Wife being fobbed off by the police?

[recycled]

Rather than taking it out on the coppers who after all have to do as they are told, perhaps we should focus more on the idiots that created this ridiculous situation.

And the stupid justice system that frustrates the coppers even more.
you arrest someone. fill in tons of paperwork , appear in court as a witness and nothing happens.

 

[Swiss Toni]

Last week while my wife was at the gym, another visitor to the gym hit her parked car and shunted it half a car length into the front of another parked car before driving off, leaving the scene of the accident.

The damage is quite substantial and her car (being 9 years old) will probably be a write off. One must assume there would be an equal amount of damage to the other car, especially since it was a little Toyota Yaris. Luckily however, there was a witness to the event who came forward provided all the details of the can and her contact number. This was a welcome relief especially as my wife only has TPF&T insurance.

So armed with the details of the registration number of other the car involved, the witness details etc, my wife immediately went to the local police station to report the incident. She was told that the police would leave it 24 hours (allowing for the 24 hour rule to report the accident) and then visit the owner of the car who was local and go from there. She was told she'd get a letter within five days from the police updating her on the position and providing a crime reference. So far so good.

Anyway, a week later and a week without the use of the car and we've heard nothing. So wifey again went down the police station only to be told that the owner of said car will be sent a letter sometime over the next two months.... no visit from the cops, just a letter from some traffic department based in Kent (not local). The police were very blase bout the whole thing, pretty much saying no-one was injured so what's the big deal.

Frankly I'm gobsmacked. Is this what our police service has come to? All it would have taken was ten minutes of a police officers time to drop round to the address corresponding to the registration number and follow it up, it is a local driver after all allegedly. In two months time the damage to the other car will have likely been repaired and all allegations will likely be denied.

So far I've kept out of this but I am furious at this utterly useless response from the Police, and think that a formal complaint should be lodged. Maybe then, someone might actually do something.

Has anyone else had a similar response from the police with a hit and run or is wifey being royally fobbed off by people who don't give a toss?

Spike

Sorry to hear about your wides experience - that the cops have'nt filled her with confidence compounds the situation.

This is something that occurs every day and is bread-and-butter stuff for the staff who work at Police Station front counters.

It is an opportunity for them to deal with you in a professional way and leave you with confidence that if you were involved in something more serious, they'd deal with that just as well. But they haven't.

I'd be surprised to find a cop behind the front desk of a Police Station (actually I'd be disappointed at the waste of a decent salary...) - most are (very capable) Police Staff.

Failing to report an accident is an offence, and in this case the fact that it is in a car park may have some significance, but only if access to the general public is restricted in some way.

To successfully prosecute the offence, it would have to be shown that the other driver knew there had been an accident (not as daft as it sounds, an HGV can cause a fair bit of damage without the driver realising) - but from what you say, that wouldn't be an issue.

You should have been given a reference number or at very least, sent one in the post. This would not be recorded as a crime immediately (and may not be recorded as a crime at all depending on the investigation).
This is unlikely to be Criminal Damage from what you say, it is a road traffic matter.

The investigation would most likely be completed in a standard format by Police Staff, not cops, sending standard letters and forms to you and to the keeper of the other vehicle.

If you have not got anything, contact the Collision Records Dept.

 

[Sp!ke]

next time just phone up and say i suspect a drunk driver crashed into my car. here is the reg. she staggered to her vehicle, could not drive in a straight line and smacked my car before driving off.
They will be at her address in seconds and since you said you suspected she was drunk, it will not be lies you are telling.
anyone who can not avoid cars in a parking lot is probably intoxicated anyway.

saw that on road wars by the way twice.
The response was instant. hefty fine instant ban.

Actually, I did say that the witness suggested the driver may have been drunk and it went no-where.

 

[glojo]

This is unlikely to be Criminal Damage from what you say, it is a road traffic matter.

