Rtc police report contains inaccuracies, help please

matttye

Bantex wrote: »

Compo is based on the level of injury etc and beyond establishing liability the level of fault has no bearing. The police have no part in directing compensation levels.

AdrianC wrote: »

Any compensation is SOLELY based on the damage to the car and the injuries suffered. There is no more due. There can be no more due. No mental anguish, no PTSD, no fluffy-bunny-hug.

AdrianC wrote: »

Never mind the OP, does Mattye?

Criminal courts can order compensation but I've just double checked and seen that they can only order compensation for injuries/loss caused in road traffic matters if the driver is uninsured - my bad.

topdaddy_2

matttye wrote: »

Sometimes an apology isn't enough though.

If someone broke both your legs, would you be happy with an apology and payment for your loss of income due to time off work?

.

Thats already been answered;)

matttye

AdrianC wrote: »

How much more than 100% blame should the bus driver have, then?



Once again, the punishment is NOT the OP's business. You or I have as much stake in the punishment as the OP does.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

There's a massive difference between certain types of the same offence. E.g. if I look to the left for a couple of seconds as fireworks are going off (a momentary lapse of concentration) vs. if I'm trying to watch TV on my phone whilst driving. Both would be drive without due care, but the latter is obviously a lot worse. Establishing what happened is important, it's not just about "Oh he accepted liability so that's the end of it."

The OP has noticed a mistake in the investigation and should bring it to the attention of the police and see if it makes any difference at all. It may or may not do.

Dont you think it's important for investigations and decisions made based on those investigations to be accurate?

AdrianC

matttye wrote: »

Criminal courts can order compensation but I've just double checked and seen that they can only order compensation for injuries/loss caused in road traffic matters if the driver is uninsured - my bad.

Indeed - and only then compensation for actual losses, as would be paid by insurers otherwise. And that's what the OP's already receiving.

Bantex_2

matttye wrote: »

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

There's a massive difference between certain types of the same offence. E.g. if I look to the left for a couple of seconds as fireworks are going off (a momentary lapse of concentration) vs. if I'm trying to watch TV on my phone whilst driving. Both would be drive without due care, but the latter is obviously a lot worse. Establishing what happened is important, it's not just about "Oh he accepted liability so that's the end of it."

The OP has noticed a mistake in the investigation and should bring it to the attention of the police and see if it makes any difference at all. It may or may not do.

Dont you think it's important for investigations and decisions made based on those investigations to be accurate?

Would make no difference to the OP though.
Just wondering what their motivation is.

matttye

Bantex wrote: »

Would make no difference to the OP though.
Just wondering what their motivation is.

I think every single person who replied here would feel the same way if they had found such errors in an investigation into their own case.

I would want to know that a decision had been made based on the actual evidence in any case involving me - not what was erroneously noted.

AdrianC

matttye wrote: »

I think every single person who replied here would feel the same way if they had found such errors in an investigation into their own case.

I would want to know that a decision had been made based on the actual evidence in any case involving me - not what was erroneously noted.

There's one massive "unless" there. And it's very relevant here.

Unless the outcome of the case was already the best possible outcome for you. Which, in this case, it is.

topdaddy_2

matttye wrote: »

I think every single person who replied here would feel the same way if they had found such errors in an investigation into their own case.

I would want to know that a decision had been made based on the actual evidence in any case involving me - not what was erroneously noted.

The errors are who sat where right? I cant see the changing of that having any effect on anything or would it?

Strider590

matttye wrote: »

I think every single person who replied here would feel the same way if they had found such errors in an investigation into their own case.

I would want to know that a decision had been made based on the actual evidence in any case involving me - not what was erroneously noted.

I'd want my sh*t paid for and my costs covered, I would not go in a personal vendetta against someone who simply had an ACCIDENT.

There's no other reason for going after the case files OTHER than going on a witch hunt.

Johno100

matttye wrote: »

I think every single person who replied here would feel the same way if they had found such errors in an investigation into their own case.

I would want to know that a decision had been made based on the actual evidence in any case involving me - not what was erroneously noted.

No we are not all that sad, get on with life, we only have one (sorry to burst your bubble Hindus and Buddhists:))