Car damaged in staff car park

SamDude

Yesterday, my car was damaged in the staff car park at work.

The driver of the car parked to the right appears to have opened their door while arriving/departing with such force that my passenger door has a big dent in it. I would understand a small ding or a bit of paint, but my car isn't made of jelly and this is a full on dent(!)

When I saw the damage when leaving work, I reported it to Security. I was shown the current live camera feeds and we confirmed that my car was parked within clear view of a CCTV camera.

The security manager stated that he was not authorised to search the footage without permission from a senior business manager. This has been escalated to request permission, but I've been told not to get my hopes up on getting access to the video footage ('you park at your own risk' and 'the company is not responsible' and all that).

I've stated that I am not holding the company responsible, and in an ideal situation, the other person would have left a note and we could have resolved this personally.

Do I have any way of getting access to the CCTV footage?

If I report it to the police, will they be able to request the evidence from my employer?
Or do I need to go through my car insurance company?

If I do have to go the police/insurance route, this would obviously turn it into a much bigger matter compared to an internal company matter.

Spicy_McHaggis

Do the public have access to the car park?

If not its not a matter for the police.

InsideInsurance

Spicy_McHaggis wrote: »

Do the public have access to the car park?

If not its not a matter for the police.

It can be a matter for the police if you believe its intentional, ie its criminal damage/ vandalism and the fact it is a car is irrelevant.


The other option is the Subject Access Request under the data protection act. The problem with this can be the company has to balance your right to see what is stored with you on it -v- the rights to privacy of everyone else the film captures.

When dealing with this as an insurer on behalf of a client in a public car park or petrol forecourt etc then most will simply give a copy of the tape and/ or stills from it. A small number however have refused due to the others captured in it OR have said we must pay for the film to be edited so reg plates/ faces of everyone other than those in the incident are obscured.

hopefully, given this is presumably two of their employees they wont get silly about things

Spicy_McHaggis

InsideInsurance wrote: »

It can be a matter for the police if you believe its intentional, ie its criminal damage/ vandalism and the fact it is a car is irrelevant.


The other option is the Subject Access Request under the data protection act. The problem with this can be the company has to balance your right to see what is stored with you on it -v- the rights to privacy of everyone else the film captures.

When dealing with this as an insurer on behalf of a client in a public car park or petrol forecourt etc then most will simply give a copy of the tape and/ or stills from it. A small number however have refused due to the others captured in it OR have said we must pay for the film to be edited so reg plates/ faces of everyone other than those in the incident are obscured.

hopefully, given this is presumably two of their employees they wont get silly about things

Does it sound like criminal damage?

The op was willing to sort it out with the third party, strange community resolution that one.

InsideInsurance

Spicy_McHaggis wrote: »

Does it sound like criminal damage?

Was it a windy day? The OP says its clearly not the normal minor mark from someone misjudging the distance.

At the end of the day there is no need for any prosecution, just enough to get the police to look at the CCTV would be sufficient for the OPs need.

I would however be going down the SARs route rather than the police, was just correcting the statement that the police couldnt get involved if it was private land/ no public access.

Foxy-Stoat_3

Police wont get involved as no injury, unless the OP got whiplash.

SamDude

It is a private car park (only employees with permits can use it).
I am very willing to be reasonable and accept the other person paying for the repair work.
I can't say if the amount of damage was intentionally caused, but as stated, the damage is significantly more than an accidental scrape due to the significant force used.

I will keep the idea of the SAR to hand. Maybe this will be possible if needed once I've heard back from the higher ups.

Thanks all.

Spicy_McHaggis

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Was it a windy day? The OP says its clearly not the normal minor mark from someone misjudging the distance.

At the end of the day there is no need for any prosecution, just enough to get the police to look at the CCTV would be sufficient for the OPs need.

I would however be going down the SARs route rather than the police, was just correcting the statement that the police couldnt get involved if it was private land/ no public access.

Ok let's look at it another way, if it is a private car park and there's no evidence of a crime. Why should the police take a look?

The chances are this is an accident, hence why I asked if its a public place. If it's not then the police are unlikely to take an interest and would simply tell the op that.

You could argue criminal damage for any accident claiming the other person was reckless in their actions.

suicidebob

Foxy-Stoat wrote: »

Police wont get involved as no injury, unless the OP got whiplash.

I honk this little theory has already been debunked many times, almost as often as the 'can't give a bad reference' one.

Spicy_McHaggis

Foxy-Stoat wrote: »

Police wont get involved as no injury, unless the OP got whiplash.

Wrong, the police have to get involved if the road traffic act is not complied with.

But as the road is not applicable it's nothing to do with them. Even if there were an injury what could the police do?

WestonDave

Send an email round work saying that your "Blue Focus" was damaged in the car park yesterday in clear view of the CCTV system and that before you pay to get a copy of the film to identify the culprit does anyone want to own up and save the additional cost of the film being added to what you claim for repairs.