Can anyone offer their perspective on this? A car reversed into my son’s, doing about £600-worth of damage. There were only the two cars in the car park at the time, and seconds after the crunch was heard my son’s colleague saw the other car driving away from my son’s rear bumper (the alarm was going off and the boot had popped open) and out of the car park. They took his number and reported the incident to the Police (he’d been drinking).
Because my son's colleague didn’t see the actual moment of impact the Police say there would be little point in taking this further(though they are following up the fact he didn’t respond to the two notices they sent him following the incident, and the fact he failed to report it). I’m assuming also then that there’s no point in pursuing it through the uninsured losses company that our insurance company contacted either – assuming the car is insured (we don’t even know that yet – the Police are taking some time to follow the matter up). As long as the other car’s insured, its insurers have to pay in an open and shut case, don’t they? (I know that’s unfair if your car’s been stolen and then involved in an accident.)
What I want to know is, surely in these the circumstances the “balance of probability” is that he did commit the offence? And wouldn’t that therefore make it worth a try through the uninsured losses company at least – obviously my son doesn’t want to do anything that will result in him having to make any kind of a claim that will affect his own insurance, having been squeezed till his pips squeak for the premium in the first place.
My son is rather endearingly waiting for justice to be done; on the other hand I’ve a horrible feeling that this little incident is going to cost, at the very least, the £600 to pay for the repair ourselves. Any comments or advice?
TIA
Carole
|
I shouldn't have thought it would be too difficult to establish responsibility - there should be some corresponding damage on the other car! Others will have more knowledge on the insurance aspect than me, but in practice a lot depends on the companies, in my experience. I assume your son's insurance isn't comprehensive?
FWIW, I don't think accidents have to be reported to the police if no-one is hurt.
|
|
You don't have to report it to police if no one is hurt, but it's stiall an offence to drive away without giving details and then not tell the police. If for reasons beyond your control you are unable to stop at the scene of the accident, or feel that it is unsafe to stop, then you must tell the police within 24 hours.
|
|
|
|
Sounds nasty, I'd personally like to round up people like this and have them shot. But anyway, I'm afraid I can't help with the uninsured loss bit, but be careful, now that your son has told his insurance company, they will have passed the information onto the databases (like MIAFTR) this means he will have to declare it if an insurance company uses the phrase "any accident or loss that may or may not have given rise to a claim in the last 3 years".
I realised this when getting quotes earlier in the year. It basically means that even if he doesn't end up claiming, some companies will still ask him to declare it :( Although any company is unlikely to increase the premium for an incindent like this seeing as his car was parked at the time. It was just bad luck...
Hope he gets it sorted out, if he has to fix it himself, it may be worth asking a reasonable bodyshop for a "Cash" price, it can be a lot cheaper... Good Luck...
|
I'm interested in these databases.
In theory, you should be able to access the information help on you under the Data Protection Act (for a small fee). Does anyone have the details of who runs these databases and therfore how to access your personal data?
|
|
That's something that I would love to know, I did spend a little time looking to see if a website for them existed to see if it's possible to access the information. I think the MIAFTR database is run by the ABI, but I couldn't be certain, have a look in your insurance policy, that's where it's listed in mine but I haven't got it here at the mo...
|
|
|
|
No advice Carole, sorry, except to push this as far as you can.
It seems utterly ridiculous that the Police are saying there's little point in taking this any further - I can't understand it at all.
Good luck with this, I hope you get justice.
|
|
|
If the uninsured loss chaser isn't your son's insurance company, you've nothing to lose by getting them to chase it up.
If the culprit's car is insured, pressure from your insurer should make his pay up.
This I know because, a couple of years ago, someone claims I reversed into his car. I know I stopped before colliding with his. My mother was in my car. He was alone. There were no witnesses. His car had no marks on it. My car had no marks on it. Yet my insurer was pressured into paying out £600 to this person.
Afore I go, a word about uninsured loss chasers. Keep on top of them and push hard!
I was rear-ended last year by a map-reading rep. He gave me his name, address, mobile number and showed me his car's log book. This recorded the keeper as a leasing company. He had no insurance details. My UL chaser gave up when they couldn't find the company that operated the car. The leasing company gave them the info, not realising that they'd sold it to a dealer several months earlier, who had now sold it on.
I spent a day tracking down the owner, then the UL chaser did the rest. They would have given up if I hadn't pressed on.
|
|
|
Aren't our police wonderful? If the driver who did the damage had of knocked someone down or maybe killed them, especially IF the driver had been drinking, what then?
Still, we can comfort ourselves with the fact that they are often complaining about having to visit relatives in the night and tell them of the demise of a loved one due to a drink driver. So why not take steps to catch them in instances like this? Ho - hum :-(
|
And how do you know he was drunk? Or are you surmising as there were only only 2 cars in the carpark and they managed to collide with the only other then they must have been drinking.
