Bongo Fury

A more likely explanation in my experience is just that the Police can't be a&$ed to do anything about it.

scanner wrote:A more likely explanation in my experience is just that the Police can't be a&$ed to do anything about it.

Indeed. But does the injured party have any right to press charges regardless?

Hi
Mike...
I guess that once you've verified that a driver of another vehicle has been the culprit of damage to yours, then you have the right to chase them for the funds to repair, but charges would have to come from the police, and they're in the hands of the CPS, who might have other ideas as to where to spend public funds...
Cheers
Helen

helen&tony wrote:Hi
Mike...
I guess that once you've verified that a driver of another vehicle has been the culprit of damage to yours, then you have the right to chase them for the funds to repair, but charges would have to come from the police, and they're in the hands of the CPS, who might have other ideas as to where to spend public funds...
Cheers
Helen

Rather suspected as much, though needing to make an example of those who attempt to avoid their legal obligation should count for something (ah yes, the 'should' word again hey ho).

Hi
They had all the answers years ago...such miscreants should be popped in the stocks!
Cheers
Helen

Ah yes, the Criminal Protection Service.

Not enough evidence... Not in the public interest...

Bob wrote:Ah yes, the Criminal Protection Service.

Not enough evidence... Not in the public interest...

Why don't they fleece them with a 'How to stay at the scene of your crime' course like they do with those hapless motorists who did 36mph in a 30mph zone.

mikeonb4c wrote:

scanner wrote:A more likely explanation in my experience is just that the Police can't be a&$ed to do anything about it.

Indeed. But does the injured party have any right to press charges regardless?

If there is a breach of a Statutory Duty ( in this case leaving the scene without reporting) then the Attending/investigating police officer had a duty to bring a charge/prosecute/caution (not the defendant) I agree that sometimes the police have to be made to do something because if there is no smoking gun then they do not want to waste the time on it.

Also if you ask the police to investigate where and if you feel a crime has been committed then they have a legal duty to do so regardless of what they think.

ELZE wrote:

mikeonb4c wrote:

scanner wrote:A more likely explanation in my experience is just that the Police can't be a&$ed to do anything about it.

Indeed. But does the injured party have any right to press charges regardless?

If there is a breach of a Statutory Duty ( in this case leaving the scene without reporting) then the Attending/investigating police officer had a duty to bring a charge/prosecute/caution (not the defendant) I agree that sometimes the police have to be made to do something because if there is no smoking gun then they do not want to waste the time on it.

Also if you ask the police to investigate where and if you feel a crime has been committed then they have a legal duty to do so regardless of what they think.

Thanks ELZE.

So there's something the miscreant could have held over their head if they don't cough up for damage caused

Note about having work carried out without involving the insurance companies.

Please be aware if you do not involve the insurance company when settling the claim yourself, remember in any future insurance correspondence if you mention that you've been involved in an accident but not informed them. They can class your current policy as null & void as you are obliged to inform them of any incident. Their argument is that if they had know of the incident it may well have loaded your policy. Therefore the policy isn't reflecting the risk & could be null & void. So keep stum about it if you do it that way.
I was recently listening to a radio program about insurance. A driver had his car broken into & radio stolen. As there was little damage done & the radio was not worth much he didn't claim on his insurance. Weeks later the thieves returned and this time did significant damage to his car stealing the replacement radio. He put in a claim on this occasion, and unfortunately mentioned to the assessor that this was the second time it had happened. The insures refused his claim & cancelled his policy on the grounds that had they have know of the previous incident his policy would have been adjusted to reflect the risk.
So be warned.

Cheers.

windywatson wrote:Note about having work carried out without involving the insurance companies.

Please be aware if you do not involve the insurance company when settling the claim yourself, remember in any future insurance correspondence if you mention that you've been involved in an accident but not informed them. They can class your current policy as null & void as you are obliged to inform them of any incident. Their argument is that if they had know of the incident it may well have loaded your policy. Therefore the policy isn't reflecting the risk & could be null & void. So keep stum about it if you do it that way.
I was recently listening to a radio program about insurance. A driver had his car broken into & radio stolen. As there was little damage done & the radio was not worth much he didn't claim on his insurance. Weeks later the thieves returned and this time did significant damage to his car stealing the replacement radio. He put in a claim on this occasion, and unfortunately mentioned to the assessor that this was the second time it had happened. The insures refused his claim & cancelled his policy on the grounds that had they have know of the previous incident his policy would have been adjusted to reflect the risk.
So be warned.

Cheers.

Good points. Is this though not more a concern for the one needing to claim/notify their insurer? Granted both parties ought really to notify, and maybe the injured party should just to cover themselves, but could the injured parties insurers have any grounds for upping the premium when the injured insured has not contributed in any way to the accident? then again I suppose they could say that they must always be sighted if the insured expects to make any subsequent claim linked to the accident

I think that you will find, hidden somewhere in your policy, that you are obliged to notify them of any accident regardless of fault whether you think you should or not.

I would never accept any offer to have work done without informing insurance company. Your insurer covers all legal costs and could assist to get back any uninsured losses. On the other hand if you accept their there is no guarantee or come back if the work is of poor quality.

Have to say, I took that risk and 6 years later its not come back to bite me. The way I looked at it, it was my way of recognising that at least they did stop, own up and offer to pay. They weren't well off and I had a lot of personal sympathy for them and could see they were very worried about their (commercial, van) premium going up.

The decision must be left to the injured party of course, and in this case the norty person didn't stop so my sympathies would be limited (or non existant), so maybe the insurance route is best