where do i stand?

bluecow

This morning, on my daily commute to work i got hit by a van that overtook too closely and the van drove off. Leaving me very obviously hit and lying on the floor. The car behind (and the one behind that) stopped. None of us got the reg, just the type of van. I went to the police station which was fortunately only a ten minute walk away and reported it. I dont think there are cameras which point to the spot i was hit, but there are cameras further back down the road where they would show the van behind me. Assuming these cameras are working and pick up the reg (big assumptions i know) what are the chances of prosecuting? This guy really ought to be told under caution that its just not chivalrous to run over girls on bikes and run away.
Btw, no major injuries, just a badly bruised and scraped elbow, think ive done something to the joint cause it hurts if i push on it, to open a door for example. Cuts to my legs and a bruise on my thigh. Also have a headache, but i think thats just from stress.
Any advice?
H

Feltup

Not much advice really, just hope you recover quickly. Did you get the name and address of the whitness? That would certainly help your case if they ever managed to track down the van driver.

lost_in_thought

Get yourself to a medical person, a GP or go to A&E. You need to be checked out, for one, and furthermore you'll need to document your injuries.

I had a hit-and-run with a van, and the police were very helpful indeed trying to track the van down, unfortunately they failed but they seemed to be trying.

I would definitely get on it with the police if you haven't already.

spen666

Chances of prosecution are limited even if they did have CCTV down the road.

how can you/they prove it was the same van? Very difficult to do evidentially

Glad you are ok (ish). You may be able to pursue a MIB claim for your injuries- NB there are 2 MIB schemes, you need the one for untraced drivers, this only covers personal injuriy, not property damage

bluecow

Im sitting at home now having just been brought home from work! I insisted i feel fine enough to be at work and that id been fine cycling the 13 miles between the incident and work. I have got a GP appt this evening, just to keep work happy really. But it will be handy to have it all documented in case my elbow gets worse. Im more just wanting to teach the little creep a lesson. He probably has no insurance/license. I will def keep on the tail of the police about this one.
I got the witnesses name and phone number so at the very least he can verify that i did get hit and what the van looked like and that it didnt stop.
Grrr.
Road safety awareness day at our work today too! I'll miss the seminar. Ironic really.

gtvlusso

Sorry to hear about your incident - nothing from me, I managed to punch the van driver that knocked me off....

Spen's yer maun though for this type of thing!

bluecow

Spen's yer maun though for this type of thing![/quote]

Eh?!

BoardinBob

Agree that charges would be hard to bring. A couple of years ago someone hit my car outside the office and a guy saw it and came in to the office to find the owner. The police were called and the witness was able to provide:

The registration number
The colour of the car
A description of the car
A description of the driver

He didn't know the make or model of the car though.

The police traced the car through the registration number and visited the owner. Both he and the car matched the description given by the witness but he denied he was involved.

The police came back and informed me that because the witness couldn't identify the make and model of the car and the guy was denying it, there was absolutely nothing they could do. :roll:

bluecow

Thats quite depressing! Ho hum, i know getting wiped out occasionally is par for the course for the regular commuter. Let's see if anything comes of it.

gtvlusso

bluecow wrote:

Spen's yer maun though for this type of thing!

Eh?![/quote]
Yer Maun was Joe Dunlops nickname - thought I would use it instead of your man!

Littigator

spen666 wrote:

Chances of prosecution are limited even if they did have CCTV down the road.

how can you/they prove it was the same van? Very difficult to do evidentially

Glad you are ok (ish). You may be able to pursue a MIB claim for your injuries- NB there are 2 MIB schemes, you need the one for untraced drivers, this only covers personal injuriy, not property damage

Spen, I've always wondered, are you a solicitor, if so what area do you work in?

Ta

H, sorry to hear about your accident, and resting at home and seeing a doctor is defo the best thing, shock can play a big part after an incident like that so take today nice and easy!

CiB

BoardinBob wrote:

Agree that charges would be hard to bring. A couple of years ago someone hit my car outside the office and a guy saw it and came in to the office to find the owner. The police were called and the witness was able to provide:

The registration number
The colour of the car
A description of the car
A description of the driver

He didn't know the make or model of the car though.

The police traced the car through the registration number and visited the owner. Both he and the car matched the description given by the witness but he denied he was involved.

The police came back and informed me that because the witness couldn't identify the make and model of the car and the guy was denying it, there was absolutely nothing they could do. :roll:

This same situation has been covered a few times in The Telegraph motoring section by 'Honest John', and in brief, your best option is to trace the owner via the DVLA [assuming you can get he reg no from cctv], then claim directly for your damages via the small claims court. The other driver must either defend himself and risk committing perjury in a court of law, or leave the case undefended in which case you'll win. The police don't necessarily have to be involved, but you will need the reg no of the van that hit you.

See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/caradvice/honestjohn/3173998/Honest-John-toll-alerts-record-mileage-and-crash-tactics.html, scroll down to Crash Course (someone must have the envious job of coming up with pithy titles for each letter).

spen666

Littigator - you have a PM

spen666

ChrisInBicester wrote:

BoardinBob wrote:

Agree that charges would be hard to bring. A couple of years ago someone hit my car outside the office and a guy saw it and came in to the office to find the owner. The police were called and the witness was able to provide:

The registration number
The colour of the car
A description of the car
A description of the driver

He didn't know the make or model of the car though.

The police traced the car through the registration number and visited the owner. Both he and the car matched the description given by the witness but he denied he was involved.

The police came back and informed me that because the witness couldn't identify the make and model of the car and the guy was denying it, there was absolutely nothing they could do. :roll:

This same situation has been covered a few times in The Telegraph motoring section by 'Honest John', and in brief, your best option is to trace the owner via the DVLA [assuming you can get he reg no from cctv], then claim directly for your damages via the small claims court. The other driver must either defend himself and risk committing perjury in a court of law, or leave the case undefended in which case you'll win. The police don't necessarily have to be involved, but you will need the reg no of the van that hit you.

See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/caradvice/honestjohn/3173998/Honest-John-toll-alerts-record-mileage-and-crash-tactics.html, scroll down to Crash Course (someone must have the envious job of coming up with pithy titles for each letter).

Chris, you appear to be very confused.


The post you quote and the others in this thread are talking about "charges" or prosecution. This is a criminal matter.

You are talking about civil litigation which is something completely different.


The OP would have a civil claim if the offender can be identified, but that is a different thing to what we have been taklking about in this thread

alfablue

Agree with the Motor Insurers Bureau - I got £4000 for a whiplash from that route. And don't assume today's niggling injuries won't become long term pains! When I had my crash (in a car) I felt completely unhurt, I got home and was told I had a huge red bruise on my forehead - (the impression of my watch when I headbutted my arms held in front of my face - it was a slow speed crash - I was parked when the bus drove into me). Next day my neck stiffened up. Still having neck pain many years later.

bigmat

spen666 wrote:

ChrisInBicester wrote:

BoardinBob wrote:

Agree that charges would be hard to bring. A couple of years ago someone hit my car outside the office and a guy saw it and came in to the office to find the owner. The police were called and the witness was able to provide:

The registration number
The colour of the car
A description of the car
A description of the driver

He didn't know the make or model of the car though.

The police traced the car through the registration number and visited the owner. Both he and the car matched the description given by the witness but he denied he was involved.

The police came back and informed me that because the witness couldn't identify the make and model of the car and the guy was denying it, there was absolutely nothing they could do. :roll:

This same situation has been covered a few times in The Telegraph motoring section by 'Honest John', and in brief, your best option is to trace the owner via the DVLA [assuming you can get he reg no from cctv], then claim directly for your damages via the small claims court. The other driver must either defend himself and risk committing perjury in a court of law, or leave the case undefended in which case you'll win. The police don't necessarily have to be involved, but you will need the reg no of the van that hit you.

See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/caradvice/honestjohn/3173998/Honest-John-toll-alerts-record-mileage-and-crash-tactics.html, scroll down to Crash Course (someone must have the envious job of coming up with pithy titles for each letter).

Chris, you appear to be very confused.


The post you quote and the others in this thread are talking about "charges" or prosecution. This is a criminal matter.

You are talking about civil litigation which is something completely different.


The OP would have a civil claim if the offender can be identified, but that is a different thing to what we have been taklking about in this thread

I'm equally confused - isn't the MIB for civil claims? If we're taking criminal, would it be possible to claim against the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board? I imagine it would be difficult to provide satisfactory evidence of a criminal offence in the circumstances though.

alfablue

Yes, the MIB is a civil matter, insurers pay into the kitty and the MIB pays out to victims of uninsured or untraced drivers. A lawyer can be used for the claim, or you can claim online yourself. I understand the OP was interested in prosecution, but as this is unlikely to happen, then some compensation for loss and injury would be in order.

