correct but it was also carelessness as my wife could get done for 'undue care and attention'....still an accident

dont worry badger, joncris is just annoyed cos he doesnt even understand what accident means in the OED. i mean, where does it state in there that an accident will only happen with the hand of god?!!! scenario: man 1 steals car stereo from stationary car. on his way to a pub, man 2 steals car stereo from man 1. later that day, man 2 gets caught by police for stealing the car stereo. man 2 says he stole stereo from man 1. should man1 get away with being investigated cos the police have man 2 and man 1 is a victim? i think not!!!! the car should not have been there whether it had all docs or not. the guy opposite us is a mechanic and put the car there. he is working from home and i can assure you he does not declare the any business taxes and should not be working there as per his tenancy agreement. i am man 2 and man 1 is the mechanic, the only difference is that nothing was stolen and no police were invovled and it was an accident regardless to what joncris says!!! i am currently gathering photo evidence to not only get him evicted but for the inland revenue to recoup the taxes he owes!!!

you need to look in the dictionary. my wife neglectic her rear view mirror resulting in an accident occurring due to her carelesness!!!

you clearly havent read all posts, he is not the victim, he is a man on a drink driving ban who is getting involved. we have never seen or heared the victim who are the owners of the car that my wife accidently hit. why's he getting involved? if i threatened your wife or partner then wouldnt you get involved? it is a matter for the police that's why i want reg of the car so i can go to the police.

with regards to what beccus told me on the phone, when i said that insurers will pay out regardless of all documents, she replied with 'thats not always the case'

joncris, accident in the dictionary means an unfortunate event resulting especially from carelessness or ignorance. also an unforeseen and unplanned event or circumstance. (edit) thank you rdm 2006, at least there is some people out there that understands the situation. (edit) i never said the car is uninsured, un mot'd or untaxed. i simply wanted my insurer to check these before paying out as i thought that you needed all of them so your car was legally allowed to be parked on the public highway. we now know this is not the case. please read all the posts properly before replying (edit). gyzmo, you are right, two wrongs dont make a right. i just wasnt aware that you can park on the road without an mot or tax and still get paid out if something happens like our case. it was my understanding that when you have an ACCIDENT, you should both swop insurance details like we did only for his to be for a different car. if we dont swop them then as the police said, its a crime and is called with holding details. we never said we were not liable and it is clear that we didnt know the law. our point was he has lied to everyone including the police and his late fathers best friend!! why would you do this if you are the victim? it is clear they have something to hide and that is why i wanted my insurer to check. i just want the number plate so the police can do a pnc check the car. if it turns out that the car has no tax then why should we be the only ones penalized for a car that has broken the law by parking on the road? most of you keep saying he's the victim but if it was parked illegally then isn't HE the victim of his own demeaning. we never wanted this, if he had swapped details then the insurers would have dealt with it and that would've been it. as he has lied, threatened and been unco-operative then isn't there fair reason to think somethings not right?!!!! why would he say my names mr nobody, why not be civil?!!!

without a valid mot cert insurance is none and void. well that what i was told by the authorities.

i have never said what i did wasn't wrong i have never tried to justify my action and i am paying for my mistake so i did'nt understand why you are failing to see that all that I'm trying to explain is why should an uninsured driver get away with parking his vehicle opposite my property and be allowed to get away Scott free. that if my final comment on this matter the police understood my case its a shame other citizens cannot. these are not beliefs they are the facts my attitude is one of a legal driver having to pay yet again for uninsured drivers being on public roads but its clear you all believe this is acceptable behavior. Jon your attitude toward us has been petty and uncalled for from day one you have never wanted to see both sides of this story and i have NEVER asked you for your justification or sympathy all i wanted was facts on what could be done in my situation not an endless reply on what you think of us as people you have nothing but negative things to say and quite frankly I'm not very interested in you opinion as it is not very helpfully. regards dazzlin.

