Another no fault accident thread - sorry.

Flyboy152

All she needs to do at this stage is to pass on the information she has, nothing more. If her insurers wish to pursue the matter now, that is up to them.

Doozergirl

Thanks for the pointers people. The additional insurance sounds like a good idea!

I'm away tonight, asked H to give the guy a call back tonight. H hasn't called me back (enjoying the peace/sleep I suspect!)

Gene_Hunt_2

170 Duty of driver to stop, report accident and give information or documents. E+W+S

(1)This section applies in a case where, owing to the presence of a [F1mechanically propelled vehicle] on a road [F2or other public place], an accident occurs by which—

(a)personal injury is caused to a person other than the driver of that [F1mechanically propelled vehicle], or

(b)damage is caused—

(i)to a vehicle other than that [F1mechanically propelled vehicle] or a trailer drawn by that [F1mechanically propelled vehicle], or

(ii)to an animal other than an animal in or on that [F1mechanically propelled vehicle] or a trailer drawn by that [F1mechanically propelled vehicle], or

(iii)to any other property constructed on, fixed to, growing in or otherwise forming part of the land on which the road [F3or place] in question is situated or land adjacent to such land.

(2)The driver of the [F1mechanically propelled vehicle] must stop and, if required to do so by any person having reasonable grounds for so requiring, give his name and address and also the name and address of the owner and the identification marks of the vehicle.

(3)If for any reason the driver of the [F1mechanically propelled vehicle] does not give his name and address under subsection (2) above, he must report the accident.

(4)A person who fails to comply with subsection (2) or (3) above is guilty of an offence.

(5)If, in a case where this section applies by virtue of subsection (1)(a) above, the driver of [F4a motor vehicle] does not at the time of the accident produce such a certificate of insurance or security, or other evidence, as is mentioned in section 165(2)(a) of this Act—

(a)to a constable, or

(b)to some person who, having reasonable grounds for so doing, has required him to produce it,

the driver must report the accident and produce such a certificate or other evidence.

This subsection does not apply to the driver of an invalid carriage.

(6)To comply with a duty under this section to report an accident or to produce such a certificate of insurance or security, or other evidence, as is mentioned in section 165(2)(a) of this Act, the driver—

(a)must do so at a police station or to a constable, and

(b)must do so as soon as is reasonably practicable and, in any case, within twenty-four hours of the occurrence of the accident.

(7)A person who fails to comply with a duty under subsection (5) above is guilty of an offence, but he shall not be convicted by reason only of a failure to produce a certificate or other evidence if, within [F5seven] days after the occurrence of the accident, the certificate or other evidence is produced at a police station that was specified by him at the time when the accident was reported.

(8)In this section “animal” means horse, cattle, !!!, mule, sheep, pig, goat or dog.

Flyboy152

Gene_Hunt, I think you are misunderstanding the context of the part of the RTA.

Gene_Hunt_2

The OP should have been given the name and address of the driver, registration number of the vehicle and the name and address of the owner if it isn't the driver. If there was any injury (which I don't think there was in this case) details of insurance. If this was not done at the time the RTA was not complied with and should have been reported.

sirmarcus

I and my family always report any RTA, which we are involved in, to the police; irrespective of whether anyone has been hurt or not.

None of the RTAs have been our fault and the insurance cos always sort them out satisfactorily. We also have PNCD on our policies.

DirectDebacle

The best case scanario is that the driver of the vehicle is who she says she is, lives where she says she does and is insured to drive the vehicle.

Same goes for the owner of the vehicle.

They agree to pay the full cost of repairing the damage plus expenses e.g. BMW accident management fee if applicable, cost of a hire car etc.

The vehicle is repaired satisfactorily and the third party pays all costs.

What has been gained by following this course of action? Nothing.

Doozer is going to have to notify her insurers of the accident at some point and this will almost certainly lead to an increase in the renewal premium, whoever she insures with.

Doozer and her husband have so far spent time and money in sorting this out and they haven't finished yet. The work would have been avoided had they put it in the hands of their insurers in the first place. In part the premiums we pay is to cover this side of claims, not just the cost of the repair. Not very MSE to pay for work to be done and then do it yourself.

Another possibility is that the driver was not insured or worse still, the vehicle is cloned. The owner, rather than report the driver for taking a vehicle without the owners consent or alternatively admitting to aiding and abetting a vehicle to be driven without insurance simply disappears, as does the driver. Phones are no longer answered.

Doozer is now faced with bearing all costs herself and having to pursue the driver/owner for re-imbursement. She is still obliged to notify her insurers of the accident. In fact she needs to check the small print of her insurance policy to see precisely what this says. This is to avoid any possibility that she herself has not invalidated the policy by not notifying her insurers of the accident.

As far as the law goes it is up to you. Already you have failed to report an accident (as has undoubtedly the other party) but it is still worth considering reporting it at this late stage. There is a possibility you would be reported for the offence but having regard to all the circumstances a verbal warning could well be given.

It is in the interests of all road users that uninsured drivers are kept off the roads and I suspect the driver who collided with your vehicle falls into this category.

The reason the law requires the action to be taken after accidents, that it does, is in part to ensure that drivers who are unwilling or unable to provide basic details are brought to the attention of the police.

Should you decide to report it to the police then take your D/L (both parts) Reg. Doc. and Cert of Ins. with you. Save you a trip back there if you don't.

Gene_Hunt_2

DirectDebacle wrote: »

The best case scanario is that the driver of the vehicle is who she says she is, lives where she says she does and is insured to drive the vehicle.

Same goes for the owner of the vehicle.

They agree to pay the full cost of repairing the damage plus expenses e.g. BMW accident management fee if applicable, cost of a hire car etc.

The vehicle is repaired satisfactorily and the third party pays all costs.

What has been gained by following this course of action? Nothing.

Doozer is going to have to notify her insurers of the accident at some point and this will almost certainly lead to an increase in the renewal premium, whoever she insures with.

Doozer and her husband have so far spent time and money in sorting this out and they haven't finished yet. The work would have been avoided had they put it in the hands of their insurers in the first place. In part the premiums we pay is to cover this side of claims, not just the cost of the repair. Not very MSE to pay for work to be done and then do it yourself.

Another possibility is that the driver was not insured or worse still, the vehicle is cloned. The owner, rather than report the driver for taking a vehicle without the owners consent or alternatively admitting to aiding and abetting a vehicle to be driven without insurance simply disappears, as does the driver. Phones are no longer answered.

Doozer is now faced with bearing all costs herself and having to pursue the driver/owner for re-imbursement. She is still obliged to notify her insurers of the accident. In fact she needs to check the small print of her insurance policy to see precisely what this says. This is to avoid any possibility that she herself has not invalidated the policy by not notifying her insurers of the accident.

As far as the law goes it is up to you. Already you have failed to report an accident (as has undoubtedly the other party) but it is still worth considering reporting it at this late stage. There is a possibility you would be reported for the offence but having regard to all the circumstances a verbal warning could well be given.

It is in the interests of all road users that uninsured drivers are kept off the roads and I suspect the driver who collided with your vehicle falls into this category.

The reason the law requires the action to be taken after accidents, that it does, is in part to ensure that drivers who are unwilling or unable to provide basic details are brought to the attention of the police.

Should you decide to report it to the police then take your D/L (both parts) Reg. Doc. and Cert of Ins. with you. Save you a trip back there if you don't.

All on a data base now so not real need. It is 2011 you know.:D

Gene_Hunt_2

sirmarcus wrote: »

I and my family always report any RTA, which we are involved in, to the police; irrespective of whether anyone has been hurt or not.

None of the RTAs have been our fault and the insurance cos always sort them out satisfactorily. We also have PNCD on our policies.

Do you have many RTC's?

I bet the local police love him wasting their time.

DirectDebacle

Gene_Hunt wrote: »

All on a data base now so not real need. It is 2011 you know.:D

Crikey! Is that the time already.

The way the O.P's luck is going she'll turn up at the cop shop, error on database and computer say, 'No'.

Her vehicle impounded for no insurance and she is banged up for the night as shown as a disqual. driver.

As you point out it is 2011 and a data base is therefore infallible.:D