<p>Why wouldNt you call the police? your insurance will want a police report.
[What</a> To Do After an Auto Accident](<a href=“What to Do After a Car Accident | State Farm®”>What to Do After a Car Accident | State Farm®)</p>
<p>Why wouldNt you call the police? your insurance will want a police report.>></p>
<p>It greatly depends on where you live. In the part of VA we lived in, the police would not even come to an accident on private property, such as parking lots. The insurance companies know the laws where they write policies, so no police report would not be an issue there.</p>
<p>I agree the police probably won’t come if on private property, but if damage is over $1,000 a police report is required. The way cars are built now, it doesn’t take much for damage to be over $1,000. :(</p>
<p>Suppose you don’t want the insurance to handle it?</p>
<p>Deega and emerald, a lot,of posters mention the drinking…the police investigated to see if the driver was DUI and did not find it to be so. I did say he had a couple of drinks but how does that add a wrinkle ? He stayed on scene knowing he had some drinks. It was his own car in the accident.</p>
<p>Someone bolded the part of the statute about stopping the vehicle and returning. That part was done. The driver stopped, went to the other driver and fulfilled the duty of exchanging info, which is what is required. THEN the vehicle left, which maynbe what had been reported to the police, so they thought it was a hit/run and were confused the driver was on scene after all. The grey area is whether the VEHICLE must remain, or just the driver. The INTENT of the statute seems to be that the DRIVER does not take off and remain unidentified. Also, they did cite him for the wrong subsection of statue regarding hitting unattended vehicle, don’t serious crooks get out on technicalities!?</p>
<p>Obviously, the car should have stayed, but my question has been whether the statute quoted applied. All these opinions make it more obvious he sould seek legal advice.</p>
<p>Yes, he needs legal advise. You’re really splitting hairs reading that the driver must stay but not the vehicle. One assumes the driver needs his vehicle to leave. In this instance, these two took advantage of the house being close as an excuse. As others have pointed out, that’s poor logic as the passenger could have walked or easily have been picked up. Something is being hidden by someone here and the story is very weak. This is totally beside the fact that the driver was drinking. If he is under 21 and I were his mother his DL would be mine for a very, very long time. I say this because I can’t imagine adults doing anything this stupid.</p>
<p>njfootballmom, Besides cost, is there any particular reason he’s reluctant to consult an attorney?</p>
<p>I would not be looking for an out on a technicality in a situation like this. I also would report it to my insurance company as is required in the policy contract. If this blows up at some point with the third party, you and your kid are going to be in a much worse position than you are at the moment.</p>
<p>I am assuming all this confusion is inexperience- I don’t think we should focus on something being hidden or fishy. We all have kids who don’t know the right way to handle certain new experiences. Let’s leave it at that.</p>
<p>I quoted the “stop the vehicle” because that is the grey area. Personally, my stance would be to focus on the major positive points: he knew to stop and immediately check the other car and driver, exchange info wait, etc. He was quite concerned, did what he could to ensure the other guy was ok. He did not know the car itself had to stay- and he had all the needed documents in hand (reg, ins card, etc.) It’s his first accident. You can’t find a reg that covers the car needng to stay. If he is a “good citizen,” no other troubles, minimum damage, no injury, etc, you are in a better position.</p>
<p>Criminals dont get off on technicalities without an attorney. Ime, the old days, when we could fight a ticket because the reg wasnt perfectly quoted or the car color was put down wrong are gone.</p>
<p>You can call an attorney tomorrow and see what the consultation would cost. You may have an attorney friend who’d give his thoughts. If the point is to prevent him from losing his license and having that follow him, maybe you’ll sleep better with legal support. The atty would try to have it dismissed.</p>
<p>Btw, the police will come on private property, if circumstances warrent.</p>
<p>Lawyer time. </p>
<p>Trying to think of the last time when I saw (uninjured) passengers in a taxi involved in an accident stick around until the cops were done…still thinking…nope.</p>
<p>“1. The only way the person you know can get accurate legal advice is from a lawyer.”</p>
<p>Tee-hee! ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In Maryland, if the cars are drivable, you do not have to call the police. The drivers share insurance information and deal with their insurance companies. The insurance companies do not require a police report. </p>
<p>In New York, if the property damage is more than $1000, you must file a form with the DMV. </p>
<p>In Chicago, if the damage is over $500, they the parties must go to the district police station to file reports. </p>
