Rear-End Collision, Police Failed To Get Statement

[CdwJava]

This is very true. I've been investigating accidents for over 20 years and I have probably seen less than 15 accurate and well-documented police reports among the thousands I've reviewed.

Maybe you have not been asked to review the good ones. If you are a hired gun, then you are likely brought in when an attorney identifies a problem in the report, and when the matter is serious (or costly). Yes, many are not complete, and many may not be done well. But, they do not have to be.

In case you do not understand it, traffic collisions are largely a civil matter and not criminal. It is already an odd thing to see the police conducting investigations for matters that are, essentially, civil matters.

Even when they think they are doing a super job, they aren't. They just don't have the proper training or experience to handle even simple crash investigations or reconstructions.

You are right. Most officers are trained only in the very basic elements of traffic collision investigation. That training generally involves simply gathering information and taking some often cursory measurements. They are neither required nor expected to conduct an in depth investigation. Unless the collision is a very serious injury or a fatal collision, the truly well-trained officers are not going to be called out to spend the many hours it might take to do it right.

They have no duty to investigate anything, and they have no duty to investigate anything correctly. And they are ALWAYS looking for somebody to charge with a crime.

True ... True ... Not true.

You do not indicate what state you are in, but in my state we are not always looking for someone to charge with a crime. The PCF is generally an infraction, and a trained investigator can issue a citation based upon the investigation should they choose, but often the "Recommendation" is simply, "None."

In CA the vast majority of traffic matters are infractions for which no arrest can be made, so the thought that all cops are hunting for the arrest is simply NOT true.

I've attended some of the schools that train cops how to investigate accidents, and frequently it's like the blind leading the blind.

Then you have not attended the ones out here. I am not sure how it is taught in your un-named state. But, I will agree that collision investigations are very cursory in the academy. Generally, that very rudimentary knowledge is sufficient for most collisions. From there we have greater levels of training that is required before an officer can write a citation based upon the investigation. Additional training up to and including reconstruction are generally conducted by renowned experts in the field - at least mine were. Hardly a "blind leading the blind" situation.

If you are going to castigate all such training, have experience with ALL such training.

The advice I give to everybody I know is that they should NEVER provide a verbal statement to police at the scene. Just give them your information and tell them you will provide a WRITTEN declaration after you collect yourself and have a chance to think about what just happened.

That's fine, but they face the very real possibility that the investigation will be completed prior to the submission of that statement. Many officers like to get simple collisions written up quickly. And, in CA we generally have 10 days to get them submitted. With only one statement at the scene, that can have a direct effect on the outcome of the collision with regard to fault. And while the insurer is not obligated to agree with the police conclusion, in CA that designation of fault can result in a point on a driver's license.

Personally, I would not recommend that anyone delay the statement ... unless, of course, they know they are at fault.

And if any police officers are offended by this, good.

Hardly "offended," though I am stunned at your arrogance and what may be a lack of knowledge of how the rest of the nation is trained on or addresses collision investigations. How it is done in your locale or state is not the national standard.

You officers, deputies, and patrolmen really need to clean up your act in this regard and realize there is a whole world related to crash investigation that goes far beyond making arrests and writing down license plate numbers. And you have the power to ruin peoples' lives so please start being more responsible with that.

I understand that quite well - and so do most officers. The problem is, these are largely civil issues that the police are being asked to take the time to look in to. I have yet to ever be subpoenaed to criminal court for a collision investigation that was not related to a DUI or reckless driving matter, and have only twice been subpoeaned to civil court - and was never actually called in either case.

In CA there is generally no legal obligation to even do collision reports unless they involve injury or death. Here, they rarely involving non-infraction criminal activity. Collisions are largely a civil matter. If the insurance industry or others want to increase the quality of training and investigations, they will have to pony up the money to PAY for the training and maybe even allow for compensation to police agencies who prepare the reports.

 

[Free_Advice]

I have yet to ever be subpoenaed to criminal court for a collision investigation that was not related to a DUI or reckless driving matter, and have only twice been subpoeaned to civil court - and was never actually called in either case.
.

That's probably because unless you actually saw the accident, you're not a proper witness at all in a civil case.

 

[CdwJava]

That's probably because unless you actually saw the accident, you're not a proper witness at all in a civil case.

