Record number of accidents in 2016

Friday 13 January 2017
In 2016, the National Central Reporting Point (LCM) of Stichting IMN handled 25,066 accident reports on IM roads, 7% more than in 2015 and 21% more than in 2013. The number of accident reports on trunk roads had fallen over several years, reaching an all-time low of 20,760 in 2013. The growth over the past few years appears to be the consequence of the growing use of mobile telephones while driving.

Koolen Garage en Bergingsbedrijf in Emmen

Koolen Garage en Bergingsbedrijf in Emmen (photograph: Bianca Verhoef)

Ever more records were broken in 2016. The total number of IM recoveries reached 91,854, 15% more than in 2015 and 13% above the record set in 2012. Growth occurred in practically every type of report, in all reporting organisations and in all parts of the country. In some work areas, the number of IM reports rose by more than 50%. Koolen Garage en Bergingsbedrijf in Emmen, for example, saw its workload practically double in districts D57, D58 and D59 (see for an overview: IM reports per district in 2016).

IM reports 2016

Type of report 2016 2015 Groei
Breakdown removal44.75137.35120% 
Unattended vehicleg2.2901.91719% 
Wasted callout17.61514.91218% 
Main road netw79.71069.17515% 
Underlying road network12.14410.59915% 
ANWB and Other15.44813.30616% 
Total Reports91.85479.77415% 

There was no rise in the number of incident locations that had to be secured by recovery companies. In the event of an accident on a main road, the incident location has to be secured for recovery work by an empty vehicle. This method screens the incident location from passing traffic. Normally speaking, this safety task is carried out by road inspectors of Rijkswaterstaat. If the road inspector is not able to reach the accident location on time, the road manager is required to instruct the IM recovery company to deploy a second vehicle. The recovery operator must then implement the necessary safety measures.

IM reports 2010 - 2016

Unfortunately however, the instruction to secure the incident location is often not issued to the IM recovery company, a fact that has undesirable consequences. If the road inspector is not able to reach the scene quickly, the recovery operator must wait at the incident location for the site to be secured. This delays the handling of the incident. It is also dangerous, so dangerous in fact that IM recovery companies often feel obliged to carry out the recovery unprotected. Stichting IMN is currently consulting with Rijkswaterstaat on how this problem can be solved as quickly as possible.

SIMN - Mauritskade 5 - 2514 HC The Hague - Tel 070 365 76 02 - Fax 070 30 600 52 -