Hit & run - what proof is required?

[rat]

Is this normal?

A work colleague today told me how his Mazda Eunos (backs to the wall!) was rear-ended last week - driver reversed & drove off. Matey collected three independent witness statements then scoured streets for his damaged car & found it.

Hit&Run Bloke was in nearby pub and Matey was able to pick him out - he denied it was him. Police called. They follow procedure, writing to Hit&Run Blokey who replies to say not me, on holiday, car was stolen while on holiday and been returned since - didn't bother reporting it.

Police say can't follow-up any further due to lack of evidence. Estimate for repairs is £1700 and as only third party insurance, Matey liable for all of that.

That can't be right? It can't be THAT easy for scrotes to avoid accountability.

Is it?

[eliminator]

Get a solicitor and take civil action.

[rat]

Thanks. Having had similar experience myself, that's what I suggested, to which he told me he does have legal expenses cover and they don't seem to want to help. I also suggested MIB and let them take him to court, which he's not tried yet.

He was understandably a bit pee'd off today at both Police and his insurers for not helping him when it seems so clear-cut from his viewpoint, so I didn't harp on too much. I think he may have had a valid point that if the Police don't think they'd successfully prosecute because of doubt about his ID, why would a civil court see it any differently?

Cheers,
Andy

[tonyrec]

Doesnt seem right to me....the Police should do something for Gods sake...especially with 3 independant witnesses.

[bassfiend]

I agree Tony ... it *SHOULD* be possible to do something about it but it's increasingly obvious that decisions are being made to only follow up the "easy" or "visible" cases.

Phil