Naming of Insured Driver in accident

StripeyUk

Hi
First post here, so please be gentle, or point me to relevant historical discussion if needs be!
While parked on Private Land (a car park for a block of flats) a driver reversed into my parked car. (causing several £'000 of damage). Yes it was within the parking space!
They got out examined the damage (so clearly identifiable on the CCTV - as a Female).
They failed to report the damage/accident or to leave any note, it was only luck that CCTV captured the events.
askMID provided the insurance details, and the insurer have now replied saying that without the "name" of the driver, as per Cameron V Liverpool Victoria, they will not accept any claim.

They claim their policy holder denies being involved, but this might be a named driver. They have been sent the CCTV and there is no doubt about the liability.

I have now reported the incident to the police (but they appear to treat this with low priority due to time passed and no personal injury), so still waiting for any personal contact and update on the matter. The Police have powers under the RTA (Section 172) to request the drivers details at the time, or indeed match the CCTV to a face present if they attend the Registered keepers address. Lots of less than certain if's and time delays.

I have sent a V888 to DVLA, which I hope to hear back in the next 14days ...

but if this comes back as a Male owner, then what are my options?

Do I have any legal right or ability to request the details from either the Registered Keeper or the insurer?
under pre-action discovery pursuant to Civil Procedure Rules r. 31.16

or a Norwich Pharmacal orders (NPO) - is this going to be possible against the insurer, who would become party to the litigation once the identity is confirmed, and the party is indeed covered un the insurance policy? Also would a judge allow use of this for such a matter?

or via Freedom of information somehow from the insurer?

Am I missing some simple remedy, where I can formally ask the insurer to confirm who the policy holder states was driving the vehicle? They have not said it was stolen or TWC.

It's a shame that the insurer is shielding and aiding/abetting their policyholder to frustrate a genuine claim, so any advice or pointers greatly appreciated

Thanks in advance

Car_54

StripeyUk wrote: »

I have now reported the incident to the police (but they appear to treat this with low priority due to time passed and no personal injury), so still waiting for any personal contact and update on the matter. The Police have powers under the RTA (Section 172) to request the drivers details at the time, or indeed match the CCTV to a face present if they attend the Registered keepers address. Lots of less than certain if's and time delays.

The police's powers under s172 only apply if certain offences are alleged. AFAIK all of those offences (and specifically failure to stop and report) apply only on "a road or public place".
Their ability (or willingness) to act may therefore hinge on whether the car park can be regarded as accesible by the public.

Ant555

I have now reported the incident to the police

Have you reported it to your insurer yet?

StripeyUk

Ant555 wrote: »

Have you reported it to your insurer yet?

I would rather not involve my own insurer due to potential adverse premium and risk assessments, as well as loss of NCD. The vehicle was not being driven.

Car_54 wrote: »

The police's powers under s172 only apply if certain offences are alleged. AFAIK all of those offences (and specifically failure to stop and report) apply only on "a road or public place".
Their ability (or willingness) to act may therefore hinge on whether the car park can be regarded as accesible by the public.

The vehicle was parked in a car park (a public place I would argue, but that could be questioned or open to interpretation), so hopefully they will be helpful (fingers crossed!) and treat it as a Pulic Place.

If no help/relief from the police under s172 then in effect I would be in the same situation as had a driver reversing into my garage door or any other property. The crime in that instance could be “criminal damage”, regardless of where the damage was (private property, public space, or public road), I assume this would allow the police to question the Registered keeper to obtain the drivers identity? (without the full force of s172) but would the keeper realise or indeed be prepared to hide the perpatrator faced with a policeperson at their door? With the aid of a photo of teh driver it becomes good old invistagion work?

My concern is if insurers start to rely unilaterally on "Cameron V Liverpool Victoria" where identification is not about a stolen car, driven by persons truly unknown, but a policy holder or named driver, where the driver is not provable beyond all doubt (identical twins, or even just denied, on the basis the burden of proof needed so “make them prove it”) then even with photographic evidence of the driver (as I have). without corresponding Photo ID (name and picture matching) the default response might be a burden of proof that is both costly, time consuming, and less than 100% reliable.

I am interested to understand from a civil perspective what remedies are available to me, to seek disclosure of the perpetrator’s identity!

