by Ken Stewart, Warwick, New York
Reprinted from Dialogue, Sept/Oct 2009

The May-June 2009 DIALOGUE article, "The Noise about Quiet Cars" by B. T. Kimbrough and Gary Norman that discussed "quiet cars" and the perspectives of various stakeholders participating in the public discourse about their impact on the safety of blind pedestrians, reported an assertion that accident statistics do not support the contention that all-electric and hybrid vehicles are disproportionately involved in pedestrian accidents. The reality is that official highway accident reports are quiet on that question. That is, reports usually do not capture the identity of a vehicle as to whether it is one that can operate part of the time or exclusively without the sounds of an internal combustion engine. My personal experiences have been illustrative.

As I crossed a wide avenue in midtown Manhattan, a vehicle approached me from behind within the parallel traffic, and made a right turn just in front of me. I was unaware of its presence until its right side struck my left arm. The impact jarred me but did not knock me down or injure me. It continued away from the intersection and no other pedestrian was close enough to have noticed the contact apparently. When I got to a phone though, I called in an accident report to the local police precinct. I subsequently obtained a copy of that accident report, and of course, the fact that it had been moving through the intersection silently was not part of the documentation.

Another time, as I walked across a Burger King parking lot, a car backed out of its parking slot and struck me. My shout caused the driver to apply her brakes. The vehicle stopped with its left rear wheel resting on my right foot. An ambulance transported me to a hospital emergency room from which I was discharged later that evening with no broken bones. I saw that police report, too. It included a VIN or Vehicle Identification Number, but no indication of whether it was a hybrid. Subsequently I had a phone conversation with an administrator from New York's state agency that collects and tabulates vehicle accident data. He acknowledged that only a small portion of the reports received offer that information. Two of the variables are whether the vehicle is registered within the state and whether the particular police agency uses the electronic reporting protocol.

A sidelight to the parking lot accident was what it revealed about insurance companies and coverage of pedestrian accidents. When two cars collide, the No-Fault approach calls for each motorist to have his injuries covered by his own policy. But when a pedestrian is injured, the motorist's insurance carrier won't even learn about its liability for an injured pedestrian unless the motorist volunteers that information. In my case, I have excellent medical coverage but I refused to shift the responsibility to it from the motorist's insurer. Each periodic bill I received from the hospital for considerably more than a $1,000 Emergency Room tab, got only the same terse response … send this bill to the motorist's insurer!

As the 12-month Statute of Limitations in Small Claims Court approached, I wrote to the motorist to inform her of the alternative to her insurer paying the hospital. In a week or so, I had a phone call from the insurance company and the bill was paid soon thereafter.

So, my advice to pedestrian safety advocates whenever an opponent claims there are no statistics demonstrating the dangers of hybrids, enlighten him about the inadequacy of current accident data. Then, work to improve that data collection. When I presented the problem to the New York State Highway Safety Board, it listened attentively. And, it confessed to an unawareness of both problems--quiet cars, and, quiet accident compilations.

For more information, E-mail us at: info@nfbct.org