California Motor Vehicle and or Criminal Law Question

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

This past weekend a friends car was severely damaged when a tow truck towing an adjacent vehicle smashed her parked car. Her undrivable car was left abandoned for her to find at 1:00 in the morning. A security guard from a nearby building approached her and told her the accident was on their security camera and let her wait for a taxi in their lobby.

The towing company responsible is being completely uncooperative. Her insurance company is treating the incident as though it was a hit and run and will pursue the towing company directly. The question is could the tow truck driver be charged with leaving the scene of an accident or anything else. She is ready to murder somebody but making this asshole significantly uninsurable would probably be sufficient.

The property owner says they have no idea what happened, assume it was a repossession and have never heard of the towing company involved. There doesn't appear to be any reason to doubt them on this.

The 2007 Prius appears to be a write-off, but that is for the insurance company to decide.

Thanks,

[snooper2]

1. I didn't know a Prius was so delicate...

so getting swiped by another vehicle at very low speed totaled the car...jeez...

[mudplanet]

12. These days the labor involved in body repair is so expensive the insurance

company will total a three-year-old car with 40K miles on it for hail damage (true story - a friend was driving in the mountains in New Mexico and went through severe hail, reported it to the insurance company and they took the car and paid off the loan. Fortunately my friend was able to get the insurance agent to arrange for him to buy the car back at the salvage value, so now he has a low mileage car that looks like someone took a ball peen hammer to it.)

I wish I knew her insurance agent, I could bet an ugly but very drivable prius.

[musette_sf]

13. I'm beginning to think they ARE delicate.

A woman in, I think, Santa Clara County just passed away from injuries sustained from a collision. She was driving a Prius. The driver at fault has not yet been located so she was able to drive away. This suggests to me that the Prius might actually be rather delicate.

http://www.mercurynews.com/cupertino/ci_16735275

When I think about it, it makes sense. The car has to be as light as possible, to be able to get maximum efficiency from the hybrid scheme. I'm not surprised.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

21. It was more than that,

The car was first hit by the tow-truck backing towards the car being towed, pushing it back into a concrete barrier and damaging the front end and then hit a second time by the car being towed while it was being pulled out of the stall. Car started to the red triangle of death and her dealer brought it back on a flatbed.

The parking lot was so tight that the truck couldn't get in position directly ahead of the car being towed, it backed in at an angle and hit the Prius the first time and hit it again with the car under tow.

[FreeState]

2. Whats the question? n/t

[Xicano]

3. The question asked was:

"The question is could the tow truck driver be charged with leaving the scene of an accident or anything else."

[Xicano]

4. Here's what I come up with.

Scroll down and read page 3 of this document, specifically at the bottom in section titled "Advisory Statement"

http://dmv.ca.gov/forms/sr/sr1.pdf

[petronius]

5. That's very interesting. I haven't had an accident in a while, but I would have

guessed that a CHP report would count (apparently I'm wrong). Perhaps insurance companies routinely handle this form in the background for clients, or else the form is just frequently ignored?

My advice to the OP would be to contact the local police department separately from the insurance process. They'd be able to answer (and hopefully proceed on) any criminal aspects...

[Xithras]

10. Most SR-1's are completed by insurance agents.

The typical driver never sees one unless they're uninsured, or unless they've delayed in reporting it so long that their agent can't get it filed on time. Occasionally people have to fill them out themselves if they get in a wreck while driving a rental.

[Xicano]

6. Here's some California law concerning "hit & run"

According to the law as I read it, and, the description of the incident you described. The driver of that tow truck in the video is indeed guilty of misdemeanor hit & run.

California Misdemeanor Hit and Run Involving Property Damage -- California Vehicle Code 20002 VC
In California, there are two types of hit & run offenses: misdemeanor and felony.

You may be charged with California misdemeanor hit and run if you:

1. leave the scene of an accident,

2. without first identifying yourself to the other party or parties involved, and

3. another's property was damaged in the accident.

The difference between California misdemeanor hit and run and California felony hit and run lies in number three above. While misdemeanor hit and run is concerned with property damage, felony hit and run is concerned with injury. You may be charged with the felony if someone (other than yourself) was injured.

These California hit and run laws apply to every accident, regardless of:

* Who was at fault,

* The amount of damage inflicted, or

* The seriousness of the injury/injuries

http://www.shouselaw.com/mishr.html

[Xithras]

8. The catch is apparently #2

According to the police officer who responded to my call a decade ago, California's hit and run law only applies if the other vehicle is occupied. If it's parked, there is no "other party or parties" involved to identify yourself to. At that point, the only legal requirement is that you report the accident (along with your insurance information) to the DMV within 10 days.

[Xicano]

9. Have her contact police and file a report, and.....

Since the video is probably not good enough to identify who the individual was driving the truck. I'd suggest that she go to the local court house and file to subpoena the tow company's records to identify the diver.

Here's a quick result I come up with on how to subpoena business records in California.


http://www.saclaw.lib.ca.us/pages/business-records-subpoena.aspx

[Xithras]

7. Leaving the scene is legal, but the tow truck driver has 10 days to file an SR-1

California law only defines it as a "hit and run" if the other vehicle was occupied or if the collision happened in the travelled part of the roadway. If the collision was on the shoulder with an unoccupied vehicle, the law does not require that the police be notified. Many California towns won't even dispatch police officers for non-injury collisions that occur off the travelled portion of the roadway unless they're somehow impacting traffic.

The only legal requirement is that the tow truck driver file a form with the DMV within 10 days of the accident. If the tow company reported the accident to their insurance company, their insurer will probably complete and submit the form for them.

I learned this about a decade ago, when my pickup was clipped on the roadway out in front of my house. A week after the truck was hit, I found out who hit it (a guy living about a mile up the road). I called the police, who simply handed him an SR-1 and informed him that he only had a few days left to submit it. Nothing happened to him.

[Xicano]

11. In her case it will boil down to what the video displayed I would imagine.

If the video shows the driver made no attempt but to flee the scene, then, I would imagine he may not be able to make any argument against fleeing the scene without making any attempt to satisfy condition #2.

At least that's what I would argue on the victims behalf.

[Xithras]

14. True. The question is whether there would be a reasonable expectation that the car was occupied.

If, for example, the tow truck driver was aware that the vehicle was unoccupied because he had just hooked up to a vehicle next to it, a H&R could be hard to prove. On the other hand, filing an SR-1 requires that you turn over information identifying the car you hit. If he simply hit it and kept driving, it might be impossible for him to file a proper SR-1, which could lead to a license suspension.

You're right though. Without the video, it's a hard call to make. In all probability though, it comes down to a simple question: Can the tow truck driver file a complete SR-1? If not, California law requires a license suspension. If so, he didn't do anything wrong, from a legal perspective.

[Xicano]

15. That too is a legitimate argument to make yes.

However, if I were arguing on the victims behalf, I would point out that even knowing the vehicle was unoccupied doesn't mean the driver cannot wait a few moments to see if anyone comes out to investigate what made the noise from the collision, and, why didn't the driver attempt to leave a note on the vehicle identifying his contact information.

In your case without a video showing the incident these points couldn't be argued, but, in her case she has video, and, if the video shows the driver made no attempt but to flee, then, I would argue the video illustrates the intent of the driver was to flee the scene.

[Xithras]

17. But I don't think the law makes that distinction.

You'll note that I said he didn't do anything "legally" wrong. The law merely requires that he file an SR-1 within 10 days. Even if his intent was originally to flee, I don't see how he can be legally prosecuted if he later reconsiders and fulfills his legal duties by filing the form before the deadline. Filing an SR-1 is the only legal requirement that I'm aware of, in California, when you cause damage to another vehicle or property outside of the traveled roadway.

Now, in civil court, she could have a field day with this guy. This is almost an open and shut settlement case (no civil jury is going to sympathize with a repo man who left an innocent woman stranded in a parking lot with a totaled car in the middle of the night), but those damages will also be picked up by insurance and won't personally impact the driver much...which seems to be the OP's intent.

[Xicano]

18. As written, or at least the way I read #2 is it doesn't make any distinction other than

"without first identifying yourself to the other party or parties involved"

I don't see anything indicating exceptions of whether the victim was or was not in or near the vehicle at the time of the collision. That tells me that "intent" would be an important factor, and, since the burden of prof is on the plaintiff, ergo the video would be very material in this case because it supports the argument of intent to flee.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

22. That is very much her intent...

In her present vindictive frame of mind, she wants this asshole to be uninsurable and therefore unemployable as a tow truck driver, when I first talked to her about it she was hoping this guys career prospects would from hereon be limited to a glory hole.

As of yesterday we don't believe they have filed anything, next Tuesday will make ten days.

Thank you, both of you for your thoughts.

[Xicano]

16. Just want to add I know we're both on the same side here Xithras, I am just playing devil's advocate

:pals:

[Xithras]

19. That's OK, I'm a law school dropout anyway. I freely admit that I could be dead wrong.

Mom was a family law attorney who later transitioned into personal injury litigation (she's retired nowadays) and pushed me to go into the field, but I quickly realized that it wasn't for me. I attended Cal as a CS major, and was accepted into McGeorge with an intent to specialize in tech law. The law, I soon discovered, is dry and boring. That's why I teach Computer Science nowadays.

In other words, I know just enough about the law to sound smart and get myself into a lot of trouble ;)

Still, the law seems reasonably clear in this case. My own experience backs that up. I've been where the OP's friend is, and I was furious too.

[Xicano]

20. Always a pleasure to meet a teacher. Nice to meet you Xithras

I've always liked teachers.

:hi:

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

23. Update: The tow truck driver was arrested along with two colleagues

cited for unsafe towing and released to the care of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The other car was a repossession by a sketchy "Wacky Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man" used car dealership - who has legal problems of their own.

Legal action pending, no further details forthcoming.