Once I have the Registered Keeper information, if the Police have failed to take action, I can hire a private detective/investigator to attempt to confirm if one of the occupiers of that address are the person pictured, but that still fails to prove a name, although I'm sure a reputable quality investigator would not stumble at that point.
However, if the driver is a relative/friend who was named, albeit for a short period, or did not or no longer lives at the same address as the Registered keeper, then the timeframe and cost to trace becomes onerous.

While not expecting a majic wand, I had hoped there was some well trodden route to obtain disclosure,,,, ?
Thanks

Car_54

StripeyUk wrote: »

I would rather not involve my own insurer due to potential adverse premium and risk assessments, as well as loss of NCD.

You're seeking a pecuniary advantage by failing to disclose information. That is fraud.


In any event, you are obliged to advise your insurers, whether you claim or not. And if you eventually succeed against the TP's insurer, your own insurer will find out anyway.

spadoosh

StripeyUk wrote: »

I would rather not involve my own insurer due to potential adverse premium and risk assessments, as well as loss of NCD. The vehicle was not being driven.


The vehicle was parked in a car park (a public place I would argue, but that could be questioned or open to interpretation), so hopefully they will be helpful (fingers crossed!) and treat it as a Pulic Place.

If no help/relief from the police under s172 then in effect I would be in the same situation as had a driver reversing into my garage door or any other property. The crime in that instance could be “criminal damage”, regardless of where the damage was (private property, public space, or public road), I assume this would allow the police to question the Registered keeper to obtain the drivers identity? (without the full force of s172) but would the keeper realise or indeed be prepared to hide the perpatrator faced with a policeperson at their door? With the aid of a photo of teh driver it becomes good old invistagion work?

My concern is if insurers start to rely unilaterally on "Cameron V Liverpool Victoria" where identification is not about a stolen car, driven by persons truly unknown, but a policy holder or named driver, where the driver is not provable beyond all doubt (identical twins, or even just denied, on the basis the burden of proof needed so “make them prove it”) then even with photographic evidence of the driver (as I have). without corresponding Photo ID (name and picture matching) the default response might be a burden of proof that is both costly, time consuming, and less than 100% reliable.

I am interested to understand from a civil perspective what remedies are available to me, to seek disclosure of the perpetrator’s identity!

Once I have the Registered Keeper information, if the Police have failed to take action, I can hire a private detective/investigator to attempt to confirm if one of the occupiers of that address are the person pictured, but that still fails to prove a name, although I'm sure a reputable quality investigator would not stumble at that point.
However, if the driver is a relative/friend who was named, albeit for a short period, or did not or no longer lives at the same address as the Registered keeper, then the timeframe and cost to trace becomes onerous.

While not expecting a majic wand, I had hoped there was some well trodden route to obtain disclosure,,,, ?
Thanks

So you pay your insurance company hundreds of pounds a year just in case someone hits you. So that you can choose not to use them when you need them.

They do all the work for you.

Lets assume you cant trace the person, youre either paying to hav eit repaired out of your own pocket or have a beat up car. Because you dont want to pay what will be at very most a couple of hundred quid this year until you renew, shop elsewhere and find out your paying less than you where last year.

All the best on learning how to be an insurance company because you wont use your insurance company, who you pay, to insure you, for situations like this.

a.turner

StripeyUk wrote: »

I would rather not involve my own insurer due to potential adverse premium and risk assessments, as well as loss of NCD. The vehicle was not being driven.


The vehicle was parked in a car park (a public place I would argue, but that could be questioned or open to interpretation), so hopefully they will be helpful (fingers crossed!) and treat it as a Pulic Place.

If no help/relief from the police under s172 then in effect I would be in the same situation as had a driver reversing into my garage door or any other property. The crime in that instance could be “criminal damage”, regardless of where the damage was (private property, public space, or public road), I assume this would allow the police to question the Registered keeper to obtain the drivers identity? (without the full force of s172) but would the keeper realise or indeed be prepared to hide the perpatrator faced with a policeperson at their door? With the aid of a photo of teh driver it becomes good old invistagion work?

