One in Ten Drivers Flee

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Drivers flee in one in ten serious crashes: Motorists admit they are more concerned about 'self-preservation’ than informing authorities. Others did not believe the crashes were serious enough to warrant reporting

That is not good. And it's against the law. Or do we feel less inclined to obey the law when we are in a car?

 

[richart]

Drivers flee in one in ten serious crashes: Motorists admit they are more concerned about 'self-preservation’ than informing authorities. Others did not believe the crashes were serious enough to warrant reporting

That is not good. And it's against the law. Or do we feel less inclined to obey the law when we are in a car?

Who is this we ? 9 out of ten drivers remain, and I would like to think we are in that group.:thup:

 

[pokerjoke]

I'm surprised its not higher.

I suppose some do it out of fear,some because there not insured or some because the car is stolen.
If you have nothing to hide you should have no worries.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Who is this we ? 9 out of ten drivers remain, and I would like to think we are in that group.:thup:

The royal we (and not the one for which Princess Margaret used to have the taps turned on to drown out)

And they are talking serious accidents where someone gets hurt...

 

[Jensen]

I imagine it's the "flight or fight" automatic response kicking in. Hence people panic and run.

 

[Blue in Munich]

I'm surprised its not higher.

I suppose some do it out of fear,some because there not insured or some because the car is stolen.
If you have nothing to hide you should have no worries.

You & me both. There are certain areas of London where insurance is regarded as an optional extra rather than a legal requirement.

 

[patricks148]

is from one of those dodgy Chinese websites??

 

[Bunkermagnet]

I think the number is greater than it was purely because more drivers go without insurance for whatever reason, however I fail to see how anyone can quantify the percentage. As it was, the example they had on BBC radio (cant remeber if it was 2 or 5) yesterday was of a woman who had a big accident, and knew nothing about it because she was totally as a newt. Ok she admitted it was wrong, but that's hardly the same as being stone cold sober and deliberately running.

 

[Robster59]

I think it's because there are quite a few vehicles out there with no insurance or MOT and in tatty old cars that may not even be registered to them so it's simpler for them to flee rather than wait for the Police to arrive or discuss the odds with the other person involved.

Myself, I'd never flee purely because it would be hard to think of someone who couldn't catch me!

 

[Blue in Munich]

I think the number is greater than it was purely because more drivers go without insurance for whatever reason, however I fail to see how anyone can quantify the percentage. As it was, the example they had on BBC radio (cant remeber if it was 2 or 5) yesterday was of a woman who had a big accident, and knew nothing about it because she was totally as a newt. Ok she admitted it was wrong, but that's hardly the same as being stone cold sober and deliberately running.

There's a requirement to report PI RTA's. If more than one vehicle is involved then the party that doesn't do a runner (as it would be rare for both or all to) reports, or causes it to be reported, and the statistics are taken from there. If there is only one vehicle involved then if it is an injury RTA and they do a runner they will have driven into something and therefore police will probably be called & report it. From that it's fairly easy to total up how many accidents there are and how many of those involve a failing to stop aspect as all the stats are collated centrally.

The one you describe above involving the newted woman would qualify as a fail to stop, regardless of the reasons for her not stopping.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

There's a requirement to report PI RTA's. If more than one vehicle is involved then the party that doesn't do a runner (as it would be rare for both or all to) reports, or causes it to be reported, and the statistics are taken from there. If there is only one vehicle involved then if it is an injury RTA and they do a runner they will have driven into something and therefore police will probably be called & report it. From that it's fairly easy to total up how many accidents there are and how many of those involve a failing to stop aspect as all the stats are collated centrally.

The one you describe above involving the newted woman would qualify as a fail to stop, regardless of the reasons for her not stopping.

She said the first she knew of it was when the policeman pulled her out of the car...after she had smashed into others.

As far as statistic collection, what about those accidents where a car is clipped, dinged etc through carelss passing or whatever manourve and no-one else is around to witness?

 

[Blue in Munich]

She said the first she knew of it was when the policeman pulled her out of the car...after she had smashed into others.

As far as statistic collection, what about those accidents where a car is clipped, dinged etc through carelss passing or whatever manourve and no-one else is around to witness?

Whether or not she knew about it, it will still be classified as a fail to stop if she got any distance from the scene; there was a duty to stop and she didn't regardless of her reason. It may be possible to avoid prosecution if you can prove that you wouldn't or couldn't have known about it, but pie-eyed doesn't qualify as an excuse.

I'm trying to remember exactly how it works with damage only accidents, to the best of my remaining knowledge it is thus; the accident you describe should be reported by the victim. However, in this day & age knowing that little will be done about it in terms of pursuing the offender, most people won't bother to report them; the belief is that they are vastly underreported.

Damage only accidents don't have to be reported to the police if the drivers involved stop and exchange details, consequently the statistics/circumstances on the majority of these are not known. As a result, what statistics are gleaned (if any) from accidents reported to the police are not collated in the same manner as personal injury accidents as it is accepted that the majority of damage only accidents are not known about and therefore the minority that are reported do not form a sound base from which to draw trends. Hope that makes sense.