Generally, car scammers prefer direct payments from victims rather than routing funds through accident registration and an insurance company. There is, however, an exception to this rule, noted by Alexander Kholodov, who holds multiple roles including deputy chairman of the Russian Motorists’ Party (ROSPA) and head of the Freedom of Choice branch in St. Petersburg. He also serves as deputy chairman of the interregional public organization focused on protecting consumer rights, the Committee for Protecting the Rights of Car Owners. In his assessment, classic automatic replacement schemes share one common feature: a non-insurance payment. A typical scenario might involve an incident where a pedestrian is involved and an expensive item like a watch or an antenna on a vehicle is damaged. In such cases, the fraudsters push for a settlement outside of insurance coverage, aiming to avoid the insurer’s involvement. The goal is to force the victim into a payout that does not go through the insurance system, which can leave the true costs unrecovered by the parties affected (source: Izvestia).
Experts emphasize that these classic schemes once relied on an on-the-spot settlement, but their frequency has diminished in recent years. Today, the likelihood of resolving the issue immediately at the scene is much lower. In most cases, drivers call the traffic police or request a European protocol to document the incident. From the scammers’ perspective, this adds steps and risk, so many simply step back and disappear, avoiding further contact (source confirmation: Izvestia).
Modern tactics see foresters and other actors using road patrols to identify typical traffic violations and capture footage with video recorders for potential insurance claims later. According to Kholodov, the pattern often involves damage to vehicles with high-value or hard-to-repair components, or events that create a reason to replace substantial parts rather than repair them. In such situations, the offenders may drive through traffic control devices like roundabouts in a way that exposes a vehicle wing to motorists changing lanes from the left, triggering a damaging but traceable interaction (source: Izvestia). This approach aims to produce a controlled encounter that can be tallied as a collision or incident, influencing subsequent insurance or legal outcomes (attribution: Izvestia).
Law enforcement and road safety professionals note that police responses remain a challenge in these cases. In some instances, authorities treat the incident in a routine fashion — there is an accident, there is damage, and the event is recorded on video. Fraudsters are often prepared to pursue court action to prove fault against the other driver, particularly if that driver deviated from traffic rules in a way that contributed to the collision. That degree of legal maneuvering can complicate the pursuit of a straightforward resolution (expert commentary: Izvestia).
To shield themselves from these schemes, drivers are advised to adhere strictly to traffic rules and to refresh their understanding of roundabout navigation. Simple awareness can significantly reduce exposure to these tactics. Keeping calm, documenting the scene with clear photos, and sharing information with the appropriate authorities is essential. When uncertain, drivers should request an official accident report through the proper channels rather than negotiating a settlement at the roadside. By staying within the established procedures, motorists can ensure that any legitimate costs are processed through the appropriate insurance pathways rather than through informal settlements that may leave important expenses uncovered. Continuous education about traffic rules and proper accident procedures helps drivers maintain control even in tense moments on the road (authoritative guidance summarized from traffic safety experts).