To think we shouldn’t be liable for this?

[Maneandfeathers]

Quick backstory.
Parked our car legally outside of our house. No lines or anything like that. Been parked there for years never any problem. We don’t have a driveway.

Neighbour at the other end of the street drives along our street blind drunk, swerves, hits our car almost writing it off, continues on his merry way, sort of parks up outside his house and gets home.

I witness this and confront him. He denies hitting our car despite me seeing him do it. Then he says we have obviously parked badly. He is very drunk, stinks of alcohol and police are called. Arrest him and he’s over the limit etc. We get his insurance details and our car is fixed to a tune of £6000. I don’t think much more of it and presume insurance are dealing with it.

6 MONTHS later I receive a letter to state he has denied hitting our car and we are now liable for the costs of the damage plus the hire car we were forced to have because he had smashed up ours while drink driving.
He is now denying the whole incident and apparently the police report is unrelated as they didn’t see him drive the car

How can this possibly be fair
We have spoken to our insurance company but apparently there is no proof despite the arrest and the photos of our car and his which was also damaged. He is denying it ever happening.
We stand to loose all of our no claims bonus also. We can’t really afford to have anything else go up and are struggling as it is

Would I be unreasonable to knock on his door and call him a shitty drunken arsehole for this

maybe h e was never charged with drunk driving just public disorder so they cant use that as evidence?

i would ask them to look at his car as he still hasnt repaired it

I haven’t spoken to the insurance company directly as I was at work today and the letter was waiting for me when I got home. I need to ring them and clarify exactly what is happening though.

The hire was expensive although it dosent say how much. The letter just says the total claim being recouped is £5860 or whatever the exact amount is. I will ask for a breakdown.

I’m more annoyed that you can drive around drunk and nothing happens! What’s the point of reporting stuff if he is still allowed to drive about probably still drunk even after something like this.

also it sholdnt go up 50 a month that would mean another 600 a year basedon one claim

I do not understand.

You can’t prove he hit your car but because he has denied in court it was him he’s more trustworthy?! On balance, insurers believe that it’s more likely he’s telling the truth?!

Wtaf?!

Please name and shame the insurer. You are the witness. There will be a police report number relating to the call out too and damage to the drunk driver's car.

Diana I presume it’s more innocent until proven guilty but I can’t prove it as it’s not on video? More me against him?

We put quotes into comparethemarket with claims and no claims and it went up considerably, why should I have to pay extra every month because that arse hole didn’t want to pay £5 for a taxi

OP did your insurance company - and his - not send out assessors at the time of the accident? That's usual, they form their own opinion and take it from there.

It's going to be fairly obvious that he hit your car while drunk.

You should talk to your insurance company. The issue is for them reclaiming the costs from the other insurer. I'm fairly sure it will work out but they are advising you of what will happen if it doesn't.

Surely if this was an issue the insurance would have said something? That much damage there should have been paint from his car on your car?

So looks like we may have to pay hundreds plus loose our no claims? How is that fair when I was on the sofa watching tv at the time

Because it's a no CLAIM bonus, not a no blame bonus. People who have their cars hit by an unknown party, have their cars vandalised, stolen, damaged by hailstones, all lose their bonus. It's not meant to be fair. You get the bonus for not claiming. You claimed and your insurers obviously paid out. Now they can't recover their outlay from anyone else.

That's the deal. That's the contract you agreed to.

Issue a claim on the small claims track. My husband did exactly that going against the advice of the insurance company. I'm qualified as a solicitor which probably persuaded him to take it to court. . A judge will listen to the evidence and make a decision on the balance of probability. My husband won.

No, no assessors. The car was collected about 3 days after the incident as it was undrivable (mainly due to the fact the doors wouldn’t bloody open!)

Nobody assessed it or asked for ohotos.

To be fair I haven’t yet spoke to the insurance company as yet so don’t want to condemn them too much as yet, it’s more the fact he has the cheek to do this knowing it will likely screw us over! I’m sure he does remember doing it but who knows for sure.

He hasn’t claimed for his car so I expect that’s why nobody assessed his.

I will ring my insurance tomorrow and see if I have misinterpreted the letter but I don’t think I have.

By the way even if the police prosecuted and he was found not guilty of an offence, the burden of proof is different in a civil court to that of a criminal court. In criminal it is beyond reasonable doubt and civil it is on the balance of probability.

Tell your insurers you want to make an official complaint about their dealings with it and if not satisfied you will go to the FOS. Also tell the lawyers they have appointed that you want to make a formal complaint. They will hate this and bend over backwards to avoid it. The FOS is VERY generous to consumers.

Disclaimer: insurance litigation lawyer.

Isn't that criminal damage he did to OP's car? Why wouldn't that be an offence to report to police?

What @sickofsquishies says is spot on. (Which, respectfully, is not the case for everything said in this thread.)

Your insurance company (Sheila's Wheels) ought to make arrangements on your behalf to pursue this against the driver / his insurance company.

Even if the driver was drunk such as to potentially invalidate his cover, his insurance company will still have to pay out on any judgment against him - see s 151 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

If he continues to deny responsibility, then it would be necessary to start a court claim - a civil claim for recovery of the sums your insurers have paid out and any other losses you have incurred. As others have said, as a civil claim, the matter would be decided on the 'balance of probabilities' - i.e. is it more likely than not that what you are saying (that you saw him drive into your stationary and unoccupied vehicle) is correct, or is it more likely that he is correct about it not being him.

The burden of proof is on you, but that needn't worry you. If you turn up and say what you have said - i.e. that you specifically saw him do it, confronted him and he admitted it (then backtracked) and that you reported him for drink driving etc - then a judge has to decide whether it is more likely that he is right (and therefore that, for some reason, you are inventing this). He would have the difficulty that there is no apparent reason for you to make all of this up, and much greater cause to doubt what he says (he was drunk, he has greater motive to conceal the truth, etc).

