RCMP’s siren not activated during crash at Surrey intersection, B.C. tribunal finds

FILE IMAGE: A member of the RCMP arrives on scene of a call in Surrey, B.C., on May 31, 2019. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jonathan Hayward)

A driver who was initially deemed fully responsible for crashing with an RCMP vehicle in B.C.’s Lower Mainland was actually only half-liable for the accident, a tribunal has ruled.

The collision happened in January 2023, when Eun Hee Choe and an unmarked police SUV drove into the same Surrey intersection at approximately the same time, at perpendicular directions.

Both parties agreed that Choe had the green light.

And while the RCMP vehicle’s emergency lights were activated at the time, the Civil Resolution Tribunal found its siren was not – despite a claim from the driver’s supervising constable.

“I find by not having their siren on, they did not drive with due regard for safety,” wrote tribunal member Megan Stewart, in her decision.

From 100% liable to 50%

Days after the crash, B.C.’s public insurer issued Choe a letter informing her she was 100 per cent at fault, a finding that weighed her account of what happened against a statement from the Surrey RCMP supervisor, who was not involved in the collision.

The supervisor, identified only as J.C. in the tribunal’s decision, indicated the police SUV had “cleared the intersection” of 108 Avenue and 140 Street with both lights and siren activated before the crash, Stewart wrote.

J.C. said eastbound traffic along 108 Avenue had stopped, except for Choe, who pulled ahead and turned right onto 140 Street, into the RCMP’s path.

“Ms. Choe denies making a right-hand turn,” Stewart noted.

The civilian driver was able to decrease her liability to 75 per cent after paying the City of Surrey $400 for CCTV video of the crash, and providing that to the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, along with two witness statements.

One of those was from a passenger in Choe’s car, who said the vehicle only spun onto 140 Street due to the impact of the collision.

Additional statements from the two RCMP officers who were in the SUV “did not support” the claim that the vehicle’s siren was blaring, nor did the accounts of two bystanders, according to Stewart’s decision.

Civilian driver also lacked due care

The tribunal member found the RCMP driver – who was responding to a call, but not chasing a suspect – should have had both lights and sirens activated before entering the intersection, citing Section 4(1)(b)(i) of B.C.’s Emergency Vehicle Driving Regulation.

But since Choe failed to notice the SUV approaching, Stewart found she also breached her duty to drive with due care and attention.

“I find it likely that if Ms. Choe had properly scanned the intersection on approach, she would have seen the SUV’s emergency lights, particularly as it was dark,” she added.

Stewart found the two parties equally responsible – decreasing the amount of Choe’s deductible from $300 to $150 – and ordered ICBC to issue her a partial refund.

The civilian driver also requested ICBC reimburse her for the cost of the CCTV video, but the insurer told the tribunal it had already processed a cheque to Choe for the $400, so Stewart dismissed that part of her claim.