Trace driver details

DiddyDavies

williamgriffin said:

DiddyDavies said:

williamgriffin said:

DiddyDavies said:

williamgriffin said:

Without damage or injury there is no accident to stop for or report.

But there was damage. Just because this was cleaned up doesn't mean that no damage occurred.

neilmcl said:

Fortunately it looked far worse than it was and turned out just to be paint transfer, I managed to polish it out.

Don't mean his paint work was damaged. 

Of course it was damaged. If paint from another vehicle went onto the OP's car, damage occurred.
I would have thought that someone such as yourself who keeps posting about the law would know the legal definition of damage.

 I stand corrected you were certain it was damage. Then you changed to it may well be, sound like you possibly not so certain anymore. 

No, you still don't seem understand written English.
I am certain that it was damage and that it may not have been permanent damage but that it may not be classed as damage under the RTA.
I honestly think that you are simply a troll looking for a reaction and because of that, I'll leave you to it. 

williamgriffin

DiddyDavies said:

williamgriffin said:

DiddyDavies said:

williamgriffin said:

DiddyDavies said:

williamgriffin said:

Without damage or injury there is no accident to stop for or report.

But there was damage. Just because this was cleaned up doesn't mean that no damage occurred.

neilmcl said:

Fortunately it looked far worse than it was and turned out just to be paint transfer, I managed to polish it out.

Don't mean his paint work was damaged. 

Of course it was damaged. If paint from another vehicle went onto the OP's car, damage occurred.
I would have thought that someone such as yourself who keeps posting about the law would know the legal definition of damage.

 I stand corrected you were certain it was damage. Then you changed to it may well be, sound like you possibly not so certain anymore. 

No, you still don't seem understand written English.
I am certain that it was damage and that it may not have been permanent damage but that it may not be classed as damage under the RTA.
I honestly think that you are simply a troll looking for a reaction and because of that, I'll leave you to it. 

So to sum it up when it comes to this thread, you're not sure if his car was damaged in relation to the relevant legislation. I agree you best leave it at that.

ontheroad1970

The car WAS damaged.  The OP repaired it.  Doesn't change the fact that it was damaged.