SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  What's Your Deal!    Minor accident: Rant and a couple of questions
Page 1 2 3 4 5 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Minor accident: Rant and a couple of questions Login/Join 
On the DL
Picture of V-Tail
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RobC2:
Some old people should not be driving.
Yeah, I have seen many of them driving like aggressive assholes. Tailgating, making erratic lane changes to get one car length ahead, using the shoulder of the road as a passing lane, texting, etc. They are old. Really old. Maybe as old as 20s or even 30s.



A mind is a terrible thing.
 
Posts: 16005 | Location: Central Florida (near Orlando) | Registered: January 03, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of SR
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by chongosuerte:
Ahhhh...the kinder, gentler days. If you'd pulled that 10 years ago, you would have likely had a different outcome.

No, we don't have to do a wreck report because "of insurance". Insurance adjusters can kiss my rosy red furry ass, and can get off theirs and do their own damn job. If it's not a reportable wreck for the jurisdiction (usually injuries and major damage) there is absolutely no reason to do a report, except to pacify some ninny.

And writing tickets is completely discretionary. At my agency we specifically do NOT write tickets for minor traffic accidents, per policy. Ninnies be damned. The ninnies do win, though, as the agency requires accident reports if any party involved requests one...which is GREAT!, because when we do a wreck report for some stupidity like this, "for insurance", the insurance companies get their copies and everybody's insurance may go up, and the damage was probably less than their deductibles to begin with.

Dealing with these accidents certainly IS an inconvenience for the officer and the rest of the public that have real crimes but have to wait the 30+ minutes that a fender bender that does not require a police response takes. There is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON to call the police to these small accidents, and to sit in the middle of the GD road for 30 minutes while traffic backs up as you wait for the officer to arrive.

I drove 50 minutes today in rush hour traffic, for a parking lot scrape that needed a report "for insurance". That was well over an hour of time spent on a needless call, while I listened to the dispatcher whom was telling the road supervisor she was holding calls because there were no units available in the ENTIRE CITY, covering a million people. And the two in the wreck had already been waiting an hour before I was even dispatched (as we were dealing with a 110+mph chase with robbery suspects).

Fender benders are a civil insurance issue. NOT a police issue. Many jurisdictions straight up won't even dispatch an officer, or if they do dispatch, it will be a non-sworn accident report taker that comes out.

The lazy insurance assholes that have created this situation deserve to be beaten.


Interesting summary. I wonder if the policy is consistent with the expectations of citizens. Not knowing the policy, I would have expected an officer to come by. There's too much he said/she said and I believe it's helpful to have a contemporaneous record from a neutral part - the reason for a police report.

Perhaps it's a funding issue - if we expect reports for such things then we need to fund the required positions.

BTW, I had a car damaged in the parking lot at work and my agent was absolutely insistent that I wait for a police report. I waited almost 3 hours (checking with dispatch every 30 min or so) before I gave up. (Dispatch kept saying officer would be there in 10 - 15 minutes)




Speak softly and carry a big stick loaded Sig
 
Posts: 4056 | Location: Raleigh, North Carolina | Registered: September 27, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Green Mountain Boy
Picture of Jus228
posted Hide Post
You're lucky an officer showed up at all. My mother got rear ended and both vehicles had major damage and there was fluids and debris all over the road and the cops refused to show up.


!~God Bless the U.S. Military~!

If the world didn't suck, we'd all fall off

Light travels faster than sound, this is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak
 
Posts: 5272 | Location: Vermont | Registered: March 02, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Cat Whisperer
Picture of cmr076
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by V-Tail:
quote:
Originally posted by RobC2:
Some old people should not be driving.
Yeah, I have seen many of them driving like aggressive assholes. Tailgating, making erratic lane changes to get one car length ahead, using the shoulder of the road as a passing lane, texting, etc. They are old. Really old. Maybe as old as 20s or even 30s.


you disagree that some older people shouldn't be driving? I commute two hours a day and the only people I see that almost cause accidents are very old. Changing lanes without looking, blowing stop signs, etc. I do agree with you that some younger people shouldn't be driving either.


------------------------------------

135
├┼┼╕
246R
 
Posts: 3716 | Location: SE PA | Registered: November 13, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Only the strong survive
Picture of 41
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by V-Tail:
quote:
Originally posted by RobC2:
Some old people should not be driving.
Yeah, I have seen many of them driving like aggressive assholes. Tailgating, making erratic lane changes to get one car length ahead, using the shoulder of the road as a passing lane, texting, etc. They are old. Really old. Maybe as old as 20s or even 30s.


One of Charlottesville's finest was setting in the median of incoming south bound vehicles Sunday. Some young'un was talking on the cellphone in the fast lane. He gave chase and finally caught up about half a mile later. Big Grin Made my day. Smile

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 41,



"Donald Trump is the grizzly bear in The Revenant. If you get his attention, he’ll be awake, bite your face off, and sit on you.".. Newt Gingrich.

41
 
Posts: 9487 | Location: Herndon, VA | Registered: June 11, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
On the DL
Picture of V-Tail
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by cmr076:
you disagree that some older people shouldn't be driving? ... the only people I see that almost cause accidents are very old.
I do NOT "disagree that some older people shouldn't be driving."

I agree.

Some older people should not be driving.

Also,
  • Some younger people should not be driving.
  • Some white people should not be driving.
  • Some black people should not be driving.
  • Some Asian people should not be driving.
  • Some Lithuanian people should not be driving.
  • Some Jewish people should not be driving.
  • Some Catholic people should not be driving.
  • Some female people should not be driving.
  • Some male people should not be driving.
  • Some indeterminate gender people should not be driving.
  • Some tall people should not be driving.
  • Some short people should not be driving.
  • Some thin people should not be driving.
  • Some fat people should not be driving.
Do you see a pattern here?

Hint: Some people should not be driving.

As far as your second point, the "only" people you see that "almost" cause accidents are old people -- you must have an area of operation that has a very skewed population. I see a lot of people who "almost" cause accidents. Some of them are old, some are young, some are white, some are black, some are ...

The thing that most of them have in common is not age, it's attitude. It is "me first." It is "get out of my way." It is aggressive driving, almost always significantly above the posted speed limit, characterized by sudden lane changes, usually without using turn signals. All of this to gain maybe one car length, while the people who drive sanely will catch up with the aggressive driver at the very next traffic light. Or maybe pass the aggressive driver while s/he is at the side of the road having a conversation with the nice police officer. These aggressive, in-a-hurry, screw everybody else, drivers seem to span all age groups (fewer of them in the "old" category, but there are some). They include all races, genders, and probably religious affiliations.

Bottom line, I agree: Some people should not be driving. How to screen them? I am in favor of a driving test, both written and in the car, to renew a license, maybe every five or eight years. Not practical, I know, with the number of drivers vs. the number of examiners available.

We pilots have to do that. A flight review or equivalent at least every two years. No carrying passengers in your airplane unless you have logged at least three take-offs and three landings in the same category and class of aircraft within the past ninety days. No flying IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) unless you have logged at least one holding pattern entry and six instrument approach procedures within the past six months. We stay current, we are re-evaluated on a regular basis. It's too bad that we cannot have similar safety standards for drivers, but no politician here in this country has the balls to push for safety standards anything like pilots have here, or drivers have in many European countries.

Back to the original statement, if you think that one single group of drivers represents the problem, I suggest that you have tunnel vision with respect to this topic.



A mind is a terrible thing.
 
Posts: 16005 | Location: Central Florida (near Orlando) | Registered: January 03, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
A Grateful American
Picture of sigmonkey
posted Hide Post
^^^

Crystal Clear.




"the meaning of life, is to give life meaning" I could explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
 
Posts: 36069 | Location: My Happy Little Tire Swing | Registered: December 20, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Let me add a proven fact. People learn from experience. A seventy year old individual has slower reflexes than a sixteen year old, no question about that. However, a person who has survived to the age of seventy clearly has more driving experience. These things tend to balance out.
 
Posts: 2512 | Location: MS GULF COAST | Registered: January 02, 2015Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Oriental Redneck
Picture of 12131
posted Hide Post
My dear old dad is 95, had a stroke many years ago, and he's still active. Still does his gardening everyday, and drives around doing his own grocery shopping. Stubborn man, I tell you. Cool


Q


 
Posts: 13403 | Location: TEXAS | Registered: September 04, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Do No Harm,
Do Know Harm
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by SR:

Interesting summary. I wonder if the policy is consistent with the expectations of citizens. Not knowing the policy, I would have expected an officer to come by. There's too much he said/she said and I believe it's helpful to have a contemporaneous record from a neutral part - the reason for a police report.

Perhaps it's a funding issue - if we expect reports for such things then we need to fund the required positions.

BTW, I had a car damaged in the parking lot at work and my agent was absolutely insistent that I wait for a police report. I waited almost 3 hours (checking with dispatch every 30 min or so) before I gave up. (Dispatch kept saying officer would be there in 10 - 15 minutes)


It is an expectation brought on by the insurance companies and agencies not wanting to hurt anyone's feelings.

Many jurisdictions don't have this issue, and will tell you they aren't coming.

The "He said/She said" does not change just because an officer shows up. All an officer can do is write down what He says and She says. The officer, unless they are a certified re-constructionist (probably 20 in my dept of 1,800), cannot testify to their opinion of what happened. Just today, our supervisor said that his #1 complaint that he gets is people wanting to change accident reports...because they don't agree with what the officer documented they said.

I had 3 wreck calls today. One decided they didn't have any damage and declined a report. Of the other 2, one had significant damage that required a report and the other had very minor damage, but one of the driver's insurance situation was questionable. Some times waiting for police is a good idea. But a rear-end collision with minor damage is not one of them.

Today at around 5:30pm our dispatcher sent out a message. There were 49 CALLS holding, and not one single officer available, CITY-WIDE.

An officer for every minor fender bender, is indeed an unrealistic expectation. We are something around 200 officers below what we are budgeted to have. More, likely. We can't get decent applicants, and we have around a 30% attrition rate for police academies once we do get them hired. We're going backwards! In the first 7 hours of my shift I had answered over 20 calls. Then from 8pm until 1am I was stuck on a felony arrest. I was on track to answer 40 calls for a 10 hour shift until I encountered a drunk that wouldn't stop trying to pick a fight, then bit an officer.

So yeah...fender benders...


-------------------------------
Knowing what one is talking about is widely admired but not strictly required here.

Although sometimes distracting, there is often a certain entertainment value to this easy standard.
-JALLEN

"All I need is a WAR ON DRUGS reference and I got myself a police thread BINGO." -jljones
 
Posts: 9338 | Location: NC | Registered: August 16, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posting without pants
Picture of KevinCW
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by erikras:
Sunday afternoon my fiance and I were on our way home from her parents' in my 6mo old Honda Ridgeline. I approached a traffic circle and came to a stop to yield to passing traffic. As I slightly lifted my foot off the brake to creep up a couple feet, I saw a fire truck coming through the round-a-bout so I stopped again. The 73yr old woman in a brand new Camry behind me rear ended me. I believe I caught a glimpse of her on a cell phone, but can't be 100% sure.

We pulled off to the side of the road and I got out of my truck. She had her driver's window rolled down and I hollered "What the fuck, you stupid idiot?" before I was even able to see her age or the damage to either vehicle. Yes, I overreacted in the heat of it. No, I shouldn't have yelled that. The woman immediately rolled her window back up and refused to talk to me. I went back to my truck, got my phone to call the police. After getting off the phone with dispatch, I snapped a picture of her license plate and the VIN plate on her dash. (I've had people leave the scene of an accident TWICE so I wasn't taking chances.) She still wouldn't roll down her window to talk to me.

A patrol sergeant from the local PD arrived a few minutes later and asked us to pull into a nearby parking lot. I pulled into the first spot and she parked many spaces away from me as if to keep her distance. The officer asks me all the usual questions and then walks over and looks at her car and talks to her. He comes back and informs me that there is no damage on either vehicle so he's not sure what I want him to do. I inform him that the plastic trim on my rear bumper is damaged and you can clearly see where her car hit my trailer hitch cover. I told him I want a report for my insurance company in case there is any more hidden damage. Also, since the woman won't talk to me, I am yet to get any of her information. He returns to his Explorer to write up the report.

Meanwhile, a middle-aged man who I presume is the woman's son shows up and begins photographing her Camry from every angle. He then walks over to my Ridgeline and does the same. Front, side, rear, everything. I am conveniently standing in front of the rear license plate and refuse to move. I ask him to not take pictures of my personal property. Yes, I'm being a dick, but I'm the one who just got rear ended and neither he nor her will say a word to me. The officer gets out of his Explorer and informs me that I must let him take pictures of my truck or else "you're not getting your report." WTF?!?! Isn't it his job to write an accident report? How can he give me that ultimatum? I begrudgingly step aside.

After the officer finishes his paperwork in his truck, he returns the woman's ID and comes over to give me mine and give me his business card with the report number written on it. I ask why he isn't citing the woman when she's clearly at fault. He gets snippy with me and rambles off some Ohio Revised Code about how he doesn't have to cite anyone if he doesn't want. I reiterate the fact that she just rear ended me and is solely at fault. His reason? "What do you want? You got your report? All a ticket is going to do is add financial burden on her." I keep my mouth shut, but can't help but think "Isn't that the point of any kind of fine? Why issue speeding tickets then?"

Normally, I have the utmost respect for law enforcement. That day I didn't. This guy wanted to make it seem like it was nothing but an inconvenience to him and refused to hold the at-fault party accountable. She gets to drive off scot-free. Monday afternoon I called the PD and had them email me the report. It stated "Absolutely no damaged to either vehicle was observable and no injuries reported. Both vehicles driven from scene. Report taken due to demand of unit #1's driver/owner." WTF! I clearly pointed out the damaged trim on my rear bumper!

So two questions:
First, does an LEO have to write an accident report if one is requested? Can they give an ultimatum such as allowing the guilty party to take photos of personal property?

Second, why the heck wouldn't you cite the at fault party for something as cut and dry as a rear-end collision?


First off, you made multiple mistakes. I say this because I've been THAT Officer on many an accident call.

Let me preface with this. Traffic accidents, at least those that aren't caused by a drunk driver, or a driver blatnetly disobeying traffic laws are CIVIL matters.

They really shouldn't have anything to do with the police. At least here in MO, you are NOT required to get a police report, and in 95 percent of instances there are a waste of everyone's time, especially mine.

As to your questions/problems,

1. With regard to the pics of your license plate. Anything in public view is NOT private. Your license plate is PUBLIC and anyone can take a picture of it. You are at a public pool in a bathing suit and someone takes a picture you don't like? Tough crap brother, public.

2. With regard to the citation, I can't speak for OH, but here, the officer MUST witness the event in order to issue a citation. I can't issue a citation based upon probability, or because person XXX said someone was going too fast. If I didn't see it, I can't ticket it. There is no such local ordinance here about bumping a car, or anything. If there is not traffic violation I witnessed, or didn't get caught on a traffic camera, then a ticket isn't going to be issued. Again, this is a CIVIL MATTER for your insurance companies to discuss. That is what you pay them that money each month for. If your insurance company won't fight for you, then find a new one. The exceptions for this are uninsured drivers, suspended/revoked license or the like.

3. Again, I don't know about OH, but here, the officer DOES NOT DETERMINE FAULT. If we write a report, the report only says factual information (name, address, DL number, Licesne plate number, VIN number, Insurance company and policy number, phone number, etc). This is all information you can trade yourselves. Then we write a narrative that says "I met with driver 1 who claimed A, B, and C. I then met with driver 2 who claimed X, Y, and Z." I wasn't there, and didn't see the accident. I don't know who did what.

4. Police officers ARE NOT SECRETARIES. We don't do reports for documentation purposes. We catch criminals. If there isn't a crime involved, in an accident situation like this a DUI driver, stolen vehicle, or vehicle fleeing from us, then it really isn't our area. It is civil court matters, not criminal court matters. Beyond the criminal events mentioned above doing an accident report is really a courtesy we try to provide, but we are in no means obligated to provide it.

Bottom line is, multiple fails here all around.

You started it, understandably you were upset, but you were a douche initially by yelling profanity at her.

She didn't help by not providing her info to you, but what did you expect after you, an able bodied male, yelled profanity at her?

You continued it by complicating the matter and "blocking" your license plate.

Also, the officer was probably a bit lazy and probably a bit peeved at your for acting like a child. I would have yelled at you more sternly then the officer did, but I would have completed a slightly better report than he did.

You were uninformed, and at times acted like a douche, but in the end, this will all be sorted out by the insurance companies. Just the same has you both been adults and traded information on scene and called it in.

Kevin





Strive to live your life so when you wake up in the morning and your feet hit the floor, the devil says "Oh crap, he's up."
 
Posts: 31846 | Location: St. Louis MO | Registered: February 15, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posting without pants
Picture of KevinCW
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by erikras:
quote:
Originally posted by Skins2881:
^^That's crazy.

OP, did her insurance fix it?


For the minimal cost of the bumper trim piece, it wasn't worth going through insurance and risking my rates going up or the hassle. I never filed a claim.



Then i saw this...

If you weren't going to even file a goddamn claim why in the holy hell did you waste everyone's time!?!?!?!?!?

I'm really not trying to dogpile here, but I hope everyone else on the internet reads this.

If you believed all the nonsense you posted in the OP about police reports that wasn't true, and wanted one anyway... BUT DIDN"T EVEN DO ANYTHING WITH IT... WHAT WAS THE POINT!?!?!?

You realize during what I can picture is about 30 to 40 minutes.... Then about 1 hours at least additional for the officer to type up the report you took an officer, who could be dealing with actual criminals off the street for NO DAMN REASON!!!!!

Come one dude....

This is why people complain we are never around. This is why there are people in large metro areas complaining officers never responded to their event.

This is no different than the woman who gets beat up by her baby daddy, he gets taken to jail, and she never shows up to court to prosecute him cause "she loves him." Even though it happens every other Saturday...

Gimmie a break man.





Strive to live your life so when you wake up in the morning and your feet hit the floor, the devil says "Oh crap, he's up."
 
Posts: 31846 | Location: St. Louis MO | Registered: February 15, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posting without pants
Picture of KevinCW
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by V-Tail:
Chongo --

I certainly understand what you're saying about minor accident reports being a waste of LE time.

BUT: There are good reasons for a person to want LE involved. I have been in a situation where the person who rear-ended me denied everything, refused to show ID, DL, registration, insurance information, etc.

It would have turned out to be a big "he said, she said" situation, so I saw no alternative to getting LE involved to document everything.

On the other hand, my city has "Community Officers" who do this sort of thing. I never even looked to see if they were armed. They drove a car that was marked very similar to the regular patrol car, but said "Community Service." Not sure if they were "regular" cops, or if they have very limited duties such as taking accident reports, directing traffic when necessary, etc.


To add for posterity...

In an accident you are REQUIRED to provide a few things.

Your name, and driver's license info and other similar stuff.

Your insurance company, and policy number.

As a general rule of thumb, if ever involved in an accident, you should take your camera phone (who doesn't have one these days) and photograph the other driver's:

1. Driver's License
2. Insurance card
3. License Plate
4. VIN number (in case the car isn't registered, or has a dealer plate, or was recently purchased)


Then you should also get the phone number of the other driver.

BEFORE YOU DO ALL OF THIS... MOVE OFF THE ROAD TO A PARKING LOT, OR THE SHOULDER, OR THE NEXT EXIT.

I can't tell you how many idiots sit in the middle of the lane, even on the damn interstate with cars whizzing by at 70mph cause "they want us to see the scene."

NO MORONS!!!! Get the hell off the road before you get hit and killed by another driver, or at min, cause another accident I have do deal with. GET THE HELL OFF THE ROAD AND TO A SAFE SPOT!!!! People don't move over for my car that is lit up brighter than a Christmas tree with flashing lights and loud sirens. You think they are going to move over for you?

If there are other passengers in the car, you should get that as well as provide that to the other driver if there are passengers in your car.

Little known fact, I have ABSOLUTELY ZERO way of knowing if a driver's insurance is legit or not. There is no database for it. The same insurance card they provide you, I'm just going to copy down on the form. I have no idea if it is real, or if fake, or if they got it up front and stopped paying the bill and it is now invalid.

If you are involved in an accident, and have doubts, then by all means, call us.

I can use my in car computer to verify a person's identify, and driver's license, and license plate. I will gladly do so for you.

Now, if someone refused to provide this information, yes, you should call us. If someone tries to flee the scene, you should call us. To prevent this, you should use that trusty camera phone, immediately upon an accident to take a picture of the vehicle, license plate, and driver if possible. Then we might be able to investigate it.

Also, if you suspect the other driver is under the influence of alcohol, or drugs, then yes... call us. If this was an actual road rage incident, then call us. If there are serious injuries, then call us. If your car is disabled and blocking traffic to the point where you are a hazard and may be struck by other vehicles, then obviously call us.

If not, then this is ALL a civil matter. This is why I pay the extra 2 dollars per month on my personal insurance for uninsured/under insured coverage.

The last frustrating thing we deal with is someone coming into the station two weeks later and telling us they want a report because there got hit by a male driver in a blue car.

How in the hell could i investigate that? How many men drive blue cars in your area? A few hundred thousand possible suspects?