I don't know much about criminal injuries compensation but I gather that it isn't too generous, even if it applied in this case, and the MIB is likely to be more fruitful.

CiB

Thanks for the slating - I wasn't 'very confused'. I was linking the OP's original query and that of BoardInBob who'd experienced a similar event where even with the reg no of the offender, witnesses etc, the police were of the opinion that nothing could or would be done. I recalled reading a similar thing in the paper not so long ago and linked to it, making it clear that as a bare minimum the reg no would be required. As an option though it's certainly feasible. If loss or damage has occurred and the authorities don't wish to pursue it, there's no reason why a private individual can't make a claim privately. In the event of any incident of this nature and similar, the victim has the right to request that he / she ends up not substantially worse off than before the incident occurred. That's not being 'very confused'.

bluecow

Just heard back from the police; the cctv has picked up me and the van on the road, but unfortunately no cigar for the registration. Makes me wonder why it's there if it cant do that.
Anyway, no good letting myself get wound up about it. I just hope i meet them again tomorrow

spen666

MatHammond wrote:

....

I'm equally confused - isn't the MIB for civil claims? If we're taking criminal, would it be possible to claim against the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board? I imagine it would be difficult to provide satisfactory evidence of a criminal offence in the circumstances though.

CICB was abolished years ago- now is the CICA [ I think!}

To get compensation under this, which is not very generous anyway, you need to show you were the victim of a crime of violence. You would need to show this was an assault, niot just careless/dangerous driving, but a deliberate act

spen666

ChrisInBicester wrote:

Thanks for the slating - I wasn't 'very confused'. I was linking the OP's original query and that of BoardInBob who'd experienced a similar event where even with the reg no of the offender, witnesses etc, the police were of the opinion that nothing could or would be done. I recalled reading a similar thing in the paper not so long ago and linked to it, making it clear that as a bare minimum the reg no would be required. As an option though it's certainly feasible. If loss or damage has occurred and the authorities don't wish to pursue it, there's no reason why a private individual can't make a claim privately. In the event of any incident of this nature and similar, the victim has the right to request that he / she ends up not substantially worse off than before the incident occurred. That's not being 'very confused'.

you again repeat the confusion.

The OP asks re PROSECUTION, you are talking re civil claims. The two are totally different

The police are nor necessary for a civil claim.

Civil claims are in County/ High court and have different rules of evidence, different standards of proof. Civil claims result in compensation. Criminal cases result in convictions and punishment

always_tyred

spen666 wrote:

MatHammond wrote:

....

I'm equally confused - isn't the MIB for civil claims? If we're taking criminal, would it be possible to claim against the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board? I imagine it would be difficult to provide satisfactory evidence of a criminal offence in the circumstances though.

CICB was abolished years ago- now is the CICA [ I think!}

To get compensation under this, which is not very generous anyway, you need to show you were the victim of a crime of violence. You would need to show this was an assault, niot just careless/dangerous driving, but a deliberate act

You couldn't, just once, divulge some positive advice, as opposed to explanations of what isn't possible?

spen666

Always Tyred wrote:

spen666 wrote:

MatHammond wrote:

....

I'm equally confused - isn't the MIB for civil claims? If we're taking criminal, would it be possible to claim against the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board? I imagine it would be difficult to provide satisfactory evidence of a criminal offence in the circumstances though.

CICB was abolished years ago- now is the CICA [ I think!}

To get compensation under this, which is not very generous anyway, you need to show you were the victim of a crime of violence. You would need to show this was an assault, niot just careless/dangerous driving, but a deliberate act

You couldn't, just once, divulge some positive advice, as opposed to explanations of what isn't possible?

Erm can you read?

Go back to my first post.

I was the one who advised Op he could make a MIB claim and advised which of the 2 MIB schemes would apply

Is that positive enough for you.

Or perhaps you object to me advising why a suggestion made by another poster would not worrk. Is it positive to let OP follow wrong advice and waste time and money pursuing a claim under the CICA which cannot possibly succeed on the facts provided by OP

Positive Advice? Learn to read

always_tyred

That's not polite, but then you rarely are. God you are such an ar$e.

STEFANOS4784

lol, brilliant

spen666

Always Tyred wrote:

That's not polite, but then you rarely are. God you are such an ar$e.

polite?

Try re reading your post

Which by the way was wrong as I clearly posted positive and ACCURATE advice unlike you

I don't see too much positive in your wrongful attacks

always_tyred

Have I committed a tort?

Oh dear, how sad, never mind.