A friend of mine, running his own business, does ground maintenance and landscaping work for a council, received this letter through the post. He was driving his van with a trailer at the time and uses that road frequently but doesn’t believe he caused any damage to a gate, which is being alleged by someone.
(Edit) He had hired a trailer that day for the job. He rang the trailer hire company when he received the letter to ask if there was any damage upon retuning the trailer, and they replied that there was no damage.
Does anyone have any contacts for legal advice for him, please?
I’ve taken a pic of his letter and a screenshot of his concerns. Any help would be great.
Deny all allegations if you genuinely did no damage. Innocent until proven guilty. Did you perform any manoeuvres near the gate? Claiming that you are unaware of a collision is leaving you open to liability. Denial requires proof to be provided.
It’s all too easy for anybody to note a commercial vehicle registration number and claim it has caused damage. If the claim is modest, many companies simply make a commercial decision to pay up, being cheaper than fighting the claim.
It’s happened to me a number of time, with claims varying from a broken windscreen to a total write off. When asked for proof, the claims usually evaporate. The damage either never existed, or occured elsewhere and doesn’t align with the allegation.
The first question to be asked is, why didn’t the witness approach the driver.
Who says that any evidence will only be disclosed after “the file is closed” ? Seems very strange to me.
Check that it is indeed the police requesting the info. Given the detail it probably is, but as with e-mails, don`t click on links, nor follow given addresses, find contact independently.
If the driver was unaware of any collision, then just say that. Why wouldn`t you?
If there is some evidence then that surely must be presented before any decision is made, or any case goes further.
I cant see that any case will succeed if it is one word against another. The onus is on the claimant/police to show guilt. Any evidence must be disclosed or it cant be challenged.
PS…it seems the file you uploaded is too big and is overflowing the screen. Could you edit it smaller? Or maybe a nice helpful mod will do so?
One step at a time.
The police are asking for the ID of a driver at a specific time. I can see no reason for the reg-owner to refuse.
Later the driver will probably receive a letter asking if he was aware of an accident. If they were unaware of an accident they say so.
Any allegations against them, have to be proved. But that is for a later day.
As already said it could be someone “flying a kite” trying to get a quick buck if the vehicle owner coughs up a few quid to avoid hassle.
Personally, I wouldn`t be spending out money on defence at this stage.
Had the same allegations against me a few years back, brand new vehicle, first trip out, queue of traffic in lane one, I was in lane two, overtook them, woman in a car came after me, I stopped, reckoned I had hit her car, magically said she had witnesses, how she got them as she didn’t have time, she chased me down, showed me a gouge on the front wing just above sill height, it was covered in rust, sort of scrape done on a short post when reversing, no other damage, even the door mirror was not touched, of course no marks on my vehicle, police came, had to give details, police not interested in it other than saying she says you did it so you have to give her your insurance details and let them sort it out.
Later filled in an accident report for the insurance company stressing the point she was just trying it on with a rusty gouge, never heard anymore about it.
The letter is only asking who the driver was, failing to reply to that simple question is a offence.
Don’t get drawn into the damage etc, that is something different for a different letter.
Acorn:
The letter is only asking who the driver was, failing to reply to that simple question is a offence.
Correct. Failure to notify can result in a rather large lightening of the wallet, so comply with that.
Was the vehicle in the area at the time where the alleged offence took place? The onus is on the owner of the gate to prove that, (A) it was and (B) it caused the damage. Without any video or photographic evidence, it will be nigh on impossible to prove.
However. I smell the “Well I have a witness” scenario here, and I would be informing my insurance company that someone is trying to defraud them.
Not legal advice but experience from the nineties of chancers trying it on.
I had made a drop to a small factory in the Ilford area which involved a bit of a dance dropping the drag trailer on the street outside, delivering the swag, coupling up again and away.
A couple of hours later the office called having received a complaint from a local alleging all kinds of damage to his car and asking what I knew about it. (Answer, “nothing” since the only thing that had actually happened was that someone with a pre-damaged car was not about to look a gift horse in the mouth).
Months later a constable from the GMP paid me a personal visit bearing a pile of paperwork sent up from the Met, all bearing the legend “no witnesses found”.
Gave statement, no further action.
Incidently, by dad used to work for the Manchester Evening News who ran a very large fleet of ■■■■■■ and Transit vans, and who used to receive equally bogus claims regularly.
As has been said all its asking for is the identity of the driver. If there’s no issue giving that. Its what happens from there that will shape it.
On your side you have your friend with no knowledge so the burden of proof sits with the prosecution in which case your friend will be bang to rights but fairly ie genuine mistake and genuinely not known but some damage did happen in case uts one of them.
But the list of potential charges seem disproportionate to me, almost like its been made to be more serious and like someone has noted your mate driving the same road frequently and is trying it on etc but it’ll onky get found out if the process is followed