old andrew, yes we reversed into a stationary car...welldone but what has that got to do with a pedestrian? cars without required docs are as i believe parked illegally on the road and as such shouldn't be there. a pedestrian on the other hand can come and go all day long. if we had reversed into a pedestrian then that is something we would have live with for the rest of our lives. thankfully for us, it was a car and not a pedestrian. joncris, we admitted to the accident and have admitted liability. i believe our insurer is or has paid out already. when people go negligently overdrawn with say a bank, they get penalized with a bank charge. people are aware that if they go overdrawn that there will be a charge and what that charge will be!!! i think we all agree that the charges are ridiculous and thats why groups like this have helped people get back their charges. although the charge is high, it is legal. i think we also agree that there should be a small charge to people for being negligent with their account. when people drive negligently into another car, they get penalized by their insurance company. you don't know by how much as you don't know what sort of accident you unfortunately would have had. this is legal and how it should be. should this still be the case if a car is parked illegally? the third party know they are parking illegally but will not get penalized!!! at least when you go overdrawn by a bank, you were aware of it before and will be charged for being negligent. what you are saying is, it is alright to claim against a charge for being negligent even though you were aware of it before the incident, as you are being unfairly penalized. on the other hand, we shouldnt claim against someone for parking their car illegally and that the car should not have been on the road in the first place!!! im not saying that im the victim not him as two wrongs dont make a right. what angers me is that people have been quick to say its all our fault. if he wasnt there then we wouldnt have hit him, if you dont go overdrawn then you wouldnt get charged!!! whats the difference? i would like to point out that i too think the bank charges are ridiculously high and congratulate everyone who have helped or received people to receive their charges back.

can i also just mention that i have been driving for 7 years and have NEVER had or been involved in an accident.

joncris im the wife who was negligent i would like to point out i have never denied my fault. i think your completely missing the point we are trying to make here as far as i was aware before we entered this forum you needed three legal documents to drive or park on a public highway. It has now come to our attention that you in fact do need these by law but that law will not protect you if you have an accident and the party in not involved personally (IE a parked vehicle with one of the legal documents missing.)However when i have all the information needed i am now aware that i can myself sue the third party for damage to my car as he/her should not have been there legally. thank for your comments.

joncris, if you ask the police, there is no difference whether a car is driving or stationary, without its necessary documents it is still a criminal offence. on the other hand, the law states that even though someone breaks the law( such as this instance), insurers must payout regardless. i dont understand why you wont answer on whether your opinion would change if our victim had run someone over without the necessary docs!! from reading your previous posts i can imagine you blaming the pedestrian for being in the wrong place at the wrong time!!!....there can be many reasons why an unisuered car is on the public highway as quoted by you on your previous reply!!! i do not appreciate you quoting my wife as driving negligently, the position of our drive is at an awkward angle to the road and we have a corner from one side and 6ft fence stopping us from seeing whats coming from the t junction on the other side. it was purely an accident. remember, this site is here to help people and from your replys it seems either you have been 'a victim' like ours and have a vendetta towards anyone who believes the law should be changed.

joncris who's using tit for tat now?!!! all i want is for the authorities to deal with the incident now. i am asking NU for the reg number and that is all. is that so bad? we now know that the law states that insurers must payout even to an illegally parked car. you never answered whether a SORN is worth the paper its written on? all i here from you is that even if the car was parked illegally, you would sue me if it was you i hit. from this, i take it that your saying you dont mind cars being on our roads illegally?!! i dont think you would agree if they had run someone over? we are also the victim here as if the car wasnt there (which it shouldnt have been)then we wouldnt have accidently bumped into the door!!all we want is some justice for the injustice caused by a third party of the car owner!! you seem to take the side of someone who threatens and lies to people than someone who has admitted straight away that they had an accident and may just have been a bit niave that the law is there to protect people that do things leagally and not illegally!!!

joncris, i would love to go to the police but they wouldnt give me any details about themselves. i dont know there name, car reg and the insurance reference he told me was a false one so the police cant really help. if i was the victim, they would have seen my documents like a shot thats why something supicious is going on here as they refused!! if you were legal and above board, wouldnt you show your doc's? i have just got off the phone to BECCA (CAG member and NU). she said will get back to me after a thorough investigation has taken place. if they havent all the docs then they may not payout!!but thats not definite!!

ok joncris, i think your post is very harsh and i dont think you understand the situation that we are in. we have accepted liability straight from the off and are willing to pay as quoted in previous posts. before we started this post, we were unaware that you can park your car anywhere without it being taxed etc...for your insurer to payout. doesn't that make a SORN irrelevent? pointless? we are now aware that the police may prosecute you for having an uninsured, untaxed and/or unmot'd car on the road but your insurer must still payout. this is another bizarre law. so what your saying is the victim can refuse to give details (criminal offence) and offer to 'sort me out' (another criminal offence even though we offered to pay for the damage)? we have never refused to pay for the damage and it was an accident and we were unaware of the bizarre law. my vendetta if any is because they committed criminal offences and threatened me and my family which i think everyone will agree is totally unacceptable. i await your reply