Fleets that rush to hand over dashcam footage after a crash could be setting themselves up for legal trouble.
Paul Root, partner at Scopelitis, said the first mistake many fleets make after an incident is sharing footage without legal review. Speaking during a legal and compliance panel at the Isaac Instruments user conference in Charlotte, N.C., he urged companies to loop in their attorney and insurer before sending videos to police or other parties.
Once an email containing video circulates, he said, it becomes part of the discoverable record in court. Only communications between the carrier and its lawyer are protected.
John Seidl, vice-president of risk services at Reliance Partners and a former state trooper, agreed that video should not be distributed without internal discussion.
He recalled an incident in which a fleet immediately emailed dashcam footage from a crash to investigating officers before reviewing it with counsel. The video showed the truck maneuvering through debris after a serious collision, and at first glance appeared to show the driver running over a baby. It was an empty car seat. He added that the lesson was don’t send anything until you are sure of what you are sending.
Both Root and Seidl said fleets should develop clear internal procedures governing who reviews and distributes video, ensuring that footage is preserved but not prematurely shared.
Consult lawyer and insurer
Once litigation is filed, fleets are legally required to produce all relevant data. Before that point, however, each case should be handled individually, ideally in consultation with legal counsel and insurance representatives.
Root said courts now expect carriers to have cameras installed and to preserve evidence immediately after a crash. Judges frequently ask in early hearings whether dashcam footage exists, and if not, why it doesn’t. “The courts are holding carriers to a very high standard on evidence preservation,” he said. Fleets should act quickly, ideally within hours of a crash, to secure data in multiple locations, including internal servers, their insurer, and legal counsel.
Seidl emphasized that failing to retain video after an incident could be seen as negligence, even though no federal rule dictates how long footage must be kept.
“The federal government’s six-month rule on documents doesn’t excuse you when there’s a crash,” he said. “If a reasonable person believes litigation could happen, you need to preserve it.”
Create a retention checklist
He recommended fleets create a retention checklist that covers everything from dashcam clips to electronic logs, maintenance records, and driver qualification files.
Melanie Simard, Isaac’s vice-president of safety, compliance, and technical support, said fleets often underestimate the amount of management required once cameras are installed. If carriers have cameras, they must manage the data.
“You need to watch the footage, take corrective action, and be ready to see the good, the bad, and the ugly,” she said. Ignoring warning signs can backfire if an unaddressed driver issue later contributes to a collision.
Third-party services to monitor video
Seidl said some fleets use third-party services to monitor video because they lack the internal staff to review clips and coach drivers. He cited an example where one carrier’s unsafe driving score under the U.S. Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) program dropped dramatically after hiring an outside company to analyze dashcam data and conduct regular driver coaching. Lower CSA scores reduce roadside inspections and can improve litigation outcomes, he noted.
While camera evidence can sometimes incriminate a driver, Root said it generally benefits fleets. He described cases where video footage disproved false claims or helped resolve disputes more quickly. Even when footage confirmed that a company driver was at fault, it still shortened litigation by focusing negotiations on damages rather than liability. “It’s always better to have the footage than not have it,” he said.
Safety culture
Insurance carriers are increasingly factoring camera use into renewal decisions, Seidl added. Even if premiums don’t immediately drop, underwriters see safety technology such as forward- and driver-facing cameras, lane departure systems, and automatic braking as evidence of a strong safety culture. He added that it tells a story about a company, and that story matters when the renewal comes up.
The panelists agreed that fleets must establish and consistently follow clear policies on data retention, coaching, and disciplinary action. Isaac’s Simard said if a company’s policy calls for deleting footage after 30 days, it must do so consistently. Keeping video longer without purpose, or ignoring risky behavior seen in footage, could create liability. “If you see a trend and do nothing about it, that will hurt you,” she warned.
A training tool
Carriers should use video as a training tool rather than a disciplinary weapon. Showing good and bad examples during safety meetings reinforces accountability and demonstrates a safety culture that can help in court.
Both Seidl and Simard acknowledged that many drivers resist the idea of inward-facing cameras. But Simard said such technology promotes accountability and can help exonerate drivers from false claims. She added that if she were back on the road, she’d want a camera because it protects her and would make her a better driver.
Don’t disable driver-facing cameras
Root cautioned that fleets that install dual-facing cameras but disable the driver-facing lens, or tell drivers to cover it, could face tough questions in court. Plaintiff lawyers, he said, will argue the carrier chose not to record behavior it knew could be risky. “If you’re only going front facing, don’t buy hardware that also faces the driver,” he advised.
Seidl reminded fleets that their written safety policies must match their actions. “Don’t include a rule you’re not willing to enforce,” he said. If the company manual says zero tolerance for cell phones, seat belts, and speeding, it should be enforced. Root added that plaintiff lawyers routinely use a company’s own policies against them in court if they aren’t followed. Once policies are in place, follow them, he advised. That’s how one can avoid nuclear verdicts, he added.
Credit: Source link
