took dogs to walk when she encountered Ms Wingstedt. This was driving at a very low speed. It’s been described as ‘nudging’. There was only a very small area of bruising and no indication of any loss of footing.
“It wasn’t planned. It was impulsive, against the backdrop of an unfortunate financial dispute where Ms Wingstedt withheld £100 that was owed. It got out of control and it’s much regretted.”
Addressing a claim that rubbish had been thrown into Ms Wingstedt’s garden, Mr Gedge said: “Ms Williams simply doesn’t accept that was her and there’s no evidence it was.”
He added his client had been married for nearly 30 years, with seven grandchildren, whom she helps care for.
The letting agency where Williams used to work wrote to the court, describing her as “honest, reliable and loyal”.
Williams, who has no income or savings, will look for a new job, Mr Gedge added. She is considered by the probation service to pose a low risk of reoffending.
Handing down the sentence, Recorder Duncan Bould said: “This was a disgraceful piece of dangerous driving, putting at risk a lady you had known for some time, over what seems to be nothing more than a disagreement between her, you and your husband.
“You caused her injury with a car. You don’t need me to explain to you how dangerous what you did was. One small mistake from you could have resulted in her being very seriously injured.
“You described it to the probation officer as the stupidest thing you’ve ever done in your life, and that is a description I can wholeheartedly agree with.
“You pleaded guilty at a late stage. It would have been more seemly had you immediately admitted what you had done and apologised to Ms Wingstedt. It took a long time for that to happen but I must take into account that ultimately it did.
“I also take into account that you have lived not only a blame-free life, but a life where you have assisted others and are regarded very highly by those who have written on your behalf.”
Williams was banned from driving for 12 months and must take an extended test to pass again. She must do 150 unpaid work hours and eight days of rehabilitation activity.
The judge imposed £1,000 in compensation to Ms Wingstedt, which he said “in no way reflects the appropriate level” but he had to take into account Williams’ “somewhat limited financial means”.
Although preparations were made for a trial, Williams will not have to cover any prosecution costs.