To think it was not an overreaction to call the police?

Olivio73 · 06/07/2025 09:49

Spot on

Olivio73 · 06/07/2025 09:47

Also let’s not forget you aren’t a trained medical professional (I assume) and therefore at this stage you hope she hasnt sustained a fracture or more damage than can be seen on first look , as the injury hasn’t been assessed. Why do people act so defensively when they have caused a problem it’s the oddest thing ? “I didn’t do anything !” Yes you did and just sorry and be more cautious when children are getting in and out of cars right next to you !!?? Not rocket science ! Hope she’s ok that’s not a nice situation and I would have done the same ! We are responsible for our children and they are precious to us

GlitteryRainbow · 05/07/2025 13:38

hottubwhocares · 26/04/2025 17:22

He was mouthing off by saying he hadn’t done anything, when he had clearly run over her foot.

When the police arrived they took him to their police car then went to look at the CCTV footage so I’m not sure what happened after that (we left as DD was very upset and it wasn’t helping her calm down)

But yes, it was only the police call that made him finally offer his details. He wasn’t exactly contrite!

I think you did the right thing, if he didn’t even know he’d done it he wasn’t checking round his vehicle properly. He could have done much worse, run over her leg or run over a smaller child and not known he’d done it.

If you described it to the operator as you did here they could have decided it wasn’t an emergency and got you to call 101. They must have thought it was an emergency. Perhaps because he didn’t know he’d done it.

657904I · 27/05/2025 10:07

you did the right thing OP.

the onus is on you to provide the facts to the call handler, if they think immediate police dispatch is required then that’s their call. You’re not in the wrong for that, it wasn’t your decision for multiple officers to attend. They might have been in the vicinity/had a quiet day. This sort of situation had the propensity to get worse, so it was good they attended to keep the peace. It wasn’t necessarily just about the initial incident but the ongoing conflict.

Plus the police were able to quickly retrieve CCTV. That’s in the best interests of everyone involved. If the other driver thought he didn’t do anything wrong then that CCTV clears up the truth.

Shotokan101 · 30/04/2025 12:35

hottubwhocares · 26/04/2025 17:27

This is all very interesting and food for thought! The dispatcher said it was very much a police matter and they were there in minutes. I’m not sure what calling a non emergency would achieve where I had an injured child and the other driver refusing to provide details?

OK, despite the "ongoing discussions" here from the twits who think it was "inappropriate/overreacting" to call 999 to report a hit and run - what do you feel needs to "happen now" regarding the incident?

Also have you addressed your DH's unreasonable behaviour yet?

bexollie · 30/04/2025 08:25

I personally can't belive how trivial some people are making this. The man ran into the child. Regardless of immediate injuries something could of been worse later. If a person is hit by a car and clearly injured which she was then its a police matter. The guy was rude and dismissive which could have escalated. The parent was right

pinkstripeycat · 29/04/2025 23:27

999 call handlers are civilians. They often get it wrong when they take calls.

I saw what I thought was a possible drunk driver. Called DH (police sergeant who was on duty). He said call it in via 999 which I did and the call handler took all the details of the car and location and did nothing with it.

DH said call never came through. Call handler must’ve decided in their clueless civilian wisdom that they knew better than a police sergeant.

Shotokan101 · 29/04/2025 09:16

Brocsacoille · 26/04/2025 17:17

I think 999 is only for an emergency. She wasn’t badly injured and you didn’t need immediate assistance. You should have called the non-emergency number and taken his number plate.

You used 999 as a threat to get him to give his details, rather than because there was a genuine emergency. For that I am with your DH.

Then you're an idiot as well, it was pure luck that she wasn't more seriously injured and the driver was obviously about to leave the scene of an accident involving a child without providing details, 999 all the way.....

Amiable · 29/04/2025 00:20

A car ran over a child’s foot, the driver refuses to accept responsibility and people think it is NOT a police matter?!!

sandyhappypeople · 28/04/2025 16:25

Dotjones · 28/04/2025 15:55

That's interesting because it suggests the driver didn't need to give his details at the time, provided he notified the police within 24 hours.

I guess this clause is more for someone who is involved in a collision and is too scared to stop because the other person is being aggressive/threatening. But on the face of it it gives a get-out clause for not giving your details on the scene.

Show quote history

No, it says he MUST give his details at the scene.

it says you MUST give your details to anyone who has reasonable grounds for requesting them, OP would be that person in this scenario, it was her child that was injured so he was legally obligated to give his details to OP at the scene, just the same as any other car accident.

