1 incident - why do I need to contact 2 different BiB
Discussion
So, the RTC I was involved in involved 4 persons.
2 of us were questioned by BiB1, the other 2 by BiB2 - the incident has 1 Incident number.
BiB1 told me he'd send full details of the other 3 people (full addresses and insurance etc - which couldn't all be done at the scene as one had to taken to A&E).
So he finally emails me the details of the 1 other person he dealt with (who I already had the details of!) but says I'll either need to contact his colleague for the other details, or wait a few days and my insurance company can call the Collision Enquiries Unit at HQ where all the details will eventually get to.
I have of course emailed his colleague but:
Now call me daft if you like, but BiB1 and BiB2 work at the same station and operate in the same car. Can one not get the details easily off the other so I only have to deal with one BiB point of contact?
Customer Care I think it is called.
Apologies to BiB if there is a daft piece of bureaucracy or inept IT system that actually prohibits such a simple idea.
2 of us were questioned by BiB1, the other 2 by BiB2 - the incident has 1 Incident number.
BiB1 told me he'd send full details of the other 3 people (full addresses and insurance etc - which couldn't all be done at the scene as one had to taken to A&E).
So he finally emails me the details of the 1 other person he dealt with (who I already had the details of!) but says I'll either need to contact his colleague for the other details, or wait a few days and my insurance company can call the Collision Enquiries Unit at HQ where all the details will eventually get to.
I have of course emailed his colleague but:
Now call me daft if you like, but BiB1 and BiB2 work at the same station and operate in the same car. Can one not get the details easily off the other so I only have to deal with one BiB point of contact?
Customer Care I think it is called.
Apologies to BiB if there is a daft piece of bureaucracy or inept IT system that actually prohibits such a simple idea.
not applicable said:
Could be from different stations? Up my way we do not pass the details on - your insurance company will obtain them and should not be getting you to do their job.
They are from the same station (well that's what it says on their business cards).
Plus this is my first RTC and I assumed I had to do the leg work (i.e. get driver details etc)- didn't realise that the insurance company would do that - or do they only do this as BiB were in attendance and there is an incident number?
(I'm thankfully a newbie at this RTC lark - so apologies if my questions are dumb!)
FG
They could be working different shifts or in a different unit within the Station and rarely come in contact.
Modern Police methods to blame me thinks(TinC) My day (genuflect profusely) one officer dealt with the RTA and he was the central point of contact etc. Nowadays it seems it is the almighty Computor with all and sundry entering bits onto the records. An enquiry in and civvy front desk Officer has access to that information but will claim DP and FoI prevents him from disclosing any information.
Sighs..
dvd
Modern Police methods to blame me thinks(TinC) My day (genuflect profusely) one officer dealt with the RTA and he was the central point of contact etc. Nowadays it seems it is the almighty Computor with all and sundry entering bits onto the records. An enquiry in and civvy front desk Officer has access to that information but will claim DP and FoI prevents him from disclosing any information.
Sighs..
dvd
Dwight VanDriver said:
They could be working different shifts or in a different unit within the Station and rarely come in contact.
Modern Police methods to blame me thinks(TinC) My day (genuflect profusely) one officer dealt with the RTA and he was the central point of contact etc. Nowadays it seems it is the almighty Computor with all and sundry entering bits onto the records. An enquiry in and civvy front desk Officer has access to that information but will claim DP and FoI prevents him from disclosing any information.
Sighs..
dvd
Modern Police methods to blame me thinks(TinC) My day (genuflect profusely) one officer dealt with the RTA and he was the central point of contact etc. Nowadays it seems it is the almighty Computor with all and sundry entering bits onto the records. An enquiry in and civvy front desk Officer has access to that information but will claim DP and FoI prevents him from disclosing any information.
Sighs..
dvd
got an email of the main BiB contact - and indeed DVD they rarely come into contact. The fact that they happened to be in the same car was due to covering of absence.
Anyhow - all sorted now, he gave me pretty much all of the details I need.
And he included what BiB who they would pursue as the cause of the accident with Careless Driving. Which is more detail than I expected.
cheers all
FG
If anybody is interested both officers have fallen into a common trap and may have committed a criminal offence. Both may have controvened the Data Protection Act 1984.
Its not for the police to be giving out details of injured parties or other involved parties. They are there to record the accident submit the paperwork and the insurance companies sort out the details after that by applying through the proper channels for a road accident report summary.
So why does all this happen with our op telephoning different bibs. The answer is simple. The insurance coy save money and get the mops to do their work. They should not be doing this but they chance it. Mops don't know and want it sorted and bibs who lack expierience do it when they shouldn't.
Thats why we pay insurance premiums.
If I get a request for info of other parties from a mop I let them know that they should not be having this stress and that their insurance coy are at it.
I have had many letters from mops thanking me for pointing out this scam and saving them time and effort.
Oh by the way that bib was a damn disgrace telling you to phone the other guy. He was your point of contact he should have pulled all the info you wanted for you once he decided to go down that route and phone you back with the lot.
He comes across as a lazy sod. If I was his gaffer he would be on rain patrol for the rest of the winter. That carry on bugs me.
Glad it sorted itself out for you.
GB
Its not for the police to be giving out details of injured parties or other involved parties. They are there to record the accident submit the paperwork and the insurance companies sort out the details after that by applying through the proper channels for a road accident report summary.
So why does all this happen with our op telephoning different bibs. The answer is simple. The insurance coy save money and get the mops to do their work. They should not be doing this but they chance it. Mops don't know and want it sorted and bibs who lack expierience do it when they shouldn't.
Thats why we pay insurance premiums.
If I get a request for info of other parties from a mop I let them know that they should not be having this stress and that their insurance coy are at it.
I have had many letters from mops thanking me for pointing out this scam and saving them time and effort.
Oh by the way that bib was a damn disgrace telling you to phone the other guy. He was your point of contact he should have pulled all the info you wanted for you once he decided to go down that route and phone you back with the lot.
He comes across as a lazy sod. If I was his gaffer he would be on rain patrol for the rest of the winter. That carry on bugs me.
Glad it sorted itself out for you.
GB
gently bentley said:
If anybody is interested both officers have fallen into a common trap and may have committed a criminal offence. Both may have controvened the Data Protection Act 1984.
GB
GB
Are you sure of this? All parties involved in an RTC are obliged to disclose their address and insurance details - the BiB in this case are merely a conduit so that obligation is met.
FG
FunkyGibbon said:
gently bentley said:
If anybody is interested both officers have fallen into a common trap and may have committed a criminal offence. Both may have controvened the Data Protection Act 1984.
GB
GB
Are you sure of this? All parties involved in an RTC are obliged to disclose their address and insurance details - the BiB in this case are merely a conduit so that obligation is met.
FG
Does the RTA not say that the parties have to exchange details (I'm cutting it well short of the legal jargon by the way) or in a matter involving injury or damage to property of another report to a constable. Nothing is then mentioned about and the constable may act as a conduit.
I'm not being flippant by that remark by the way. Most people think this would be a normal function of the police but there are good reasons for it.
Say the other driver is charged with an offence. So the bib has now told you the name and address of the accused. Not exactly fair when it comes to evidence of identification at the later trial.
Lawyer: Are you sure the person you have identified was the driver of the car.
You: Yes I think I'm right.
Lawyer: What do you mean by that?
You: Well it must be him because it looks like him and the police told me his name and address and that they had charged him with bla bla bla.
Don't fancy being the bib next through the door to give evidence in that trial.
It does happen and this is one of the reasons that the police don't run around chasing up people for insurance coy's or the poor sods who got their car damaged. They have people who do this sort of thing they are called loss adjusters but hey why pay one a wage when you can get joe public to run about for free. Its a scam.
The insurance coy should do this its their job for a reason and you are paying through the nose for them to do it.
Everytime they can get joe public to get the details for them the save £79.
Thats a lot of £79 saved in a day when you add the accidents up.
Oh and that doesn't mean because they do this they are helping us keep the premiums down. Ive heard that excuse from a manager of an insurance coy and its rubbish. It goes into the coy profit and they all get richer.
No problem Funky. As I say it just boils my blood that you have the hastle and stress of getting bumped, your car is off the road etc and the insurance coys leave you with even more hastle when you should be sitting back and saying "Well at least I'm insured Ive paid my hard earned money to them, they will sort it out" and they don't because they are lining their pockets. You end up the victim twice. Bah to insurance coys
if i have 3rd party insurance my company is not in the least bit interested in the incident apart from any claims on them, any claims i might need to make as the injured party are going to be down to me. or is this more of the money making scam?
in this case how do i get the infomation? i don't see the BiB allowing me to wander about and start asking questions.
in this case how do i get the infomation? i don't see the BiB allowing me to wander about and start asking questions.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff