CS Police illegally arrest open carrier ... now have to pay up.

[TheBelly]

True- I was speaking in general terms. I've met an officer who works on an agency that has a pair of officers that were successfully sued, he stated that promotions for these guys are really difficult, and they are very reluctant to even try putting in lateral hires with other agencies.

The lateral hire info is what REALLY catches folks: no one wants to hire a guy that's been sued a few times.

I ran into this with a 1LT (Army) that had been fired a couple of times. I just made him my HQ PL just so I could keep a close eye on him/make sure he got the proper amount of mentoring. different situation, I know, but the same principle applies.

Oh, and he sucked at the HQ PL job.

[driver]

After all this time, it still surprises you? The one I hear all the time in my profession is, "Well the police officer told me this is a no fault state, so he didn't write a ticket."

The words, "No fault state" should never come out of a police officer's mouth. I'm not sure when police started saying that (probably around 2003 when Colorado changed from PIP to MED PAY), but I really wish they'd stop saying that. Ronin, can you mention that in class sometime?

I did a ride along with Lakewood PD last week and we drove up on an accident. Icy conditions and one vehicle hit the other in a double turn lane. Both drivers were cordial and legal. The agent/officer told me he felt bad for the driver at fault but had to write him a ticket precisely because we are a no fault state. He said the insurance cos would fight it out and end up 50/50 so he issued a ticket to protect the guy who got hit.

[Irving]

I did a ride along with Lakewood PD last week and we drove up on an accident. Icy conditions and one vehicle hit the other in a double turn lane. Both drivers were cordial and legal. The agent/officer told me he felt bad for the driver at fault but had to write him a ticket precisely because we are a no fault state. He said the insurance cos would fight it out and end up 50/50 so he issued a ticket to protect the guy who got hit.

Oh man, that hurts my head. Liability decisions can weigh on if someone was issued a ticket or not, but are mostly independent. Whether or not an officer "has" to write a ticket is completely independent of how the insurance industry operates as far as I know. Heck, in Missouri, most times there isn't a ticket issued no matter what happened.

In this case, the officer had the right idea, but his understanding of why he did what he did was off. An example of this is when one of my insureds fell off his motorcycle, and was then run over by a truck. He was issued a careless driving ticket even though he was killed in the accident. I was initially upset by this, but another member pointed out that this likely makes it much easier on the guy driving the truck, who didn't do anything wrong, to not have any liability pinned on him.

Here is a definition of what "No fault" means. http://www.answerfinancial.com/insur...nsurance-state

EDIT: Here is an example of a definition that is incorrect as far as Colorado or any of the other states (Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas, Nebraska, Missouri, Iowa) I've ever handled claims in goes: http://www.ask.com/question/what-is-a-no-fault-state

Sorry for all the insurance talk, keep calm and open carry on with the current discussion.

[driver]

My post was poorly worded. I didn't mean that he had to as policy, write the ticket. I believe he felt he was helping the driver that was hit.

[KevDen2005]

I did a ride along with Lakewood PD last week and we drove up on an accident. Icy conditions and one vehicle hit the other in a double turn lane. Both drivers were cordial and legal. The agent/officer told me he felt bad for the driver at fault but had to write him a ticket precisely because we are a no fault state. He said the insurance cos would fight it out and end up 50/50 so he issued a ticket to protect the guy who got hit.

That is so odd. I have never used that at all. I also have never heard another office say it. It has never occurred to me to use that as a reason when issuing a summons for an accident. Where are they getting this info? What PD's?

[Irving]

What PD's?

Every single PD I've ever encountered In all of those states I mentioned. It is very common.

Driver: The officer from your ride along DID do the correct thing.

[OneGuy67]

Irv, that is pretty general. Most LEO's I know tend to explain no-fault to the driver's as they need to contact their insurance company to handle their issue and the other driver will do the same. Tickets are given out for violations of traffic law, not because of some idea that insurance people will care about them. Too many civil lawyers have called me when I was working traffic and wanted me to side with their persons version of events and want me to say the other guy was 51% at fault.

[Snowman78]

Every single PD I've ever encountered In all of those states I mentioned. It is very common.

Yep, I see this all the time too.

[Irving]

Keep in mind that I handle nearly 1,000 claims a year, so when I say I see it in every area I deal in, I don't mean in every claim specifically. I just have enough volume that I can safely say that I see it happening every where. I hear some variation of an officer telling that to an involved party probably once a week. To reinforce your first point Oneguy, officers just as often tell people that the insurance companies will hash out the liability, which is true. I'm not harping on the police as it may appear as providing incorrect info doesn't generally have an effect on what I do. People do tend to believe whatever an officer says though.

[wreave]

Every pilot, from a casual recreational flier to a commercial pro, is required by law to have a CURRENT copy of federal airline regs in the cockpit at all times. Why should cops not have to have a current copy of the laws they are enforcing?