The 24 hour bit you are referring to is with regards to notifying the police, because he injured someone with his car, he is legally obligated to ALSO report that incident to the police, but that can be done up to 24 hours later, it doesn't have to be done immediately, if he had handed over his details to OP as requested, which he was legally required to do, she wouldn't have had to call the police at the scene at all, she could have taken his details and rang 101 later to make sure it was reported.

But because he caused injury and refused to give details, OP was right to call the police there and then.

Dotjones · 28/04/2025 15:55

sandyhappypeople · 28/04/2025 15:34

Why does anyone have to be 'to blame'? It was obviously an accident, kiddo stepped back while opening the door to get in at the same time he started to drive out. He should have noticed her at the side of his car, and she should have been more aware of the other car, but she is an 8 year old child and he is an adult, and as the driver who caused the damage to her foot it was 100% up to him to make sure he was clear to move his car, it doesn't mean he did it on purpose, but she had just seen her walk in front of his car then down the side, there really was no excuse for not checking where she was before pulling out of the space.

He still needed to provide his details though, he has injured someone with his car while driving and OP was perfectly within her right to call the police over his refusal:

If you have an accident causing damage or injury you must give the following to anyone with ‘reasonable grounds for requiring them’, for example an insurance company:

your name and address
the vehicle registration number

You also need to give the owner’s name and address if the vehicle is not yours. You must report the accident to the police within 24 hours if you do not give your details at the time of the accident. You must also report the accident to your insurance company, even if you’re not planning to make a claim.

Show quote history

That's interesting because it suggests the driver didn't need to give his details at the time, provided he notified the police within 24 hours.

I guess this clause is more for someone who is involved in a collision and is too scared to stop because the other person is being aggressive/threatening. But on the face of it it gives a get-out clause for not giving your details on the scene.

sandyhappypeople · 28/04/2025 15:34

Bugaloo77 · 28/04/2025 14:59

YABU
I feel it was a bit of an over reaction and you are partly to blame! If he was parked as close as you say why were you not stood there making sure she got in safely without banging the car door in to the next to you.
Did he actually run over her foot or just scrape it?
was the man in the car in the wrong for mouthing off? Yes he was but What exactly do you want to do with his details? Sue? It’s unlikely you would get anything out of this? Did you need to take your DD to hospital or was it just a cold compress sort of thing? We need more details to actually decide who truly was to blame.

Why does anyone have to be 'to blame'? It was obviously an accident, kiddo stepped back while opening the door to get in at the same time he started to drive out. He should have noticed her at the side of his car, and she should have been more aware of the other car, but she is an 8 year old child and he is an adult, and as the driver who caused the damage to her foot it was 100% up to him to make sure he was clear to move his car, it doesn't mean he did it on purpose, but she had just seen her walk in front of his car then down the side, there really was no excuse for not checking where she was before pulling out of the space.

He still needed to provide his details though, he has injured someone with his car while driving and OP was perfectly within her right to call the police over his refusal:

If you have an accident causing damage or injury you must give the following to anyone with ‘reasonable grounds for requiring them’, for example an insurance company:

your name and address
the vehicle registration number

You also need to give the owner’s name and address if the vehicle is not yours. You must report the accident to the police within 24 hours if you do not give your details at the time of the accident. You must also report the accident to your insurance company, even if you’re not planning to make a claim.

Bugaloo77 · 28/04/2025 14:59

YABU
I feel it was a bit of an over reaction and you are partly to blame! If he was parked as close as you say why were you not stood there making sure she got in safely without banging the car door in to the next to you.
Did he actually run over her foot or just scrape it?
was the man in the car in the wrong for mouthing off? Yes he was but What exactly do you want to do with his details? Sue? It’s unlikely you would get anything out of this? Did you need to take your DD to hospital or was it just a cold compress sort of thing? We need more details to actually decide who truly was to blame.

DraigCymraeg · 28/04/2025 14:28

Brocsacoille · 26/04/2025 17:17

I think 999 is only for an emergency. She wasn’t badly injured and you didn’t need immediate assistance. You should have called the non-emergency number and taken his number plate.

You used 999 as a threat to get him to give his details, rather than because there was a genuine emergency. For that I am with your DH.

Wrong. It is the driver's responsibility to make sure it is safe to move off. And at that stage how would anybody know if it was a serious injury or not? Without getting any details what if there was a subsequent issue with the 8 year old foot ?

WendyA22 · 28/04/2025 13:53

hottubwhocares · 26/04/2025 17:12

We were out today at a family event. We were parked up in the car park of the venue and were getting in our cars to travel home. There was a man parked next to us in the (relatively narrow) bays, window down, chatting to his girlfriend. He was there when we came out and approached our car.

DD age 8 was getting into the back passenger side of our car, so on the same side as his car. I was on the other/driver’s side. As I was getting in, I heard DD start to scream. Basically the man next to us had started to move his car forward and his back wheel had run over the back of her ankle/foot.

