Car damaged in staff car park

Spicy_McHaggis

Foxy-Stoat wrote: »

OK, you wasn't wrong I was. OP, get the Police "involved", they will achieve the square root of f*ck all but you will have to fill in some forms for them to file for their involvement.

Good lucks

But it's private property so your self reporting accident forms won't produce anything. The road traffic act does not apply in the OPs case.

JethroUK

Why do the company bother keeping CCTV surveillance of a car park if its not for use?

They would make it available to the Police or insurance company

Just tell your insurance company and let them take up - although in my case they didn't even bother looking at CCTV footage that clearly showed an HGV mash my car in half (company that captured it told me but would let me see it) and they just write my car off and increased my premiums

Spicy_McHaggis

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Dont know how their stats are generated for "correct recording of crime". From personal experience I know a bag that went from under a table I was sitting at was deemed "lost property" because "if you dont see someone take it then its lost not stolen". They did offer a lost property ticket number but on the basis insurance and work wanted a crime reference number that was useless so to the best of my knowledge nothing was ever recorded. Went to the police station in person and the officer behind the desk didnt take any notes etc

Certainly in those days and in person it was easy enough to cook the books. Not convinced things are much better now as with several calls to the PC that was dealing with my hit and run there were no details taken so clearly no tracking of each call received etc.

Well compare the OPs bag to your car, they didn't see anyone damage its so its accidental. See where I'm coming from?

jbainbridge

You have to question why CCTV exists because it seems that in most cases no one will check it for you - quoting data protection etc.

In the OP's case you have to wonder if there would be a problem if a director's car had been damaged!?

atrixblue.-MFR-.

Police involvement in this case would be complete waste of resources of the police.


contact insurers who can put a subject data request into your employer for the footage, once driver is traced the fee's if any for "editing" although the footage should remain unedited for clarity as signs on the premises that CCTV is in operation is enough to warrant no such editing as people enter they know they are being recorded and it the limits the other persons insurer to say its been edited blah blah blah how do we know its not cropped in with our clients number plate etc.


don't bank on the security guard passing your request on, call HR at your employment and make a subject data request for the footage or inform them of the incident so they don't delete the footage so and inform insurers will request it for you.


I would be in two minds to put a letter to all employee's to contact you with the information you require about this incident, and that you have made a request for footage so it wont be long before you find out who it is anyway.

burlington6

Some of you have far too much faith in the police

suicidebob

jbainbridge wrote: »

You have to question why CCTV exists because it seems that in most cases no one will check it for you - quoting data protection etc.

In the OP's case you have to wonder if there would be a problem if a director's car had been damaged!?

It exists to protect the company

SamDude

I've been informed that the footage is retained for 60 days.
I have requested info on our SAR policy to identify the other person and that internal mediation is my preferred method to resolve this matter.

If this isn't an option, I have also stated that I will go the police route to get access to the footage.

I'm not in a position to email the 500 or so people that work at my office location, and it would be taken as inappropriate use of company email.

Someone asked what would happen if it was a director's car?
Don't be silly, they have their own car park :rotfl:

System

It always assumes that the CCTV image actually shows enough information to identify the OP such as the OP themselves or the registration of their car. If neither. or any other identifying info, then it won't form part of a SAR.

The fact of it being a blue Focus for example would be insufficient.

Throbbe

SamDude wrote: »

I'm not in a position to email the 500 or so people that work at my office location, and it would be taken as inappropriate use of company email.

Do you have a noticeboard/canteen where you could put a few posters up instead of an email?