Parking Accident - Australia Fair Shopping Centre Won't Provide Footage - What to Do?

LHasty13kia on 12/04/2022 - 11:21
Last edited 12/04/2022 - 12:53 by 1 other user

Hello people, hope you're all well.

I went to the Australia Fair Shopping (Gold Coast) with the misses and newborn, stayed there for around 2.5 hours. When I went back to my car found it hit.

Can't say for sure that it was the car on my side, he did have marks on it, but the damage on mine seems deeper than his marks

I asked the shopping to see the footage, they said that because of privacy only the police could ask. I did a police report, and after that lodge a claim through my RACQ insurance.

To my surprise, today I received a call from RACQ saying that because they can't have access to the footage they have to charge me excess, I questioned them about the police report, they said that the police didn't put anything on the report.

Did someone here went through something similar and can give me ideas? Is there anyway to "force" the police to look into the footage so I can avoid paying the excess?

Thanks for the help in advance!

Automotive Insurance

Related Stores

Australia Fair Shopping Centre
Australia Fair Shopping Centre

Comments

  • Caped Baldy on 12/04/2022 - 11:32
    +8

    Ouch. Honestly, you're best to cop it and move on.

    Get a dashcam with parking mode set up.

    • HeWhoKnows on 13/04/2022 - 17:23
      -7

      The CCTV is there for shopping center security…..Not for your convenience!
      They are certainly not oblidged to allow you to view or copy footage under law unless with a police or court order.
      If they agreed to provide access to the footage there would certainly be cost involved as such services are NOT FREE! We all seem to forget this.
      It costs time and money to scan over security footage.

      And furthermore the camera most likely would not have picked up the accident.
      And if so, not in sufficient detail to provide the evidence required.
      So money wasted for nothing.

      As far as your excess goes, you must provide evidence and contact details of the offender and evidence of the same to avoid paying th excess.
      i.e. Sufficient that your insurance company can make a claim on someone else!

      As Caped Baldy said "just move on"

      Sadly this is very common in shopping centres and may have been caused by a run-away trolly.

      • [Deactivated] on 14/04/2022 - 09:32
        +2

        It costs time and money to scan over security footage.

        You know the day, time, and duration of parking, play it at 2-5x speed, I don't imagine it taking longer than 20 minutes…

        • HeWhoKnows on 16/04/2022 - 18:18
          -1

          So you are involved in doing this?
          You know how it works?
          Been there done that?

          You are such a know it all?

          Dont make such outrageuos assumptions

          Nothing is ever that simple
          And you dont know what rate they charge.
          Could be $100/ 5min of time and a setup fee on top
          The time to make a copy onto whatever media
          By the time they find the tape or hard disk, identify the correct part, play back a few times to ensure its useful, then copy it to some media could be 2 or 3 hours
          They might need to bring in another person and pay the minimum shift time.
          This is not what security guards are paid to do.
          So you see. - dont guess what can happen
          Its never that simple, especially when they are not there to provide that service to the public

          By the way, you DONT know the exact time and day because you dont know when it happened Genius!
          OP doesnt even know if this happened in the car park.
          Only noticed it then. Thats all

      • dogboy on 14/04/2022 - 11:29
        +3

        I don't think I have ever seen so many assumptions in one comment post.

        • HeWhoKnows on 16/04/2022 - 18:19

          No you poor doggy boy.
          These are FACTS!

      • Cave Fire on 14/04/2022 - 12:52
        +1

        this location has cctv on the ticket points (entry and exit) as it's paid parking. The OP parked near an entrance door so might be another camera there.

  • orangetrain on 12/04/2022 - 11:32

    Ask the police?

    • Hasty13kia on 12/04/2022 - 12:13
      +1

      Ye, that was the first, they just say it's in progress, but it has been 1,5 month now…

      • HeWhoKnows on 13/04/2022 - 17:35
        +1

        Very low priority matter and they are not obligated to act at all.
        They have much more important things to attend to.
        As far as the police are concerned its up to your insurance company to sort out. Not them.

        • dogboy on 14/04/2022 - 11:29
          +1

          More assumptions .. damn, you are on fire mate

          • HeWhoKnows on 16/04/2022 - 18:15
            -1

            @dogboy: Not mate Its a fact!
            You have absolutely NO IDEA about police man. Seriously

      • Carve2 on 14/04/2022 - 10:14

        Most commercial CCTV systems aren't required to hold footage for 6 weeks either (although individual centres might have their own policies), so the chances of that footage still existing are pretty slim. Sorry, there's not much you can do now.

      • lonewolf on 14/04/2022 - 12:36

        Police arent really interested in solving crimes anymore. They are short staffed and are required to spend their time revenue raising for the government.

        https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/693738?page=1#comment-1200…

    • dust on 12/04/2022 - 13:04
      +10

      Hah! Like they'll do anything.

  • Ocker on 12/04/2022 - 11:33
    +2

    Sadly I reckon you are screwed. Your own dash cam would has solved the issue.

    • Euphemistic on 12/04/2022 - 11:49
      +22

      Dash cam MAY have resolved the issue. It’s entirely likely that forward or rear facing camera may not be enough to catch an impact in that area.

      • Ocker on 12/04/2022 - 12:27
        -4

        The impact would have triggered the camera to start recording and you would then get info about the car and rego. as it drove away

        • Euphemistic on 12/04/2022 - 13:06
          +4

          If the vehicle approached from 90 degrees, which is most likely in a carpark it would also have left at a similar angle making it difficult for the camera to catch a plate.

          You would most likely see what type, colour of car but MAY not see the rego.

      • HeWhoKnows on 13/04/2022 - 17:38
        -1

        Dash cam may have been activated by a nudge if you are lucky but probably capture nothing of any use.
        And a nudge can be caused by anything

  • JMosk on 12/04/2022 - 11:34
    +9

    Follow up the police report and see if they asked for the footage or what they put on the report that they provided to your insurance

    • Donaldhump on 12/04/2022 - 13:49
      +1

      100% logical process, get the police to get you the footage

    • HeWhoKnows on 13/04/2022 - 17:41
      -1

      Police have more important and critical things to do than to spend hours chasing up and reviewing security camera footage for a very minor incident that proves nothing and for a matter can be resolved by the persons car insurance.
      They only review such footage for a robbery of if anyone is injured.
      Car accident have long been fobbed off onto insurance companies to sort out unless someone is injured.

      • dogboy on 14/04/2022 - 11:30
        +1

        More assumptions! Maybe you should stop commenting…

  • GG57 on 12/04/2022 - 11:42

    Pay the excess, get it fixed, move on.

  • spackbace on 12/04/2022 - 11:49
    -3

    Even if you got the footage, it's only the rego and doesn't prove who was driving

    Best to pay the excess and move on and invest in a decent dash cam

    • knobbs on 12/04/2022 - 12:02
      +17

      Would that not be the same as saying, "oh a red light camera only got their rego and doesn't prove who was driving"?
      The same thing would apply of sending a notice to the registered owner and they sort out who was driving from there?

    • Jameslane on 12/04/2022 - 14:56
      +1

      Not sure why the downvotes. Rare that an insurer would waive the excess without rego AND driver name & address so they can make the recovery.

      • [Deactivated] on 12/04/2022 - 16:35
        +6

        Rego is tied to the person who registered the vehicle and is responsible for what happens with it.

        If they say they weren't driving at the time, they need to nominate who was, and they need to admit it.

        This is up to the insurer to work out.

        • ol mate on 12/04/2022 - 16:42
          +1

          Pretty sure there is only a requirement to nominate if the police ask, not an insurer.

        • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 12/04/2022 - 16:44

          Not for civil matters they don't.

          Think you're confused with speeding fine nominations here.

        • Ughhh on 12/04/2022 - 18:28
          +3

          This is up to the insurer to work out.

          Even aami insurance tells you what you need to make a claim without being charged excess-you need name and address.

          • leiiv on 14/04/2022 - 09:26

            @Ughhh: So if the person who hit you refuse to give their name and address and just run away, what can you do? Police won't do anything, and insurance is not on your side too. Take matter into your own hands?

            • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 14/04/2022 - 10:33
              +2

              @leiiv: Yes police can do something once they refuse to identify, as the driver is now breaking the law. That's the point where you call police and they will get involved.

              • leiiv on 14/04/2022 - 11:25

                @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: So what is the difference with OP's case? Is the unidentified driver here not breaking the law just because the evidence is just too hard to obtain?

                • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 15/04/2022 - 09:28
                  -1

                  @leiiv: OP wasn't there. How is OP going to ask the other driver to identify if they literally aren't there?

                  • leiiv on 15/04/2022 - 10:39

                    @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: If it is a hit and run on the road, you can't also ask the other driver unless you want to do a road chase..

                    • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 16/04/2022 - 08:44

                      @leiiv: Hit and run and shopping carpark ding…so obviously related lmao

                      • leiiv on 16/04/2022 - 10:55

                        @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: No one is saying they are related. But in both cases, the victim can't get the name and address.
                        Are you saying that the police will prioritise the cases differently?

    • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 12/04/2022 - 16:44
      +2

      spackbace 100% correct here. Haven't seen a policy that will waive the excess with only a rego number. Need a name.

      • resubaehtgnolhcs on 12/04/2022 - 17:54
        -1

        I have heard that in QLD you only need to provide number plate details to your insurer. This is contrary to my experience in NSW where you also need the driver's details in addition to the number plate details.

        • greyeye on 13/04/2022 - 08:20

          nope, I got hit from the rear and had to provide the damn address and phone number of the driver to my insurer, AND they told me if the driver denies the claim, I will be responsible for the excess.
          I paid for the excess, call the driver's phone number I exchanged earlier (to get the address) and wait for the insurance to reimburse me the excess.

          all in QLD.

      • WT on 13/04/2022 - 09:44

        if its a hit and run and you only get the rego then what?

        I would think that the difference here is that one is parked

    • HeWhoKnows on 13/04/2022 - 17:43

      Not even the rego. Maybe nothing at all other than the roof of a car

  • AndyC1 on 12/04/2022 - 11:50

    The police will do nothing. Did you take photo's of the car next to yours? If you did supply them to the insurance company and let them see what they think if it was that car or someone else.

    • Muzeeb on 12/04/2022 - 12:00

      Op posted photos of car next to them. Scroll on the link.

    • jellykingdom on 12/04/2022 - 15:49
      +10

      The police can be pretty useless in this sort of aspect. I had my car written off when a drunk driver hit me at a traffic light. But the copper didn't put who was at fault on the report, and so his insurers wouldn't pay up. No footage of the accident. I only had 3rd Party at the time (young student) so I ended up with no car… it was a bit sh*t

      • brendanm on 12/04/2022 - 21:14
        +2

        drunk driver

        Their insurance is likely void if they are drunk, so you were up shit creek anyway.

      • S2 on 14/04/2022 - 12:02

        But the copper didn't put who was at fault on the report

        I think this is standard. They aren't performing a full investigation to determine at fault party. It's up to the insurance companies to work that out.
        The police turned up and ensured people were safe and took a drunk driver off the road.

  • OpenAI on 12/04/2022 - 12:10
    +1

    OP also showed his face in the last photo!

    • Muzeeb on 12/04/2022 - 12:15
      +4

      There's a picture of him and his kid in his avatar.

      • jv on 12/04/2022 - 12:54
        +1

        Has it been reported?

      • Hasty13kia on 12/04/2022 - 20:12

        Is it wrong?

        • Muzeeb on 12/04/2022 - 20:54

          No. Just unusual. Most people don't include their own picture. Like who knows what TA or JV looks like?

  • Hithere on 12/04/2022 - 12:10
    +1

    With no proof supplied as to who caused the accident your insurance company will expect you to pay the excess if you go through with the claim.

    Probably the only way you can force the police into looking at the footage is to employ a Lawyer. That could cost you more than repairing the damage will cost you.

    It's a fact of life nowadays, people don't take responsibility for their actions anymore.

    I've also had a car hit while stationary by a third party who drove off without leaving a note or attempting to find me.

  • samp365 on 12/04/2022 - 12:11
    +1

    Did you try touching the scratch marks on the other car? Fresh scratches are a bit rough and there would be some plastic filings.

    • Hasty13kia on 12/04/2022 - 12:15

      It looked like it was cleaned, but I couldn't be sure

  • Austaurean on 12/04/2022 - 12:21
    -1

    Whats their FOI policy….

    • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 12/04/2022 - 16:46

      Very certain Australia Fair shopping centre isn't owned or managed by a government department lol

      • Austaurean on 12/04/2022 - 17:47

        True, just a thought though.

  • Xistn on 12/04/2022 - 12:25

    Do you have photo of car that was parked next to you? if so OzBargains can OzInvestigate the differences of the 2 vehicles?

    • dust on 12/04/2022 - 13:06

      OP posted this already. Scroll on the link in the original post.

      • Xistn on 12/04/2022 - 13:09
        +1

        ah.. my bad I did not scroll…

        • Caped Baldy on 13/04/2022 - 17:54

          Neither did I. Sure looks like the car next to his did the deed.

  • Cave Fire on 12/04/2022 - 12:31

    … is there damage on the rear passenger side of the Outlander? Panel does not look straight behind wheel arch. Looks like they have possibly attempted a reverse park and messed up.

  • jv on 12/04/2022 - 12:35
    +6

    When I went back to my car found it hitted hit.

    It's now fixed

    • Hasty13kia on 12/04/2022 - 12:41
      +4

      Thanks

    • TEER3X on 12/04/2022 - 13:19

      I feel like this exact same comment / response was posted a year or so ago, or am I wrong?

  • jv on 12/04/2022 - 12:37
    -1

    Is there anyway to "force" the police to look into the footage

    No

    Did you ask them to look at the footage?

    • No on 12/04/2022 - 13:07
      +4

      Ask OP not me but reading between the lines I think yes.

      • jv on 12/04/2022 - 13:11

        Ask OP not me

        I didn't ask you…

        • No on 12/04/2022 - 13:15
          +4

          Why did you address it to me then ?

          • jv on 12/04/2022 - 13:15
            +2

            @No: You are delusional…

    • Hasty13kia on 12/04/2022 - 16:28

      Yes, but no answer on that, I'll go in person this week, maybe I'll get an answer

  • fullmetal on 12/04/2022 - 12:51
    +4

    I can give you 2 ideas. Idea 1: Start applying to be a police officer, get a job at the police force. Then "force" a colleague to look into it. Idea 2: Apply to become a security officer in Australia Fair, get the footage you need and then bring it to your insurer.

  • Seraphin7 on 12/04/2022 - 13:56

    You are likely going to best off just paying the excess.

    The shopping centre don't want to do the work so will hide behind the police request/privacy matter.

    The police aren't interested.

    If the insurer says in the absence of there being an identified party you're stuck.

    It sucks, but unless you nail the culprit red handed, that's about the story.

    • jv on 12/04/2022 - 14:34
      +1

      You are likely going to best off just paying the excess.

      Will also affect your rating and next year's premium…

      • Seraphin7 on 12/04/2022 - 15:40
        +1

        Will May also affect your rating and next year's premium…

        • jv on 12/04/2022 - 16:03

          True, he may already be on the worst rating.

  • peterwilliams83 on 12/04/2022 - 15:23
    +9

    Thanks for reminding me not to shop at Australia Fair. What are they on about "privacy"? A car park is a publicly accessible space, whose privacy could possible be invaded? Sound like a bunch of clowns, in my opinion!

    • jv on 12/04/2022 - 16:04
      +6

      What are they on about "privacy"?

      It sounds better than "can't be stuffed looking"

    • dizzle on 12/04/2022 - 19:01

      As far as I'm aware most shopping centers won't just release footage to the public. Whether that's in the name of privacy or to prevent any blame being put on them for incidents.

      As for actual privacy, it's one thing to record/take photos for personal use (ie security footage), and another to hand it over to the general public. If someone was in danger/a crime was reported it's a simple thing for the police to request it. I'd say the ball is now in the police's court, but whether they do anything is another matter.

  • JimmyF on 12/04/2022 - 17:11
    +3

    To my surprise, today I received a call from RACQ saying that because they can't have access to the footage they have to charge me excess, I questioned them about the police report, they said that the police didn't put anything on the report.

    Standard 101…. insurance NEEDS someone to pay the bill, so if you can't provide a rego/name of the at fault party, then yeah it is on you.

    I asked the shopping to see the footage, they said that because of privacy only the police could ask

    Also pretty standard 101…. Otherwise shopping centers end up chasing up footage all day long.

    Are you even sure there was a camera looking over your car spot?

  • USER DC on 12/04/2022 - 17:38
    +2

    That's why I dont get insurance, because give you nothing in return in most of the cases when you need them most.

    Ofcourse I dont mean to say the damager should be allowed to simply walk out. But i dont know dude, how you can get the damage's evidence of done by the damager.

    • Ughhh on 12/04/2022 - 18:32

      This is up to the insurer to work out.

      If you and op had the same brand new car, and both got into a similar incident with $5000 worth of damages , at worst, op could pay the excess of maybe $700 to get car fixed. You, would have to fork out $5000 yourself.

  • morse on 12/04/2022 - 18:44
    +2

    That sucks. Australia fair is a pretty average car park. Unfortunately I doubt you’ll get far and will just have to pay the excess.

    You’re parked pretty close to the line, presumably due to baby car seat on side nearest the pole. This doesn’t make it your fault, but as my husband keeps telling me, always try and park in the middle as cars change whilst your in the shop and you’re basically leaving yourself vulnerable to this kind of thing. I doubt it was the car next to you as it would be weird to stay around after scraping the car next to you.

    Over time I’ve come to expect and accept that this will happen and budget into the cost of car ownership - you own the car, it doesn’t own you.

  • adam-07 on 12/04/2022 - 19:31
    +1

    Tell them you saw a guy with a gun get into get into the car and speed off. He hit your car as he was leaving. You were really scared and you think he might hurt someone.

  • Gratt on 12/04/2022 - 19:31
    +5

    Ask to speak to the Sergeant in charge at the police station. Politely ask about progress and what his/her expectations are of the assigned police officer. It could be that they truly don't have the resources to follow up on the accident report.

    It could also be the case that the assigned officer is just shirking his responsibilities. An accident has occurred and the other party has not reported it nor left their details. As such I assume an offence has taken place. It needs to be investigated and a fine should be considered by the investigating officer. Usually a job would have been created that cannot usually be finalised by the assigned officer without reason.

    The fine for the offending party would be the primary concern of the police officer. When raising your concerns about them not identifying the guilty party this should be your focus. Access to the report by your insurance company is just a side effect.

    The police have no role in investigating civil matters. People crashing into cars in car parks and not leaving details is an offence that you as the victim should strongly insist is investigated.

  • GordonD on 12/04/2022 - 19:52
    +1

    It would take a pretty stupid person to collide with another car when parking next to it, then leave your car there right beside it for the owner of the other car to come back, see the matching damage on both, record an image of it, and record your vehicle registration.

    Surely you'd have to be drunk or drugged to do that, and perhaps suggesting that to the police at the time might have gotten their attention.

    • Caped Baldy on 13/04/2022 - 17:55
      +2

      I think they might be oblivious. A lot of drivers are.

  • dizzle on 12/04/2022 - 21:13
    +1

    I think you overestimate the intellect needed to do stupid things.

    I once had someone steel from my store, but they had already purchased something else and left thier name and contact details.. A quick phone call and they came back into the store to purchase it "oh I forgot that I put that in my pocket"

    • WT on 13/04/2022 - 09:52
      +1

      I had this happen a long time ago, told them "we have you on camera".

      The camera was fake

      • Euphemistic on 13/04/2022 - 18:20
        +1

        Not that hard to bluff people into returning stolen stuff.

        Knew a guy who blocked his number, rang a suspected thief as ‘security from the club’ told thief they were reviewing footage for police. Stolen charity donation box returned.

  • WT on 13/04/2022 - 09:49
    +3

    I had a 2nd look at the pics and it is very possible that it was the silver car next to you.

    The angle of the last pic makes it hard to tell, there is white paint on it but it really should be pretty much on the height of their bumper.

    There is also some grey looking paint on the first pic

  • StingyBritches on 13/04/2022 - 10:43
    +1

    We had a similar ‘hit and run’ incident at a shopping centre. Insurer (rightly) made us pay the excess as we had no proof of who/what dinged the front of our car.

  • cashless on 14/04/2022 - 09:40
    -2

    with the misses and newborn

    What were you missing? The footage?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join