Car hit whilst parked with dash cam evidence, what's next?
Discussion
Wife was parked in a vet's car park yesterday and was scraped and bashed on the rear quarter panel and suffered a broken lamp lens as well, certainly a few hundred quid's worth of damage. All captured on dashcam with a thoroughly clear view of the black Jag's XF plate, no note left naturally.
Not entirely sure what to do next; cops, insurers? She's going to ring the vets tomorrow on the off chance they have any info that they are willing to offer up but suspect not. Clearly she would like the perp to cough up and pay for the damage they've caused all the while avoiding our own insurers but suspect this may be the only route.
Any pointers gratefully received.
Not entirely sure what to do next; cops, insurers? She's going to ring the vets tomorrow on the off chance they have any info that they are willing to offer up but suspect not. Clearly she would like the perp to cough up and pay for the damage they've caused all the while avoiding our own insurers but suspect this may be the only route.
Any pointers gratefully received.
We ended up going through insurance when our car was hit whilst parked. No note left and (No surprises) denied all knowledge when finally found them a few days later. Like you I wanted to trace them to avoid insurance and give them chance to pay to repair couple of hundreds worth of damage but knew I was wasting my time soon as spoke to her.
First year insurance was probably £50 higher, second year about £20 (Compared to previous years costs) by time third year came round, it had dropped to less than previous insurance cost. Year 4 and 5 nothing at all.
Save yourself a headache and just go through insurance, price of a meal every year for a couple of years is worth it to avoid the hassle.
First year insurance was probably £50 higher, second year about £20 (Compared to previous years costs) by time third year came round, it had dropped to less than previous insurance cost. Year 4 and 5 nothing at all.
Save yourself a headache and just go through insurance, price of a meal every year for a couple of years is worth it to avoid the hassle.
I had this issue before.
My car was parked outside the house and somebody hit it. Unfortunately for the third party a taxi driver with a dash cam was driving behind and got all the footage in Full HD.
I rang my insurance, sent them the footage etc. They were very reasonable, said it's quite clearly not my fault, waived my excess and gave me a like for like courtesy car for a week whilst mine was being fixed.
Hopefully with your footage it's very straightforward because you literally have all the evidence you need. My premiums weren't too badly affected (as a relatively young driver).
My car was parked outside the house and somebody hit it. Unfortunately for the third party a taxi driver with a dash cam was driving behind and got all the footage in Full HD.
I rang my insurance, sent them the footage etc. They were very reasonable, said it's quite clearly not my fault, waived my excess and gave me a like for like courtesy car for a week whilst mine was being fixed.
Hopefully with your footage it's very straightforward because you literally have all the evidence you need. My premiums weren't too badly affected (as a relatively young driver).
GolfDragon said:
I had this issue before.
My car was parked outside the house and somebody hit it. Unfortunately for the third party a taxi driver with a dash cam was driving behind and got all the footage in Full HD.
I rang my insurance, sent them the footage etc. They were very reasonable, said it's quite clearly not my fault, waived my excess and gave me a like for like courtesy car for a week whilst mine was being fixed.
Hopefully with your footage it's very straightforward because you literally have all the evidence you need. My premiums weren't too badly affected (as a relatively young driver).
Aye, it's pretty clear cut. Jag approaches, bangs car, car rocks, car buggers off. Ironically you can see my wife walk out of the vets literally 20s after it had happened. My car was parked outside the house and somebody hit it. Unfortunately for the third party a taxi driver with a dash cam was driving behind and got all the footage in Full HD.
I rang my insurance, sent them the footage etc. They were very reasonable, said it's quite clearly not my fault, waived my excess and gave me a like for like courtesy car for a week whilst mine was being fixed.
Hopefully with your footage it's very straightforward because you literally have all the evidence you need. My premiums weren't too badly affected (as a relatively young driver).
I don't get why people think an insurance claim immediately means higher premiums, especially if it's a non fault claim.
I dragged every panel on the side of my 3 week old Merc E class along the corner of a LR discovery trying to get out of the way of an oncoming mad taxi. Claimed on my insurance and left a note for the LR owner. Total insurance claim was £10k and my insurance quote from the same insurer was £25 less the next year.
I'd notify the police on the non emergency number, and then pass to your insurers. You could also check on MID that the car which hit you was insured.