My concern is if insurers start to rely unilaterally on "Cameron V Liverpool Victoria" where identification is not about a stolen car, driven by persons truly unknown, but a policy holder or named driver, where the driver is not provable beyond all doubt (identical twins, or even just denied, on the basis the burden of proof needed so “make them prove it”) then even with photographic evidence of the driver (as I have). without corresponding Photo ID (name and picture matching) the default response might be a burden of proof that is both costly, time consuming, and less than 100% reliable.

I am interested to understand from a civil perspective what remedies are available to me, to seek disclosure of the perpetrator’s identity!

Once I have the Registered Keeper information, if the Police have failed to take action, I can hire a private detective/investigator to attempt to confirm if one of the occupiers of that address are the person pictured, but that still fails to prove a name, although I'm sure a reputable quality investigator would not stumble at that point.
However, if the driver is a relative/friend who was named, albeit for a short period, or did not or no longer lives at the same address as the Registered keeper, then the timeframe and cost to trace becomes onerous.

While not expecting a majic wand, I had hoped there was some well trodden route to obtain disclosure,,,, ?
Thanks

Unless it can be shown it was an intentional act to damage the door then it would be the same as hitting your car, an accident.

Being careless when reversing isn't a willful act and is careless driving si not reckless.

MovingForwards

Only once did I ever issue court proceedings against a vehicle owner, as much as they tried to defend it there was one case law which I relied on all the way through for the client.

Just put it through your insurance company, get your car repaired and let their panel solicitors do the work to recover the outlay and your UILs.

StripeyUk

Car_54 wrote: »

You're seeking a pecuniary advantage by failing to disclose information. That is fraud.
In any event, you are obliged to advise your insurers, whether you claim or not. And if you eventually succeed against the TP's insurer, your own insurer will find out anyway.

I have an insurance policy that covers cars I am driving, I was not driving it. It's not fraud and I have no need to disclose to my insurers. The vehicle is not listed on the insurance policy, was parked on private property albeit with public access.

I believe the policy I have will not cover the damage, as I was not in the vehicle. The circumstances would be the same if I had a TPFT policy.

However, the thread is not about why or if I report to my insurance company etc, or moral judgement when only part of the facts are in evidence.

Respectfully, the question being posed is about the ability to trace and if needed gain disclosure about the tortfeasor who damaged my property (regardless of being a vehicle, but in this case it was).

While I appreciate the time some have taken to reply, I'm only asking for specific information about how to identify the person who DROVE INTO MY PROPERTY. Your views on my use of time or otherwise are not constructive to the question asked.

I hope that helps clarify things, but the I feel replies are going off topic, and I'd rather try to keep it to the specific and narrow area of interest. I hope you understand!
:huh::huh::huh:

a.turner

StripeyUk wrote: »

I have an insurance policy that covers cars I am driving, I was not driving it. It's not fraud and I have no need to disclose to my insurers. The vehicle is not listed on the insurance policy, was parked on private property albeit with public access.

I believe the policy I have will not cover the damage, as I was not in the vehicle. The circumstances would be the same if I had a TPFT policy.

However, the thread is not about why or if I report to my insurance company etc, or moral judgement when only part of the facts are in evidence.

Respectfully, the question being posed is about the ability to trace and if needed gain disclosure about the tortfeasor who damaged my property (regardless of being a vehicle, but in this case it was).

While I appreciate the time some have taken to reply, I'm only asking for specific information about how to identify the person who DROVE INTO MY PROPERTY. Your views on my use of time or otherwise are not constructive to the question asked.

I hope that helps clarify things, but the I feel replies are going off topic, and I'd rather try to keep it to the specific and narrow area of interest. I hope you understand!
:huh::huh::huh:

So you only have cover for cars you own and are driving at the time?

Sounds like third party fire and theft.

So what insurance was covering the vehicle at the time? Given you want it to be a public place and have involved the police.

Nearly_Old

StripeyUk wrote: »

Respectfully, the question being posed is about the ability to trace and if needed gain disclosure about the tortfeasor who damaged my property (regardless of being a vehicle, but in this case it was)

Respectfully the quickest way is to report the incident to your insurers, make a claim on your insurance, get your car repaired and let your insurers identify and recover the costs from the 3rd party that caused the damage. This works cars, houses, etc/