The television advert which shows a driver failing in his bid to drive through a puddle and soak a pedestrian at a bus stop is aptly titled 'a refreshing change'.

The same description applies to the case in which 18-year-old Richard Harker was fined for driving without consideration when he drenched a woman pensioner instead of his intended school chum victims.

It may have been a prank which went wrong, and he had no intention of dousing the two women with puddle water. All credit that he admitted the offence.

But instead of taking it on the chin Harker has moaned and whinged about the police and how the incident may have affected his exam studies.

Not only that, but his mother has also joined in the fray saying the case was a waste of time, effort and taxpayers' money. It was not.

She even poses the question of why the elderly victim didn't come to see her - where an apology would have been issued and an offer made to pay for her dry cleaning. How generous!

She says her son couldn't avoid the puddle, as every time it rains water collects in front of the bus shelter. And as Harker says, it was throwing it down that day anyway. Unbelievable!

The offence exists to deal with such incidents, and where police find evidence that an offence has been committed they take action. The conviction and endorsements are an indication of how seriously the offence was taken. Nor should it be forgotten that this was not a case of children running up and down a street splashing each other. The offence was committed while the lad was at the wheel of a motor car.

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.