Being taken to court over mistaken identity

AdrianC

Mr_D said:

I presume insurance companies can only search for a vehicle's insurer by plate and need to contact them to get the policyholder, so without a postal address it could be a needle in a haystack search?

DVLA registered keeper details, of course.

And in cases where the perpetrator can't be traced, which I understand still get paid out (assuming fully comp) but with loss of NCB, can the claimant hold out indefinitely while the other party is sought or do they at some point have to take it or lose it? At which point the subsequent outcome becomes irrelevant to the claimant (unless NCB can be reinstated).

Who's funding the court claim? The driver/keeper of the other car? Or their insurer...?

Their insurer can pull the plug at any time - and will do at the point they decide it's cheaper to just pay the damn claim themselves than try to chase mist.

But if it the driver/keeper themselves... Some people will go to the point of personal financial ruination in search of proving a point of principle...

MEM62

OP, the approach here is simple.  You do not have to prove your innocence. 
You go back and state that you were not involved in this incident and ask that the claimant provides any evidence that they claim to have to the contrary.  I have deal with two of these cases recently in respect of our fleet at work.  One even had a photo of the registration number of what was alleged to be our car.  The fact that is was taken so close that the actual car could not be identified and the fact that, at the time of the incident, ours was sitting under a CCTV camera settled the issue.  In another incident a woman claimed to have been hit by one of our vans.  The was present when and when she said it was but had no damage.  She subsequently made three claims though her insurers and two other parties and on each occasion her account of the story and dame to her vehicle were vastly different.  Our underwriters had no problems rejecting her claim and all the threats of legal action were hot air. 
Your insurers should be accustomed to dealing with such spurious claims.   

kmb500

I would relax and try to stop worrying. Courts are there for a reason and they work. If you were not in an incident then I doubt the court will find you guilty because there will be no evidence. Zero. By definition there cannot be any evidence for it, if it did not happen. And if no evidence, then no chance the court will agree that it happened.

AdrianC

 MEM62 said:

OP, the approach here is simple.  You do not have to prove your innocence. 
You go back and state that you were not involved in this incident and ask that the claimant provides any evidence that they claim to have to the contrary.    

kmb500 said:

I would relax and try to stop worrying. Courts are there for a reason and they work. If you were not in an incident then I doubt the court will find you guilty because there will be no evidence. Zero. By definition there cannot be any evidence for it, if it did not happen. And if no evidence, then no chance the court will agree that it happened.

Don't forget that this is merely a civil claim, not criminal - so the court are PURELY addressing the balance of probabilities, not beyond reasonable doubt.

MysteryMe

Just as a learning point future re securing CCTV evidence. Even though your workplace cameras are wiped after a couple of days there may be businesses nearby that might have captured your car on the road  arriving for work or leaving and who keep images for 30 days.  Always worth asking, they can only say no.