Actually, expert testimony is permitted in civil cases as well as criminal. Plus, there could be other reasons to subpoena the officer as the officer is a witness to the scene, the parties, the damage, the injuries, etc.

It's rare that they are called to actually testify (in my experience), but there are reasons to do so. If the matter is serious enough, the parties likely have their own experts coming up with hypotheses and opinions and do not intend to rely on the officer who, very likely, has little formal training in collision investigations. Plus, the person calling the officer has to pay the agency for the officer's time - ALL of it - and this includes costs associated with wages and benefits at the overtime rate. So, unless the officer has something very important to add that cannot be stipulated to or provided for by some other means (such as statements made by one party or another) there is generally no great reason to call the officer if he lacks sufficient training to make a good expert ... and, his opinion is relevant and beneficial to the party that calls him.

 

[Veranor]

My insurance totaled the truck. The frame snapped in several places (found after disassembly) and I would need a completely new truck bed.

So they offered me a little less than payoff, and then after the deductible taken out, I am about 700 to 900 upside down.

The police report has not been finished yet officially, so the agent is still waiting on that information. For good measure my wife and I contacted an attorney in the Austin area who specializes in this kind of issue. It was a free consult and this is what I've taken from it. We plan on shopping around because it appears there is a case. I will elaborate based on the information that has been given to me.

1) The police were called to the scene but did not show immediately. There were EMTs on the scene after I was transported away by other EMTs. They did not see the police arrive at the scene.

2) The police were told that the location was 7600 XXXXX Road (censored just in case). A car arived at the 7700 address (wrong location). No one was there, so they left.

3) An officer arrived at the hospital to take my statement and insurance. He reported that he saw no one there and it was too bad (the too bad statement was as he was walking away).

4) Preliminary report was filed that the person who hit me was a John Doe, and uninsured motorist. The report is still in progress and the final has not been made.

5) Insurance agent expressed concern that the report was filed as an uninsured motorist. I've requested that if the person left before police could show up that the police log it as a hit and run. They refused.

6) Found out that the truck was totaled. The settlement is approximately 200 - 300 less than payoff. Minus the deductible and we're short 700 to 800 now. I have not given the insurance the lien holder's information yet.

7) Called an attorney to explore options. They informed me that it is very common the Austin PD screws up on traffic accidents. They have also been known to simply not show up to fatality accidents until the wrecks have been cleared. The cases that claim negligence on the PD have routinely been settled out of court for the past 6 or so months. I basically have a case, once my claim has been closed, but I need to contact an attorney who handles going after a municipal entity like the police. Traditional accident attorneys will not take the case because they go after insurance companies, and those are more of a "sure" thing.

8) Contacted the family attorney (close friend, no retainer). She explained that it is possible to hold the PD liable if they did not follow protocol. It would be dependent on any city ordinances currently in place requiring them to act responsibly when responding to an accident. She did not know if Austin has one in place, but would get back with me if she found out from her contacts.

9) Contact within PD (Lieutenant) informed that PD must respond to an accident where EMS is called within a certain amount of time, and it is a dismissable offense if they fail to respond. He would not give me specifics, but just that its something they have to remain compliant with for certain regulations in place.

10) I still hurt (lol). And now I'm trying to figure out my options on negotiating the settlement to a little more than what they're offering in order to get the loan paid off.

So that's all the information that has been given to me thus far. The accident attorney also said that given the bad PR the police have been getting lately, they may just settle with me if I send a demand letter explaining that someone must be accountable and if they were dispatched to the scene, they needed to be there promptly. There is a possibility they sent a uniform to the wrong address (7700 block instead of 7600 block), but if the EMS and fire were able to get to you without giving the address, they can't use that as a reason for excuse.

We plan on getting more information and doing more research on this before moving forward. IN the interim, I have no vehicle now and I've got to focus on that.

 

[Veranor]

I also found out one last item of information, but don't have the rest:

The other person had to be towed away. A tow truck was called in, but we don't yet know who called it. I think I will get that information as all details of the report are made available.

 

[CdwJava]

I'm surprised that Texas has any law that holds the POLICE accountable for your damages in an incident that is largely civil in nature. Case law holds that there is no duty to protect, so absent some clear negligence on the part of the police that caused you damage, I don't know how they could possibly be responsible.

