Scratch on colleagues car
Discussion
If you bumped into this man in the street on a Saturday night and he hurt his shoulder, say, what the f
k would that have to do with your employer?
Now, if you punched him in the face on a night out, I can see they may want to look at procedures to keep you separate, or if it was deemed a gross misconduct, and work related, ie you knew him from work and targeted him, that may be something employers get involved in...MAY..
If you wacked his car with your in the car park, and he saw you, or someone did, I can see them asking you for your details and letting insurance sort it out. But how about if you had a fender bender on a weekend.....why would that be any of the company's concern? Why would a zip scratching a car in a public car park be their concern......and accident in a public space....damage or not, an accident is that, and like hurting hsi shoulder, i cant see work being slightest bit interested...
Now if he was targeted, or if his vehicle was, they may be...clearly they think that is what happened.
Does this bloke know anyone else you know outside or work. Family, or friends? your mum or dad? your missus? There HAS to be more to this than you are letting on, or it is horsest. You would just say to them, "bks did I damage his car 4 months ago?"
OP go see the car, take your own photos and post them up. £3k to paint the side of a car, my hairy ahole. £700 to £1k max for an insurance claim. All this "special paint" is bks, that is for the bodyshop to worry about, they quote and they get it right or do it the fk again.
If the phots shows it has been proper keyed, then surely the evidence they have woudl show you keying it, not walking past it. As for the idea you left the car park after it was walked by. Well, how do they know you didn't sit in your car for 20mins. How do they know the perp even had a car? you can presumably walk in and out of this place from the street.
If you Definitely did not do this, tell them you did not, they can have no proof as you did not do it, say it is fk all to do with your manager, and if the M3 wker wants to make a thing of it, it should be a police matter. Tell M3 wker if he wants to go about telling people it was you, that's slander and you will pursue him in the courts. And the manager who left, tell HR you want his details as you are going afte rhim for the same. It is fking outrageous to accuse you of something like this when you did not do it. All that is what a totally innocent person would do...…..
any sane or rational one ……
but you haven't...…...you've fannied about with your insurance company, asked to see the evidence, messaged the owner, faffed about with it, asked the internet. which suggests you may not be innocent...….if you are though, go see a fking lawyer and get some letters out there to nip this in the bud, (is that possible after 4 months?)
If you know more about this than you are letting on, ie is this bloke something to you or yours, you best be careful, but if you're innocent, go see a lawyer and stop fking about with messages and requests for cctv. Let the lawyer do that, and when they cant give it, they will have to STFU.
k would that have to do with your employer? Now, if you punched him in the face on a night out, I can see they may want to look at procedures to keep you separate, or if it was deemed a gross misconduct, and work related, ie you knew him from work and targeted him, that may be something employers get involved in...MAY..
If you wacked his car with your in the car park, and he saw you, or someone did, I can see them asking you for your details and letting insurance sort it out. But how about if you had a fender bender on a weekend.....why would that be any of the company's concern? Why would a zip scratching a car in a public car park be their concern......and accident in a public space....damage or not, an accident is that, and like hurting hsi shoulder, i cant see work being slightest bit interested...
Now if he was targeted, or if his vehicle was, they may be...clearly they think that is what happened.
Does this bloke know anyone else you know outside or work. Family, or friends? your mum or dad? your missus? There HAS to be more to this than you are letting on, or it is horses
t. You would just say to them, "bks did I damage his car 4 months ago?" OP go see the car, take your own photos and post them up. £3k to paint the side of a car, my hairy a
hole. £700 to £1k max for an insurance claim. All this "special paint" is bks, that is for the bodyshop to worry about, they quote and they get it right or do it the fk again. If the phots shows it has been proper keyed, then surely the evidence they have woudl show you keying it, not walking past it. As for the idea you left the car park after it was walked by. Well, how do they know you didn't sit in your car for 20mins. How do they know the perp even had a car? you can presumably walk in and out of this place from the street.
If you Definitely did not do this, tell them you did not, they can have no proof as you did not do it, say it is f
k all to do with your manager, and if the M3 wker wants to make a thing of it, it should be a police matter. Tell M3 wker if he wants to go about telling people it was you, that's slander and you will pursue him in the courts. And the manager who left, tell HR you want his details as you are going afte rhim for the same. It is fking outrageous to accuse you of something like this when you did not do it. All that is what a totally innocent person would do...…..any sane or rational one ……
but you haven't...…...you've fannied about with your insurance company, asked to see the evidence, messaged the owner, faffed about with it, asked the internet. which suggests you may not be innocent...….if you are though, go see a f
king lawyer and get some letters out there to nip this in the bud, (is that possible after 4 months?) If you know more about this than you are letting on, ie is this bloke something to you or yours, you best be careful, but if you're innocent, go see a lawyer and stop f
king about with messages and requests for cctv. Let the lawyer do that, and when they cant give it, they will have to STFU. OP says he is called in by his manager that a colleague accused the OP of scratching the colleague's car 4 months ago in a public car park.
Manager is told that there is evidence of someone walking past the car in question but the image is not clear who it is.
That person is seen getting in a car and leaves the car park and its ANPR picks up that it is the OPs car.
OP finally manages to catch up with car park security who says we don't keep records for more than two days and would have no record of such an incident four months ago.
The description of the scratches on the car are said to be deep and may require panels to be taken off for the work to be done at a cost of over £2000. This does not sound like someone walking past a car and possibly scratched it with their bag.