Strive to live your life so when you wake up in the morning and your feet hit the floor, the devil says "Oh crap, he's up."
 
Posts: 31846 | Location: St. Louis MO | Registered: February 15, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Low Profile Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
I commute two hours a day and the only people I see that almost cause accidents are very old.


Ha. Right
 
Posts: 2593 | Registered: August 19, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
On the DL
Picture of V-Tail
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by nasig:
quote:
I commute two hours a day and the only people I see that [b/almost[/b] cause accidents are very old.
Ha. Right
I don't commute two hours a day, but some days I spend eight or ten hours in my delivery truck.

While it is quite possible that many (but NOT the "only") people who "almost" cause accidents are old, there's an old saying about "almost." "Almost" doesn't count. "Actual" counts. My observation is that in actual accidents old people seem to be involved in approximately the same proportion that they represent in the driving population. Maybe less, as the general tendency is that older people have had a few years to learn judgement and restraint, and are in general, less aggressive drivers than the not-so-old, "gotta get there right now" drivers.



A mind is a terrible thing.
 
Posts: 16005 | Location: Central Florida (near Orlando) | Registered: January 03, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Low Profile Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by V-Tail:
quote:
Originally posted by nasig:
quote:
I commute two hours a day and the only people I see that [b/almost[/b] cause accidents are very old.
Ha. Right
I don't commute two hours a day, but some days I spend eight or ten hours in my delivery truck.

While it is quite possible that many (but NOT the "only") people who "almost" cause accidents are old, there's an old saying about "almost." "Almost" doesn't count. "Actual" counts. My observation is that in actual accidents old people seem to be involved in approximately the same proportion that they represent in the driving population. Maybe less, as the general tendency is that older people have had a few years to learn judgement and restraint, and are in general, less aggressive drivers than the not-so-old, "gotta get there right now" drivers.


Yes,my own observations indicate that the majority of accidents, particularly serious and deadly, seem to be the result of reckless, irresponsible driving not typical of seniors.
 
Posts: 2593 | Registered: August 19, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by chongosuerte:
quote:
Originally posted by SR:

Interesting summary. I wonder if the policy is consistent with the expectations of citizens. Not knowing the policy, I would have expected an officer to come by. There's too much he said/she said and I believe it's helpful to have a contemporaneous record from a neutral part - the reason for a police report.

Perhaps it's a funding issue - if we expect reports for such things then we need to fund the required positions.

BTW, I had a car damaged in the parking lot at work and my agent was absolutely insistent that I wait for a police report. I waited almost 3 hours (checking with dispatch every 30 min or so) before I gave up. (Dispatch kept saying officer would be there in 10 - 15 minutes)


It is an expectation brought on by the insurance companies and agencies not wanting to hurt anyone's feelings.

Many jurisdictions don't have this issue, and will tell you they aren't coming.

The "He said/She said" does not change just because an officer shows up. All an officer can do is write down what He says and She says. The officer, unless they are a certified re-constructionist (probably 20 in my dept of 1,800), cannot testify to their opinion of what happened. Just today, our supervisor said that his #1 complaint that he gets is people wanting to change accident reports...because they don't agree with what the officer documented they said.

I had 3 wreck calls today. One decided they didn't have any damage and declined a report. Of the other 2, one had significant damage that required a report and the other had very minor damage, but one of the driver's insurance situation was questionable. Some times waiting for police is a good idea. But a rear-end collision with minor damage is not one of them.

Today at around 5:30pm our dispatcher sent out a message. There were 49 CALLS holding, and not one single officer available, CITY-WIDE.

An officer for every minor fender bender, is indeed an unrealistic expectation. We are something around 200 officers below what we are budgeted to have. More, likely. We can't get decent applicants, and we have around a 30% attrition rate for police academies once we do get them hired. We're going backwards! In the first 7 hours of my shift I had answered over 20 calls. Then from 8pm until 1am I was stuck on a felony arrest. I was on track to answer 40 calls for a 10 hour shift until I encountered a drunk that wouldn't stop trying to pick a fight, then bit an officer.

So yeah...fender benders...


Why is it that after a 14 hour shift, tired, dirty, tore your uniform chasing a dumb ass, there was always a fender bender flagging you down when you were two blocks from the station?
 
Posts: 5243 | Registered: April 02, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4 5  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  What's Your Deal!    Minor accident: Rant and a couple of questions

© SIGforum 2017