<p>It is important that everyone know the laws of their particular jurisdiction.</p>
<p>COST is the issue. He will certainly gets one if he needs to, because the punishment could be excessive given the “crime”. He did stay and submit to DUI tests…</p>
<p>He is 22, legal to drink. No record at all. One 1-9 mph speeding ticket a few years ago so no points at all on license. He works and goes to school.(worked full time the last two semesters while in school)</p>
<p>Still don’t get what was being hidden by leaving. Never seen them search a car for a traffic accident so except for accident circumstances it didn’t matter. The circumstances were not disputed. He pulled out and didn’t see the car coming. He hit it. It happens. It happens in that area a LOT.</p>
<p>So, he will get a lawyer because he did not leave…he wanted to, but he didn’t. What’s so weird about “my mom is coming, you may as well take the car so it’s not in the street and I’ll go with my mom.”. Stupid maybe…6 month suspension…does that really fit here? Equal to someone who was driving DUI?</p>
<p>I guess I’m done with this thread. I was looking for advice not criticism. What’s done is done and we have to go from here. Thank you to those who responded with advice or logical thinking and not with suspicion.</p>
<p>njfootballmon, it is the police and the judge who may well be suspicious. They are paid to be suspicious. They may infer that taking the car from the scene suggests an effort to hide something. Rather than be defensive about that possible inference, prepare for it. </p>
<p>There are some jurisdictions in which you need a lawyer for every traffic offense, no matter how minor - if you expect a good outcome. The system is just set up to employ lawyers. I know, from experience, that there is no need to take a lawyer with you to traffic court in Maryland. I would not give the same advice in all jurisdictions in Virginia, for example. Virginia panders to attorneys much more than Maryland. Heck, you have to hire a lawyer in order to complete a real estate transaction in Virginia - that says a lot. </p>
<p>The OP needs to determine if not going to court with a lawyer will be detrimental to the case. Never depend on traffic court appeals. In my jurisdiction, judges do not look favorably on traffic court appeals. They always give deference to the underlying opinion, but in traffic cases, it is a burden that is almost impossible to overcome. The appeal will be much more expensive than hiring a lawyer for the underlying case.</p>
<p>
Multiple possible issues with drinking and driving … 1) DUI or not? the cop checked this out … 2) Were they drinking while driving the car? Tough to check when car had gone missing … and if I’m a cop the car gone missing heightens my suspicion that that might be the case</p>
<p>
A traffic accident where they are also giving the driver a sobriety test? You bet they would search the car. Removing the car leads to suspicion.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with you. Penalty completely out of line with non-offence. But the “my mom is coming” aspect of it is something that makes more sense that you had not mentioned before.</p>
<p>I’ve been rear-ended twice at stop/yield signs in the last ten years resulting in bumper damage, and in neither case did we call the cops. No one was hurt. We just exchanged information and went our separate ways. End of story. And that is what would have happened in this case if some third party had not called the cops for no apparent reason.</p>
<p>Once the cops showed up, and the whole sobriety thing reared its head, they obviously became suspicious that the passenger was actually the one driving, or that there were open containers even though the driver was not DUI, or that something was being concealed. So they stuck the driver with a bogus charge. Some cops love to assert themselves, no matter what.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, he is going to need a lawyer. Presumably the passenger, and perhaps the other driver, would be available to testify if necessary that he did NOT leave the scene.</p>
<p>I find it disturbing that a parent would be getting defensive about this and thinking that the police over-reacted or did something wrong. The driver may have been of legal age to drink but the fact remains that he WAS drinking and then got behind the wheel of a car. Lucky for him that enough time had gone by that he was able to pass the breathalyzer tests.
22 or not, this guy showed bad judgement on multiple levels, and this could have turned out much worse.</p>
<p>
No, he didn’t pass a breathalyzer test. He wasn’t given one. This may have been a blessing.</p>
<p>If someone has a couple of drinks and causes an accident, I certainly wouldn’t assume that the couple of drinks had nothing to do with it. Passing a field sobriety test does not mean that reaction time is not impaired.</p>
<p>I agree the police probably won’t come if on private property, but if damage is over $1,000 a police report is required.>></p>
<p>The same car was hit twice - both times with $1300 of damage and no police report since it was private property. No problems with insurance, but like I said, that will vary by state.</p>