We investigate how well the variability of extreme daily precipitation events across the United Kingdom is represented in a set of regional climate models and the E-OBS gridded data set. Instead of simply evaluating the climatologies of extreme precipitation measures, we develop an approach to validate the representation of physical mechanisms controlling extreme precipitation variability. In part I of this study we applied a statistical model to investigate the influence of the synoptic scale atmospheric circulation on extreme precipitation using observational rain gauge data. More specifically, airflow strength, direction and vorticity are used as predictors for the parameters of the generalised extreme value (GEV) distribution of local precipitation extremes. Here we employ this statistical model for our validation study. In a first step, the statistical model is calibrated against a gridded precipitation data set provided by the UK Met Office. In a second step, the same statistical model is calibrated against 14 ERA40 driven 25 km resolution RCMs from the ENSEMBLES project and the E-OBS gridded data set. Validation indices describing relevant physical mechanisms are derived from the statistical models for observations and RCMs and are compared using pattern standard deviation, pattern correlation and centered pattern root mean squared error as validation measures. The results for the different RCMs and E-OBS are visualised using Taylor diagrams. We show that the RCMs adequately simulate moderately extreme precipitation and the influence of airflow strength and vorticity on precipitation extremes, but show deficits in representing the influence of airflow direction. Also very rare extremes are misrepresented, but this result is afflicted with a high uncertainty. E-OBS shows considerable biases, in particular in regions of sparse data. The proposed approach might be used to validate other physical relationships in regional as well as global climate models.