Incomplete Police Report

[runway123]

What is the name of your state? New York

I was involved in an accident in which a vehicle ran into the passenger side of mines. The policemen filed a report. When I finally received it, I remembered that I forgot to tell tell the officer that there was an automobile parked directly in front of the vehicle (who left the scene before the police arrived). This was evident when the officer drew the diagram of the accident minus the car.

I mentioned it to my insurance carrier and my attorney at the time (who said that it was not important) and provided them with the license plate number of the vehicle.Since then I have different counsel but need to know is this bit of information that I left out crucial?

I am confused by those who tell me that the police report can be interpreted differently by any 2 different people and that it can carry weight but not generally that much. Is this true? Any information that can be provided will be deeply appreciated.

 

[GaAtty]

Why didn't you contact the officer and ask him to amend his report? The police report is hearsay. It is not sworn testimony. The necessary information will come out in court or in deposition, just tell your attorney.

 

[runway123]

"Why didn't you contact the officer and ask him to amend his report? The police report is hearsay. It is not sworn testimony. The necessary information will come out in court or in deposition, just tell your attorney."


I didn't realize that one could contact the officer after a report had been officially filed. I understand that it is hearsay, as two sides gave accounts of the accident. I truly believe that the truth will come out, given the "actual evidence" to support my stance.

It just goes to show that I need to be more trusting of my attorney, as I gave them all of the particulars. Thank you and God Bless.

 

[CdwJava]

The officer doesn't need to amend his report. In fact, out here we don't amend reports ... we might add a supplement, but amending them is a big no-no. However, I wouldn't even add a supplement in this case.

Since the collision report is simply a document for statistical information and the insurance companies anyway, the officer's regurgitation on paper of the witness's claim that another vehicle was present will hold LESS weight than the witness advising his insurer of this fact.

Besides, how is a parked vehicle relevant to the crash? Unless it obstructed someone's view (which might benefit the party at fault), it is likely irrelevent. We often are NOT concerned with parked vehicles not involved in a collision.

- Carl

 

[runway123]

The way that the accident report was illustrated had the vehicle driving parallel to me and then turning into me. That would clearly prove why the impact was so significant and also demonstrate that the other driver did not use reasonable caution before attempting to get access to the road.

I was told that a vehicle on the curb must yield to any oncoming nearby traffic.

 

[CdwJava]

The way that the accident report was illustrated had the vehicle driving parallel to me and then turning into me. That would clearly prove why the impact was so significant and also demonstrate that the other driver did not use reasonable caution before attempting to get access to the road.

I was told that a vehicle on the curb must yield to any oncoming nearby traffic.

I am not sure what you mean by "a vehicle on the curb", but I presume you are referring to a vehicle parked at the curb entering in to traffic. If so, then you are correct, the vehicle entering into traffic from a parked position WOULD have to yield.

But, I fail to see how relevant a parked vehicle is to the matter.

Again, your verbal or written statement to the court or the insurance company has more weight than the officer's regurgitation of what you told him. You might get lucky and maybe the officer will supplement his report with your statement (not that it means anything). I wouldn't ... but, agency and state agency policies do differ.

- Carl

 

[runway123]

The other company states that I ran into the vehicle (although the impact points on the photo's say otherwise). I was just attempting to get all the factual information together in the event an accident reconstructionist or expert in that field is asked to recreate the accident.

 

[CdwJava]

The other company states that I ran into the vehicle (although the impact points on the photo's say otherwise).

Of course they do. They are trying to keep from paying out on the claim.

I was just attempting to get all the factual information together in the event an accident reconstructionist or expert in that field is asked to recreate the accident.

That's an expensive proposition ... and one the insurance companies tend to not fall back on unless there is many thousands of dollars at stake. A reconstructionist will often charge OVER $100 per hour for his or her work (I have friends that get as much as $200/hr.), and then even more for testimony.

Keep in mind that no matter WHAT is in the report, the insurance companies can and will base responsiiblity on a formula of their own making. And having it in the report does not make it truth. As I said, your statement has more legal weight than the officer's regurgitation.

And a parked vehicle is not going to be relevant unless it was struck or it was a visual obstruction to either party. Many things and vehicle present at a collision are not relevant and we don't document them. A parked vehicle is one of those things we tend to ignore unless someone brings it up as being relevant in some way.

I have investigated more than 600 collisions in my career and I have been called to criminal court on, I believe, only three (and these were for serious criminal prosecutions based upon the report), and to civil court on only 1 ... and I was never called to the stand as they settled on the third day.

Let your insurance company hash this one out.

- Carl

 

[runway123]

It is just that I have incurred injuries and have counsel defending me at this point. The vehicle that was in front of the other left the scene before the police showed up saying "I better leave before I get a ticket." This may not even get to court.

I fully respect your expert comments. Thank you for your time.

 

[CdwJava]

It could be that the other vehicle's driver had no license, or the resgistration was expired, or something else.

Did this mystery car DO anything? It sounds like it was just parked (i.e. not moving) at the curb. If so, then it still isn't relevant to the collision unless someone mentioned it somehow blocked their view in some manner or was otherwise involved.

- Carl

 

[runway123]

No, the car didn't actually do anything. I believe that this person would have gotten a ticket because both vehicles were between 2 no standing bus stops and 2 fire hydrants. As a matter of fact, the driver of that vehicle stated exactly that.

 

[CdwJava]

No, the car didn't actually do anything. I believe that this person would have gotten a ticket because both vehicles were between 2 no standing bus stops and 2 fire hydrants. As a matter of fact, the driver of that vehicle stated exactly that.

Then I would not stress about it not being in the report.

- Carl