> National crashes-per-miles-driven rates are currently calculated on police-reported crashes.
This made me curious; wouldn't it make more sense to get that kind of data from crashes reported to insurance companies? At least here in Italy, most minor-but-with-small-damages crashes are reported to insurance companies, but not to the police.
On my case in France (countryside, don't know about large cities), most small damages are not even reported at all since both driver are fearing that the insurance would increase their monthly fee so people are giving cash to each other, it's quite common.
Very much the same in the UK as well. Most folk will try to avoid going through insurance. I'd rather be out of pocket for a few hundred £ than pay extra on insurance for the next few years.
Could you please provide legislation for that? I would not believe, that you would commit fraud when not reporting an accident and paying for repair yourself. At least not in Germany, where I am from.
It's part of almost every insurer's terms and conditions.
They use your driving history to set your premiums. Thus they want to know every accident you've been in because that affects how much they charge you - it affects how risky you are.
If you know you've had an accident, and they ask you to report all accidents, and you do not report an accident with the intent to keep your premiums down you've possibly committed fraud.
I have absolutely never heard of such a thing in the US and I've been driving for a long time. I mean, people get little dings and whatnot in parking lots or wherever all the time--which they may or may not do something about at some point. I've never heard of sending a letter to the insurance company in the absence of a claim. I'm not saying there isn't some fine print in some contracts but it's just not something I've ever heard of someone doing.
I would imagine one of the primary reasons for not reporting to the police in the USA is to avoid reporting to insurance companies. A claim makes one's premiums go up, often higher than it would take to amicably settle the issue between the drivers.
Note: I'm not commenting on the legality of such an approach, which varies by local law and the severity of the crash.
> most minor-but-with-small-damages crashes are reported to insurance companies, but not to the police.
I'm not sure if it's the same way in America, but in South Africa insurance companies will at least ping the police for information if you make a claim - so drivers generally always get them involved if they plan to claim.
The reason why that wouldn't work here is because there are a few hidden costs if you make a claim: people frequently fix small bumps out of their own pockets. This means that not even insurance companies have decent stats on the type of accidents that Google is talking about.
As others have pointed out, lots of small accidents aren't reported for fear of rates going up. But there also just a lot of people without insurance. Bizarrely, not every state requires car insurance, so some people just don't have it.
How many employees with cars does Google have? It could offer a voluntary system where they fit data gathering boxes to every willing employee's car. A bit like the insurance-reducing boxes currently used.
As a fellow European, this also surprises me. However, IIRC, in the US a lot of accidents aren't reported to the insurance companies either, but are handled with cash transactions.
This made me curious; wouldn't it make more sense to get that kind of data from crashes reported to insurance companies? At least here in Italy, most minor-but-with-small-damages crashes are reported to insurance companies, but not to the police.