But, if TX law requires them to respond, so be it. I have not heard of any such thing and can't find any info on it, but ... okay.

And if Austin has a policy mandating their response, and a failure to respond and gather info is somehow an implied promise to provide a specific service, then that's bad for them and they should consider re-writing that policy because if for some reason an officer cannot respond then this sort of claim can be made.

Very odd ...

 

[Veranor]

I'm surprised that Texas has any law that holds the POLICE accountable for your damages in an incident that is largely civil in nature. Case law holds that there is no duty to protect, so absent some clear negligence on the part of the police that caused you damage, I don't know how they could possibly be responsible.

But, if TX law requires them to respond, so be it. I have not heard of any such thing and can't find any info on it, but ... okay.

And if Austin has a policy mandating their response, and a failure to respond and gather info is somehow an implied promise to provide a specific service, then that's bad for them and they should consider re-writing that policy because if for some reason an officer cannot respond then this sort of claim can be made.

Very odd ...

We're trying to verify the existence of such an ordinance. So far I can't seem to find one yet. Our family attorney said that if we didn't find one, their internal policies would get the best of them if made public. They've been under the gun for some other nasty issues that have put the chief under fire. She said the press would conduct a detailed investigation into why they "screw up" so many accidents and the PR would be a nightmare for them to clean up.

 

[CdwJava]

The only thought I have as to why or even how the police might have some limited liability here would be that IF they have a policy that states they must respond to a collision within X minutes of the call and they failed to do so, and TX state law requires a report for injury collisions, then their failure to obtain the information of another driver could deprive you (the plaintiff) of your ability to recover any damages from that party.

However, if the law that requires a report does not mandate that they will respond in a specific time frame, and if no local statute mandates such a response, then it can hardly be the fault of the police if the suspect fled the scene prior to their arrival. If they were held liable for every hit and run, then the police could be sued into insolvency.

I believe that TX law requires reports for serious injury and fatal collisions, and for collisions involving $1,000 or more in damages (which is easy with today's cars ... I know of few fender benders that do not involve at least $600+ in damage, so two cars with damage is almost certainly hitting that level). But, mandated reporting does not mean they are mandated to get all the information including that of drivers that fled prior to the arrival of the police.

It might be a different situation had the officer responded, contacted the other driver, and failed to obtain even basic information like a name or license plate.

I suspect that the information you received was general. Yes, under the right fact set the police could be held liable. But, I would doubt that such a fact set exists here as the suspect vehicle was gone on the arrival of the police if I recall the original story correctly. If so, about all they could do would be to interview you and the medical staff to see if anyone observed or recalled anything about the car or the driver.

 

[Veranor]

The only thought I have as to why or even how the police might have some limited liability here would be that IF they have a policy that states they must respond to a collision within X minutes of the call and they failed to do so, and TX state law requires a report for injury collisions, then their failure to obtain the information of another driver could deprive you (the plaintiff) of your ability to recover any damages from that party.

This statement has been repeated to me by a few attorneys today. One of them said its a stretch, but has been done before and offered to take the case. We told him we would think about it and get back to them.

Failure to obtain the information of another driver from a serious injury traffic accident could deprive the plantiff of the ability of recovering any damages (pain & suffering, vehicle / insurance amounts, and medical). 3 or 4 different firms have told me this.

 

[Veranor]

According to the state laws, I found the following info.

1) The officer *must* file the report if:

• Bodily injury was sustained by either driver
• Damage exceeding $1000 dollars

FULL report must be filed by the 10th day after the accident. We don't have the full report yet.

I'm still digging around on the state laws, but I need to find a listing of the ordinances for Austin regarding traffic collisions.

 

[CdwJava]

This statement has been repeated to me by a few attorneys today. One of them said its a stretch, but has been done before and offered to take the case. We told him we would think about it and get back to them.

Failure to obtain the information of another driver from a serious injury traffic accident could deprive the plantiff of the ability of recovering any damages (pain & suffering, vehicle / insurance amounts, and medical). 3 or 4 different firms have told me this.

