A callous driver behaved in a “disgusting” way after he knocked a teenager off his moped, causing him serious injury, a court heard.

Darren Lockyer stood over Ryan Prytherch as he lay in agony in the road and ranted: “Where is your ------- insurance? I bet you have got none.”

The comment was ironic, it was said, because the 31-year-old self-employed builder had no insurance for the car he was driving at the time.

Maidstone Crown Court was told that Lockyer left the scene of the accident and showed little remorse when later interviewed by police, seeking to blame the 16-year-old victim for what happened.

He walked free with just a £250 fine and six penalty points on his licence after admitting careless driving, failing to report an accident and having insurance.

A judge declared: “I am limited by the (sentencing) guidelines and the type of sentence I can impose. There is no criminal offence for causing serious harm by careless driving.”

Prosecutor James Benson said the teenager was on London Road, Bapchild, near Sittingbourne, at about 5pm on January 19 2015 when Lockyer turned across him into Hempstead Lane in his Fiat Seicento.

“He did it without having proper regard for oncoming traffic,” said Mr Benson. “He pulled straight across Mr Prytherch. He simply collided with the side of the car and sustained serious injuries.”

He was taken to King’s College Hospital in London where he was treated for multiple fractures of his pelvis and needed long rehabilitation to recover.

One witness described how Lockyer was extremely aggressive when he stopped after the collision. The witness was disgusted by his behaviour.

Lockyer, of Whitehill Lane, Gravesend, then got into his car and drove off with loud music playing. He was arrested two days later.

“He showed very little remorse for what happened or compassion for the victim,” said Mr Benson. “He suggested time was money and it wasn’t financially viable for him to stay around for the victim and report the matter properly.

“He seemed to exhibit a lack of insight into the seriousness of what occurred. Asked if loud music playing distracted him, he said: ‘It’s possible. It does distract.’

“Asked if he thought he should be on the road, he replied: ‘Not with my attitude, no.’ He suggested the motorcyclist was at fault. He laid the blame for the accident on the victim.”

Louis French, defending, said of Lockyer, formerly of Thistle Walk, Sittingbourne: “In terms of diplomacy and charm, nil out of a hundred.”

An explanation for Lockyer’s “disagreeable manner”, he said could be that he suffered from autistic spectrum disorder.

“The aftermath of all this apparent callousness is explicable,” said Mr French. “The police may not have thought him remorseful. They were not aware of his condition.

“He does not come out of it well, and he knows that. He has expressed an apology to the unfortunate young man. He was in panic and temper at the time and he regrets it.”

Lockyer was considering bankruptcy because he was in “massive” debt.

Mr French said there was no claim for compensation by the victim and if civil action were taken he would be suing someone with no means to pay.

Recorder Mark van der Zwart said Lockyer had not been keeping a proper lookout when he performed the manoeuvre.

“The volume of music in your car may have had something to do with it,” he said.

“The description from witnesses of your behaviour at that time did not do you credit, but you are not being prosecuted or sentenced for showing a lack of remorse.

“You showed a lack of remorse and consideration for the great pain he must have been in. You got back in your car and drove off" - Recorder Mark van der Zwart

“You are being prosecuted for having caused that collision and failing to report an accident. You didn’t offer that young man assistance.

“You showed a lack of remorse and consideration for the great pain he must have been in. You got back in your car and drove off.

“I sentence on the basis it is an aggravated form of careless driving - aggravated by the injuries and the failure to report it.”

The judge said it was important to understand that such sentences were not intended to equate to or be a measure of the harm that was caused.

“The sentence could never equate to what he suffered,” he said.

Allowing six months to pay the fine and refusing to order costs, he added: “I would be surprised if he can pay the fine, let alone the costs.”