I fully endorse all your points and my criminal damage remarks are personal thoughts and would never happen unless there was proof of ulterior motives. The way our laws are applied can be a complete donkey at times and little wonder we are getting so frustrated.

Going off topic for a second......

I steal a car, I have no driving licence, and obviously no insurance. I then kill a pedestrian on a zebra crossing. In my crazy little world I would charge myself with murder! Never mind the motoring aspect, never mind the intent, never mind whether I 'meant' to kill anyone. The facts in my world is that I had no licence, so I had no right to be driving and NO right to be on the road. I stole the car, so I had no right to be driving and I had no insurance so once again I had no right to be driving. If I have no rights to be on the road, no rights for being behind the wheel, then in my world I have no excuse, no defence for being on the road. I don't care what part the pedestrian played. In my world it is my actions that caused the death of someone and the car was simply the 'weapon'.

Motoring law is absolutely crazy especially the silly death by dangerous driving where you have to proof state of mind or intent regarding causing the death. Even when a conviction is obtained the sentence is an insult to the relatives of the deceased. I fully accept I am loco and this will never happen because we are already far too tough on crime and too tough on the causes of crime.

Police no longer want to know about non injury accident\incidents, but why don't they at the very least attend and check the details of all parties? We are continually hearing about 'crack-downs' and how they will be looking out for drivers that use parents to have them as named drivers etc etc. I would suggest checking out the details of drivers involved in accidents would prove to be very beneficial for everyone?

Just a Sunday afternoon rant as I lay here enveloped in 'orrible pain watching MotoGp

Poor old Rossi

Regards
John

 

[Sp!ke]

I don't agree with that, quite the contrary.

The law is the law and should be the law for everybody. In just the same way as you, arbitrarily and only based on your personal beliefs, find that you should not stick to the laws that all the rest of us have to adhere to, it would seem that the person that damaged your wife's car has an equal arbitrary belief that they should not stick to the part of the law that makes them take responsibility for their actions. It's a nice example of trying to have your cake and eat it.

You just can't have it both ways. If you want to have any argument that relies on the legal obligations of the other driver to leave details etc, then not respecting your own duties under the law is the best way to undermine that argument.

There are good reasons why number plates have to be a certain size, and why visors are subject to rules in the interest of visibility. These are emphatically not "victimless" offences, as they relate to the safety and security of other road users. In the case of the plate not in the least other road users' right to be able to identify a potential hit-and-run perpetrator as in the case of your wife's car. If that person would have had an illegible plate you might not even have been able to identify them.

All that being said, I have a lot of sympathy for your predicament - I would certainly be very annoyed too, would it happen to me. I don't wish this kind of thing upon anyone. I hope that it gets sorted out.

Now your just being difficult and deliberately argumentative.

If my numberplate was technically illegal but perfectly legible (such as having a welsh flag on it for instance) then there is no possibility potential victim of my crime.

Equally, if I am using a tinted visor during sunny daylight hours as opposed to wearing sunglasses, again I am technically breaking the law but by doing so I am making it safer for myself and other road users and once again there is no possibility of a potential victim of my crime.

Now if you or any other jobsworth in uniform can't see the difference between the above 'crimes' and one where the perpetrator caused harm or loss through deliberate actions then there's no point in any further debate with you. *plonk

Twist my words all you like but you are deluding yourself. There is no such thing as a crime where there is no possibility of a victim. Technically breaking the law, maybe but its not a crime.

If you abide by rules and laws without question then more fool you. I was brought up to engage brain.

 

[MBManInKen]

Try and engage your brain.

I'm sure everyone will be deeply impressed by your rational and factual arguments.

It appears I was right in the other thread when I suggested you prefer to play the man. Oh well, another one bites the dust .

 

[janner]

If your car was shunted into the one in front then your insurance company will have to pay out for that and will recover the cost from the other driver. If you have legal cover then use it, if not get a no-win-no-fee solicitor to recover the cost of your car (and other costs) at the same time.
The DVLA will supply you with the keeper's details if you need them.

 

[Sp!ke]

If your car was shunted into the one in front then your insurance company will have to pay out for that and will recover the cost from the other driver. If you have legal cover then use it, if not get a no-win-no-fee solicitor to recover the cost of your car (and other costs) at the same time.
The DVLA will supply you with the keeper's details if you need them.

I agree, but the car that was shunted was a 20 year old volvo with big metal sprung bumpers, no damage whatsoever.

 

[janner]

If it was me I would do several things.
1) Put on good suit and politely ask the police for the keeper's details. They might give you the details if you don't look like you're going to go round there with a baseball bat.

2) Buy baseball bat (I'm joking!)

3) Try again to get a copy of the cctv tape. If you can't then ask if you can photograph the screen with a 35mm camera.

4) Get details from DVLA if police won't oblige.

5) Doorstep the owner. Be very careful not to make any threats. This might work but even if it doesn't you get a feel for who you are dealing with and sometimes them just knowing that you can recognise them and where they live is enough.

6) Get a solicitor and hope for the best.

 

[Swiss Toni]

Double post (well, stuck in the post due to strike action )

 

[Swiss Toni]

You won't get the other drivers details from the cops.

They know that they will lose their job and many will know the case which resulted in a murder as a result of the illegal disclosure of such information.

If they give you the information, tell the other driver that you will both share the compensation as it is going to be far more than the value of the Toyota.



If you haven't got the letter from the Accident Records Dept, just contact them and chase it up.
(If they know nothing, call the local station and make an appointment to speak to anOfficer of Inspector rank or above).


TBH, it sounds like you have been the victim of incompetence or error (or, just possibly, the Postal Strike).

 

[verytalldave]

And what about if the OTHER driver is a cop?
Could that explain some of the points raised?
Its not impossible.

 

[Merc-C180K]

Apologies - I've not bothered reading the whole thread as I detected some of it was 'bickering' etc (no offense meant to any of the parties involved...)

You can always pursue a civil claim through the small claims courts for damage to your wifes car. The basics of the claim would be willful criminal damage to your property, stress, loss of earnings, cost of a hire car etc etc etc

I imagine it would be a fairly open and shut case but I'm no expert in these matters.

 

[prprandall51]

Why hound someone for having a tinted visor or slightly small numberplate when it a victimless crime. Whilst on the other hand not bother to pursue a matter when there is a clear victim of a much greater crime(potentially punishable by imprisonment) such as this?

I think it emphasises my previous point actually.

But small numberplates indicates (in many bikers) an intent to commit a crime (speeding) and attempt to get away with it.

But a tinted visor on a rider who then ploughs into an innocent pedestrian because he can't see him because he is obsessed with looking cool rather than riding carefully is a crime.

And a loud exhaust is also a crime - it comes under noise legislation.

What is a victimless crime exactly?

You want cops to have more time for the crimes that you don't like to see commited but less time for those you like to commit yourself.

 

[glojo]

Hi Sp!ke
I do hope you are sorting this out and not wasting your time making this a rant about the incompetance of the police? What steps have you taken to get renumeration from the guilty party?

Every day you leave this is a day wasted.

Please keep us informed and this question is from a friend and not someone out to score points.

Regards
John

 

[Merc-C180K]

Now your just being difficult and deliberately argumentative.

If my numberplate was technically illegal but perfectly legible (such as having a welsh flag on it for instance) then there is no possibility potential victim of my crime.

Equally, if I am using a tinted visor during sunny daylight hours as opposed to wearing sunglasses, again I am technically breaking the law but by doing so I am making it safer for myself and other road users and once again there is no possibility of a potential victim of my crime.

Now if you or any other jobsworth in uniform can't see the difference between the above 'crimes' and one where the perpetrator caused harm or loss through deliberate actions then there's no point in any further debate with you. *plonk

Twist my words all you like but you are deluding yourself. There is no such thing as a crime where there is no possibility of a victim. Technically breaking the law, maybe but its not a crime.