But! That would require that the officer had the opportunity to obtain the information for this to even be a remote possibility. If the suspect left before the officer arrived, and there was no malfeasance on the part of the officer or agency in dispatching or responding, then it's a long shot of a claim (at a high cost for the attorney making the claim). Not to mention overcoming the general lack of any duty to protect in such matters. I would think it a rather high burden to meet unless you could show that the responding officer stopped for a pizza on the way to the call, or the agency held the call for dispatch an amount of time that was well outside the norm for such calls.

Be careful. Attorneys may tell you what they think you want to hear, and then ask for their retainer up front.

But, shouldn't your insurance be handling damages and injuries and the like? Aside from a deductible, what losses have you sustained?

 

[CdwJava]

According to the state laws, I found the following info.

1) The officer *must* file the report if:

• Bodily injury was sustained by either driver
• Damage exceeding $1000 dollars

FULL report must be filed by the 10th day after the accident. We don't have the full report yet.

I'm still digging around on the state laws, but I need to find a listing of the ordinances for Austin regarding traffic collisions.

I found the same summary, though the ones I read (not a statute but from agency websites) described serious injury or death not simply an injury. Though in my state an injury is sufficient for the requirement and we must also have the report completed within 10 days, so it seems to make sense that ANY injury might be the actual law. However, there ARE exceptions to that. For serious collisions ten days can often be impossible. The CHP out here is lucky to have the FULL investigation done in a serious (near fatal or fatal) collision for upwards of 90 days. I'm on day 10 of a near fatal DUI (driver under the influence of meth.) that I'm working and while the narrative, cause, and opinions are complete, the diagrams and calculations are still probably another week away.

Unless their ordinances were written by monkeys, I cannot imagine that they make a promise to respond within a specific period of time. The agency policy (not a law) may indicate they will endeavor to get to a scene in a certain amount of time, but they would be asking for a lawsuit if they made any promises as to responses or what they WOULD do at certain incidents. I would think that the first attorney to review such an ordinance would first go into apoplexy and then be on the horn to the city manager to get him to call a midnight session of the council to remove such a time bomb from the city code.

With a hit and run type collision a "full report" may not be possible. In my state we cannot even complete the state mandated report forms in some hit and run collisions so the report can not even be completed for quite some time because the state kicks them back to us when we don't have the boxes filled out just right. And, if we are missing data, then we can't fill out the boxes. I imagine there is a similar process in TX.

From friends of mine who are officers in TX it seems that TX trains a great many more of its officers in at least basic collision investigations than they do in my state. There are a plethora of collision training opportunities available in TX, and very few - relatively - out here. It is not uncommon for classes to get cancelled or postponed here for a lack of enrollment, so it seems that TX places greater emphasis on T/C investigations than we do.

 

[Free_Advice]

I would think it a rather high burden to meet unless you could show that the responding officer stopped for a pizza on the way to the call,?

Donuts OK but no PIZZA dang it !

 

[Veranor]

But, shouldn't your insurance be handling damages and injuries and the like? Aside from a deductible, what losses have you sustained?

About 400 dollars in co-pays, 4 days lost wages, and my vehicle that gets me to work. The wife has the actual full costs of all of the medical bills (that insurance covered), but we received a notice from blue cross blue shield of tx that if this was an accident and it was not my fault, they reserve the right to refuse coverage and have it negotiated with the other driver's car insurance.

It was really a bizarre letter, but I've gotten bizarre things lately from this carrier. The med insurance is HMO.

We put all of this in a file. The insurance agent said I may have to engage 3rd parties to obtain reimbursement for those amounts. Also, the attorney that said he would take the case said he would only charge fees upon winning. It wasn't a "slam dunk" case, but he was willing to move forward with it because this type of scenario appeared to happen in the past. I didn't bother asking the specifics.

 

[Veranor]

With a hit and run type collision a "full report" may not be possible. In my state we cannot even complete the state mandated report forms in some hit and run collisions so the report can not even be completed for quite some time because the state kicks them back to us when we don't have the boxes filled out just right. And, if we are missing data, then we can't fill out the boxes. I imagine there is a similar process in TX.

They did not log it as a hit and run. The law states that if the other driver fled the scene without giving a statement and information to law enforcement, the accident is deemed a hit and run. The police will not log it as such. I've asked them several times and they said no because the driver asked if I was alright. My problem is that how do they know that since I never told them that. I told them that I was in no condition to ask the driver for his information since I stumbled out of my truck and had to be placed on a stretcher.