UK and Europe · Public discussion

OT: car prang - documents question

Started by Peewiglet · · Last activity · 41 posts · 1,538 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
2 November 2005
Last activity
11 November 2005
Original author
Peewiglet
Posts
41
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,538
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 41
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I had a car crash last Thursday when a woman drove out of a side road
    into the side of my car. I was on the main road.

    The police attended (grudgingly), and phoned from the scene to check
    whether there was valid insurance on both vehicles. There was. Despite
    that, the officer issued both of us with a notice to produce insurance
    certificate and DL at the local station within 7 days. I've just gone
    down to do that, in considerable pain from the whiplash that developed
    a couple of days after the prang.

    I asked at the station why it was necessary for me to produce my
    documents when the officer knew at the scene that my car was insured
    but the enquiry officer couldn't say. Does anyone here have any idea?
    I'm wondering whether this was some sort of retribution for insisting
    that the police attend the accident.

    Maybe I'm just feeling paranoid because my neck is so sore, but I
    really can't see the point. Any ideas, peeps?

    Wet fishes,
    --
    ,,
    (**)PeeWiglet~~
    / \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

  2. Sorry to hear about your prang peewiglet. Mend soon.

    No, it's standard practice to issue producers to all parties, I don't
    know if it's because they don't trust the computer, or whether it's
    because they've always done it. Either way, they always just do it.

    Well done for getting them to attend - they don't like to unless it's a
    major incident (ie you're blocking the road for other people - LOL),
    but it will really help you when the insurance co starts to say it was
    your fault or ask for 50/50.

    If it's any consolation, you'll get compensation for the whiplash, get
    a solicitor on it (check your policy for legal expenses cover). And
    don't forget to tell them how much you miss being unable to cycle.

  3. Quoted message said:


    The police attended (grudgingly), and phoned from the scene to check
    whether there was valid insurance on both vehicles. There was. Despite
    that, the officer issued both of us with a notice to produce insurance
    certificate and DL at the local station within 7 days. >
    I asked at the station why it was necessary for me to produce my
    documents when the officer knew at the scene that my car was insured
    but the enquiry officer couldn't say.

    I have met police officers several times during the last 45 years - often
    (but not always) I have been unimpressed.

    This week I am on jury service - the police officer in charge of the case is
    a dullard. There are more holes in his case than a string vest.

    The officers I have been impressed by have been (1) A sargeant (2) An
    inspector (3) A CID bloke (a DC). I have met several PCs that were doing a
    proper job but five times I have had contact with PCs who were less than
    competant.

    There may well be something to parts of this latest report on police
    recruits.

    Best to do a belt and braces job with evidence and collect witness names and
    addresses for yourself - assuming you're not injured. When they ask for
    documents twice - hand them over twice. Police officers have a lot of power.

    John

  4. Peewiglet said:

    I had a car crash last Thursday when a woman drove out of a side road
    into the side of my car. I was on the main road.

    The police attended (grudgingly), and phoned from the scene to check
    whether there was valid insurance on both vehicles. There was. Despite
    that, the officer issued both of us with a notice to produce insurance
    certificate and DL at the local station within 7 days. I've just gone
    down to do that, in considerable pain from the whiplash that developed
    a couple of days after the prang.

    I asked at the station why it was necessary for me to produce my
    documents when the officer knew at the scene that my car was insured
    but the enquiry officer couldn't say. Does anyone here have any idea?
    I'm wondering whether this was some sort of retribution for insisting
    that the police attend the accident.

    Maybe I'm just feeling paranoid because my neck is so sore, but I
    really can't see the point. Any ideas, peeps?

    Wet fishes,

    You may have cancelled your insurance but it may not have filtered down
    to the Police National Computer. You would wish to make sure the other
    party was insured wouldn't you?

    Frank

  5. On 2 Nov 2005 12:28:49 -0800, "iakobski" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    Sorry to hear about your prang peewiglet. Mend soon.

    Thank you 🙂

    Quoted message said:


    No, it's standard practice to issue producers to all parties, I don't
    know if it's because they don't trust the computer, or whether it's
    because they've always done it. Either way, they always just do it.

    Ok, then - thanks for explaining.

    Quoted message said:


    Well done for getting them to attend - they don't like to unless it's a
    major incident (ie you're blocking the road for other people - LOL),
    but it will really help you when the insurance co starts to say it was
    your fault or ask for 50/50.

    Quite right! I insisted when the other driver wasn't willing to accept
    that she'd driven out of the side road and into my car: it made me
    wonder what account she might give of it further down the line. Since
    then I've been asked by the hospital, the GP and my insurance company
    whether the police attended, so I'm very glad I insisted.

    Quoted message said:


    If it's any consolation, you'll get compensation for the whiplash, get
    a solicitor on it (check your policy for legal expenses cover). And
    don't forget to tell them how much you miss being unable to cycle.

