hello all,

quick question for those in the know. Is there a rule that prevents the police from clearing an accident?

Driving home wednesday night a minor shunt resulted in 3 slightly damaged cars. this led to four lanes gridlocked for miles and two closed completely. (it happened where two major commuters routes out of the city split) The damaged cars were only in one lane but police closed the other one as well, i presume for H&S reasons? No injuries and both cars looked either drivable or easily towable (at least to the hard shoulder alongside)

Traffic all around at less than walking pace.

Two police cars blocking lanes and protecting the damaged cars, and oddly enough the policemen and two of the drivers who were standing in the carriageway chatting.

my question is whether the police could have taken a view that given the light damage and traffic gridlock at 5:30 pm on a weekday night they could have moved damaged cars to hard shoulder and freed up the traffic rather than i presume waiting for three recovery trucks to arrive and remove.

not intended as an arsy post but it felt as if freeing up the traffic wasnt a priority.

but i can imagine there may well be a rule here and they arent allowed to use discretion in this sort of case?

Paul

Same thing on Edinburgh bypass this morning a minor bump stopped on carrage way, slip road 100mtrs in front off it bump and 5 miles of tail back.

I am not in the know but do think that most police are pragmatic and would of freed up the lanes and fled the scene ASAP, general Joe is not going to fine himself while serious crime is going on elsewhere!!

One thing I can say is I experienced the opposite to this a few years back. When I wrote of my previous kit car off I was on the A2 right by the M25 at 4pm on a saturday, beautiful weather. I was sprawled all over the fast and Middle lanes and caused Mahem.

The M25 patrol turned up because they saw me on cctv. No police turned up at any time. I must of caused hours of traffic jams. No breathalyser, No questions. I was very surprised.

If they need to collect evidence for prosecution it can require some time as they have "procedures".

Even if they didn't shut it, there would be a massive traffic jam caused by rubbernecking anyway!

If there is a death its treated as a crime and they process the site appropriately - hence closed motorways for hours sometimes. In your case it sounds odd. Perhaps the police where avoiding some other job.

Imho, it's more to do with the future claims that usually ensue. The plod reports will have to be watertight if they end up in court so just to cover their arses, they have to make sure stuff is done by the book and to the letter!
I recall witnessing an accident where everything was at a standstill until one of the BiB got a radio message to say the person involved had refused treatment in the ambulance and decided to walk home. He then kicked the cones out of the way, pushed the car into the hedge and waved all the cars passed.

It's annoying but Id think there would be a good reason and its a lose lose situation as if they didn't and something happened as a result every one would say 'why didn't they shut the road? '. The thing to remember is there's probably elements we're not aware of.

Annoying but better safe than sorry.

I have notice this a lot in the last couple of years it really getting out of hand.

Colleague of mine is a special who says the first thing he demands when he turns up at a minor is why the hell they've stopped in the middle of the road and causing a massive jam and to get the hell out the way.

In your case I'd have thought someone was more seriously injured, or the stories were conflicting as to who was guilty!

James

If injury was caused or witnesses said the cause was due to dangerous driving then they would gather evidence and be waiting for the team to do that.