I dragged every panel on the side of my 3 week old Merc E class along the corner of a LR discovery trying to get out of the way of an oncoming mad taxi. Claimed on my insurance and left a note for the LR owner. Total insurance claim was £10k and my insurance quote from the same insurer was £25 less the next year.
I'd notify the police on the non emergency number, and then pass to your insurers. You could also check on MID that the car which hit you was insured.
spookly said:
I don't get why people think an insurance claim immediately means higher premiums, especially if it's a non fault claim.
I dragged every panel on the side of my 3 week old Merc E class along the corner of a LR discovery trying to get out of the way of an oncoming mad taxi. Claimed on my insurance and left a note for the LR owner. Total insurance claim was £10k and my insurance quote from the same insurer was £25 less the next year.
I'd notify the police on the non emergency number, and then pass to your insurers. You could also check on MID that the car which hit you was insured.
Equally I don’t get why people assume it’s had no effect on premiums simply because the total premium hasn’t risen.I dragged every panel on the side of my 3 week old Merc E class along the corner of a LR discovery trying to get out of the way of an oncoming mad taxi. Claimed on my insurance and left a note for the LR owner. Total insurance claim was £10k and my insurance quote from the same insurer was £25 less the next year.
I'd notify the police on the non emergency number, and then pass to your insurers. You could also check on MID that the car which hit you was insured.
There’s so many factors involved, none of which are itemised, that your renewal might have been more than £25 cheaper without the non-fault claim.
Hugo Stiglitz said:
Report fail to stop and report then pass to insurers.
Sadly you'll be stung for the next five years for increased premiums due to you 'being an increased risk'.
I agree, let’s all pay exactly the same regardless of age, car or experience. It’s fairer that way. Sadly you'll be stung for the next five years for increased premiums due to you 'being an increased risk'.
[/sarcasm]
It depends if you want the police to do anything about the fail to stop/fail to report element. If you want to just get it fixed, contact your insurance company (or wifes) pass the number plate/footage to them and they'll be able to search their database for the insurance company and start the claim.
oyster said:
Statistically of course those who are involved in such collisions ARE more of a risk.
Depends which way you interpret that data. If, satistically the average person is involved in 1 accident every 3 years, then after your 1 accident you are technically good for 3 years and less likely to have an accidental that someone who has never had one.Yeah, statistics are stupid.
0ddball said:
Yeah, statistics are stupid.
They aren't though. The statistical argument showing that the group of drivers with one or more non fault accidents is higher risk than the group of drivers that have had no accidents for example is trivial and obvious. How the insurance company uses that info on rating risk for a driver is up to them.Not that long ago we had someone sideswipe our (parallel) parked car and evidently drive off with their car substantially damaged (there was a trail of rubber from a wonky wheel).
Thankfully a neighbour witnessed it and got the plate. Reported it to the police as I suspected the driver was probably drunk given the situation and level of damage. They declined to pursue it despite a witness, plate and description of the driver.
My insurance company were really good and it turns out the other party were insured and there was no quibble.
Let your insurance company do the leg work.
Thankfully a neighbour witnessed it and got the plate. Reported it to the police as I suspected the driver was probably drunk given the situation and level of damage. They declined to pursue it despite a witness, plate and description of the driver.
My insurance company were really good and it turns out the other party were insured and there was no quibble.
Let your insurance company do the leg work.
0ddball said:
oyster said:
Statistically of course those who are involved in such collisions ARE more of a risk.
Depends which way you interpret that data. If, satistically the average person is involved in 1 accident every 3 years, then after your 1 accident you are technically good for 3 years and less likely to have an accidental that someone who has never had one.Yeah, statistics are stupid.
Collectively, those who make non-fault claims are more likely to do so again.
With a small value claim there are a few things to consider when working out whether to claim and how:
Excess, if the other driver is not found, is the claim minus the excess still a positive number?
No claims, does that get any loss and what effect it'll have on premiums?
In theory any premium increase due to an assessment of higher risk will be the same as the driver will tell his ins co via the claim or directly if they claim direct from the third party. In theory this will also be the same even if just pay for the fix themselves as they will still declare the accident to their insurers when required to do so.
Bert
Excess, if the other driver is not found, is the claim minus the excess still a positive number?
No claims, does that get any loss and what effect it'll have on premiums?
In theory any premium increase due to an assessment of higher risk will be the same as the driver will tell his ins co via the claim or directly if they claim direct from the third party. In theory this will also be the same even if just pay for the fix themselves as they will still declare the accident to their insurers when required to do so.
Bert
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff