neighbor keyed my car and I have CCTV proof

Strider590

arcon5 wrote: »

I'd forget the insurance then and have him pay the lot.

Otherwise you're still left declaring a 'claim' for the next 5 years

It's too late for that, it's on the insurance records now, whether a claim or not.

I made a "for information only" to my insurer in 2009 and it's been haunting me at every renewal ever since.

ado

hollydays wrote: »

That could cause you a problem. I am fairly sure that when you give evidence to the police you are supposed to give all copies too.

No definitely not otherwise we'd be seizing hard drives all day rather than just taking copies.

I think the OP should try talking to the OIC (investigating officer) when one is allocated and make your feelings known to them. Depending on force policy and the suspects offending history as well as attitude/cooperation with the police he might be eligible for restorative justice or a conditional caution, with a condition that he pays your excess. Even if it goes to court the OIC can recommend compensation as part of the outcome.

I've gone down the restorative justice route with a drunk male but otherwise a person of good nature, who smashed a window in a taxi. When sober he was mortified and happy to pay for the damage. The taxi driver got a quote and in this case the suspect paid the garage for the damage. The suspect was still recorded as an offender on our records which under some circumstances would show up on a CRB check and was out of pocket however he didn't get away scot free.

arcon5

Strider590 wrote: »

It's too late for that, it's on the insurance records now, whether a claim or not.

I made a "for information only" to my insurer in 2009 and it's been haunting me at every renewal ever since.

The difference is though declaring an 'incident' and declaring a 'claim'

Tucker

hollydays wrote: »

That could cause you a problem. I am fairly sure that when you give evidence to the police you are supposed to give all copies too.

Where do you get that from??

Not so. the evidence where possible should be the best available. In some cases this will be the original but in many situations it's not practical, so the best available is fine as long as there's no prospect of a legal argument to claim it's been tampered with.

CCTV footage of this type is recorded to a hard drive and the OP will copy it off the hard drive. The hard drive on these systems over write themselves and the footage is later gone from it, so the copy is the best available evidence. There would be no need to hand over the original hard drive itself. Much of the same applies when investigation bodies films footage to a hard drive of some sort. A copy is taken.

lazer

arcon5 wrote: »

The difference is though declaring an 'incident' and declaring a 'claim'

Is this even an incident - as its not a crash or accident.


I think the question most ask is any accidents or claims - this "incident" is neither

hollydays

Tucker wrote: »

Where do you get that from??

Not so. the evidence where possible should be the best available. In some cases this will be the original but in many situations it's not practical, so the best available is fine as long as there's no prospect of a legal argument to claim it's been tampered with.

CCTV footage of this type is recorded to a hard drive and the OP will copy it off the hard drive. The hard drive on these systems over write themselves and the footage is later gone from it, so the copy is the best available evidence. There would be no need to hand over the original hard drive itself. Much of the same applies when investigation bodies films footage to a hard drive of some sort. A copy is taken.

It's certainly the case with written evidence, but obviously then isn't the case with a hard drive.

Richard53

hollydays wrote: »

It's certainly the case with written evidence, but obviously then isn't the case with a hard drive.

Now that so many things are digital, the idea of a sole copy is a nonsense. There is no point in returning those 'interesting' jpgs your girlfriend sent you last year, and a blackmailer can't hand the negatives to the police to close the matter. There will always be a copy somewhere.


My insurers haven't caught up with this yet. I recently sold a motorbike and phoned them to take it off cover (it was a 2-bike policy). The adviser on the phone asked me to simply return the certificate of insurance. The 'certificate' is of course a PDF which they emailed to me when I took the policy out. What would be the point of hitting 'reply' to return it to them? Or, equally, printing a copy off and posting it to them, as I would still have the original in either case. He didn't know.

hollydays

Ahem..
Let's come back to the real world ..
Everything isn't digital ..lol..
Sole copy ..
A person who notes down something on a piece of paper , but then " rewrites it" would need to submit BOTH pieces of paper to the police..
Most street crime doesn't generally occur virtually..!!!!!!.
Just sayin ..
But what do I know

Master_Blaster

hollydays wrote: »

Ahem..
Let's come back to the real world ..
Everything isn't digital ..lol..
Sole copy ..
A person who notes down something on a piece of paper , but then " rewrites it" would need to submit BOTH pieces of paper to the police..
Most street crime doesn't generally occur virtually..!!!!!!.
Just sayin ..
But what do I know

Not much judging by some of your posts.

headpin

lazer wrote: »

Is this even an incident - as its not a crash or accident.


I think the question most ask is any accidents or claims - this "incident" is neither

Makes no difference. You still need to dislose. My wife informed her insurer of an incident that affected her car. No claim was made or the insurer involved. Four years eleven months later when renewing her insurance her new insurer raised why not declaring that incident and upped the premium. Only by £20. The incident was logged on the insurance data base that they interrogate for nformation. So, now too late to change mind and will need to declare for next five years, even if no claim submitted via insurer.