    I will!

    Thanks 🙂

    Wet fishes,
    --
    ,,
    (**)PeeWiglet~~
    / \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

  6. On 2 Nov 2005 20:33:42 GMT, Frank Smith <[email hidden]>
    wrote:

    [...]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Maybe I'm just feeling paranoid because my neck is so sore, but I
    really can't see the point. Any ideas, peeps?

    Quoted message said:

    You may have cancelled your insurance but it may not have filtered down
    to the Police National Computer.

    Good point: I'd not thought of that.

    Quoted message said:

    You would wish to make sure the other party was insured wouldn't you?

    Obviously, but - as I said - I thought that had already been
    established. I see now that perhaps it hadn't.

    Thanks.

    Wet fishes,
    --
    ,,
    (**)PeeWiglet~~
    / \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

  7. Phil Clarke said:

    if you ask witnesses for statements prepare a note saying "I am
    collecting statements, please write down your recollection" or similar
    words & give it to them, so you can reproduce the note if needed to
    demonstrate you havent influenced a witness.

    Quoted message said:

    I once faced a trumped-up careless driving charge, a witness statement
    exonerated me but I couldnt remember & couldnt swear whether Id reminded
    her of the facts when requesting it. On the stand she said Id been
    adamant that she just write what she remembered, but in the summing up
    the (appeals) judge dismissed her evidence as I may have led or baised
    her statement (ho hum).

    I'm sorry to hear it. Were you convicted?

    Wet fishes,
    --
    ,,
    (**)PeeWiglet~~
    / \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

  8. Peewiglet said:

    On 2 Nov 2005 20:33:42 GMT, Frank Smith <[email hidden]>
    wrote:

    [...]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Maybe I'm just feeling paranoid because my neck is so sore, but I
    really can't see the point. Any ideas, peeps?

    Quoted message said:

    You may have cancelled your insurance but it may not have filtered down
    to the Police National Computer.

    Good point: I'd not thought of that.

    Quoted message said:

    You would wish to make sure the other party was insured wouldn't you?

    Obviously, but - as I said - I thought that had already been
    established. I see now that perhaps it hadn't.

    Thanks.

    Wet fishes,

    Sorry about your bingle. You really shouldnt be on newsgroups mate.. you
    are far too rational 🙂

  9. "Peewiglet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On 2 Nov 2005 20:33:42 GMT, Frank Smith <[email hidden]>
    wrote:

    [...]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Maybe I'm just feeling paranoid because my neck is so sore, but I
    really can't see the point. Any ideas, peeps?

    Quoted message said:

    You may have cancelled your insurance but it may not have filtered down
    to the Police National Computer.

    Good point: I'd not thought of that.

    Quoted message said:

    You would wish to make sure the other party was insured wouldn't you?

    Obviously, but - as I said - I thought that had already been
    established. I see now that perhaps it hadn't.

    Thanks.

    Wet fishes,
    --
    ,,
    (**)PeeWiglet~~
    / \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

    I'm confused now... Why would producing the same documents at a police
    station
    change things even if you've cancelled???

    Graham

  10. Peewiglet said:

    On 2 Nov 2005 12:28:49 -0800, "iakobski" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    If it's any consolation, you'll get compensation for the whiplash, get
    a solicitor on it (check your policy for legal expenses cover). And
    don't forget to tell them how much you miss being unable to cycle.

    I will!

    Thanks 🙂

    Try hard ..

    It took a year before they'd finished all the letter writing, but
    the compensation I got for a rear-end shunt could buy you two
    Titanium Bromptons ..

    -adrian

  11. Graham Dean said:


    "Peewiglet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On 2 Nov 2005 20:33:42 GMT, Frank Smith <[email hidden]>
    wrote:

    [...]

    Quoted message said:

    > Maybe I'm just feeling paranoid because my neck is so sore, but I
    > really can't see the point. Any ideas, peeps?

    Quoted message said:

    You may have cancelled your insurance but it may not have filtered down
    to the Police National Computer.

    Good point: I'd not thought of that.

    Quoted message said:

    You would wish to make sure the other party was insured wouldn't you?

    Obviously, but - as I said - I thought that had already been
    established. I see now that perhaps it hadn't.

    Thanks.

    Wet fishes,
    --
    ,,
    (**)PeeWiglet~~
    / \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

    I'm confused now... Why would producing the same documents at a police
    station
    change things even if you've cancelled???

    Another good point 🙂 But... I think that if insurance is cancelled
    then the insured is required to send the policy back. So, it shouldn't
    then be possible to present the policy to the police later. If it's
    not been returned, of course, it would be possible to present it
    fraudulently.

