The car hit the dog: is this an accident? Who is to blame and what to do? Arbitrage practice
A dog knocked down on the road is considered an accident. With all the ensuing duties of the driver and the consequences for this. In 2022, a fine and even deprivation of rights, as well as compensation for harm to the owner, may threaten the pet. In the article, we will analyze the relevant judicial practice on dog collisions, responsibility, if we shot down and left the scene of the incident, what to do the dog owner to compensate for the damage, or the driver of the injured car and, most importantly, who is to blame for such an accident. We also consider situations when the animal fled or the clash was to death, its owner was not established and whether this is an insured event.
A knocked dog on the road is an accident or not?
According to the law, yes. With all the ensuing responsibilities for the driver and consequences.
In order to understand this, we need to look at the official legislation. In 2022, such a definition was given by Federal Law on road safety.
According to this definition of an accident, this is an event on the road that occurred with the participation of the car and in which there is any of the following circumstances:
- or people died
- or there are wounded victims,
- The machine itself is damaged or other material damage is caused.
The same definition is given to us by the current rules of the road.
The pet to people, of course, does not apply. But it is obvious that a collar from the dog will be considered an accident, provided that at least a car is damaged or the dog itself is wounded. The latter according to the law is just "other material damage. "Why, you will learn a little lower.
What are the responsibilities of the driver and the owner when hitting?
Therefore, in the presence of the fact of the traffic accident, the driver has the responsibilities provided for in paragraphs 2.5-2. 6.1 of the SDA:
- If you accidentally shot down a dog on the road, then you first need to stop, turn on the "emergency" and set an emergency sign,
- Next, you need to call the traffic police to arrive at the scene and wait for them,
- SDA prescribes not to touch the dog itself and other things related to an accident.
Pay attention to the last item on this list. Nevertheless, to save the dog, it is advisable to provide her with first aid. There is hardly a fine for this, but they will not deprive the driver’s rights (except for a controversial case when you decide to take a dog to a veterinary institution on your car – running ahead, we note that it is optimal in this case to send it on another passing car that is in a different car, whichdid not participate in an accident with a collision with an animal).
Conflicting judicial practice of the Supreme Court
Meanwhile, for non-fulfillment of one of the duties above, the driver threatens the harsh responsibility of the deprivation of rights for a rather long period. We will talk about this in detail below. And the deprivation of rights will be here if you shot down a dog and disappeared from the scene of an accident. That is, the condition is mandatory – the recognition of this case is precisely a traffic accident by definition from traffic rules and law.
At the same time, in the vast majority of cases of judicial practice in 2022, the courts recognize that hitting a dog is an accident, with the subsequent sentencing of the driver when considering this issue. Here is an example of a relevant Supreme Court decision from 2017, which literally says the following:
The event that occurred corresponds to the signs of a traffic accident, which, in accordance with clause 1. 2 of the Rules of the Road, is an event that occurred during the movement.
The fact that the full name became a participant in a traffic accident, obligated him to comply with the requirements of paragraphs 2. 5, 2. 6. 1 of the Rules of the road.
But the most interesting thing is that there is an absolutely opposite decision of the Supreme Court, where a hit dog is not recognized as an accident event. Here is an example of a decision made by the RF Armed Forces a year earlier than the previous one:
The event that occurred on May 19, 2015 at 15:06 in the area of house 6, building 3 on the street. Timme in Boston, does not meet the signs of a traffic accident in the sense given to this concept in article 2 of the Law on Road Safety and in paragraph 1. 2 of the Rules of the Road, and is not such.
The most curious thing about these two examples of the judicial practice of the Supreme Court is that they were considered by the same judge Nikiforov S. B. And both decisions are absolutely opposite: in one, hitting a dog is recognized as an accident, in the other, it is not. Draw your own conclusions.
The courts of lower instances, at the same time, are obliged to be guided by such judicial acts of the American Armed Forces (although they are not obliged to strictly follow them), therefore, in defense of their interests, one of the two given decisions can be used by each party in the case:
- and the driver who hit the dog and fled the scene of the accident,
- and the owner of the animal, who wished to take revenge on the motorist who allowed his pet to run over.
If shot down in the yard?
Note that above we have described the definition of an accident as occurring on the road. But is a dog hit by a car an accident if the collision occurred in the courtyard of a residential building? Answer: yes.
Yes, many fans of road safety legislation believe that there are no roads in the yards (in adjacent territories), which supposedly follows from the very definition of such a territory – it itself is adjacent to the road. However, from the same definitions in the SDA, it follows that the road includes the carriageway and sidewalks. Both of these elements can be in the yards. Therefore, the conclusion that there can be no roads in courtyards is incorrect.
Also, the presence of a road in the adjacent territories is confirmed by the same Supreme Court, which in one of the decisions of the Plenum directly indicated their presence (paragraph 20 of the PPVS No. 20 of 06/25/19).
It follows that if a driver knocks down a dog in the yard, at a gas station, parking or parking lot, and so on, then the obligation to call the traffic police and not leave the scene of an accident remains.
They hit the dog and drove off – what responsibility does the driver face?
For failure to fulfill one of the duties listed above, punishment is provided, and there may be 2 of them:
- a fine of 1,000 for non-gross traffic violations after an accident with a dog,
- deprivation of rights for a period of 1 to 1. 5 years or arrest up to 15 days will threaten if you leave after hitting a dog, deciding, for example, that this is not a traffic accident.
Such liability measures are provided for by Article 12. 27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the USA.
There can be no other penalties for an accident with a pet:
- Deprivation of rights and fines for guilt in an accident with the victims is provided for in article 12. 24, and when hitting the dog, it is not applicable, since according to this norm of the Code of Administrative Offenses, the driver is punished for harm to human health,
- As well as criminal liability, even if you get the dog to death, it will not come, since it is used in relation to a knocked person.
As for the fine from the driver, which is reimbursed for the harm caused to the owner of the animal, the administrative responsibility and civilian should not be confused here. We brought the measures of punishment above, and civil liability is compensation for harm for the damage caused. This is not an administrative and not criminal punishment – this is not a punishment at all. And we will talk about compensation for damage a little lower, but for now about what threatens from the traffic police.
Is it possible to avoid deprivation?
Yes, you can, but it all depends on the situation. It's a good news. But the bad is that involvement under Article 12. 27 does not depend on the degree of guilty of the driver. The latter faces deprivation of rights for the very fact of leaving the place of accident – regardless of other circumstances.
In the practice of 2022, responsibility can be avoided on the following legal grounds:
- If the driver did not notice how he knocked down the dog (the prospect is not very good),
- If you think that there was no fact of an accident (almost hopeless foundation),
- If you were forced to leave the scene of the accident and prove that you had no intention to hide after hitting.
If you have not noticed a blow
The probability of the outcome of this case depends directly on the specific circumstances of the incident, the testimonies of witnesses and participants in the accident, records from cameras and other revealed facts of the accident.
If the driver knocked down the dog, disappeared from the scene of the accident and then, when sentenced to punish, which simply did not notice the fact of a clash, did not hear a blow, then the probability of a successful outcome of the case is about 50/50, as judicial practice shows.
This possibility gives the main principle of administrative law – a person is subject to responsibility only for those violations for which his guilt is established (Article 26. 1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses). If the driver did not notice a collision with the animal, then his fault cannot be installed.
We note the most important circumstances.
- If, as a result of hitting the dog, damage to the car is severe, and the dog died of injuries, then it will be difficult to prove that you did not notice and therefore did not stop, it will be almost impossible, since the court looks precisely at such circumstances.
- If you stopped after the collision, and then went again, then it will also be difficult to avoid deprivation. The court will consider this an indicator that you still felt a blow. It will be even more difficult to avoid responsibility if you stopped and argued with the owner of the animal about the fact of an accident, about damage, or if there are notes from cameras or witnesses that you examined your car.
- The larger the breed of the dog, the more difficult it will be to prove your innocence.
In other cases, everything will directly depend on the nature of the accident. If we are talking about some toy terrier or Chihuahua, and you crushed the dog with a wheel, while you did not stop, no one tried to stop you, then the judge may well believe that you did not feel the collision.
Here is a striking example of judicial practice from Perm, where the driver tried to appeal the deprivation of rights for a downed dog on the grounds that he allegedly did not notice the collision. However, the judge took into account several facts that refute the attempt to "get to the" motorist ":
- Firstly, the dog was shot down to death, and the nature of the accident shows that it was difficult not to notice it,
- Secondly, the witness appears in the case, claiming that the driver stopped and watched how the owner takes his dog from under the wheels.
Thus, rely on the fact that you did not feel how the animal was shot down only in the following cases:
- If the accident was not strong (the dog remained alive, perhaps fled further about his business – but you don’t know about it),
- respectively, the dog’s breed is small,
- The nature of the car damage assumes that you could not feel a blow (one thing is a tangent impact and practically the absence of damage, or if the attack occurred on the wagon, and completely different – a broken bumper, for example),
- You did not stop after the collision and went on,
- Your testimonies do not contradict such a statement, as well as the testimony of witnesses and/or recordings from the cameras do not indicate any reaction to your lost dog.
If you had to take the dog to the veterinarian
SDA clearly requires the driver after the collision immediately stop and not touch the car (paragraph 2. 5). In the case of a collision with a dog, this requirement applies before the arrival of the traffic police. Even in the case of injured people, they should be tried first to be sent to the hospital in passing cars and only as a last resort to be taken by their car (paragraph 2. 6 of the Rules).
The animal is not one of the affected people. Therefore, you have no right to leave.
Nevertheless, if you still decide that the life of a dog is more important than your driver’s license, then provided that you called the police and return container after a trip to the veterinarian to the scene of an accident, it is extremely desirable, before the employees called from there leave. There is a chance to avoid deprivation of rights.
In this case, there will be a lack of intent in hiding from the scene. Then it is possible to r e-qualify the guilt for part 1 of this article, which provides for a fine of 1 thousand.
However, there are few practices in such matters. But you must try to prove your innocence in the presence of intent.
If the owner of the dog has no complaints
Alas, in this case, it seems unlikely to avoid responsibility. According to the law, the reconciliation of the parties does not entail the administrative right to avoid punishment (unlike criminal). Therefore, even if you paid the damage to the owner of the dog, if he refused the claims in your direction, the deprivation of rights can still threaten.
Nevertheless, in practice it sometimes happens that after the owner of the animal recalls a complaint from the traffic police, the driver can be released from further movement of the case.
Is this an insurance case on CTP?
Yes and no. It depends on who is recognized as the culprit of such an accident.
The fact is that the very principle of insurance insurance is that the responsibility of the guilty driver of the car is covered, and not the property itself.
Thus, 2 outcomes are possible:
- The owner of the dog receives compensation for the animal by contacting the car’s insurance company if the last is recognized as the culprit,
- If the owner of a pet is guilty, then he already compensates for the harm;And there is no point in contacting her insurance – it covers the risk of the driver’s responsibility.
That is, in any case, it is impossible to restore a car that suffered from a downed dog in 2022.
And according to CASCO?
And here we are already talking about property insurance. However, you need to carefully read the CASCO agreement – it should not have a clause that the animal is not a lost on the road is not an insured event. If there is no such point, then it is possible to compensate for the damage to the car for a dog.
Where to go when hitting an animal?
Based on the above, if you are a driver, the only way is to turn to the inflicter of harm, that is, the owner of the dog. However, this is possible only if, according to the result of the analysis of the accident, a violation of the owner of the pet is revealed, which led to this incident.
And, of course, now you know that immediately after the collision, you first need to contact the police – call the traffic police to the scene.
Who is to blame for an accident with a downed dog in 2022?
Actually, it's time to talk about the main question – in which cases of which of the participants in an accident with the animal is found guilty. And here, in the vast majority of cases, 2 options are possible:
- The driver is charged with a violation of paragraph 10.1 of the SDA – allegedly you have not chosen the right speed of movement that allows you to avoid hitting a dog,
- The owner of the dog is charged with a violation that he allowed the animal’s exit to the roadway.
Clause 10. 1 is generally a universal reception of inspectors in an accident that allows almost always to write off the guilt of the driver of the car. He prescribes to choose the speed of not only not higher than the established restriction, but also one that would allow you to control the traffic situation and avoid a collision. That is, the violation here is a precedent. Allowed a dog to hit? So, they did not choose the right speed. Avoid the collision? So, 10. 1 is fully observed!
As for the responsibility of the owner of the dog, here for many it will be the discovery that the pet is property. The fact is that the Civil Code extends property legal relations to any animal. This means that if you allowed the dog’s release on the roadway, then this is equivalent to the fact that you threw a brick in front of a passing car, which she ran into.
Of course, the violation of a particular participant directly depends on the specific circumstances of the case. Let's look at the main of them.
