Unhappy with police action following road traffic collision

dacouch

If you're looking to make a claim against the other driver's insurance for your damaged vehicle and / or injuries, then the police officer has done you a big favour.

If the other driver was convicted of drink driving it can cause problems with their insurers which slow your claim down, the convicted drink drivers will also on occasion ignore their Insurers and not inform them of the details of the accident, again causing problems.

A careless driving conviction on the other hand won't potentially cause him problems with his Insurers and in the view of his own Insurers is generally a slam dunk him being at fault. So even if he ignores his Insurers they will normally just accept liability and deal with your claim.

Trust me, the police officer has done you a favour

irishboy

Dacouche- I was in a works vehicle at the time so claiming for the vehicle isn't really an issue.
As stated before, it's probably just a phase I'm going through, but I think it's madness that if someone is over the limit ( and I'm not saying they were. I'll never know now) they potentially get a fixed penalty notice for careless driving as opposed to a harsher outcome for failing to provide or being over the limit.
If someone has intentionally driven whilst impaired through alcohol I would much rather they be taken off the road. That might make them think twice before doing it again.
I've been to too many RTC's where alcohol was a contributory factor. Just my opinion.

Thanks to everyone who has posted and provided their opinions. I appreciate the feedback.

Astronaughtwannabe

matttye wrote: »

The point of the link was that the police didn't bother to arrest someone who was over the limit.

There a lot of bluster in that article, the usual 'it sets a precedent' and all that bollox.


On the face of it, the driver would have been booked in then given a negative anyway, at least according to the story. Waste of resources?

matttye

Astronaughtwannabe wrote: »

There a lot of bluster in that article, the usual 'it sets a precedent' and all that bollox.


On the face of it, the driver would have been booked in then given a negative anyway, at least according to the story. Waste of resources?

Could have pursued a drive whilst unfit if there was evidence of impairment e.g. Someone witnessed the vehicle driving erratically.

We don't have the full details but the only thing we can say for sure is that the police didn't bother arresting a drink driver who was potentially impaired by the level of alcohol in his system.