    Wet fishes,
    --
    ,,
    (**)PeeWiglet~~
    / \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

  12. "Peewiglet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Graham Dean said:


    "Peewiglet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On 2 Nov 2005 20:33:42 GMT, Frank Smith <[email hidden]>
    wrote:

    [...]
    >> Maybe I'm just feeling paranoid because my neck is so sore, but I
    >> really can't see the point. Any ideas, peeps?

    >You may have cancelled your insurance but it may not have filtered down
    >to the Police National Computer.

    Good point: I'd not thought of that.

    > You would wish to make sure the other party was insured wouldn't you?

    Obviously, but - as I said - I thought that had already been
    established. I see now that perhaps it hadn't.

    Thanks.

    Wet fishes,
    --
    ,,
    (**)PeeWiglet~~
    / \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

    I'm confused now... Why would producing the same documents at a police
    station
    change things even if you've cancelled???

    Another good point 🙂 But... I think that if insurance is cancelled
    then the insured is required to send the policy back. So, it shouldn't
    then be possible to present the policy to the police later. If it's
    not been returned, of course, it would be possible to present it
    fraudulently.

    Wet fishes,
    --
    ,,
    (**)PeeWiglet~~
    / \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

    I hope not as I recently cancelled some motorbike insurance and I didn't do
    this! I don't think
    it was requested from insurance company - I simply shredded the docs!

    Hope you're okay by the way!

    Graham

  13. Graham Dean said:

    I hope not as I recently cancelled some motorbike insurance and I didn't do
    this! I don't think
    it was requested from insurance company - I simply shredded the docs!

    It sounds as though practice varies between insurers 🙂 I'm sure
    they'd have told you if they wanted it.

    Quoted message said:


    Hope you're okay by the way!

    Yes, thanks, except for v. v. stiff/sore neck/shoulders! I'm sure
    it'll pass.

    Wet fishes,
    --
    ,,
    (**)PeeWiglet~~
    / \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

  14. dave said:

    Sorry about your bingle.

    Thanks 🙂

    Quoted message said:

    You really shouldnt be on newsgroups mate.. you
    are far too rational 🙂

    Heh! I'll have to frame that 🙂 I'm not sure I've ever been accused
    of rationality before! :-))

    Wet fishes,
    --
    ,,
    (**)PeeWiglet~~
    / \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

  15. Quoted message said:

    The police attended (grudgingly), and phoned from the scene to check
    whether there was valid insurance on both vehicles. There was. Despite
    that, the officer issued both of us with a notice to produce insurance
    certificate and DL at the local station within 7 days. I've just gone
    down to do that, in considerable pain from the whiplash that developed
    a couple of days after the prang.

    The police are under no obligation to attend any road traffic accident
    unless there's an injury involved. It's worth remembering this as it's easy
    enough to 'fake' an injury when summoning the constabulary. The issuing of a
    'producer' as a consequence of a document check is standard practice. I
    notice theat you did not mention your MOT certificate, is your car
    relatively new and not need an MOT? There is a time lag between insurance
    renewals/purchases and their appearance on the central records. I was
    stopped by the police because their records showed that I did not have any
    insurance despite the cfact that i had purchased a policy from a different
    company 24 hours before a policy had lapsed.

    Possibly the demand to see all documentation arises from the desire to have
    a simple, one size fits all procedure. Once MOT certification is
    computerised in the not too distant future, the police will have access to
    licence, MOT and insurance details instantly. Still gives a driver the
    opportunity to attempt to pass him/herself off as someone else unless photo
    id is carrried.

    Quoted message said:


    I asked at the station why it was necessary for me to produce my
    documents when the officer knew at the scene that my car was insured
    but the enquiry officer couldn't say. Does anyone here have any idea?
    I'm wondering whether this was some sort of retribution for insisting
    that the police attend the accident.

    No it was retribution, just standard procedure. Could have been worse. You
    could have been breathalysed.

  16. On Thu, 3 Nov 2005 03:36:25 +0000 (UTC), "vernon" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The police attended (grudgingly), and phoned from the scene to check
    whether there was valid insurance on both vehicles. There was. Despite
    that, the officer issued both of us with a notice to produce insurance
    certificate and DL at the local station within 7 days. I've just gone
    down to do that, in considerable pain from the whiplash that developed
    a couple of days after the prang.

    The police are under no obligation to attend any road traffic accident
    unless there's an injury involved.

    This seems crazy to me, though. Since I was present, I know that the
    other driver shot out of a side road at considerable speed, ignoring
    the give way markings, and collided at speed with the side of my car,
    causing it to spin round in the road and end up on the wrong side
    facing in the wrong direction. That's certainly driving without due
    care and attention, and maybe even reckless driving. In either event
    it's a criminal offence, and it's only by the grace of god that there
    was nothing coming in the other direction. The only reason police
    don't send people out when there are no immediately apparent injuries
    is to save money.

