Bad driver bends my bumper

OldStyle

Getting the hang of it
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
231
Reaction score
30
Sorry to see your van was damaged, but their van was off a lot worse!
 

fbnoise

Getting the hang of it
Joined
Dec 29, 2014
Messages
270
Reaction score
61
He could learn a thing or two if he followed wrestling heroes that lead by example and show us all what it means to be a decent citizen: https://www.instagram.com/p/39D-VBoh2D/

Either that or maybe you could find his bumper a new home right through the windshield of his probably newer van. He almost certainly traded it in because he was too paranoid to drive anywhere in that van (he'd be spotted for sure!). It forced him to park on the adjacent the street to yours when he needed to conduct his "business" in the area, always felt like he was hiding, not to mention his wife didn't like the no-bumper look because let's be honest, it's embarrassing and she has standards when it comes to vans, so he went and did a no money down deal on a less conspicuous 2001 town and country with maybe just a few dings in it.
 

Git

Banned
Joined
Sep 14, 2014
Messages
212
Reaction score
34
Most laws covering 'hit and runs' indicate something like -> the driver knew, or should have known that they (1) collided with another vehicle and (2) as a result of that collision there was damage and (3) they left the scene without identifying themselves or leaving a note, yada yada yada

I think it it pretty obvious from the video that the driver knew there was a collision that resulted in damage and they fled. The problem is, the Police do not prosecute vehicles, they prosecute people and in this case, identifying the driver of the suspect vehicle from the video is not possible... However, they should at least try since you have what is commonly called 'workable evidence'

You have the license number to the Van that hit your truck - the Police should have followed up by either trying to call or sending a letter to the registered owner of the vehicle and at the very least spoke with them about the 'incident' and ask them to come in so they can inspect their vehicle for damage that is consistent with the damage to your vehicle. (9 out of 10 times at that point they will just admit to it). Usually when they do not cooperate (fail to answer letter or phone call) the vehicle gets impounded for investigation of Hit and Run, a 'hold' gets place on the vehicle so it can not be released until they speak with the Police...

At the very least the Police should have obtained their insurance information which they should be able to share with you and then You make a claim with their insurance company (if they have insurance). Also, I have seen a number of times where the 'victim' has located the 'suspect' vehicle in the area and they call the Police who should then respond and impound the vehicle at that point for investigation of hit and run. You should try talking with a Traffic Supervisor or Watch Commander at your local agency
 

fenderman

Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
34,469
Reaction score
14,982
Git;99593 The problem is said:
See my post above, pointing out that most states/municipalities have allow either a presumptive inference or a rebuttable presumption that the owner of the vehicle was the driver. You dont need an image of his/her face.
 

Git

Banned
Joined
Sep 14, 2014
Messages
212
Reaction score
34
See my post above, pointing out that most states/municipalities have allow either a presumptive inference or a rebuttable presumption that the owner of the vehicle was the driver. You don't need an image of his/her face.

I can't speak regarding the laws in all 50 states - but generally when your talking about a "rebuttable presumption that the owner of the vehicle was the driver" your basically dealing with some sort of traffic violation - photo radar, red light camera, etc etc

These violations are usually classified as a 'misdemeanor' and generally you do not even contest the violations before a judge - it is usually some sort of "traffic commissioner" (an attorney who volunteers his time, etc)

Again, not trying to paint with a broad brush - a 'property damage only' Hit and Run is usually classified as a misdemeanor and the suspect would have the right to a trial and the right to face their accuser. (6th amendment and 'innocent until proven guilty' comes to mind). You need to prove who was the driver was and the case can not stand on the suspect's own admission even if they did cop out to it - they could later recant and/or don't have to testify (5th amendment)

Civilly - the Investigating Officer should have been able to conclude that the Caravan did infact collide with the OP's truck and now that I take a closer look at the license plate I see that it is a California plate - so at this point I am pretty confident that I know what I am talking about :)

OP - what city or area did this occur in? If it is California and you find the vehicle, call the police and have a Traffic Officer respond to impound it - they can only hold it for up to 48 hours, but it sure gets there attention...


22655. (a) When any peace officer, as that term is defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of the
Penal Code or any regularly employed and salaried employee who is
engaged in directing traffic or enforcing parking statutes and
regulations, has reasonable cause to believe that a motor vehicle on
a highway or on private property open to the general public onto
which the public is explicitly or implicitly invited, located within
the territorial limits in which the officer is empowered to act, has
been involved in a hit-and-run accident, and the operator of the
vehicle has failed to stop and comply with Sections 20002 to 20006,
inclusive, the officer may remove the vehicle from the highway or
from public or private property for the purpose of inspection.
(b) Unless sooner released, the vehicle shall be released upon the
expiration of 48 hours after the removal from the highway or private
property upon demand of the owner. When determining the 48-hour
period, weekends, and holidays shall not be included.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pozzello

Known around here
Joined
Oct 7, 2015
Messages
2,260
Reaction score
1,087
"OP - what city or area did this occur in?"

Ber(zer)keley, of course!
 

fenderman

Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
34,469
Reaction score
14,982
I can't speak regarding the laws in all 50 states - but generally when your talking about a "rebuttable presumption that the owner of the vehicle was the driver" your basically dealing with some sort of traffic violation - photo radar, red light camera, etc etc

These violations are usually classified as a 'misdemeanor' and generally you do not even contest the violations before a judge - it is usually some sort of "traffic commissioner" (an attorney who volunteers his time, etc)

Again, not trying to paint with a broad brush - a 'property damage only' Hit and Run is usually classified as a misdemeanor and the suspect would have the right to a trial and the right to face their accuser. (6th amendment and 'innocent until proven guilty' comes to mind). You need to prove who was the driver was and the case can not stand on the suspect's own admission even if they did cop out to it - they could later recant and/or don't have to testify (5th amendment)

Civilly - the Investigating Officer should have been able to conclude that the Caravan did infact collide with the OP's truck and now that I take a closer look at the license plate I see that it is a California plate - so at this point I am pretty confident that I know what I am talking about :)

OP - what city or area did this occur in? If it is California and you find the vehicle, call the police and have a Traffic Officer respond to impound it - they can only hold it for up to 48 hours, but it sure gets there attention...
This is incorrect, for example the statute I cited in new jersey, N.J.S.A. 39:4-129 includes a permissive inference and the driver faces 6 months in jail if anyone was injured (that can even be a minor injury) or up to 30 days for property damage alone. It is not a simple red light camera type ticket. In fact in NJ, the courts essentially allowed a presumptive inference before it was codified into law. Now this might not applicable in every state but im pretty certain NJ is not the only state/municipality with this provision.


 

Git

Banned
Joined
Sep 14, 2014
Messages
212
Reaction score
34
This is incorrect, for example the statute I cited in new jersey, N.J.S.A. 39:4-129 includes a permissive inference and the driver faces 6 months in jail if anyone was injured (that can even be a minor injury) or up to 30 days for property damage alone. It is not a simple red light camera type ticket. In fact in NJ, the courts essentially allowed a presumptive inference before it was codified into law. Now this might not applicable in every state but im pretty certain NJ is not the only state/municipality with this provision.

Fenderman - I guess you missed the part where the OP said it happened it California and that I am pretty familiar with California Law :)

I don't want to get into a legal debate with you, but the prosecutor still has the burden to PROVE that someone committed the crime. (Use some common sense - a jury is going to convict someone just because they are the registered owner of a vehicle ?) Last time I checked New Jersey is still in the United States and again you're innocent until proven guilty, you have the right to challenge your accuser and you have the right not to testify)

pozella - the Police should have filled out a 'long form' accident report since there is workable evidence - the license plate. (A 'short form' is only two pages, front and back and is basically to just record the accident as a stat for the state) On the long form report, it should list the suspect vehicle on the front page since you have the plate and the officer should have listed the registered owner info also. You are entitled to a copy of the report - you should ask for one, and it should have the suspects name and address on it.

If all they did was the short form - you need to ask to speak with a Traffic Supervisor and ask what is going on. A short form report is usually taken when there is nothing to go on - ie, you parked your car at 10 PM and when you went the back the next morning you the side door smashed in, and you have no idea what happened, etc.

A long form report usually requires follow up and attempt to contact the registered owner of the other vehicle at the very least. If someone didn't do that - they are not doing their job (in my opinion.)


http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/police/
 

fenderman

Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
34,469
Reaction score
14,982
Fenderman - I guess you missed the part where the OP said it happened it California and that I am pretty familiar with California Law :)

I don't want to get into a legal debate with you, but the prosecutor still has the burden to PROVE that someone committed the crime. (Use some common sense - a jury is going to convict someone just because they are the registered owner of a vehicle ?) Last time I checked New Jersey is still in the United States and again you're innocent until proven guilty, you have the right to challenge your accuser and you have the right not to testify)

pozella - the Police should have filled out a 'long form' accident report since there is workable evidence - the license plate. (A 'short form' is only two pages, front and back and is basically to just record the accident as a stat for the state) On the long form report, it should list the suspect vehicle on the front page since you have the plate and the officer should have listed the registered owner info also. You are entitled to a copy of the report - you should ask for one, and it should have the suspects name and address on it.

If all they did was the short form - you need to ask to speak with a Traffic Supervisor and ask what is going on. A short form report is usually taken when there is nothing to go on - ie, you parked your car at 10 PM and when you went the back the next morning you the side door smashed in, and you have no idea what happened, etc.

A long form report usually requires follow up and attempt to contact the registered owner of the other vehicle at the very least. If someone didn't do that - they are not doing their job (in my opinion.)


http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/police/
I did miss the post about California and I have not done the research for California law or the local municipal ordinance.
In NJ you are not entitled to a jury trial at the municipal level. Even when facing jail time. All the prosecutor in NJ needs to prove is that the particular vehicle was involved in the incident and the damage was sufficient that the driver should have known that he was in an accident. At that point if the defendant refuses to testify or the defendant cannot produce any evidence that he was not the driver, the judge or jury is permitted to infer (if they choose) that the owner was the driver. Nothing else is needed.That is what a permissive inference is. Jury have and do convict on much less. Heck, they convict alleged murderers on circumstantial evidence alone with no inferences permitted. A quick search shows that there are municipalities in other states that impose a harsher rebuttable presumption that the owner was the driver.
You are misapplying the defendants constitutional rights. You can challenge your accuser, the accuser is the state - that is how it is in every criminal prosecution. The victim may be dead, doesnt mean you get off. You have the right not to testify, but if there is a permissive inference allowed and you choose not to testify you will likely be convicted. The constitutional challenges to permissive inference or rebuttable has been rejected by the courts in NJ and California as it applies to other criminal offenses.
 

pozzello

Known around here
Joined
Oct 7, 2015
Messages
2,260
Reaction score
1,087
Huisun/Imporx 10x Mini-ptz at about 60ft (using all the zoom), ~40 degrees off-angle.
 

alphawave7

Getting the hang of it
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
574
Reaction score
94
Didja submit to your insurance? They can use the same data (lic.plate) to file against the owner's insurer, no need to wait for po-po. A few years ago I filed a claim, and my insurer (USAA) said all they needed was the license plate to go after the other party..less a legal matter, more a subrogation and settlement affair.
 

pozzello

Known around here
Joined
Oct 7, 2015
Messages
2,260
Reaction score
1,087
I'm with USAA also, but don't have comprehensive insurance on the old van (only liability).
Even if I did, deductible would probably be more than It'll cost me to fix it up
(a few hours of my time with the welder and some sort of rig/lever to bend the
bumper back down a bit once properly re-attached.) Frankly, as long as it can still
make it to BRC and back, I don't care too much... :)
 
Top