By Sia Ling Xin

WHENcar owner Adrian Lee got into an minor accident with another driver in July last year, he did not expect it to lead to a dispute that would drag on for over a year.

The repair cost of $470 for the left bumper of Mr Lee's car was covered by the other driver's insurance company.

But though it seemed like all had been settled, it was, in fact, just beginning.

On three different occasions earlier this year, Mr Lee's car was vandalised. Each time, his car was scratched and the tyres were also slashed. The damage came up to about $10,000.

Frustrated, he filed police reports each time. He even caught the culprit red-handed on a closed-circuit TV camera for the second and third occasions.

Mr Lee said the footage clearly showed the culprit's face, which he identified as the other driver involved in the car accident.

The police confirmed that three reports were made.

When my paper contacted the other driver, he declined to comment on the incidents. All he said was: "The police have already closed the case".

He also claimed that he himself had been harassed.

Since the accident, he had been receiving prank calls once a week, the most recent one being just two days ago.

His own car had also been damaged shortly after the accident, with the windshield damaged by someone.

He said that he suspected Mr Lee was behind the acts.

Mr Lee said he was unaware of the incidents.

In March, Mr Lee posted details of the car accident and the three vandalism incidents after he did not hear from the police.

He uploaded photographs of his damaged car and a copy of the police report on an online forum.

He, too, suspected that the other driver was behind the acts carried out against him.

When the police told Mr Lee that the other driver had been let off with a stern warning, he wanted to sue the other driver.

However, Mr Lee decided against it after finding out that the other party was an undischarged bankrupt and could not afford to pay damages.

Three days ago, the driver dropped a note into Mr Lee's letterbox, asking him to contact him. That same day, the pair met and settled their differences, with Mr Lee receiving an undisclosed sum as compensation.

Relieved, the driver said: "I am just glad this incident is settled. It started off as something very small and silly."

Lawyer Chia Boon Teck said that if Mr Lee was not satisfied with the outcome of the police's investigations, he could have appealed through the Attorney General's Chambers to prosecute the culprit.

He added: "Unlike suing the culprit, this would not have incurred any costs."

For more my paper stories click here.