Accused of hitting parked car...advise please

WLC

Thanks Richard53. You seem to be thinking along the same lines as me, just not sure whether we are legally correct or not.

He has now spoken to the person making the accusation, and also seen the CcTV, but it merely shows him reversing (albeit, it's not a Birdseye view so he could still argue he clipped him but it just can't be seen by the camera).

I have messaged a police officer friend of mine that I'm hoping might be able to tell me our legal obligation. But atm I'm advising against handing his details out so willy nilly to a chancer, unless informed otherwise

Richard53

You're on the forum very late/early! I'm working nights and it's quiet; what's your excuse?

Richard53

Just to reiterate: you say there is no evidence of contact on your partner's car. So there is no prima facie evidence that a collision has taken place with his car at all. Damage to one car, and no damage to the car it was parked next to, is not evidence of an accident. It would be laughed out of court.

WLC

Grrr Why does it keep repeating my posts. They really aren't THAT interesting!!

WLC

Same excuse as you...night worker (on an unofficial break)

Yeah that's right, when he looked at the CCTV he could merely see his car reversing next to the other persons car. He does pull forward again (to straighten up), then reverse back again. But it does not show him making contact with his car. Although, like I said, it's not a birdseye shot, so I imagine he's going to argue that the viewpoint simply does not show he made contact.

Also my partners car is fairly old, so it has a few scratches, dents etc (the usual), so we will no doubt have to match the cars to see if he has a mark in the EXACT spot where he's claiming he hit him. But no paint work from the other persons car, or anything like that

paddedjohn

Tell them to do one. You only have to give them your insurance details in the event of an accident, and you havnt had one.

Norman_Castle

What damage is there?. Its possible to damage a car and leave your bumper unmarked. Try relating the damage to your car. Its also possible after your car left another car used the space. Any evidence of this on CCTV.

Aretnap

paddedjohn wrote: »

Tell them to do one. You only have to give them your insurance details in the event of an accident, and you havnt had one.

That's not correct. You're perhaps thinking of the requirement to stop and give your name and address (though not, usually, your insurance details) after an accident (RTA s170).

There's a quite separate duty (RTA s154) to give your insurance details on demand if someone actually makes a claim against you. Note "claim", no mention of "accident". The fact that the claim had no merit would not be a proper reason for refusing to give your insurance details - it's ultimately for a court, not you, to decide whether the claim is a valid one. If there's no evidence to support the claim it will (or at least should) be thrown out.

The RTA is a little vague on what exactly it means by "claim" - it could be read as anything from "Oi! You damaged my car!" to the actual issue of court papers. I'm not sure whether there's clarification on that from case law. In practice if she doesn't give them and the other bloke decides to take things further she will get a solicitor's letter demanding them.

If the "incident" was not in a public place then arguable s154 doesn't apply as it would not be a liability which the policy is required to cover by the RTA (though it will be covered unless the OP has the cheapest, nastiest insurance policy in the world)... but whether or not the car park is a public place is a knotty question, and the fact that it's a works car park doesn't automatically mean it's not a public place.

In any event if the other guy wants to pursue this further he can quite easily get her insurance details whether she gives them or not, and her insurance company will not be too happy if she doesn't tell them of the potential claim and the first they hear of it is from him. So doing nothing has little advantage, and potentially significant disadvantages.

Aretnap

WLC wrote: »

If the other person makes a claim? My only issue with this is, a claim for what exactly? Possible old damage that he's trying to pin on an innocent person? I wouldn't give my insurance details to Joe Bloggs on the street, so I don't understand why he's obliged to give them to a 'chancer'?

So does that mean I can pop to Tesco car park tomorrow with my car that has a few old scratches, park next to a random car owner, and then request their insurance details to blame them for my 'old' scratches?

Look at it from the other angle - if you dent someone's car and honestly but mistakenly believe you didn't do it, can you refuse to give him your details, leaving him with no recourse? Or even better, if you dishonestly said "nothing to do with me"?

You give your details. He attempts to claim from your insurers. Your insurers tell him to get stuffed when you tell them there was no accident and he can't provide any evidence to show that there was. If he's not happy he can take your insurers to court, where he'll lose if he can't prove (on the balance of probabilities) that you damaged his car. That's how it works. You don't get to decide unilaterally that his claim is false and stop the process yourself.

Ultimately, this is exactly the sort of thing you pay your insurers to deal with, so I'd suggest letting them deal with it.

Guest101

skitler wrote: »

unless you own the cctv, you could be in breach of the data protection act if you view any material on its recording. you should request a copy from the person/company that owns the cctv, should it be required.

and as stated before the plaintiff has to prove it was you that caused the damage.

take no further action till you hear more.

Not at all, either quote the section or move along - nothing true in that post whatsoever