Car accident- strange one...

NeverAgain_2

...Cross your tee's and dot your i's and if it comes to a dispute you'll be seen as the person who did the right thing without trying to evade responsibility.

Absolutely spot on - officialdom likes people who behave like that.

And if this develops into a close call, it could tip the balance in your favour.

scheming_gypsy

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Here I'll post this one in green, because red is a little too hard to read:

No, she did not leave the scene without leaving any details.

Which part of it did you fail to understand?

Black is too hard for you as well apparently.

ajp166 wrote: »

I immediately pointed at her vehicle explaining she was over the wrong side of the road and there was enough room for both vehicles, she only had a slight bit of my paint on her very last panel of her van..... its clear she had the wrong line, a witness also came from a parked car and also agreed that she didnt slow down when cornering and was in the middle of the road.... when she heard the witness she got very nervous and said that she works for a charity and they can't afford these issues..... she wouldnt give me her insurance details!! she said 'cant we agree to disagree and leave it'..... she then left the scene.... I took pictures of her van and her positioning on the road. I went online and saw that I could obtain her insurance details for a fee of 3.75, I called her insurance company and explained what happended, they ask to get a quote for my damage, they said they need to send her (charity firm) a claim form to see whether they contest it.... Surely her manager would not contest it? she may do but as I have witnesses surely she cant stand a chance? I just don't wanna end up contacting my insurance company etc....

there you go.. wouldn't give details, said we can't agree to disagree and then left the scene. The OP had to go online and obtain the details.

maybe you should change your name to Einstein.

Flyboy152

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

Black is too hard for you as well apparently.




there you go.. wouldn't give details, said we can't agree to disagree and then left the scene. The OP had to go online and obtain the details.

maybe you should change your name to Einstein.

:wall:

she wouldnt give me her insurance details

Not, "she wouldnt give me any details."

scheming_gypsy

oh dear.. if you didn't keep banging your head against the wall you'd still have some brains.

NeverAgain_2

Of course she left the scene without leaving details - the OP had to go online to find the name of the charity's insurance company.

I don't suppose the OP knows the name of the driver, either, which I think she is also obliged to give.

Flyboy152

NeverAgain wrote: »

Of course she left the scene without leaving details - the OP had to go online to find the name of the charity's insurance company.

But not the driver's personal details and the details of the keeper of the vehicle.

I don't suppose the OP knows the name of the driver, either, which I think she is also obliged to give.

Where in the OP did it state that?

NeverAgain_2

...Where in the OP did it state that?...

Flyboy,

It didn't - just a supposition on my part.

My use of the word 'suppose' is a clue which you apparently failed to pick up.

I wouldn't have supposed had I not thought it was right, but only the OP can confirm that.

Despite all your doubletalk, on the account we have the driver left the scene without giving the details she is obliged to give.

I believe there is a get out if she felt at risk, but in that case she is obliged to report the event to the police as soon as she reasonably can.

Maybe she did, but I'll risk another supposition that she did not.

scheming_gypsy

I made the same assumption from:

1 - she didn't leave her insurance details
2 - the insurance is for the charity
3 - if she'd left contact details the OP would have phoned the charity and got the insurance details

thenudeone

Tilt wrote: »

If details havn't been exchanged then you are obliged to report it within 24 hours under the RTA.

Another widely held but incorrect belief, even amonst Police Officers.
You do not have 24 hours to report an accident if required to do so.

The law is very clear. Such an accident must be reported "as soon as reasonably practicable, and in any case within 24 hours".
Road Traffic Act 1972, s25
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1972/20/pdfs/ukpga_19720020_en.pdf

So if you go out one evening, have a reportable accident, go to the cinema, then a restaurant, have a good nights sleep, go to work, play football after work then think "I need to report that accident last night", you have already broken the law.
The 24 hours is given as an absolute maximum and should only be used for accidents occurring in remote areas where the nearest Police station might be a long drive and possibly a ferry trip away.

Flyboy152

thenudeone wrote: »

Another widely held but incorrect belief, even amonst Police Officers.
You do not have 24 hours to report an accident if required to do so.

The law is very clear. Such an accident must be reported "as soon as reasonably practicable, and in any case within 24 hours".
Road Traffic Act 1972, s25
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1972/20/pdfs/ukpga_19720020_en.pdf

So if you go out one evening, have a reportable accident, go to the cinema, then a restaurant, have a good nights sleep, go to work, play football after work then think "I need to report that accident last night", you have already broken the law.
The 24 hours is given as an absolute maximum and should only be used for accidents occurring in remote areas where the nearest Police station might be a long drive and possibly a ferry trip away.

This is the key phrase here.