I note that you say that :
We have a letter from our insurance stating that he is refusing to pay the claim therefore they will try and take him through a court to recoup costs however we may be liable for the cost and loose our ncb should they not be able to claim from him? Does that sound about right?

That's fine - it means that Sheilas Wheels are backing you - but (as others have said) they have to warn you of the worst case scenario were (for example) this to go to a trial and the judge to happen to believe him.

Sheila's Wheels should arrange for a solicitor to progress this on your behalf. If Sheila's Wheels show any inclination to stop backing you, you should respectfully but gently challenge this. Otherwise, you should work with the solicitors to get this to a point where either his insurers accept responsibility or you prove it at court if need be.

Who repaired your car the insurance company under your comp cover or did they refer you to an accident management company who repaired the car and provided hire?

If it was the later then they are perusing his insurance company who aren't paying up and have referred the claim back to your insurers to pay.

Did you sign paper work when you got the car? If it's a AMC It's usually pages long and there in the T & C s will be buried that if they cant recover the hirer costs you will be liable.

Police bodycam footage has to be requested within a few days of the accident so it won't be available now.

Ultimately at court this comes down to what can be proved. Did you see him hit your car? (not just hear the impact and put 2 and 2 together but actually see the collision) If you did, and can give evidence of that, and come across as a better witness than your neighbour, it is likely a judge will find in your favour.

However if you didn't actually see him hit the car, it's a slightly different situation. You can say he was drunk, but was he over the limit when tested? If not then it's just your opinion that he was drunk.

I work for an insurance company and train people to deal with disputes like this. Insurers have to look for evidence and then consider the approach a court is likely to take. A lot turns on how credible people seem as witnesses at court. It's not always the person who's being honest that comes across best, unfortunately.

If you Did actually witness the impact be aware you'll need to explain to court how and why- what made you look out to the street at that exact time? Etc. Also are you happy to go to court and give evidence? That's something I tell people they always need to find out from our customers.

Put his registration plate no. into your phone - every time you see him drunk when you suspect he has driven there, ring the police that you suspect he is drunk driving. Every single damned time.

Thank you all for all of the advice given on this thread. It’s all been very helpful!

I am happy and willing to go to court to prove I am telling the truth.

I will put in an official complaint should the insurance company not back me on this one also.

I’m not sure who repaired the car. It was all arranged by the insurance company. Our car was collected by a garage and then a separate company dropped off a hire car. I literally didn’t organise a thing however did sign paperwork when the car was taken and the hire car dropped off.

I was sat in the chair by the window at the time, heard the screech and then the bang. He was still driving along our car as I jumped up to look outside. I then saw him drive to his house, attempt badly to park and that’s when DH had caught up with him.
It was dark and happened in seconds so I didn’t have time to record.

I also presumed he was a normal decent bloke who would apologise and sort it properly as most would hence wasn’t too bothered about evidence collection. We see him everyday and he has always been pleasant so I didn’t think for a second he would be so much of an idiot!

I do not understand.

You can’t prove he hit your car but because he has denied in court it was him he’s more trustworthy?! On balance, insurers believe that it’s more likely he’s telling the truth?!

Wtaf?!

(And apologies if an actuary has addressed this I’m just aghast at the OP!)

OP, you need to get back in touch with the police officer who arrested him on the night and get the full facts established so you know where you stand.

You need to ask:

1. Was he arrested for drink driving that night? He may have been arrested for something else which you were not aware of.
2. If it was drink driving, did he pass or fail the breathalyser test?
3. If he failed the test (therefore was 'over the limit'), was he charged and has a court date been set?
4. What inquiries were done into the road accident which you reported to them that night?
5. Why have you not been informed of the outcome of the investigations?

There are a couple of things which concern me.
It could actually be that he passed the breathalyser test - I don't doubt that you thought he was drunk but if he wasn't actually 'over' the limit then the police can't charge him with drink-driving.

If he has been charged and been to court, and I would have expected that to have happened by now if this happened before Christmas, what was the outcome? Courts take drink driving very seriously. If he was over the limit and charged with such then he WILL have been given a driving ban. Is this the case? Perhaps he is now driving without a licence which is also a serious offence.

Even if he wasn't over the limit that night and therefore wasn't charged with drink driving, if you suspect that he does this regularly then report it to the police each time you see him driving when you think he is drunk. It sounds like you didn't get the best out of the police on that night but the majority of police officers will jump at the chance of arresting a drink driver.

Finally, get the name and collar number of the police officer who dealt with the incident that night and tell your insurance company. They can contact the officer direct and establish what facts they need.

Perhaps his insurers would like to explain how your paint managed to make its way into his car? Surely the police should have checked his bonnet for heat and will have known it had just been driven. This is his insurers and him pulling a fast one. Use your legal cover to show that on a balance of probability, he is a lying pissheaded wanker. Also, be interesting to see if any cctv from where he came from

Perhaps consider making a complaint to the police about the fact that he was not charged with drink driving.

nevermovinghouseagain56

From what I remember the events were he hit the car. I rang police. One officer in car blocked his car in and then another came and parked at the side of his car.
He was then taken into a police car and driven away.
Another police officer took photos of my car and his but no ‘evidence’ that I’m aware of.
Then another officer came into my house to take a statement and informed me that he was over the limit on the breathaliser and also that if he pleaded guilty that i wouldn’t need to anything further.

I never heard a thing about it after that!

My car was then fixed, his was not and I didn’t think about it again until I got this letter today.