Ethnic origin of the driver???????

dvd

I am not clear on the circumstances. Did he pull across your path and you crashed into him or did you just run into the back of him as he suddenly turned left? Old damage is relatively easy to spot and your accident investigator should pick up on any previous damage and it should be excluded from any claim - if there is a claim against you. Whether it is be a scam or not? I don't currently have enough information to express an opinion but insurance scams don't usually involve a disputed manoeuvre leading to a damage-only claim on an old car where there are no witnesses.

Hi, Lucy BC. He suddenly pulled across the road just in front of me and stopped. In over 50 years driving I have not seen anything like it. His considerable damage was still bright metal, but could have been two or three weeks old. His attitude did not encourage me to look closely. My "damage" is small paint chips. If an assessor gets a look at both cars, my chances ought to be good. I quite agree that the lack of witnesses (so far!!) is curious for a scam, but surely many scams of this type would involve a disputed manoeuvre? To the other reply, there were no ethnic considerations. Thanks for your interest. --- Aulusplautius

I can now give the outcome of this incident. I sent full details of the incident to my insurance agent, with a diagram and photos of my car with its two little paint chips, giving reasons for my virtual certainty that this was an intentional collision. There was a sensible reply. Some days later, I had a letter from a firm of solicitors stating intention to claim for damage to the Audi (presumably would be a write-off, so cash), lost time, and hire car. I was accused of going too fast and not braking adequately (both entirely untrue). I sent the letter to my insurance agent without replying to it. After about four weeks, I had a phone call from my insurance agent saying that the Audi driver had withdrawn from the case and my NCB was intact. So everything is nuw OK apart from the trouble and worry, and I have touched in my little paint chips! It was actually quite interesting, though, he could have no witness with him in the car, by the way, as his pre-existing damage was by the passenger door. Also, he was probably not the car owner as he was unsure of "his" address, I suppose the owner would do the paperwork while the driver did the action bit.

Back in January we received a visit from a local PC at 11:30 on a Sat night, advising my husband his car had been in a collision the week before and that he had left the scene. This was news to us, although my husband HAD been in next town at the time and date in question. The PC inspected the car and agreed that it was pristine and obviously hadn't been in an accident.

We then received a letter from Direct Line, third party insurer, advising they were claiming from us. We reported to our insurer, Churchill.
We have received letter and documents from "COGENT LAW, Part of the Parabis Group" which we have forwarded to Churchill.

Today Churchill advised they may have our vehicle inspected, which we welcome, but part of me fears our car being damaged as part of this scam, as it's parked outside our house on main road, third party knows our address and lives not far away.

What does third party hope to gain from this?

Many thanks

You also have the evidence of the police officer who inspected your car when he visited you.

Sorry to hear that you've been an intended victim of low-life, dishonest, money grabbing scum. Just remember that you also have their address....