Witness refused to give contact details

sevenhills

DUTR wrote: »

Well they are not going to say they reversed into the path of a moving vehicle :eek:

Maybe, if the damage was closer to the end of the car, but the damage was a door.

DUTR

sevenhills wrote: »

Maybe, if the damage was closer to the end of the car, but the damage was a door.

I'm not saying that the OP indeed did reverse into the path of a moving vehicle, but it cannot be ruled out, there is a high probability that the course of events are as the Op described, but we are not the underwriters that are saving outlay.

Tigsteroonie

Presumably the OP and the 3rd party where perpendicular when the damage occurred, so the dent would reflect that. If the OP were to be the one reversing and the 3rd party coming straight down the carriageway, then it is very unlikely the OP would be reversing straight (they'd be turning the car) so not perpendicular, and the dent would be deeper on one side than the other.

AndyMc.....

Tigsteroonie wrote: »

Presumably the OP and the 3rd party where perpendicular when the damage occurred, so the dent would reflect that. If the OP were to be the one reversing and the 3rd party coming straight down the carriageway, then it is very unlikely the OP would be reversing straight (they'd be turning the car) so not perpendicular, and the dent would be deeper on one side than the other.

Makes no difference, it'll be cheaper 50:50 than to fight it and it's one word against the other.

Joe_Horner

foxy-stoat wrote: »

Fair enough, never been a witness yet - waiting for an accident to happen in front of me and I can sell the dash camera footage for a few stirlings !!

Or not, seeing as it's a more than fair bet that any footage of any accident would show potential fault on both sides

stukno

Isn't it possible to challenge the 50/50 decision by referencing the nature and position of the damage?? How is this said to be the fault of the OP if the damage is in he side of his car and on the rear of the other car. Cars don't move sideways

loskie

you cannot seriously expect a 12 yr old to be a credible witness, even if it were legal which I suspect it is not.
The father cannot be witness if he did not witness it!!

You are unfortunately clutching at straws.

AndyMc.....

loskie wrote: »

you cannot seriously expect a 12 yr old to be a credible witness, even if it were legal which I suspect it is not.
The father cannot be witness if he did not witness it!!

You are unfortunately clutching at straws.

It's not illegal for a 12 year old to be a witness.

wgl2014

AndyMc..... wrote: »

It's not illegal for a 12 year old to be a witness.

Depends what they are witnessing! (Gets coat).

James2k

I feel like it's exceptionally douchey to refuse your details when someone needs your help in a matter such as this.

If i couldn't help someone out with a few minutes of my time to write a statement or talk to the insurer then i'd have a bit of self reflecting to do.