We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Witness refused to give contact details
Comments
-
Since you were stationary at the time, and the other car was moving, that would put them more at fault. Sounding your horn is in your favour, and being hit in the side of your car is in your favour - how could you have moved sideways?!
I'm not quite clear - was the child the passenger in the car that hit you? So his/her dad wanted to 'help' with the cost of repairs?
It seems from the forum that these often go 50/50, but you seem to have a strong case, minus witness.0 -
I captured an incident on a bike helmet camera, passed email and phone number to both parties, only spoke to the damaged party and had email from both to give them the download location for the video footage. Damaged party insurer asked me for a statement which I provided.
Phones can block numbers to avoid calls, emails can block you and you don't need to give anyone your home addressSam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness:
People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.
0 -
I'm not quite clear - was the child the passenger in the car that hit you? So his/her dad wanted to 'help' with the cost of repairs?
It seems from the forum that these often go 50/50, but you seem to have a strong case, minus witness.
The child was sitting in a car in the next parking spot, with I'm guessing his mum. What got his attention was the sounding of the horn.
The mother didn't appear to speak English and remained completely silent when I asked her0 -
I would just forget it. There is no legal route to force the issue.If you are querying your Council Tax band would you please state whether you are in England, Scotland or Wales0
-
Since you were stationary at the time, and the other car was moving, that would put them more at fault. Sounding your horn is in your favour, and being hit in the side of your car is in your favour - how could you have moved sideways?!
I'm not quite clear - was the child the passenger in the car that hit you? So his/her dad wanted to 'help' with the cost of repairs?
It seems from the forum that these often go 50/50, but you seem to have a strong case, minus witness.
We were not there.....however who is to say that the Op didn't reverse into the path of a moving vehicle?0 -
Since you were stationary at the time, and the other car was moving, that would put them more at fault. Sounding your horn is in your favour, and being hit in the side of your car is in your favour - how could you have moved sideways?!
I'm not quite clear - was the child the passenger in the car that hit you? So his/her dad wanted to 'help' with the cost of repairs?
It seems from the forum that these often go 50/50, but you seem to have a strong case, minus witness.
Had a similar problem with my van a couple of years ago the person who hit me driving a big stupid chelsea tractor tried to say it should be 50/50 and then her insurance company said the same.It was only when i submitted the photos of damage to my door and sketch plan of accident pointed out that my van couldn't drive sideways and that if you looked at the crease/dent you could tell which way the other person driving when they hit me
OP if you sure it wasn't your fault don't settle for 50/500 -
[quote=[Deleted User];74830521]The OP has said that he was stationary, and is seeking advice based upon that.[/QUOTE]
Well they are not going to say they reversed into the path of a moving vehicle :eek:0 -
Well they are not going to say they reversed into the path of a moving vehicle :eek:
People have said worse, and still claimed to be blameless!
It seems to be generally accepted on forums that we take the OP's account as accurate, unless it's self-contradictory or there are obvious untruths.
It's difficult enough to get sensible advice based on a single version of enents ....0 -
[quote=[Deleted User];74830675]People have said worse, and still claimed to be blameless!
It seems to be generally accepted on forums that we take the OP's account as accurate, unless it's self-contradictory or there are obvious untruths.
It's difficult enough to get sensible advice based on a single version of enents ....[/QUOTE]
I agree, I also note the insurers have suggested 50/50, and these sort of incidents often go that way due to the cost of processing the claim.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.5K Spending & Discounts
- 247.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards