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

If he is old you might also suggest to the DVLA that you believe him to be unfit to drive .......

He’s not old, maybe 60s

OP - if he is denying it and the insurance companies are not pursuing the matter, it may be that you could say that the driver is unknown?
Therefore, could you try the Motor Insurance Bureau:

The Motor Insurers' Bureau (MIB) was founded in the UK in 1946 as a private company limited by guarantee and is the mechanism in the UK through which compensation is provided for victims of accidents caused by uninsured and untraced drivers, which is funded by an estimated £30 a year from every insured driver's premiums.

AntsDeck the Motor Insurers Bureau WON'T cover it because Op clearly has comprehensive insurance. They are "insurer of last resort" ie they can only be involved when compensation can't be claimed elsewhere. They won't reimburse Ops insurer.

Mane it seems you had the wrong end of the stick when you posted first but you've since clarified what the letter actually says which is that your Insurer does intend to pursue the matter to court if necessary. That's all they can do - the judge will decide liability.

FWIW I've worked in Insurance claims for over 20 years and based on what you've outlined I'd certainly run this case. You don't have to have actually seen him impact with your car - your evidence in court alongside the photos, the police report and the impact damage to the cars (it's very likely a motor assessor saw your car at the repairer, no reason you'd know that) would all suggest that on balance you are telling the truth. So I'd be pretty confident (as the insurer) in pushing it all the way. By the same token if I was his insurer, faced with that evidence, there's no way I'd want to waste money defending the claim.

On the way to work a few years ago a white van pulled out behind me while I was stationary in traffic, bashing my rear bumper. Although I blasted my horn he just drove off. Reported it to the police after work. I was able to give the car reg and a description of emblem on the side as my kids were in the car at the time and memorised the number.
To cut a long story short, my insurers collected car and returned it with bumper repaired. Forgot about it until I received a letter from my insurers 6 months later asking if I would go 50/50. Refused as I was no way to blame. Then given a court date. Incidentally, this apparently would have involved both sides sitting around a table. Irritatingly I took a day off work only to find it was cancelled the day before. So glad I stuck to my guns. The other side eventually admitted liability.

Many insurance companies are owned by the same people. All out to make money and penalise us. They obviously want to avoid paying out if they can. You were covered by your insurance and did nothing wrong. That is what insurance is for. Stick to your guns and do not worry. If it goes to court fine, but it may not get that far. You have done everything right and I hope it works out for you.

Maneandfeathers - I totally get what you are saying. My advice to you would still be to find out what has happened since the incident. Was he charged and convicted of drink driving? If yes, then this proves that he was driving which then discredits his claim not to have been.

As far as evidence of the incident itself goes, you saw it therefore you are a witness. I don't get how it can be said there is no evidence if you saw it take place. The police don't need to have been witnesses to the actual collision, their report is still relevant.

As it was your car that was damaged you are entitled to know the end result of the police enquiries.

So
Your insurers have paid for your damage and have tried to get the money back. Other side are not playing ball (it could be because he was drunk and they want a judgement against him to make it easier to get their money back) and your insurance company are issuing legal proceedings to fight your corner.
Big bad insurance company doing exactly what is correct in the circumstances.