If you abide by rules and laws without question then more fool you. I was brought up to engage brain.

Erm unless I'm going slightly potty you've just contradicted yourself...

My advice...? Don't mention the fact you like hiding the number plate on your bike or have a penchant for wearing a tinted visor on your helmet.

The law is the law. Breaking the law is a crime. Simple.

I'll bet you are glad the car who knocked into your wifes had a normal sized number plate which was clearly visible though... I wonder if the driver's vision was obscured during the incident...? Oh the irony...

 

[Sp!ke]

May I kindly ask you to read through my post again where I specifically refer to riding in sunlight with a tinted visor and having a welsh flag on the numberplate.

I did not use an example of a small or illegible number plate nor one of riding in poor visibility with a tinted visor.

Now having re-read my post, how is your reference to obscured vision or small number-plates in any way pertinant, or in any way has a possibility of a potential victim of crime?

In future, please don't try to twist what I say in order to have a pop at me. By all means have a go with some facts behind you but using falsehoods in order to make your point is plain childish.

 

[Sp!ke]

Hi Sp!ke
I do hope you are sorting this out and not wasting your time making this a rant about the incompetance of the police? What steps have you taken to get renumeration from the guilty party?

Every day you leave this is a day wasted.

Please keep us informed and this question is from a friend and not someone out to score points.

Regards
John

I'm not having a rant at anyone John.

I've taken no steps whatsoever. My wife on the other hand is writing to the DVLA and has now got an insurance claim form to complete so her insurers can chase the other party. (They confirmed they will do this).

As for the police, were still waiting for even a crime reference number - I think I may pop down to the station tonight with my best public school accent and politely ask for them to look at the situation once more.

 

[Merc-C180K]

May I kindly ask you to read through my post again where I specifically refer to riding in sunlight with a tinted visor and having a welsh flag on the numberplate.

I did not use an example of a small or illegible number plate nor one of riding in poor visibility with a tinted visor.

Now having re-read my post, how is your reference to obscured vision or small number-plates in any way pertinant, or in any way has a possibility of a potential victim of crime?

In future, please don't try to twist what I say in order to have a pop at me. By all means have a go with some facts behind you but using falsehoods in order to make your point is plain childish.

Ah but no one twisted your words. If you 'kindly' re-read my post you would see that to be the case.

And yes you did make reference to riding within a tinted visor:

Equally, if I am using a tinted visor during sunny daylight hours as opposed to wearing sunglasses, again I am technically breaking the law but by doing so I am making it safer for myself and other road users and once again there is no possibility of a potential victim of my crime.

My advice was:

Don't mention the fact you like hiding the number plate on your bike or have a penchant for wearing a tinted visor on your helmet.

Which seems to have been brought up in the past, the reason the advice was given was that doesn't seem to go down well on the board.

The main point I was making, which you have sidestepped by making a personal attack on me . was the fact you had issued contradictory statements, this was given with the rider that I could be mistaken ('going potty').

The fact you are glad the number plate was legible on the car which hit your wifes was more an ironical comment.

You may want to wind your neck in somewhat and stop taking things personally.

Oh and scroll up a few posts for my serious advice which isn't littered with witticisms, irony and the general destroying of your peculiar arguments regarding breaking the law.

And relax... :bannana::bannana::bannana:

 

[prprandall51]

In future, please don't try to twist what I say in order to have a pop at me. By all means have a go with some facts behind you but using falsehoods in order to make your point is plain childish.

Sp!ke, I am really sorry. When you wrote:

Since the relaxation, the law is fine with my tinted visor and my small plate and to a certain extent my exhaust as long as I'm not taking the complete piss.

I interpreted this to mean that you use a tinted visor, have an undersized numberplate and have a non-standard (i.e. loud) exhaust.

All of these things are plain childish and, as far as I am aware, illegal. But, I guess that you are saying you don't have any of these things? So that makes this statement of yours quoted above a falsehood. No wait, I am really confused now....