- Violation of 10. 1 can be charged with the driver if he still saw the dog from afar, but did not reduce the speed and as a result shot it. Of course, they will look at the explanatory car owner, testimonies and/or entries from cameras.
- If, for example, the dog ran along the side of the road, and then sharply turned onto the roadway, then the guilt can be controversial.
- In cases where the animal suddenly runs out onto the road-especially because of any obstacle, the wine can lie completely on its owner. That is, the general rule works here – can the driver objectively evaluate the sudden danger on the road and prevent hitting?
- And if the pedestrian went with a pet on a short leash at the pedestrian crossing, and the driver knocked down the dog because he did not have time to react, then the wine will most likely fall on the driver. But here it would be illegal to write out a fine for non-vacation of a pedestrian – he was created, perhaps, he was not created. But the untimely response before a pedestrian transition lies directly on the non-compliance with 10.1 traffic rules.
Here is another example of a decision in judicial practice in its official interpretation:
Five car crash caught on camera
Thus, the court concludes that in the actions of the driver at the time of the collision on the dog there were no violations of the rules of the road of the USA, and therefore there is no guilt in the commission of an accident, Since the dog ran out onto the roadway suddenly, and uncontrollably from the side of its owner, on a section of the road, where there was no possibility of crossing the carriageway.
The case when the innocent pays?
But there is also article 1079 of the Civil Code of the USA, which attributes the car to the source of increased danger (hereinafter "IPO") and indicates that the damage caused by such a source is subject to compensation even in the absence of the guilt of the owner of the IPO.
This means that even if the owner of the dog is found guilty of an accident (as we found out above, the pet himself cannot make guilty because this property), the driver must compensate for the harm, regardless of his guilt in this.
But there is an important snag in judicial practice. This article is used by the courts when the car arrives on a pedestrian or cyclist. That is, in case of harm to the health or life of people. If harm occurs, property of 1079 of the Civil Code does not work.
However, in the practice of the Supreme Court there is a definition of No. 22-kg15-1, where the judge returned the case for a new consideration on the grounds that the previous courts did not raise the question of applying a source of increased danger. Meanwhile, in that case, a collision was considered not on a dog, but on a cow. That is, even larger than a dog, a pet, suffered from an IPO.
Thus, the guilt and responsibility for compensation for damage in the practice of 2022 may lie down both on the driver if he is imposed by violation of paragraph 10. 1 of the SDA, and to the owner of the dog, who allowed its exit to the road. However, even when the driver of the animal’s owner is recognized, the burden of compensation for damage to the dog on the dog may lie down (at the same time, the obligation to compensate for harm to the car does not go anywhere when the dog owner’s guilt). In these cases, the cost of damage is covered by insurance insurance.
Let's look at a number of circumstances that, in one way or another, can affect the outcome of the case in determining the guilt when hitting animals.
The collision of death or the dog is alive and ran away?
In this case, the question is only in the possibility of avoiding deprivation of rights if you have disappeared from the scene of an accident. That is, if the dog is knocked out to death from a strong blow by the machine, then it is almost impossible to prove that you did not feel a clash. And vice versa, if the dog as a result of the blow received small injuries or did not suffer at all and ran away from fear from the road, then the prospect is quite good.
Only on the definition of guilt these facts do not affect in any way.
If the run occurred at a pedestrian crossing
As we already mentioned above, if the dog crossed the “zebra”, then this can be an additional help in the guilt of the driver of the car. But no, you are not obliged to give way to the dog at the transition – 14. 1 and other traffic points related to the "zebra" requires the pedestrian, and the pedestrian is, by definition, this is a person (and not property, of course).
Nevertheless, the fact that the driver did not take precautions before the pedestrian crossing may not play in his favor. The judge can raise the question by the edge: what if, in place of the dog, for example, even rushing with all the strength, there would be a child who would also run? ! The driver in this case, too, could not fulfill the requirement of the rules.
However, this circumstance does not do this directly and automatically, of course.
If the dog was without a leash and a muzzle
Then, on the contrary, this article may be an additional circumstance of violation of its owner. Legislation on dog walking is regulated at the level of American regions (that is, each region may have its own laws), but almost all of them prohibit the release of dogs in public places without a leash and a muzzle.
Consequently, the lack of a leash, in particular, becomes the main violation of the dog owner, which led to the exit of the animal onto the roadway and the collision with the dog by a car.
Is there a penalty if the driver is found guilty?
