Problem with the police

Honest John Back Room » Legal matters
What is life like with your car? Let us know and win £500 in John Lewis vouchers | No thanks
View Threaded
Wed 16 Feb 2011 17:49
Problem with the police - D P Dance

Just before Christmas a car crashed into my front garden wall, causing considerable damage to it. Although severely damaged, (no head lights), the car drove off at high speed and was abandoned 100 yards away. The tax disc was 6 months out of date.

The police have provided me with the name of the registered keeper/owner, but are unable or unwilling to name the driver, or provide any insurance details. Although my home insurace covers this, I have a £250 excess and would no doubt lose my NCD if I am forced to make a claim. I am also up to speed on the MIB uninsured Drivers Compensation Scheme.

Despite the fact that two offences have been committed under Road Traffic Acts, and perhaps several more, (it is unlikely that the driver had a licence or insurance, the police say that they are unlikely to bring any charges, although the owner of the vehicle is “well known to them”, (he deals in scrap metal).

I realise that the police are reluctant to have contact with members of certain oppressed communities, from which I believe the RK hails, but I cannot but feel that my human rights may be being overlooked I am white and middle class.

I am mindful to ask the Independent Police Complaints Commission to investigate the TVP's conduct of this matter in order to ensure that they are not favouring certain communities above others.

Has any other motorist suffered here as a result of the police acting in this way?

Edited by D P Dance on 16/02/2011 at 17:55

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 17 Feb 2011 07:16
Problem with the police - LucyBC

If the vehicle was insured - even if the driver wasn't - then it is a straight claim against any insurance policy in force on the vehicle. If it was not insured then there may be an MIB claim but you cannot bring an MIB claim for damage only if the driver is untraced.

From a police point of view it doesn't matter if it was a drunken businessman or a traveller, if they legged it then it is unlikely they have any evidence who was driving. You might seek to imply that because the owner was a traveller that makes it likely he committed the offence but that is hardly going to stand up in court.

No doubt your "problem with the police" is that they are not investigating this further. The chances are they more things to worry about than a minor road traffic accident involving a single vehicle where no one was hurt - which will almost certainly not lead to a conviction in any event.

It's not a comment on your social standing or an unwillingness to investigate crimes undertaken by members of various ethnic, social or racial groups, which they will do on a daily basis.

Edited by LucyBC on 17/02/2011 at 07:28

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 17 Feb 2011 07:39
Problem with the police - Dwight Van Driver

I share your frustration but until such time as the registered Keeper is made responsible for acts and omissions made by the driver incidents like this will continue.

dvd

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 17 Feb 2011 07:47
Problem with the police - LucyBC
I have a very similar case at the moment where a (middle class) son probably took his friend's out for a jaunt in his mother's car (while she was away) and smashed it through a field hedge into one our fields getting bogged down in the mud.

At least that my suspicion as to happened and is the turn of events believed in the local pub, but I have no evidence.

The mother reported the vehicle stolen (the insurer won't pay out because the driver clearly had the keys). The son says he was in bed. The police aren't investigating that case either.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 17 Feb 2011 09:45
Problem with the police - D P Dance

If the vehicle was insured - even if the driver wasn't - then it is a straight claim against any insurance

Are you sure? MUI that the insurance cover may be negated if driver is dwi, banned, driving off road, unlicenced, left on a driveway with the engine running, left at a petrol station with the keys in the ignition, racing or rallying, driving without mot, with bald tyres, etc., etc., etc.

... you cannot bring an MIB claim for damage only if the driver is untraced.#

The RK has named a driver, but the police will not tell me who he is as that are sure that the RK did not fill in the form, and the driver named will produce a witnesses to say he was elsewhere. These people are used to leading the police up the garden path.

From a police point of view it doesn't matter if it was a drunken businessman or a traveller,

if they legged it then it is unlikely they have any evidence who was driving. You might seek to imply that because the owner was a traveller that makes it likely he committed the offence but that is hardly going to stand up in court.

True

No doubt your "problem with the police" is that they are not investigating this further. The chances are they more things to worry about than a minor road traffic accident involving a single vehicle where no one was hurt - which will almost certainly not lead to a conviction in any event..

Part of me, that which pays police salaries, agrees with you, but another part, middle class law abiding citizen, does not.

It's not a comment on your social standing or an unwillingness to investigate crimes undertaken by members of various ethnic, social or racial groups, which they will do on a daily basis.

It is precisely that!

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 17 Feb 2011 13:03
Problem with the police - LucyBC
MIB only kicks in as insurer of last resort if there is no cover whatsoever in place so even if the vehicle is stolen (but insured) the insurance on the vehicle has to settle the non-fault third party claim, not the MIB.

Normally the MIB will not provide cover if the vehicle and driver are untraced and the incident is "damage only". They will provide cover on an untraced driver case if there is an injury involved.

An insurer will not (or may not) settle the **at-fault** driver's claim if there has been negligence, as might be the case with a drunk, keys in the car etc.

Negligence would not normally include no MOT - if the vehicle is roadworthy (whether it has an MOT or not) it is almost certainly covered. Bald tyres are more difficult as they are usually argued to be contributory in a moving vehicle case, but if a parked vehicle has bald tyres and is struck by another moving vehicle then bald tyres would not affect the liability which would be 100% with the moving vehicle.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 17 Feb 2011 15:00
Problem with the police - D P Dance

MIB only kicks in as insurer of last resort if there is no cover whatsoever in place so even if the vehicle is stolen (but insured) the insurance on the vehicle has to settle the non-fault third party claim, not the MIB.

But, as I have already stated, the police think that the vehicle was almost certainly uninsured. They are reluctant to tell me whether the car was insured or not.

My home insurers are perfectly willing to pay for repairs to the wall, but I shall have to pay £250 excess, and, no doubt, lose by ncd.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 17 Feb 2011 15:10
Problem with the police - LucyBC
Uninsured vehicle + no injury + disappeared driver = you pay for the repair or claim on your own insurance.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 17 Feb 2011 15:41
Problem with the police - D P Dance
Uninsured vehicle + no injury + disappeared driver = you pay for the repair or claim on your own insurance.

Are you sure about that?

As the collision occurred after 14th February 2003, and given that the vehicle has been identified, would not the claim fall to be considered under the Untraced Drivers Agreement 2003. Furthermore, as far as I am aware the driver has not disappeared, he is the brother of the registered keeper, and the police know where he lives.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 17 Feb 2011 16:17
Problem with the police - LucyBC
Sorry, too busy here at the moment and I was diverted by the phone which meant my editing time ran out.

Should have read:

Uninsured vehicle + no injury + disappeared driver = you pay for the repair or claim on your own insurance who claim against MIB. Claim is subject to MIB excess of £300. Your insurer charges you the first £250 of the claim and recovers any losses they face north of £300 from MIB (albeit probably several months later).

At this stage I think that the legal position is the driver is untraced.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 17 Feb 2011 16:36
Problem with the police - D P Dance

... At this stage I think that the legal position is the driver is untraced.

Thank you, I shall continue to put pressue on the police to provide me with the name of the driver.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link

We give you the low down on how to save on insurance, little-known tricks and tips, what insurance groups mean and how to use insurance aggregators to beat insurers.

Insurance group finder and how to save on insurance