As we continue to collect more data and continue to analyze the information we have collected,  we are able to observe more trends developing on causes of vehicle-into-building crashes and more about the drivers in those crashes.    We have just finished running accident data by driver age and found that our results run much higher than the expected curve for the age of drivers who have storefront crashes.

As the chart below illustrates, we have compared national figures for the age of licensed drivers (stated as a percentage of total licensed drivers) against the reported ages of drivers involved in vehicle-into-building crashes (when driver age is reported.)  What we have found is startling -- just 19% of the licensed drivers are responsible for something like 45% of such storefront crashes.

Those 19% of licensed drivers who are  responsible for 45% of all storefront crashes are drivers over the age of 60.

By comparison, 44% of licensed drivers who are responsible for just 38% of all storefront crashes are drivers under the age of 40.

While there has been a great deal of research indicating that drivers over 65 are more likely to have pedal error accidents than younger drivers, most of those studies have been conducted by NHTSA or State and Federal Transportation or Highway departments using data collected from reports of incidents which occurred on state or federal roads and highways.  In contrast, most of our data is collected on private property;  parking lots, malls, local streets and driveways, etc.  Significantly, our data also shows that pedal error is the leading cause of vehicle-into-building crashes in such locations -- as high as 36%.

Our data is very different from highway data because pedal error is many times more common in the act of parking or unparking.  Driving into and through parking lots is very much more hazardous than on open roads, as NHTSA pointed out in their report in 2013.  NHTSA noted a study done in North Carolina which showed that injuries and deaths are much more common in lower speed accidents in parking lots and retail storefronts than they are in highway collisios -- mostly because of the presence of unprotected pedestrians outside of stores and vulnerable employees and customers inside the stores.  See the NHTSA study and the North Carolina data HERE.

We have no desire to get into a shouting match with NHTSA, or for that matter with AARP, AAA, and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, all of whom have gone to great lengths to paint the problem in a very different light.  So we will just say that the Storefront Safety Council a very small, all-volunteer organization which would be overjoyed to receive any help or support available from competent parties who would like to help us crunch data, conduct research, or compile anecdotal or media reports on crashes going back to 2004 -- which is what we are trying to do while we attempt to stay current with as many of the sixty or more storefront crashes that we believe occur in the United States every single day.

But we say to those organizations -- if you have better numbers for storefront crashes on private property than we have -- please share them with us.  And if you have them, why in the heck have you not tried to do something to call attention to the problem?

(CLICK TO ENLARGE)

Seven years ago when I was running Calpipe Security Bollards, I struck up a casual friendship with a gentleman who wrote for Penton Media.  Riccardo Davis ended up writing a timely and very informative article about people driving into shopping malls that ran in Retail Traffic Magazine.  The title of the piece was "CURBING THE MALL DRIVE-THRU" and I am pleased that the link from 2007 is still live -- read this excellent article HERE.

That article discussed three incidents in less than a year where someone drove into malls and caused considerable damage inside to stores and merchandise, as well as to the mall structure itself.  The point was made that for anti-terrorist or anti-theft reasons alone, mall owners should make the investment to protect mall entrances -- protecting malls from malicious drivers or clueless drivers would be an added bonus.

Fast forward seven years.  2500 days later.  And drivers are STILL driving through unprotected shopping malls in the United States.  This time, an 83 year-old driver drove right up an ADA ramp, through a front door, and several hundred feet down a main aisle with people and shoppers and stores in front and on both sides.  He finally crashed into a vacant space at the end of the aisle.

Hudson Mall clearly did not anticipate that anyone would ever drive an SUV up the ADA access ramp from the parking lot, or they would have taken simple measures to prevent it.......What confuse me is how could they NOT know how often this happens?  The three malls mentioned in the article were all owned by national mall companies, and the owner of this mall is a very sophisticated real estate investor.  So WHY so much trouble learning simple lessons that others have learned so much better?

Watch this video coverage from NJ.com -- it is proof that these accidents can and will happen here, there, and every where.  And think to yourself -- what if the next driver is not an innocent and confused driver, but an angry, malicious driver intent on harming people?

There were no reports of injuries this time, but damage will be in the many tens of thousands of dollars.  And an 83 year-old may lose his license.  I hope that this time, the lesson that got swept under the rug for seven years will finally take root -- after all, an accident like that could have just as easily sent a dozen people to the hospital.  What investor or shareholder wants to have to deal with that kind of problem when solutions are so simple, so proven, and so inexpensive?

Some activities are just riskier than others.  And while some risks strike at random, such as earthquakes and lightning and tornadoes, others result from engaging in certain activities, such as sky diving or piloting your own aircraft.

The insurance industry cringes about risks associated with tornadoes and lightning and earthquakes, and most Americans would agree that these are indeed hazards.  Though last year no Americans were killed in earthquakes, 23 people were killed when struck by lightning and 55 were killed by tornadoes.   And sky diving and piloting your own aircraft are generally agreed to be risky activities; in 2011 21 sky divers were killed, and 378 pilots and passengers died in crashes of private aircraft.

But compared to all of these better known risks, it turns out going to the store or sitting and eating a fast food burger or drinking a cup of $4 coffee can be can be even more dangerous.  We believe that at least 500 Americans died last year when a vehicle crashed through the doorways, windows, or walls of stores, restaurants, office buildings and strip malls.  That’s more fatalities than all of these better known risks combined.  Employees, shoppers, customers, and people just entering or leaving through front doors are killed every day when a vehicle leaves the street or parking lot and crashes into a commercial building.  As many as 3600 people were injured last year – and the toll keeps rising.

See our latest releases on updated 2014 statistics HERE.

What do you think?  Of course, millions go into stores and shopping centers and commercial buildings every day, so this discussion is not about a comparison of rates of such accidents.  This is a discussion about the perceptions of the public versus the very real toll of vehicle-into-building crashes.  After all, retailers and property managers and business owners know that there is a very real risk of storefront crashes every day because they suffer through them every day -- do you?

The Storefront Safety Council released the first report of a series on our current research and statistics about vehicle-into-building crashes in The US.  This first report discussed the rate of storefront crashes in Florida today.  See the first posting on the Storefront Safety Council website HERE.

Our latest statistics were updated to include January 2014 thru June 2014, and we incorporated them into July thru December 2013.  Much to no one’s surprise, Florida suffers the most storefront crashes of any state in America.  And not by a little margin -- by as much as four times the expected rate!

By way of comparison, California suffers a little over 10% of the reported crashes which is not too far out of line with population figures (California with 36 million people is 11% of the US population.)  But Florida suffers about 17% of all reported crashes — 70% more than California — but it does so with just  half the population.  WHAT IS GOING ON?



America usually thinks of Florida as a state filled to overflowing with retired folks, and of course that has some truth to it.  But consider — California has 400,000 MORE drivers over the age of 65 than Florida does, yet the Golden State experiences far fewer vehicle-into-building crashes than the Sunshine State does. As the chart along side shows, if age of driver was the sole determining factor for storefront crashes, California would experience far more accidents than Florida, instead of the reverse.


 Another part of the puzzle – the states with the highest number of drivers 65 and older DO lead the nation in storefront crashes — the Top Ten states for older drivers are all in the Top 12 states for vehicle-into-building crashes nationally.  The chart at bottom of this page lines up states by number of licensed drivers and by percentage of crashes.  As you can see there is good correlation between the number of licensed drivers in a given state and the number of storefront accidents in that state, and drawing on the chart above, states with the highest number of drivers 65 years and older also seem to have the highest numbers of accidents.

Except Florida.  Florida is the exception.  Far more accidents than can be explained simply by age of driver.  And Florida is alone of all the states in that the number of accidents (as a percentage of all such accidents in the United States) substantially exceeds the percentage of licensed drivers versus all drivers in the United States.

A note about our accident numbers:  Our research turns up crashes (limited to commercial or public buildings, transit stops, public areas, and other non-residential structures) using anecdotal and media reports, court records, and published studies.  These are then analyzed for details such as cause, age of driver, type of building and other information, and then this is added into our growing database.  

So what is going on in Florida?  We’ll keep working on collecting data and we will keep investigating with various third parties to get more answers.  When we do, we will let you know.