    It's also interesting to me that I was asked at the hospital, by the
    GP and on my insurance certificate whether the police attended.
    Accidents are not taken so seriously if the police were not there.

    The other driver and I were very polite to each other, but I rang the
    police when she stopped talking after I asked if she'd not seen me,
    since she'd just driven straight out into the side of me. I realised
    it was possible that she might give a false account of the accident in
    the future, so I wanted the police to be there to record the position
    of the vehicles, and the damage. When I rang the police, though, I was
    told it was just an insurance matter. I had to insist on them sending
    a patrol. When the officer came he too said it was just an insurance
    matter, and he issued us both with notices to produce our documents.
    He did record the position of the vehicles and the position of the
    damage, though, so if at some stage I need a police witness I have
    one.

    Quoted message said:

    It's worth remembering this as it's easy
    enough to 'fake' an injury when summoning the constabulary.

    Many people who are actually injured in an RTA don't develop symptoms
    until some time afterwards: whiplash tends to come on later.

    Quoted message said:

    The issuing of a
    'producer' as a consequence of a document check is standard practice. I
    notice theat you did not mention your MOT certificate, is your car
    relatively new and not need an MOT?

    Yes.

    Quoted message said:

    There is a time lag between insurance
    renewals/purchases and their appearance on the central records. I was
    stopped by the police because their records showed that I did not have any
    insurance despite the cfact that i had purchased a policy from a different
    company 24 hours before a policy had lapsed.

    I'd not realised that until I saw what a previous poster wrote, but it
    makes sense.

    Quoted message said:


    Possibly the demand to see all documentation arises from the desire to have
    a simple, one size fits all procedure. Once MOT certification is
    computerised in the not too distant future, the police will have access to
    licence, MOT and insurance details instantly. Still gives a driver the
    opportunity to attempt to pass him/herself off as someone else unless photo
    id is carrried.

    I had my DL with me, and the officer could have seen it had he asked.
    (It's the one with the photo.)

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:


    I asked at the station why it was necessary for me to produce my
    documents when the officer knew at the scene that my car was insured
    but the enquiry officer couldn't say. Does anyone here have any idea?
    I'm wondering whether this was some sort of retribution for insisting
    that the police attend the accident.

    No it was retribution, just standard procedure. Could have been worse. You
    could have been breathalysed.

    Yes, I could have been. There would have been no reason to breathalyse
    me at 9.15 in the morning, since I was quite clearly sober, but there
    are lots of ways for officers to abuse their position, if so inclined.
    Wet fishes,
    --
    ,,
    (**)PeeWiglet~~
    / \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

  17. Peewiglet said:


    Yes, thanks, except for v. v. stiff/sore neck/shoulders! I'm sure
    it'll pass.

    Wet fishes,

    It's likely to get worse before it gets better. Get a GP to refer you
    to a physio, and keep notes on everything - who you saw, what hurts
    and for how long. Otherwise the insurance claim forms will be a severe
    memory test.

    -adrian

  18. In message <[email hidden]>, Peewiglet
    <[email hidden]> writes

    Quoted message said:

    On 2 Nov 2005 20:33:42 GMT, Frank Smith <[email hidden]>
    wrote:

    [...]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Maybe I'm just feeling paranoid because my neck is so sore, but I
    really can't see the point. Any ideas, peeps?

    Quoted message said:

    You may have cancelled your insurance but it may not have filtered down
    to the Police National Computer.

    Good point: I'd not thought of that.

    Quoted message said:

    You would wish to make sure the other party was insured wouldn't you?

    Obviously, but - as I said - I thought that had already been
    established. I see now that perhaps it hadn't.

    Alos, what info does the PNC give them I wonder re insurance. If it just
    says 'yes this car has insurance' then that doesn't mean that the person
    driving it was insured. Maybe they need to see the docs to check things
    like that
    --
    Chris French

  19. Peewiglet said:
    Quoted message said:

    No it was retribution, just standard procedure. Could have been worse. You
    could have been breathalysed.

    Quoted message said:

    Yes, I could have been. There would have been no reason to breathalyse
    me at 9.15 in the morning, since I was quite clearly sober, but there
    are lots of ways for officers to abuse their position, if so inclined.

    I was breathalysed after a minor 3-car head-tail prang on my way into work
    a couple of years ago. Officer at the time explained that it was standard
    in any sort of accident.
    And there is this campaign at the moment telling people that if they're
    very drunk at 2 am then they're likely to be still quite drunk at 9:15!

    I didn't mind actually, it was done on the spot and I hadn't seen one of
    those machines before 🙂

    Roos

  20. In message <[email hidden]>, Peewiglet
    <[email hidden]> writes

    Quoted message said:


    There would have been no reason to breathalyse
    me at 9.15 in the morning, since I was quite clearly sober,

    It's not that hard to drink enough the night before to still be over the
    limit in the morning

    --
    Chris French

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.