What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by thirdcrank »

[XAP]Bob wrote: .... Don't see why that makes a fleshbag look like a problem. Makes cars look problematic to me - two cyclists are far less likely to collide.


What I'm trying to say is that the decisionmakers are looking down the other end of the telescope. If car drivers playing dodgems (or more accurately bumper cars) among themselves are not counted, they are not an official problem. To the extent that vulnerable road users inevitably figure prominently in the casualties - they become the problem. Down that end of the telescope, the cause of the casualties is not apparent. So, we have measures to make street furniture as forgiving as possible and vulnerable road users are then the focus. Oblige "peds" to use urine-soaked subways, or meandering footbridges. Shove cyclists up on the footway with the "peds". Any cyclists who persist in riding on the road are exhorted to wear helmets, hi-viz and all the rest of it.
aprildavy
Posts: 247
Joined: 3 May 2010, 11:48am

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by aprildavy »

From my limited knowledge, but experience as a car driver in collision with a cyclist (his fault in my opinion and the witnesses), to protect yourself...

1) Get witnesses - this is so crucial - whatever you agree verbally with the driver at the scene is completely meaningless if the other party denies the conversation took place or claims it was different. Without witnesses you're unlikely to have any substance for recompense and may in fact have the tables turned against you and the plice end up investigating you!
2) Get his insurance details. If he was in collision with you, then he almost certainly should report it to his insurerers, that's if he is insured, or MOT'd or taxed.
3) In my case the cyclist did report it to the police and IMHO made false statements. I voluntary went to the police although I was not legally obliged to as soon as I found out he had gone to the plice, apperently on the advice of the hospital where he attended. The police investigated etc etc, and determined the other party was lying.

It did'nt stop the other party going to a no win no fee lawyer who he lied to as well.

At the time, the other party was very pleasant and concilliatory.

Get witnesses, get their details, there addresses and phone numbers, get the other parties details, make a cliam to his insurance company. There is a definite risk that when you have your invoice all ready he will walk away from it and claim you're making the whole thing up.
Hypocacculus
Posts: 316
Joined: 23 Mar 2010, 2:00pm

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by Hypocacculus »

thirdcrank wrote:
[XAP]Bob wrote: .... Don't see why that makes a fleshbag look like a problem. Makes cars look problematic to me - two cyclists are far less likely to collide.


What I'm trying to say is that the decisionmakers are looking down the other end of the telescope. If car drivers playing dodgems (or more accurately bumper cars) among themselves are not counted, they are not an official problem. To the extent that vulnerable road users inevitably figure prominently in the casualties - they become the problem. Down that end of the telescope, the cause of the casualties is not apparent. So, we have measures to make street furniture as forgiving as possible and vulnerable road users are then the focus. Oblige "peds" to use urine-soaked subways, or meandering footbridges. Shove cyclists up on the footway with the "peds". Any cyclists who persist in riding on the road are exhorted to wear helmets, hi-viz and all the rest of it.



Sadly, the inability of politicians to interpret data has been with us since time began. However, data is there for everybody to use. The very same data gives pressure groups leverage to argue their point of view too. If there is no data, then there can be no sensible argument. If accident statistics pile up connected with, for examples, those "speed calming" barriers (or as I like to think of them, "head on collision encouraging" barriers), then maybe reasoned debate can force a rethink. Without evidence, there is no case to answer.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by thirdcrank »

I'm not against the collection and interpretation of data. I'm saying that in this case, only collecting data about injury accidents and then concentrating on KSI is what has led to vulnerable road users being seen as the problem. eg driver hits a bollard on a pedestrian refuge - not recorded statistically (we've already reached the stage where bollards are collapsible to minimise injuries to divers who hit them) driver hits a "ped" on a refuge and it is recorded (and "peds" crossing the road are more of a problem.) The real solution would be to stop drivers collding with pedestrian refuges. Quite beyond the with of the authorities here.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by [XAP]Bob »

thirdcrank wrote:I'm not against the collection and interpretation of data. I'm saying that in this case, only collecting data about injury accidents and then concentrating on KSI is what has led to vulnerable road users being seen as the problem. eg driver hits a bollard on a pedestrian refuge - not recorded statistically (we've already reached the stage where bollards are collapsible to minimise injuries to divers who hit them) driver hits a "ped" on a refuge and it is recorded (and "peds" crossing the road are more of a problem.) The real solution would be to stop drivers collding with pedestrian refuges. Quite beyond the with of the authorities here.

The issue isn't the stats is that politicians manage to claim that all dogs are dalmations...

"You've got hair, four legs and a tail - you're a dog"
"No, I'm a squirrel"
"No, you're a dog - look I've a got a list and everything"
"I'm a squirrel"
"No, they live in trees, you're on the ground"
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by thirdcrank »

The way I see it is this: There are X motor vehicles being driven about by Y drivers. There are Z vulnerable road users. X are all inanimate, but have the potential to kill or injure any / all of Z depending mainly on the conduct of Y. Most of the conduct of Y which might give a clue to this propensity is ignored. This only really leaves blaming Z.
Regulator
Posts: 523
Joined: 27 Jan 2007, 10:13am

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by Regulator »

irc missed one or two pertinent bits:

A driver involved in a traffic accident should stop whether or not the accident was their fault if:-

* anyone, other than themselves, is injured; or
* another vehicle, or someone else’s property, is damaged; or
* an animal in another vehicle or running across the road is injured; or
* a bollard, street lamp or other item of street furniture is damaged.

If you have to stop, you must remain near the vehicle long enough for anyone who is involved directly or indirectly in the accident to ask for details. This could be, for example, the owner of an injured animal, a relative of someone who is injured, or the police. The driver must then give their name and address, the name and address of the owner of the vehicle (if the driver is not the owner), and the registration number of the vehicle.

The driver may also have to report the accident to a police officer or at a police station, in person, as soon as practicable and in any case within 24 hours. This duty arises whenever the driver has not given their name and address at the scene of the accident, whether or not they were asked to do so.

If any personal injury is caused to another person, the driver must also produce a valid insurance certificate if asked to do so by a police officer, injured person, or anyone else directly or indirectly involved in the accident. If the insurance certificate is asked for, but not produced at the time, the accident must be reported to a police station as soon as practicable, or in any case within 24 hours, and the insurance certificate must be taken to a police station within seven days of the accident. However if the driver is asked at the time of the accident to produce insurance details and does so, there is no further obligation to report the accident to the police, as long as they have complied with the duties described above.


As a default, the police advise that any accident which results in injury should be reported to the police. Some insurers also require it.
User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10801
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by Cunobelin »

[XAP]Bob wrote:Thanks irc - most helpful to have someone with a clear head around ;)


Don't rely on it though!

The problem with accidents is that with the "fight / flight syndrome" and all the chemicals shooting around you are very unlikely to think straight.

The LCC do a very good guide as to what to do in a crash. I have the main points on a card in my wallet.... acts as a trigger to record the important bits
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by thirdcrank »

The problem with the law - ie, what is curently s 170 of the RTA 1988 - is that it is full of ifs and, as irc implied it's virtually impossible to simplify it while retaining all its provisions. A flow-chart - if that's the right expression - would look like a complicated railway junction.

For our purposes here, I thought that irc did an excellent job of summarising the main points. The Metropolitan Police site is another summary for a slightly different purpose and it's certainly not a definitive statement of the law.

I'd still emphasis that there is a difference between the legal duty to report an accident to the police (which only arises if certain steps have not been taken which are often referred to as exchanging details) and what might be called the operational procedures of the police which require that all injury accidents coming to notice are recorded on a stats form.

One example of the difference might be the driver who runs over a stray dog. An animal (see irc's mnemonic - around here it used to be dog and HMSPigBAG or something similar :roll: ) has been injured and details have not been exchanged with the owner. The driver is under a duty to report to police, but no stats form would be completed. Another example would be a collision with an unattended car or street furniture etc.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by [XAP]Bob »

Cunobelin wrote:
[XAP]Bob wrote:Thanks irc - most helpful to have someone with a clear head around ;)


Don't rely on it though!

The problem with accidents is that with the "fight / flight syndrome" and all the chemicals shooting around you are very unlikely to think straight.

The LCC do a very good guide as to what to do in a crash. I have the main points on a card in my wallet.... acts as a trigger to record the important bits

I still wasn't clear headed a few hours after
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
gaz545
Posts: 70
Joined: 21 Mar 2010, 8:44pm

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by gaz545 »

They are not classed as RTA's by anyone now, all RTC's. the police are very specific on calling them RTC's.

I think you have grounds to report it though. Needs logging at least on the system and the driver by law is meant to do it within 24 hours (could be 48, would need to check)
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by thirdcrank »

gaz545 wrote:They are not classed as RTA's by anyone now,...


.... but the word accident is still used in the the Road Traffic Act, both in s 170 under discussion here, and s 6 (police powers to administer breathalyser etc.) I've not got a case reference at this time in the morning, but in the early days of breath testing, a case went to appeal on the basis that the defendant had not been in a collision-type accident but the court ruled that an accident, for what was then the Road Safety Act, was simply an unintended event.

It's true that after campaigning by interested people, the word collision is now widely used in preference to accident, as it both describes what happened and avoids an implication of crashes being unavoidable. OTOH, when the law is being discussed, I think there's a strong reason to stick with the lingo.
irc
Posts: 5192
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by irc »

thirdcrank wrote:
gaz545 wrote:They are not classed as RTA's by anyone now,...


.... but the word accident is still used in the the Road Traffic Act, both in s 170 under discussion here, and s 6 (police powers to administer breathalyser etc.) I've not got a case reference at this time in the morning, but in the early days of breath testing, a case went to appeal on the basis that the defendant had not been in a collision-type accident but the court ruled that an accident, for what was then the Road Safety Act, was simply an unintended event.

It's true that after campaigning by interested people, the word collision is now widely used in preference to accident, as it both describes what happened and avoids an implication of crashes being unavoidable. OTOH, when the law is being discussed, I think there's a strong reason to stick with the lingo.


And collision doesn't cover every instance. For example bus driver forced to brake hard to avoid hitting a vehicle that pulls out in front of him. No collision takes place but a bus passenger falls and is injured. A reportable RTA but not a collision or the alt common "road traffic crash".

I have never used anything apart from RTA. It is accurate, it is in the legislastion, and it covers every incident. Alternatives are just political correctness IMO.
No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by [XAP]Bob »

irc wrote:
thirdcrank wrote:
gaz545 wrote:They are not classed as RTA's by anyone now,...


.... but the word accident is still used in the the Road Traffic Act, both in s 170 under discussion here, and s 6 (police powers to administer breathalyser etc.) I've not got a case reference at this time in the morning, but in the early days of breath testing, a case went to appeal on the basis that the defendant had not been in a collision-type accident but the court ruled that an accident, for what was then the Road Safety Act, was simply an unintended event.

It's true that after campaigning by interested people, the word collision is now widely used in preference to accident, as it both describes what happened and avoids an implication of crashes being unavoidable. OTOH, when the law is being discussed, I think there's a strong reason to stick with the lingo.


And collision doesn't cover every instance. For example bus driver forced to brake hard to avoid hitting a vehicle that pulls out in front of him. No collision takes place but a bus passenger falls and is injured. A reportable RTA but not a collision or the alt common "road traffic crash".

I have never used anything apart from RTA. It is accurate, it is in the legislastion, and it covers every incident. Alternatives are just political correctness IMO.


Thought the local police used RTI for exactly that reason - it covers every incident, but doesn't imply a complete lack of responsibility that the word accident conveys.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: What constitutes a reportable RTA?

Post by [XAP]Bob »

[XAP]Bob wrote:I have his plate, and his mobile number, and his place of work. He said to sort him out with an invoice and he'd cut me a cheque. I'll probably text him with the quote from ICE and pointing out that it is a reportable incident later today.


I now have his insurance details - after he got the quote ;)

Also had a quick chat with the ctc legal advice team :D
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
Post Reply