This "public car park", I presume it is only used for office staff. Is your work place in an office with multiple companies sharing the same car park but not open to the public? Otherwise where is the work involvement in a public car park?
Is the car park secure enough that someone could not walk off the street and enter the car park without security noticing? Maybe it could had been a vandal who just came in the car park and scratched the car.
Manager is told that there is evidence of someone walking past the car in question but the image is not clear who it is.
That person is seen getting in a car and leaves the car park and its ANPR picks up that it is the OPs car.
OP finally manages to catch up with car park security who says we don't keep records for more than two days and would have no record of such an incident four months ago.
The description of the scratches on the car are said to be deep and may require panels to be taken off for the work to be done at a cost of over £2000. This does not sound like someone walking past a car and possibly scratched it with their bag.
This "public car park", I presume it is only used for office staff. Is your work place in an office with multiple companies sharing the same car park but not open to the public? Otherwise where is the work involvement in a public car park?
Is the car park secure enough that someone could not walk off the street and enter the car park without security noticing? Maybe it could had been a vandal who just came in the car park and scratched the car.
janesmith1950 said:
graylag said:
Why do people keep bringing up courts and the police? It has nothing to do with that. It’s an employment matter and the burden of proof is much much lower.
The what of proof?Breadvan72 said:
janesmith1950 said:
graylag said:
Why do people keep bringing up courts and the police? It has nothing to do with that. It’s an employment matter and the burden of proof is much much lower.
The what of proof?graylag said:
Breadvan72 said:
janesmith1950 said:
graylag said:
Why do people keep bringing up courts and the police? It has nothing to do with that. It’s an employment matter and the burden of proof is much much lower.
The what of proof?
I reckon he did it
well i reckon the whole thing is obviously made up, like every other thread on here
but i am going to play the game a reckon he did it.
You'd know if you scratched a car badly, and you'd remember it for a few months even if you were busy having babies, so for there to be anything other than it definitely wasn't me, means you did it and know you did it, you probably did it on purpose because it's not that easy to leave that big a scratch, you say you didn't know the guy that well, but we can't really take your word for that since you are the sort of person who goes around keying cars.
well i reckon the whole thing is obviously made up, like every other thread on here
but i am going to play the game a reckon he did it.
You'd know if you scratched a car badly, and you'd remember it for a few months even if you were busy having babies, so for there to be anything other than it definitely wasn't me, means you did it and know you did it, you probably did it on purpose because it's not that easy to leave that big a scratch, you say you didn't know the guy that well, but we can't really take your word for that since you are the sort of person who goes around keying cars.
i resisted the urge to add in wife having an affair with the guy and paternity test stuff to the story on the off chance this is not totally made up
in which case tell your employer it had nothing to do with you, and that they need to stay the fk out of what is a private matter and go find other ways to be less productive than our European neighbours.
in which case tell your employer it had nothing to do with you, and that they need to stay the f
k out of what is a private matter and go find other ways to be less productive than our European neighbours.janesmith1950 said:
graylag said:
You pulled me up on that earlier too. It might not be the precise wording a solicitor would use, but pretty much everyone knows what’s meant by it.
Pedantry for pedantry’s sake marks you out for all the wrong reasons
The burden of proof relates to who has to do the proving. The standard of proof is to how convincing the evidence must be.Pedantry for pedantry’s sake marks you out for all the wrong reasons
Getting them the wrong way around when attempting to sound authoritative on a subject marks you out for all the wrong reasons.
Even more so when you fail initially to explain your pedantry.
At best you come across as a pedant, at worst just a knob.
graylag said:
Quite, I trust neither of you has ever stated that you have a mortgage. When that’s patently wrong, even if in common usage and understood by everyone.
That's a bit presumptious of you. As a businessman, I am party to several mortgages. I do not, however, have a home loan.oyster said:
Trying to sound authoritative whilst berating someone for using common parlance marks YOU out for all the wrong reasons too.
Even more so when you fail initially to explain your pedantry.
At best you come across as a pedant, at worst just a knob.
I'll take that as a compliment, thank you.Even more so when you fail initially to explain your pedantry.
At best you come across as a pedant, at worst just a knob.
Whole thread is a work of fiction, including lots of the so-called advice/commentary.
ging84 said:
i resisted the urge to add in wife having an affair with the guy and paternity test stuff to the story on the off chance this is not totally made up
in which case tell your employer it had nothing to do with you, and that they need to stay the fk out of what is a private matter and go find other ways to be less productive than our European neighbours.
well...we'll just have to wait until next week for the next episode. I reckon this is a misdirection. The story is trying to make you suspect there is something going on with the other guy and then in the finale maybe we find out that the paternity test shows that it's the boss who's the father in which case tell your employer it had nothing to do with you, and that they need to stay the f
k out of what is a private matter and go find other ways to be less productive than our European neighbours.
f
k £86million for a new Eastenders set, this way better value for money 
leef44 said:
well...we'll just have to wait until next week for the next episode. I reckon this is a misdirection. The story is trying to make you suspect there is something going on with the other guy and then in the finale maybe we find out that the paternity test shows that it's the boss who's the father
fk £86million for a new Eastenders set, this way better value for money
Does that mean the scratch was from a high heel or trouser zip whilst getting banged on the bonnet?f
k £86million for a new Eastenders set, this way better value for money Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff