I can only speak from personal experience. But a similar thing happened to me. Seriously dented door. I made the other insurance pay. They regarded it as a write off. Took the money, replaced the door. Never heard anything more about it. Except clearly someone sold my details to claims company, because I got loads of calls in bad English for a few month's

Re the police response - factually wrong on so many levels. I'm not suggesting that is the most effective port of call (it probably isn't) but you would be the owner even if you never saw the item. How else would other goods in transit be invesrigated? This response was once known as "cuffing the job"

I am sure the resident experts will give you a comprehensive guide to your rights. The responsibility lies with the retailer. I have dealt with Cotswold before for similar. And found them refreshingly helpful. Even when I lost the receipt for one item I had bought in Inverness. The manager in Newcastle called the store. Found the transaction and gave me a full refund.

The advice from other members is correct.It depends on the outcome you want. Stolen property also incudes the proceeds of the theft. So a stolen watch remains stolen, and if sold the proceeds are also stolen goods. Until the property is 'reduced' into lawful custody. (eg the police or original owner). So, as a courtesy the unwitting buyer should be put on notice (politely) not to dispose of your stolen picture. Ideally they should return it to the owner, but they might be forgiven for not entirely believing the story. The name and address of the buyer would be useful. But again, would you give that to a stranger? Perhaps they might wish to return the disputed property to the auction hpuse. Then you only have one person to deal with. I do recall that some second hand chains used to refuse to hand over stolen property to police without clear evidence of ownership (not just suspicion). One manager told me that they lost a lot of stock into police property stores and it increased their admin burden. I don't know if what the auction would do.

As a friend, who is was a medical negligence lawyer, explained to me. Despite all the compo ads for motor vehicle claims, medical related injuries rarely result in much if any compensation unless they are serious. There is also an assumption that during procedures minor injuries may occur and that the patient has explicitly or tacitly accepted that risk. For example, during colonoscopy it is possible (though rare to tear the colon wall. My friend also said she wished people would just accept minor mishaps. On a personal note, I think I probably would not bother escalating this because the nurse clearly regretted it and gathered evidence against herself by photographing it. Finally. During an examination a nurse tipped my bag over breaking my tablet. Did I care? No. I was glad of the free service from the NHS and a few days later I dropped off some staff room essentials for the team that treated me well.

Just a clarification. GDPR does not apply to police where there is a legal requirement to release the information. (One might also make a case for "policing purposes"). I have not come across any occasion where information has been refused after a collision. Any more than it would apply to you for sharing it with insurance company or legal representative.

Ok. The short version. After a collision drivers have to provide certain information to anyone (including police) having a reason to ask for it. This includes the drivers name and address. (And other information) If particulars were not exchanged at the tine, as it seems to be here, then police will ensure the law is complied with by furnishing particulars of parties involved. Often by letter. I suggest you write to the area HQ asking for this information. Keep it simple. You were involved in a collision on (date) at (place). Details were not exchanged at the time. Please provide the name and address of the driver and keeper if different. It should be automatic.

It would be very tempting to plead not guilty to both and use the opposing photo in each case to throw reasonable doubt on the other. I have seen a similar defence work in a London magistrates court but that was some time ago. In any event I would suggest a lawyer to present it correctly.

For me the annoyance was more that I didn't know about the consultation. I used to be liason to the BPA for a public body. I certainly would have had an opinion.

Apologies if anyone has posted this begore. I didn't find it in a search. Last month the HoL had a ninety minute debate about the government Codes of Practice for Private Parking. The debate is here https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/private-parking-code-of-practice-latest-developments/ In short. After a six month consultation in 2023 it been kicked forward a bit

The usual thing is to put a notice in the Gazette (London Gazette) asking parties with claims against the estate to come forward. We gave 21 days today do do. The object being to protect the executor from subsequent claims after they distribute the estate

My experience regarding witness treatment comes from criminal courts in England and Wales and from staff association work and (unfortunately) appearing as a witness at employment tribunals. I would not give advice outside my experience. The Professional Qualifications Act 2022 enables appropriate regulations to be made by relevant bodies (eg Nursing and Midwifery Council). If you know the regulatory body there should be a pathway for complaints. Beyond that it feels like lawyer territory. Sorry I cannot be more help.

Having dealt with witnesses in many criminal cases and other public tribunals. I am sorry to hear of your experience. Members of the public support the criminal justice system by giving evidence. Witnesses should not be abused during hearings, although some barristers seem to forget that. You have asked about a breach of your human rights and it seems you might be thinking of Article 7 - right to private life, by revealing your identity and intrusive questioning. You say this was a public body holding a disciplinary hearing. So HR legislation would likely apply to that body. But try getting an explanation first. My first port of call would be the officer or official who led the investigation. Speak to them and follow up with a letter explaining your concerns. Ask them to put you in contact with the organisation (or part of it) that ran the hearing. There will usually be a secretariat who will direct your complaint to the right person. If a witness feels badly treated during a hearing, then it will be taken seriously. Without witnesses there could be no hearings or justice. Should an explanation be unsatisfactory then ask how to escalate the matter. Grounds for withholding witnesses identities. This is usually dealt with at the preparation stage if harm might arise or justice thwarted. There is no general breach of Article 7 for identifying witnesses but it is not unusual to keep it out of the public record. In respect of intrusive questioning by defencr. The panel should have intervened if it became inappropriate. However the accused also has a right to a fair trial (Article 5) and a proper denfence. A balance must be found. I'm sorry if this seems unspecific. In my experience miscommunication is often at the bottom of witness issues. Perhaps there is a learning need you can highlight.

Many thanks for clarification.

No disrespect intended, and apologies if I remember incorrectly. This appears similar to a post three weeks ago. If it is being resurrected could you please link to the original.