Posted By FAH
More info needed here Teaboy.

Was the driver of the company provided car "at work" or not? Just because they're driving the car doean't automatically mean that they are.

Frank Hallett

Posted By Charlie0538
Hi,

I think your right in airing on the side caution. Ultimatley you could always ask the question to the operator (if it is RIDDOR your on about) and they can advise if it would be reportable or not.

I would hope that the employee would have reported this internally to you guys in the first instance, in case there was an insurance issue that would need addressing.

thanks

Charlie

Posted By Coshh Assessor
It doesn't matter if the driving was "at work" or not, driving accidents on the public roads are not included in RIDDOR.

Posted By paulw71
just to clarify. under riddor the only reportable incidents on involving moving work vehicles on public roads are.
exposure to a substance conveyed by road.
loading and unloading activities, such as refuse collecting, furniture removal, delivery drivers,
construction, demolition,maintenance on or alongside public roads.
and one about a train wich is irrelevant.
reg 10 riddor

Posted By stephen d clarke
Hi,
I think as RTA not reportable under RIDDOR: unless injured person was injured by a substance carried by the vehicle, injured whiltst vehicle loaded/unloaded, injured as a result of construction activities on road/adjacent buildings. It falls under the jurisdiction of the police.
Steve

Posted By john thos 147
Would it make a difference if you reported it to Riddor even if you didnt have too?.

I think the answer is No it wouldnt make a differnce.

Posted By steve e ashton
John Thos.

If you work in an industry where your customers are in the habit of asking "how many riddor-reportable accidents have you had in the last year / five years?" then my answer has to be YES. It can make a very big difference indeed to the continued survival of your employer. Some clients / employers simply will not work with any organisation that allows accidents to occur. (Don't get me started on the inevitable efforts this then causes to avoid reporting at all costs - the 'sweep it under the carpet' approach.)

I am all in favour of reporting when it has to be reported. But because of the (mis)use some people make of the statistics, it can often be best not to report if it doesn't have to be.

Harsh commercial reality for many of us I'm afraid.

Steve