Barnet worst borough in north London for hit and run drivers

First published in News
Last updated
Harrow Times: Photograph of the Author by

Barnet was the worst north London borough for hit and run crashes between 2009 and 2012, police figures show.

With 528 recorded incidents in four years, including four deaths, the borough experienced more hit and run crashes than neighbouring Haringey, Enfield and Harrow.
   
Between 2009 and 2012, the annual total of incidents ranging from fatal to slight ranged from 130 in 2009, to 158 the following year, before returning to 130 again in 2012.

Harrow suffered the lowest number, with a four-year total of 209, while Haringey and Enfield ran close behind Barnet with 503 and 489 respectively.

There were no deaths in Harrow during the recorded period, with three in Haringey and four in Enfield.

London-wide, more than 74 people a week were injured in collisions involving hit and run drivers in the capital in 2012.

Greater London Authority figures show an increase in hit and runs each year from 2009.

The data, from the Met's London Road Safety Unit, was obtained by Green Party London Assembly member Jenny Jones, who says the increasing number of incidents in the capital is being blamed on a higher number of illegal drivers.

She said: “The Met has made a lot of progress in tackling the problem of hit and run drivers in recent years by removing thousands of uninsured and unlicensed drivers from our streets.

“But the number of hit and runs in London remains at a high level which is incredibly concerning.

“We need the police to crack down on these illegal drivers urgently. We need to make our streets safer and to send a clear message that illegal drivers will not be tolerated.”

Comments (5)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:32am Thu 20 Mar 14

Don't Call Me Dave says...

Statistics like this are utterly meaningless because you are not comparing like with like. The boroughs are all of different sizes. A per capita comparison would be more useful. But the lack of such information won't stop the usual horse and cart lefties from using this data to have a good anti Tory whinge.
Statistics like this are utterly meaningless because you are not comparing like with like. The boroughs are all of different sizes. A per capita comparison would be more useful. But the lack of such information won't stop the usual horse and cart lefties from using this data to have a good anti Tory whinge. Don't Call Me Dave
  • Score: 2

11:13am Fri 21 Mar 14

Edgar de Jarnac says...

Don't Call Me Dave wrote:
Statistics like this are utterly meaningless because you are not comparing like with like. The boroughs are all of different sizes. A per capita comparison would be more useful. But the lack of such information won't stop the usual horse and cart lefties from using this data to have a good anti Tory whinge.
Don’t Call Me Dave — You are certainly right to point out that the figures given do not compare like with like. According to the 2011 census, Barnet has has the largest population of any borough in north London, at 356,400. Enfield has 312,500 and Haringey 254,900. By my calculations, this means that Haringey has easily the worst record of the three, with 1.97 incidents per 1000 population, while Enfield is second with 1.56 and Barnet is third with 1.48. Harrow remains best of the four with only 0.87 incidents per 1000 population. And if we were given the incident numbers for all other dozen or so north London boroughs we may well find that Barnet is even lower than third on a like-for-like basis.
[quote][p][bold]Don't Call Me Dave[/bold] wrote: Statistics like this are utterly meaningless because you are not comparing like with like. The boroughs are all of different sizes. A per capita comparison would be more useful. But the lack of such information won't stop the usual horse and cart lefties from using this data to have a good anti Tory whinge.[/p][/quote]Don’t Call Me Dave — You are certainly right to point out that the figures given do not compare like with like. According to the 2011 census, Barnet has has the largest population of any borough in north London, at 356,400. Enfield has 312,500 and Haringey 254,900. By my calculations, this means that Haringey has easily the worst record of the three, with 1.97 incidents per 1000 population, while Enfield is second with 1.56 and Barnet is third with 1.48. Harrow remains best of the four with only 0.87 incidents per 1000 population. And if we were given the incident numbers for all other dozen or so north London boroughs we may well find that Barnet is even lower than third on a like-for-like basis. Edgar de Jarnac
  • Score: -1

11:15am Fri 21 Mar 14

Edgar de Jarnac says...

surfnutt wrote:
There are two traveller sites in the immediate Barnet area, Draw your own conclusions
Surfnutt — I can certainly draw my own conclusions. My main conclusion is that surfnutt is a complete idiot to make such a stupid comment.
[quote][p][bold]surfnutt[/bold] wrote: There are two traveller sites in the immediate Barnet area, Draw your own conclusions[/p][/quote]Surfnutt — I can certainly draw my own conclusions. My main conclusion is that surfnutt is a complete idiot to make such a stupid comment. Edgar de Jarnac
  • Score: 1

6:13am Sun 23 Mar 14

gingis says...

How many witnesses were there to these alleged hit and runs?
Only the 5 occupants in each vehicle who are all claiming whiplash i would guess.
A fabricated hit and run collision is a great moneymaker.
Motor Insurers Bureau Untraced Driver claim straight away through the local Accident Management Company.
Easy peasy as no liability to argue.
Figures based on reported incidents not proven hit & runs.
How many witnesses were there to these alleged hit and runs? Only the 5 occupants in each vehicle who are all claiming whiplash i would guess. A fabricated hit and run collision is a great moneymaker. Motor Insurers Bureau Untraced Driver claim straight away through the local Accident Management Company. Easy peasy as no liability to argue. Figures based on reported incidents not proven hit & runs. gingis
  • Score: 0

4:27pm Mon 24 Mar 14

Mr. Datchery says...

Edgar de Jarnac wrote:
surfnutt wrote:
There are two traveller sites in the immediate Barnet area, Draw your own conclusions
Surfnutt — I can certainly draw my own conclusions. My main conclusion is that surfnutt is a complete idiot to make such a stupid comment.
I reported the original posting as being racist and, just possibly, verging on an offence under the Crime and Disorder Act. Good to see it was removed promptly. Goodness me seems like we agree on something.
[quote][p][bold]Edgar de Jarnac[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]surfnutt[/bold] wrote: There are two traveller sites in the immediate Barnet area, Draw your own conclusions[/p][/quote]Surfnutt — I can certainly draw my own conclusions. My main conclusion is that surfnutt is a complete idiot to make such a stupid comment.[/p][/quote]I reported the original posting as being racist and, just possibly, verging on an offence under the Crime and Disorder Act. Good to see it was removed promptly. Goodness me seems like we agree on something. Mr. Datchery
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree