Insurance claim against a third party - will I be able to claim this cost back?

Barny1979

My vehicle was struck by another vehicle whilst mine was stationary. My car is currently being repaired and I have a hire car from Enterprise, I have had to pay £69.99 to cover if there is any damage and claim on the hire vehicle, the £69.99 means I do not have to pay my insurance excess.

Can this be claimed back against the third party as I have had to pay it because of needing a hire car or as there is the option of not taking the cover out mean it is my choice?

Hope that makes sense?!

huckster

Yes as it is part of the hire cost charges. Just make sure your invoice from Enterprise includes this.

OnanTheBarbarian

Yes a CDW is recoverable, although insurers routinely try to challenge it by arguing it is betterment as you are avoiding any excess liability when your own policy has an excess, but they are wrong.

If you get any resistance, copy & paste the following:

These risks were detailed in the skeleton argument of Christopher Butcher Q.C , in the case of Bee –v- Jenson [2006] EWHC 3359 (Comms), with which The Hon Mr Justice Morison agreed, at p.15, namely;

“"The fallacy in [the Defendant's expert witness'] case on [collision waiver damage] is that whilst asserting the betterment of the nil excess, he disregards the detriment [Mr Bee ] suffered by being placed in a car belonging to a hire company. He treats Mr Bee as if on receiving the hire car, he was in the same position after the accident as he was before it. Obviously, he was not. He was not in his own car; he was in somebody else's. He was obliged to return the car in the same state as he received it. Were his own car damaged, he could defer repairs, perform amateur or temporary repairs or not bother with repairs. These would not be options with Helphire. Moreover, were [Mr Bee ] to blame for damage to that vehicle, he would be subject not only to a claim for the cost of repair, but also for Helphire's loss of profit whilst it was out of commission. In other words, by forcing [Mr Bee] into a hire vehicle, [the Defendant] was exposing him to risks which he did not previously face, such that his insurance needs were different. As such, it is impossible to portray the nil excess as betterment. It was a reasonable arrangement, consequential on the tort. "

At p.16, The Hon Mr Justice Morison then said;

“In any event, there is a decision on this issue in an unreported decision of the Court of Appeal given on 20 February 1985 Marcic v Davies. There, the court held that the claimant who hired a replacement vehicle and paid the waiver fee to achieve a nil excess when his own excess had been £150 was entitled to recover that fee since if there had been no collision the claimant would "never have come under any contractual liability to the car hire company". "It was entirely reasonable that he should pay the waiver fee to cover himself against a contractual liability which he would otherwise never been under." per Lord Justice Browne-Wilkinson. Mr Flaux accepts that this case is binding on me. I have no hesitation in following it for the reasons expressed above”.

It is often argued by insurance handlers that this cannot be claimed under the ABI GTA, but what they fail to grasp (and only God knows why), is that the cost of the CDW is NOT being claimed under the ABI GTA as part of the hirer’s credit hire charges; it is being claimed by the hirer as an uninsured recoverable loss, in law. Equally, his other uninsured losses would not be presented as recoverable under the ABI GTA.

Barny1979

Thank you both for your help.