Hit and Run
- Thread starter nam
- Start date
yes uploaded in lower quality. The IP camera got the Full Reg
Just makes you wonder how many people try and get away with it, imagine if it was there own vehicle
will be reporting tomorrow for a reference number, but as you said they won't pursue further unless injured parties involved..
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,564
- Location
- Warwickshire
By similar, you presumably mean you also had a video of it? Because this would be a major distinction between your incident and OP's if you didn't.
Next time don't park right up close to a vehicle so they have a hard time getting out?j/k
Was not me who parked close, never do
, i always leave room especially as car is in front of my house which is a resident's only controlled bay. This Van driver was a chancer who parked after 7:30pm and then proceeded to take my bumper with him when he left at 8:50am . Just wish he had got a Ticket from the Parking Warden too, that would have made my day 
Agreed , but really show's the Vileness in some people, they have no respect for anyone but themselves
Agreed , but really show's the Vileness in some people, they have no respect for anyone but themselves
Yeah
Very reason I consider getting one. Kids use the area next to my car as a turning around on their bikes and scooters. Not sure what good it would do as their parents would just refuse to pay Yeah
These are the camera's Hikvision 4mm 3Mp DSC-2CD2032-I camera's from Use-IP
Just dialed 101 and got asked to fill in a form 206 and get stamped for Ref from local Police office. Will be off there in the morning
http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Collision-forms-and-reports/1400005513174/1400005513174
http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Collision-forms-and-reports/1400005513174/1400005513174
I've seen a large vehicle hit a smaller one enough that the smaller one hopped about a foot sideways but the driver in the larger vehicle was oblivious, his car didn't seem to take a 'bump' from the impact at all it just carried on it's path completely smoothly, he had no idea.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,564
- Location
- Warwickshire
So that's driving without due care and attention then, if you are special enough to knock a vehicle a foot sideways and never see it.
The van man would been paying close attention to the op's car at the time he passed it to try and avoid it, so he would certainly have seen it move, even if he claims not to have felt it (which he almost certainly would have).
I watched the video before I read the rest of the thread and immediately thought 'there's no way the usual OcUK apologists can even semi-seriously defend this one, is there?' Apparently there is
!
No I had an independant witness who was prepared to give a statement to the police saying he saw the other CR hit my parked car and move it enough to have absolutely known he had hit it.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,564
- Location
- Warwickshire
Not similar then, because that's witness opinion which is nowhere near as good as a video.
So that's driving without due care and attention then, if you are special enough to knock a vehicle a foot sideways and never see it.
The van man would been paying close attention to the op's car at the time he passed it to try and avoid it, so he would certainly have seen it move, even if he claims not to have felt it (which he almost certainly would have).
I watched the video before I read the rest of the thread and immediately thought 'there's no way the usual OcUK apologists can even semi-seriously defend this one, is there?' Apparently there is
I'm not referring to that video specifically, just the idea that because the car moved slightly he must have known he hit it - that's not true, if your own vehicle is large enough in comparison, you can easily hit something else without your vehicle registering any sign of it.
The example I referred to was a new Merc ML bouncing an old Punto as he swung backwards out of a parking bay (badly).
That's not the point I'm making. It was proved that he did hit my car and I won the claim against his insurance company. The evidence I had was:
1) Damage to his car in the expected location as agreed by the insurance assessor.
2) An independant witness who wrote a statement to the police and could be verified at the scene by their company and the hospital (it was a hospital car park).
3) The driver admitting he was at the scene at the time of the incident.
The police didn't prosecute because the man simply said he did not realise at the time that he had hit my car (despite a big matching scrape on his). It wasn't disputed that he hit me. It wasn't disputed that the witness told the truth. It was simply that there was no proof that the driver knew that he'd hit me. The OP will face the same issue. However I still recommend he reports it because it may help with the weight of his case against the other party's insurance company regardless of the outcome (no guarantees).
