Where do I stand?

Isn't it offence to leave an engine running when the vehicle is unattended?

If so does that mean that he wouldn't be able to claim for the damage to his own car?
 
I did ask the cop and the cop said he has to pay for damage as well.
Just remember that the police has no training at all in the civil matter of liability and damages and so you're may as well be asking a random person the street their opinion.

Back in my claims days the policeman's opinion caused no end of arguements when they had advised one party wasn't liable when there is a mountain of case law saying they are (or partially are). Never saw one case where the police were right and we were wrong (from a theoretical point of view - there are also econmic considerations but there we may acknowledge the theoretical correctness but say we don't like the odds)
 
I think he did otherwise he wouldn't have said to me that his premium is quite high, his insurance won't pay out, I need to pay the damage on his car and pay half of the damage of my car as well. The last one was totally shocked me and I said that he was damaging my personal property and I think he should pay for the damage he's done.

I did ask the cop and the cop said he has to pay for damage as well.

At least that is one less Christmas card to write this year!!!!
Obviously he does not care at all about neighbour relations. This is something I can kind of understand in a big apartment block in a city when you will only know maybe a few people in the block but if you live in a small community like you appear to then it just seems strange.
 
Yeah definitely no Xmas card for them anyway [emoji1].

The funny thing is he's not short of money as well. He's works offshore.

Still don't understand why he left the scene and came back with another car and said his wife had to go.
 
Isn't it offence to leave an engine running when the vehicle is unattended?

As far as I know, yes.

If so does that mean that he wouldn't be able to claim for the damage to his own car?

Not as far as I know, he could claim on his insurance and they would pay out in accordance with his policy, but as it is an "own fault" his insurers would then claim the money back from him (plus costs), if necessary taking him to court.
 
OK so we've got the perpetrator and car (person in charge of the car at the time) leaving the scene of an accident without actually exchanging details;
The victim believing his car which was SORN was not on a public highway.
The perpetrator leaving the engine running in an unattended vehicle - did she think that was OK because she also believed it was off the public highway?
A possible fault with the vehicle, should the e-brake have held stationary with nobody in the driving seat, or is the e-brake not designed to combat inclines?
 
If you have comprehensive insurance and you crash your own car through your own fault then your insurance still pays out - you just pay the excess. That's what comprehensive insurance is for, otherwise we'd just have 3rd party, fire and theft and cover our own losses.
They will increase the premium at renewal.

In my opinion the insurance of the party with the unattended vehicle that ran away are responsible for all the costs of both repairs. The fact that the other car wasn't insured at the time isn't significant. If their car had driven into a caravan or boat with no insurance, they would still be liable. I'm not a lawyer so if the other party's insurance isn't playing ball you may need one.
 
The insurance wrote it off now and they phoned yesterday and gave a settlement over the phone. They gave £100 more than I was going to accept on the sale as I said I just put 2 new tyres as well. No excess etc to pay. Just waiting for a letter about my charges now [emoji17]
 
A result on the settlement then. Hopefully the police matter will not be too bad either. You would hope for some common sense in terms of it was parked up and not being used. If you had been caught driving it with no insurance etc. then that would be a different matter
 
If you had been caught driving it with no insurance etc. then that would be a different matter
As proven my this incident though.... a car doesnt need to be being driven to cause damage.
 
It could be on your drive without insurance and roll forward into road and cause damage. Would have been legal in terms of SORN. I think intent needs to be taken into account. The OP did not intend to fall foul of the rules so this should be taken into account IMHO.
 
I don't think there is any room to move on the offence. It is a set out of court settlement penalty once the car is sighted on the road. I presume the police will accept it was seen since it was hit on a road. Looks like £30 plus (edit oops double the) remaining tax - hopefully it was near the end of the SORN period :)

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...icle_Enforcement_Policy_Table_1__revised_.pdf

As mentioned though none of this has anything to do with who pays and who was or wasn't insured.
 
The amount above the sale price should cover that.
 
It seems he dobbed himself or his wife in for an offence for leaving the car running with nobody licences to drive it in it.

There is another offence for emissions and that actually applies while you are driving it seems! That one seem to be local councils that enforce it so maybe not many pay those ones!

Parked up? Engine running? Lawbreaker!
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom