Third party insurance details after an accident, data protection breach claim Options

[Formfeed]

Driver A is involved in an accident with Driver B.

Both stop and exchange details.

Driver B is at fault and coughs at the roadside, then leaves.

Driver A wishes to verify that Driver B is insured so flags down a passing Police van to ask them to PCN via photos of the scene which contain VRM.

They refuse citing data protection and ask that Driver A contact their insurer.

Question being that Driver A is now a third party claimant, is there in fact any legitimate cause to refuse the disclosure.

Police seem happy for disclosure to take place the next day despite the material facts not having changed overnight.

[Advertisement]

[southpaw82]

Other than the fact that the police aren’t obliged to assist at all in those circumstances? There is no way on earth I’d have assisted a member of the public in verifying details from the PNC.

[DancingDad]

I would not expect cops to either.
Last time I had to process a claim... few months back for my daughter, I spoke to her insurer, gave the other party's details and they confirmed immediately that the other party was insured and who with.
Why bother with police at all?

[jdh]

I was in a similar position a dozen or so years ago and just happened to stop next to a police van when I reached my next destination, I just wanted to double check I'd done the right thing and would be OK reporting the next day when the station was open but the officer ran both mine and the other drivers details and said both were showing as insured so no interest from the police, here's an incident number to go with your insurance claim. That came in handy a few weeks later when the other party changed their story, invented a fictitious junction & collision and also claimed I'd failed to report.

[Fredd]

Driver A wishes to verify that Driver B is insured so flags down a passing Police van to ask them to PCN via photos of the scene which contain VRM.

They refuse citing data protection and ask that Driver A contact their insurer.

Question being that Driver A is now a third party claimant, is there in fact any legitimate cause to refuse the disclosure.

As has been alluded to, you've got the question the wrong way around - they don't need a legitimate cause to withhold the information, rather they'd need a legitimate cause to disclose it, and even then could choose not to.

If you've got a smartphone you can check the other party's insurance details yourself at the time, using the free AskMID Roadside Check. Worth bookmarking on your phone.

[Jimzzr]

Other than the fact that the police aren’t obliged to assist at all in those circumstances? There is no way on earth I’d have assisted a member of the public in verifying details from the PNC.

Out of interest if someone wanted to report an accident to a police officer they happened to come across after the event, would the officer be obliged to record the details or could he insist they went to the station to do it?

[southpaw82]

Other than the fact that the police aren’t obliged to assist at all in those circumstances? There is no way on earth I’d have assisted a member of the public in verifying details from the PNC.

Out of interest if someone wanted to report an accident to a police officer they happened to come across after the event, would the officer be obliged to record the details or could he insist they went to the station to do it?

Do you mean in relation to the requirement to report to a constable? I'm not aware of any law obliging an officer to take a report (I can't comment on force policies) but if the driver decided, for some reason, not to report it at a police station as requested then arguably they would have a defence, or strong public interest grounds not to prosecute.

[The Slithy Tove]

Do you still have to go to a real (open) police station these days to report such things? With police stations closing at the rate they are, it can be a very long way to the nearest. If the legislation still states you must visit in person, then it's time it changed.

[southpaw82]

The legislation doesn’t say that but case law has interpreted it as such. So, case law can change to reflect changing circumstances.

[cp8759]

The government consulted on changing the reporting requirements last year, see https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/go...onsultation.pdf

Presumably once Brexit is out of the way and there's available legislative bandwidth the proposals will be implemented.

[Formfeed]

Other than the fact that the police aren’t obliged to assist at all in those circumstances? There is no way on earth I’d have assisted a member of the public in verifying details from the PNC.

Not solely a member of the public but also just been crashed in to by the negligent driver whose insurance status was pertinent.

Why bother with police at all?

Early evening, insurer closed.

Passenger from another vehicle used askmid.com

I was curious on the Police position.

I know they don't attend unless there is an injury but if they're already there then to refuse to PCN seemed very unusual.

Grounds for refusal also seemed questionable, DP was cited as the reason when in fact its not.

Perhaps they'd have been better just saying I'm not doing it because I don't want to.

they don't need a legitimate cause to withhold the information, rather they'd need a legitimate cause to disclose it, and even then could choose not to.

Is having been crashed in to not legitimate cause?

This post has been edited by Formfeed: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 - 03:52

[southpaw82]

Yes, member of the public (crashed into or not) who has no right to the PNC data. I’d say citing DP as a reason is spot on - the officer isn’t the data controller and can’t unilaterally decide to release the data to you. The fact that you might fall within a permitted ground doesn’t change that - it merely means that the data controller could decide to release the data to you if they wanted to. Your question has been answered - little point in arguing just because you don’t like the answer.

This post has been edited by southpaw82: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 - 09:06

[Formfeed]

Your question has been answered - little point in arguing just because you don’t like the answer.

Because I'd like to fully understand what is going on in case I ever need to know what to do in the future.

The stock answer appeared to be that my insurer would assist.

Late at night that couldn't be done.

And if there were no insurer? If someone collides with my bike and leaves a name and number plate but I forget to ask the name of their insurer? Would I then have grounds for assistance?

Or would I call every insurer with my permitted ground and hopefully chance upon the one person who knows the answer?

What if I don't want to notify my insurer? If I am not compelled to involve them where my contract doesn't stipulate that I need to, where else would I find it out?

[southpaw82]

What if I don't want to notify my insurer? If I am not compelled to involve them where my contract doesn't stipulate that I need to, where else would I find it out?

Why wouldn’t you? That’s what they’re there for.

[cp8759]

What if I don't want to notify my insurer? If I am not compelled to involve them where my contract doesn't stipulate that I need to, where else would I find it out?

Why wouldn’t you? That’s what they’re there for.

Are they? I thought insurance was there to indemnify my liabilities to others, apart from notifying them "for information only" I would never want my insurance company to be involved in my claim against a third party.

[southpaw82]

Are they? I thought insurance was there to indemnify my liabilities to others,

Perhaps because they can identify the relevant insurer? Or the OP could try approaching relevant data controllers until one decides to help him.

[cp8759]

Are they? I thought insurance was there to indemnify my liabilities to others,

Perhaps because they can identify the relevant insurer? Or the OP could try approaching relevant data controllers until one decides to help him.

Or just get the data from the MIB? That's what it's there for.

[southpaw82]

Are they? I thought insurance was there to indemnify my liabilities to others,

Perhaps because they can identify the relevant insurer? Or the OP could try approaching relevant data controllers until one decides to help him.

Or just get the data from the MIB? That's what it's there for.

I thought they helped where the other driver was uninsured or untraced. Will they assist where the driver is traceable but the claimant simply doesn’t know the details of their insurance company?

[The Rookie]

Given it would have to be declared when renewing (or going elsewhere) anyway, why on earth not use a service you pay for?

Insurers details not needed anyway, it’s the driver you claim off not the insurer.

Also the OP chose not to based on an ignorance of how it would work which has since been corrected.

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 - 22:53

[cp8759]

Insurers details not needed anyway, it’s the driver you claim off not the insurer.

You can claim off either, the insurer has deeper pockets.