I immediately ran round the back of the car, picked her up, helped her into the back seat and took her shoe and sock off to have a look. The top layer of skin had come off and it looked bruised so I went round to his car, said sorry, I think you have hurt her so I am going to need your details.

He and his girlfriend then said ‘Why? I haven’t done anything wrong’. I asked if he was refusing and he said he ‘didn’t even know what happened’ and started mouthing off.

So, I called 999 and of course the second he heard I was on the phone to the police, he started offering his details.

Two police cars then attended. DH is furious with me and says I completely overreacted as DD’s injury was minor (scrapes and bruises) and I ‘see the worst in everyone’. I am very upset about his lack of support when our child was hurt and upset.

FWIW I would never move my own car when a child was down the side and if I had ever done anything like this I certainly wouldn’t be mouthing off at the parent of the injured child!

So, was it an overreaction to call the police?

Personally I wouldn't have let my 8 year old get in the car on the other side. You're lucky she never flung the door open and hit their car (which is what mine would do).

JennyBG · 28/04/2025 13:43

There are obviously an awful lot of mums on here who don’t give a damn about their kids.
OK, she might not have seemed badly injured…at first. However, who’s to say that the damage wasn’t worse that first thought? Sometimes shock alone can mask the pain of a more serious injury.

The actions of the driver however, would/should certainly raise concerns with a call handler and a police officer (mum to two police officers here).

LittleBitofBread · 28/04/2025 13:12

Have some of you saying it was an overreaction/calling the OP a 'hysterical mother' etc not seen the post from an actual call handler?

VivIsBlonde · 28/04/2025 13:03

Sleepalldaylong · 26/04/2025 20:15

🤣 She wasn’t run over, she got scraped skin on her heel. Boo hoo

Show quote history

Exactly!!
To say she was run over by a car is being very dramatic!!!

LittleBitofBread · 28/04/2025 13:00

IdaGlossop · 26/04/2025 17:36

Had you told us in your original post that the dispatcher said it was very much a police matter, the responses would have been different. Does your DH know the dispatcher said this? If so, the issue becomes one about your husband's stubbornness.

Show quote history

It was easy enough to infer from the OP's post that the dispatcher thought it was a police matter and needed a fast response.

LittleBitofBread · 28/04/2025 12:58

YourSnugHazelTraybake · 26/04/2025 17:26

So he was driving without due care and attention, tried to leave the scene of an accident without supplying his details, then got aggressive when you asked for his details? I can certainly see why you felt 999 was appropriate.obviously the call handler also felt it was appropriate as you got an almost immediate response, it would have been given a much lower priority if they hadn't judged it appropriate.

Yes, exactly. Funny how many MNetters are better informed and qualified than the police call handler

Widower2014 · 28/04/2025 11:26

Did he see your daughter before moving??
What did Police say??
If you were that concerned, did you take DD to a&E on way home??

Once you had matey boys details, police could of followed up later. What did she suggest doing

Sibilantseamstress · 28/04/2025 11:15

Wow! The guy ran over a small child’s foot with evidence. The man refused to share details and everyone seems so casual. This is a dangerous driver.

Helpmybrainsmelted · 28/04/2025 11:07

Almostwelsh · 28/04/2025 07:51

999 is when you need a response right away, it doesn't mean it has to be a life or death emergency. But people here are funny about calling police or ambulances. I've seen people here told they are time wasting going to A & E with symptoms that could definitely be something serious.

I remember once a pregnant woman who was alone and literally so ill she couldn't move being told she was a time waster for calling an ambulance, so I wouldn't pay much attention to people scolding you on here for calling 999.

A woman in our local area drove her car to the GP practice when she thought she was having a heart attack because she didn't want to make a fuss. It was so bad that she just stopped the car in the middle of the car park to get into the doctors. She was having a heart attack. The message you shouldn't make a fuss is just as damaging as calling an ambulance for a sprained ankle. She was lucky she made it safely to the GP's without hurting herself or others.

The call to the police helped bring the situation under control. Had the OP not called the police, it could have escalated. We will never know because it was brought into control. That is what the police want, to stop potential issues escalating. This is part of their role.

Hankunamatata · 28/04/2025 11:06

So car didn't run over her foot/ankle. It's caught the heel of her shoe then scraped the back of her foot when she pulled it free? Semantics but important ones

I hope you dd is OK. There's not much use questioning if you should orr shouldn't call the police as its a decision you can only make if your there at the time.

Mumoftwins78 · 28/04/2025 11:04

Actually police should be notified of all accidents but doesn't need to be done at the time. You have 24 hours to report