yup, I'll post them up later once I get home from work and can upload them to a different location. My take on it is that although the photos on their own may not be the smoking gun, if I could at least get my insurance company to provide a solicitor then I am convinced a half-decent solicitor would be able to discredit their statements and make it on the balance of probabilities that it didn't happen how they claim it did.

I would think they would have a hard time convincing the court that I swept the glass considering the photo was taken with the 3rd party present and is not only time & date stamped but also has GPS location info embedded in it. Also, I believe one of the passengers took a photo of the parked car too and their photo too will show no debris.

Here's a couple of the photos, this one was taken from behind the 3rd party's car. He's claiming it happened beside that VW. Despite my colour-coded mirror cover coming off and the mirror glass coming out and smashing, you can see there is nothing in the road beside that car. It actually happened where the blue Vectra is. My vehicle is the black vectra in the distance. Here's from my view, as you can see he is parked very close to the VW, I don't believe at 20 or 30 especially in icy conditions, he would have stopped that quick given that the Highway Code stated typical stopping distances as 3 car lengths at 20 and 6 car lengths at 30 not even taking into consideration the icy conditions.

it may be a possibility. I have sent a 2 page letter back to my insurers with the photosgraphs printed onto A4 and I've made comments on them explaining why the collision couldn't have happened where the 3rd party claims it did. I hope to be able to persuade them that it will be worthwhile pursuing this if they just put a bit of thought into it. I have also asked them to send me a copy of the docs they have received from the 3rd party insurer so I can see what the 3rd party is claiming exactly and to see if there is statements from the passengers or not. fingers crossed, by far me preference would be for my insurers to see the light and assign solicitors to this because as far as I am concerned the only evidence the 3rd party has is his witness statements from his passengers (friends/family). There was no physical evidence to support his story because his version didn't actually happen. I'm wondering if its even worthwhile saying to them that I don't believe 2 cars could have fitted through the gap in the road without them colliding head on and leaving it to them to prove otherwise.

*bump*

ok so if I work on the basis that this will be a 50:50 claim. The 3rd party is claiming £850 for repairs to his car. If it goes 50:50 my insurance company will pay £425. Will they then ask me for my excess (I haven't been asked for it yet as I didn't make a claim I just informed them of the incident, I fixed my own car for £25). If they will then it'll cost me £200 so I might as well spend the extra £225 to cover the whole amount my insurance would be out of pocket. In this circumstance would I get to keep my NCB because my insurance hasn't had to pay anything out technically? (ie it's like my paying for half of his repairs)

if my insurance company won't defent the claim, can I take court action myself to establish liability?

the thing is, I had to pick up the colour coded mirror cover from my car, the mirror glass which broke all of the road and there was bits of the plastic surround that broke off too. I have a photo of the location where the 3rd party claim the collision took place and the road is clear of debris so I can show that it didn't happen there. unfortunately I just can't show that it did happen further up the road. The photo was taken at the time of the incident with the 3rd party standing behind me writing down his details. A 50/50 claim is something I would hope to avoid however if he is going to take down my NCB then hey ho I'll take his down with me. I've tried to do the decent thing and sort my own car despite imo not being liable for the incident and as a thanks I'm getting screwed over by a liar. grrrr.

hiya, no witnesses stopped. He had several family members in the car, I was on my own in my car. The police weren't called. I think they only usually come out if someone was hurt.

In January my vehicle was involved in a collision with a Mercedes in which both our driver side wing mirrors were damaged. I was able to fix mine for £25 and decided not to claim as it wasn't worth it. However the 3rd party has put in a claim against me. Up until recently my insurer has said they agree I was in the right and in their view I was not liable. Today I've received a letter from them saying they don't think they can defend it and they'll now be looking to settle it in the best possible terms. Which really means I can kiss my NCB good bye. The thing is, the 3rd party is lying about which part of the road the collision happened on. They are claiming it happened further down the road beside a parked car and therefore I was on there side of the road and am negligent. however it actually took place further up the road beside a sign that stated the 3rd party should have given way to oncoming traffic, ie me. Can I force my insurer to defend the claim or at least appeal their decision. I have already told them I am willing to stand in front of a judge if necessary. I'd even take the 3rd party to court without my insurer if needed. I don't want my NCB being screwed by a lying 3rd party. I have photos from the scene. I even have a photo showing the parked car and there is clearly no debris in the road. unfortunately the one thing I didn't take a photo of was the debris lying in the road where the collision happened. Help!

Oh don't worry I intend to hold them to it. I'm been communicating with them via e-mail so far and they take a long time to reply so when i come back from my hols I intend to take this up with them via recorded mail instead and if they do default me I will be launching legal action against them. i don't even thing their "default notice" complied in any way with the CCA either.

Thesis are trying this with me at the moment. They wrote threatening to default me unless I contacted them and agreed a reasonable arrangement. I offered £50 a month which they accepted and then said it wouldn't stop the "arrears being registered" with a CRA. They have now said I must repay the full amount within 6 months otherwise they will default me. Seems they've changed their mind since the Notice of Intention to Register Defaults came. I thought I complied with it.

I have written to them several times to cancel my hosting however they refuse to and say I MUST phone them to cancel it. Can they do this? isn't giving it to them in writing adequate? grrrrr. Thanks in advance. knox

lol

ideal, well done sparkie, go get em

I imagine the default removal is probably automated and it relies on the server getting it right that it requires removing. Also, most banks only process CRA info monthly so depending on when they process it might not be removed on the exact date.

hi postggj well yeah, since I can't get credit anymore, I've nothing better to do for the remaining 3.5 years of my default but to bug HBOS with complaints to every possible body I can think of. I'm not holding my breath with ICO, they are probably as useful as FOS lol Still trying to decide whether I have the motivation and confidence to take it to court or not.

wow completely forgot I had raised a complaint with ICO in August but out of the blue today I got an e-mail from them saying they are going to write to BoS for more info.

following various correspondance with SLC, I have agreed to start paying back at £100 per month and as long as these payments are maintained they have stated they won't place a default on my credit record.

contact your bank and tell them it's an unauthorised transaction

I got a reply from SLC collections today saying basically I have to come up with the £2k by fri or they will default me. They won't take reduced payments. So looks like I'll be getting another default then Seems a bit strange that I'm offering to pay up yet they seem more interested in ruining my credit record than getting money out of me.

Not heard from Thesis since they allegedly took over part of my loans.

From checkmyfile.com

That's what I'm saying though, regardless of whether the agreement had it in or not, according to ICO consent isn't the only way they can share info with the CRA. I'll try and track it down, i'm pretty sure organisations can share without specific consent.

i've heard it from the ICO before in relation to a default placed by a bank. Oh and the link you posted takes me to an article entitled "Banking and Credit Card Survey shows wide differences in how different banks are rated." I already have 1 default which I have went through a lot of pain to try and get removed. It only has about 3 years to go, getting another one would extend my uncreditworthiness by another 3 years. I would rather pay and avoid another one than get it put on and have to fight again to get them to remove it.