Car accident - is this correct?

MrMoonX · 16 Dec 2015 at 08:20

police don't even police anymore unless it involves infringing on the "normal" public's civil rights, scum bags get away with it all the time.

Your son in law should make a formal complaint to the police. He is evidence, his witness statement saw the guy driving, that should easily be enough combined with the massive damage to both cars

wordy · 16 Dec 2015 at 08:40

Tosno said:
Seems the police know the driver too

Indeed.

Sin_Chase · 16 Dec 2015 at 08:58

Got to be more to this than you are being told.

Hitman_Leon · 16 Dec 2015 at 09:03

Terminal_Boy said:
Or a follower of a certain prophet or a politician.

Enough of that.

bledd · 16 Dec 2015 at 10:22

In b4 letterbox

Skeeter · 16 Dec 2015 at 10:56

So if I drive around with no Tax, MOT or Insurance but wear a bag over my head I will be fine as the police won't be able to prove it was me driving so won't bother to investigate?

SexyGreyFox said:
The car registration he wrote down doesn't exist.

If so, how were the Police able to confirm that it had no Tax, MOT or Insurance? Or did they actually say that there is no record of a car with that registration having Tax, MOT or Insurance, which is a subtle but important difference.

Twirlywoos · 16 Dec 2015 at 11:25

Sounds fishy

SexyGreyFox · 16 Dec 2015 at 11:39

Sin_Chase said:
Got to be more to this than you are being told.

I agree.

They got in from A&E around 1:30am so I quizzed him then.
At the accident they swapped details but he knew the driver and where he lived and the driver knew that he knew him.
The other driver left the scene and the Police came but before that two people came out of the Chip Shop and said "That was John Smith who hit you" and my SIW said he knew (name change obviously).
The Police came but when they looked at the registration number he wrote down he'd put too many digits eg RKJ5124ZHFT obviously through shock.
They went to the blokes house but couldn't find any white van (not car) that had been in an accident and couldn't work out what the registration may be and that's why John Smith has got away with it.
If John Smith had stayed at the scene it would be a different story.

Basically it's a pointless thread now I've got all the proper details

linktoinsanity · 16 Dec 2015 at 11:47

SexyGreyFox said:
Story gets better but for the bad guy.
The 2 witnesses were just 2 people who spoke to my SIR after the accident but didn't leave numbers.
The car registration he wrote down doesn't exist.

If he suffered from concussion then it is more likely that he noted the registration down wrongly and that it affected his memory/ability to tell you what actually happened accurately.

However this is not a full excuse, the police really should be looking into similar registrations, especially as your Son In Law was injured.

SexyGreyFox said:
The Police said that things would be different if he'd still been at the accident but since he wasn't there was now nothing they can do.

OK then I'll remember that if I ever have an accident and my car still drives... :/

Seriously though, sounds like ********. It's things like that that make it hard to respect the police sometimes, especially with regards to traffic laws. (That and personal experience, which I will not go into in this thread.)

EDIT: Just read your last post so in this case it seems like there is genuinely not much they could do.

tom_e · 16 Dec 2015 at 11:48

I like the random letters you've substituted for "L" in any reference to your son in law after the OP.
That's all I have to say on the matter.

SexyGreyFox · 16 Dec 2015 at 11:50

tom_e said:
I like the random letters you've substituted for "L" in any reference to your son in law after the OP.
That's all I have to say on the matter.

SIL

Son in Law!

Oh just seen them

Bloody phone.

tom_e · 16 Dec 2015 at 11:50

linktoinsanity said:
If he suffered from concussion then it is more likely that he noted the registration down wrongly and that it affected his memory/ability to tell you what actually happened accurately.

However this is not a full excuse, the police really should be looking into similar registrations, especially as your Son In Law was injured.

OK then I'll remember that if I ever have an accident and my car still drives... :/

Seriously though, sounds like ********. It's things like that that make it hard to respect the police sometimes, especially with regards to traffic laws. (That and personal experience, which I will not go into in this thread.)

What more can they do?

They've got a reg that doesn't exist, 2 independent witnesses they can't talk to because no one got their details, the details they do have came from someone who obviously wasn't quite with it and they've been round and looked for a vehicle that's been involved in an accident at the accused's residence.

It's not great obviously but how much time and resource can you expect them to plough into it?

tom_e · 16 Dec 2015 at 11:51

SexyGreyFox said:
SIL
Son in Law!

Indeed but you've also called him SIR and SIW.

SexyGreyFox · 16 Dec 2015 at 11:53

tom_e said:
Indeed but you've also called him SIR and SIW.

Bloody autotext

However I'd love to know what you saw in those mistakes!

wordy · 16 Dec 2015 at 11:53

SexyGreyFox said:
The Police came but when they looked at the registration number he wrote down he'd put too many digits eg RKJ5124ZHFT obviously through shock.
They went to the blokes house but couldn't find any white van (not car) that had been in an accident and couldn't work out what the registration may be and that's why John Smith has got away with it.
If John Smith had stayed at the scene it would be a different story.

Basically it's a pointless thread now I've got all the proper details

Can't the police go back round in a couple of days time & check again for vehicles of that description or better yet ask the guy who's been identified?

dl8860 · 16 Dec 2015 at 11:57

tom_e said:
Indeed but you've also called him SIR and SIW.

I also enjoyed this.

Son-in-relation?

Son-in-wife?

Mynight · 16 Dec 2015 at 12:02

dl8860 said:
Son-in-wife?

I don't think stokes that bad

.

linktoinsanity · 16 Dec 2015 at 12:17

tom_e said:
What more can they do?

They've got a reg that doesn't exist, 2 independent witnesses they can't talk to because no one got their details, the details they do have came from someone who obviously wasn't quite with it and they've been round and looked for a vehicle that's been involved in an accident at the accused's residence.

It's not great obviously but how much time and resource can you expect them to plough into it?

Re-read my edited post after the OP posted just above.

Though that does not change my personal experiences of the police, but hey-ho in this occasion, no there is not much they can do.

SexyGreyFox · 16 Dec 2015 at 15:02

wordy said:
Can't the police go back round in a couple of days time & check again for vehicles of that description or better yet ask the guy who's been identified?

My SIV is with me now and we've been through several scenarios -

1) blah blah blah - outcome: John Smith's family are a nasty bunch of scum
2) blah blah blah - outcome: John Smith's family are a nasty bunch of scum
3) blah blah blah - outcome: John Smith's family are a nasty bunch of scum
4) blah blah blah - outcome: John Smith's family are a nasty bunch of scum

The SIQ is happy to lose £100 excess and let it go.

tom_e · 16 Dec 2015 at 15:03

It's an irritating situation but on the other hand it could have been much worse, and your autocorrect is providing me with far more amusement than it really should be.