The other party is not obliged to notify their insurer and a civil claim against the driver is the only way of recovering losses. The insurer will not ackkowledge the claim without cooperation of their customer.
Andrew
|
Hmm Tricky,
If your son is TPFT only insurance then best bet is to press the uninsured loss company. That is what they are paid to do. They can, however, be lazy. So the more info they have the better the chance that they will achieve something.
However:
1) you mentioned colleague and car park.
Depending on nature and size of business the car park may be monitored by CCTV cameras. Also true for some public car parks.
These days there should be a prominantely sited notice somewhere in the car park giving details of who runs the CCTV, (council or private company). The notice should give details of a Data Controller and either a phone number or an address. If the cameras are there give it a try. Contact the data controller and see if they wil play ball. Better still get your son to do it!
2) This next bit could be wrong. Other backroomers should correct me, but I seem to recall that DVLC will release/forward details of other car ownership if a car is involved in an accident.
Given the low priority that the police will assign I do not know if they would release this info to insurance company. Could be worth a try.
3) Time and patience. Ask your son to keep his eyes peeled and see if the car that may have done the damage returns to the car park. Don't confront anybody if it does (because the driver may be innocent, mad or beyond caring) but the outside of the car may be showing obvious damage, then call the police station that you reported the incident to and if you can get them to come out.
In a nutshell, there are people paid to do this for your son but sometimes they need prodding.
Just some ideas
Good luck
Vercin
|
|
|
Full Chat - they knew he'd been drinking 'cos the carpark belonged to the pub they were working in and they'd been serving him all night before he staggered to the door. Hence their concern to have followed him out.
Thanks everyone for your constructive comments. The insurance is FC; but like someone said, I'm wary of involving any insurance-related company for the very reasons stated. My son reported it to our insurance company because the Police told him he had to: he's 18 and not experienced in the ways of the world..... The visible damage to my son's car was minimal; maybe the offending car's bumper was not damaged (we've all seen this happen I'm sure). The uninsured losses company were put on to us by our insurers: we had no say in that, but they did tell me that as long as we had the registration number they could follow it up. They felt that given the circumstances the other party's insurers would have to pay. It's a bit more complicated because the car belongs to a lease firm, apparently.
As it happens the car is my son's first, so it's not the most expensive car in the world. But there's a matter of principle involved here, and the replies seem to indicate you agree! (Mental note: must get to know friendly bodyshop man!)
|
To be honest I wouldn't worry too hard about the insurance with this, as long as he gets his excess back then he has not accepted any blame. Be careful though, if the other insurers don't give him the excess back IN FULL then it is considered that he has accepted some liability, I can't remember where I read it, but a bloke got his excess back except £10, the insurance companies then said that meant he had accepted some responsibility for the accident and put his premium up!
Unfortunately as he's told them already, there's no way he can deny it happened...
|
|
|
|
|
Again leaping to the defence of the Police here.
Before we start down the, usual, route of Police-bashing here, some facts may need to be established.
1. Is the car park a road within the meaning of RTA. If not there is no responsibility on the Police to investigate over and beyond what they've done. If the drink-driving aspect was mentioned at the time of the report, they may well have taken steps to trace him unbeknown to the complainant. Whether the car-park is a a road for the purposes of the act is highly subjective and could depend on the time of day the incident occured.
2. Had someone been killed or injured they would probably have pursued the matter as a death or injury would open a different
type of offence not realted (directly) to Road Traffic Act offences.
Balance of probabilities may well be a key phrase in this instance and the matter could well be a civil matter where the burden of proof is less than a criminal matter.
|
|
|
|
|
The burden of proof in a civil case is very much less than for a criminal case hence no interest from the Police. I'm no lawyer but I think your case may stand up in a civil court. DVLA will cough up the name and address of the registered keeper for a fee of £25 for a valid reason for needing it, and £600 damage and failing to stop is a valid reason. If you chase the Police they might give it to you for nothing, but in my experience you will have to chase them. Be very carefull about the probity of the uninsured loss company you use as there are quite a few cowboys around in the area of motor cases.
|
|
A further thought you can take it to the small claims court yourself for the cost of the court fee £60 I think. To win your witness must be willing to appear. Oh, and another thing getting judgement is one thing extracting the money from the guilty party is quite another!
|
|
|
I'm afraid the Police should not give keeper details proded or not data Protection and all that! It is a sackable offence.
Having said that how is it that the DVLA can sell the same information are they not bound by the same rules?
Full Chat
|
Yes they will.I got the name and address of the guy that damaged my car after he had a big self inflicted accident. We had to call all the emergency services and as he was a hospital case and I couldn't ask him myself.
|
|
|
|
|
