Good to see the mind set your working with.
Why not? It will be at Blains inconvenience as he won't have a car and will have to find other means of travel so that'll need paying for, and it's all the other blokes fault.
Good to see the mind set your working with.
[TW]Fox;16706042 said:Nice, you are suggesting defrauding the guy to get some self taken compensation?
Lovely, lovely. Whilst that says a lot about your character I don't think Scuzi is the sort to need to fabricate stories and inflated repair costs to make a profit. He just wants his car fixed with the minimum of fuss.
Doesn't anyone who is in view of the CCTV have a legal right to view that footage with them in it?Except for the obvious data protection issues. Full CCTV footage can only be released to bodies which are exempt from the DPA - eg the police. For it to be given to you, they would have to edit out everyone elses faces, registration numbers etc - some will charge, some will just say no
I'd be interested to know what the official line is on that. From the limited knowledge of CCTV related DPA in my office, the consensus is that unless the footage particularly focuses on individuals faces, rather than just taking images of a general scene, then it doesn't fall under the DPA. IIRC, this is how the authorities get round having to show every tom, dick and harry all the footage they have of themselves. It only becomes a DPA issue if the footage focusses on the individual and tracks them or monitors them closely rather than surveying the entire scene. And would the number plates need blanking out? They're hardly private data, surely? I can see that blanking out plates is good practice for publicly available material, but does it fall within the remit of the DPA?Yup, or I think insurance companies can ask for it if they have reasonable cause or it's part of a criminal investigation. I forget the exact terms, I could dig the ICO CCTV code of conduct out my desk drawer if it becomes relevant![]()
Doesn't anyone who is in view of the CCTV have a legal right to view that footage with them in it?
As Scuzi already knows the number plate and the name of the other person there is no reason to blur it out.
From what I can remember all they can do is charge you a small fee for a copy.
I'd be interested to know what the official line is on that. From the limited knowledge of CCTV related DPA in my office, the consensus is that unless the footage particularly focuses on individuals faces, rather than just taking images of a general scene, then it doesn't fall under the DPA. IIRC, this is how the authorities get round having to show every tom, dick and harry all the footage they have of themselves. It only becomes a DPA issue if the footage focusses on the individual and tracks them or monitors them closely rather than surveying the entire scene. And would the number plates need blanking out? They're hardly private data, surely? I can see that blanking out plates is good practice for publicly available material, but does it fall within the remit of the DPA?
Why not? It will be at Blains inconvenience as he won't have a car and will have to find other means of travel so that'll need paying for, and it's all the other blokes fault.
You moan about the time it will take, yet you declined the quickest possible route (Him paying out of his pocket).
I'd have been down to the best local bodyshop the same day for a quote, then back to his address to collect a cheque - it could have been all sorted within a week (depending on the bodyshops current workload of course).
Anyone with half a brain, will just ask to see the quote or even go to the person doing the work and find out the price.
You moan about the time it will take, yet you declined the quickest possible route (Him paying out of his pocket).
I'd have been down to the best local bodyshop the same day for a quote, then back to his address to collect a cheque - it could have been all sorted within a week (depending on the bodyshops current workload of course).
At the time he didn't know who he was dealing with.
The person could have offered to pay, seen the price and then refused to pay such a high amount etc.
I was suspicious. I had an old guy in a tatty looking old Octavia, who when writing down his details omitted his name. He also didn't know who he was insured with. My car is probably going to need a new door - a bill that's probably going to run into 4 figures I would imagine. I also have a lot on my plate at the minute being signed off work due to illness and the last thing I need is the hassle of chasing up someone for the repair money. I didn't feel comfortable so I defaulted to standard practice. I think I did the right thing with hindsight.
[TW]Fox;16750012 said:Do you have any witnesses?
It appears the scumbag is using his knowledge of the law and what is required to make a succesful claim to get out of it.
Isn't perverting the course of justice an offence for which a member of the legal profession can be de-barred?