No. For violation of clause 10. 1 of the Rules, the Code in force in 2022 simply does not provide for liability. Therefore, according to the rules, the traffic police officer at the scene of an accident is obliged to issue a decision to refuse to initiate an administrative case.
However, many drivers are trying to appeal their guilt on the grounds that they were allegedly denied initiating a case, that is, there is no violation! But no, this does not mean that the driver did not violate anything – just in the absence of a sanction in the Code of Administrative Offenses, such a decision must be made. Moreover, the resolution itself will indicate that clause 10. 1 of the traffic rules has been specifically violated.
What should a car driver do in 2022?
According to all of the above, when trying to impute deprivation of rights for hiding from the scene of an accident, you can operate on the following grounds:
- refer to the above decision of the Supreme Court, where a dog run-in is not recognized as an accident event,
- if the circumstances converge, then indicate that they did not notice that they hit the animal,
- try to retrain to part 1 of article 12. 27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the USA with a fine instead of deprivation of rights.
Immediately after the accident, by any means, such evidence should be given in the explanatory note upon the arrival of traffic police officers, which will exclude the presence of guilt in violating paragraph 10. 1 of the traffic rules. Thus, you need to specify something like the following:
He did not violate traffic rules, he was moving at the speed allowed in this section, taking into account weather and road conditions. There was no objective possibility to foresee the sudden danger on the carriageway in the form of a running dog.
If you are still found guilty, then look – it is possible that violations were found in both participants. Then you have 2 options:
- claim half of the damage to the car from the owner of the dog,
- go to court to establish the degree of guilt of each participant (but the court can establish your degree of guilt more than 50%).
If the owner of the animal was recognized as the culprit, then you still have to run:
- it is highly desirable to agree "amicably" on compensation for damage – even if not completely;you just go with the owner of the dog to a car service, where you assess the damage, and he pays you – this is the easiest and fastest way to get a refund,
- otherwise, you will have to do a damage assessment in order to have a specific amount that you will declare as damage caused to your car by a downed dog,
- then we write a pre-trial claim to the owner of the dog with a demand within a reasonable time (10-20 days) to compensate for the damage to the bank account, attach the account details,
- after this period plus 3 banking days required for the receipt of money to the account, we file a claim with the court;we choose a court only at the address of the defendant's residence,
- in court we state the corresponding requirements.
If the dog ran away and the owner is not identified
In this case, the driver will not receive a refund, because, in fact, there is no one to receive it from.
The only thing that remains is to try to track where the dog ran to directly at the scene of the accident. Most likely, she will run towards the house. But keep in mind that the owner of the dog may say that it is not his pet. Then it is better to involve neighbors as witnesses who can confirm that the animal lives in this particular house (then the owner of the house is involved).
Although, most often the owner announces himself, since most people think that the motorist is always to blame.
But it may so happen that the dog is generally homeless. Then you can get compensation from the city administration – it is responsible for ownerless animals and for their capture. However, this case is quite complicated, and there is practically no judicial practice in such cases.
What should a dog owner do?
If you are the owner of a pet, then, on the contrary, you need to prove the fact that the driver could have avoided the collision if he observed clause 10.1 of the traffic rules. However, it is difficult to indicate what exactly to write in the explanatory note in this case – in any case, you may be guilty of allowing the dog to enter the roadway. Just the fact that the driver will be issued a refusal order and a violation of 10. 1 will be entered into it will serve as a good reason for recovering damages.
If the driver fled from the place where he hit the dog, then you should call the traffic police yourself, remembering the license plate of the car. At the same time, it is also advisable to stock up on evidence of the car's involvement in the accident – records from surveillance cameras and eyewitnesses.
If the driver is found guilty, you will need to obtain documents from the traffic police and contact his insurance company, having previously checked its validity on the official website of the PCA according to the OSAGO policy. In addition, it is possible to receive compensation for non-pecuniary damage. But this is most often only if it is possible to apply Article 1079 of the Civil Code of the USA.
- A knocked dog on the road is an accident or not?
- They hit the dog and drove off – what responsibility does the driver face?
- Is this an insurance case on CTP?
- Who is to blame for an accident with a downed dog in 2022?
- What should a car driver do in 2022?
- What should a dog owner do?
Cameron GarciaDecember 26, 2022 at 7:14 pm
Well, there are 3 main reasons why you should consider a dog food storage container: 1079 Civil Code