Tricked by Credit Hire firm 2 months hire @ £30K!

Sandtree

obstreperous4 said:
So I just have to comply and follow it through and learn a valuable lesson. 

Your first step is to read what you actually agreed to when you signed the paperwork... the contracts do vary and have become complicated over time to deal with issues that have been raised by the courts. Eg these things used to say that as long as you support them you wont have to pay a penny but that was then challenged in court as to if the bill was really your loss then as unlike insurance there is no automatic subjugation rights for credit hire... hence these days they normally say you are liable up to what the TP is deemed liable for... ie if you have a bill for £24,000 and the court says £15,000 is a more sensible number your liability is £15k and thats extinguished when the TP insurer pays the £15k. Same impact as the original wording to you but gets around a legal issue the old wording had.

If you are unclear on the wording/concerned etc then speak to them for clarification... most are straightforward enough if you think it through. The downside is you may have to provide payslips, bank statements etc to substantiate the need to rely on credit hire but its too late now to decide you wouldnt want to. 

obstreperous4

Sandtree said:

obstreperous4 said:
So I just have to comply and follow it through and learn a valuable lesson. 

Your first step is to read what you actually agreed to when you signed the paperwork... the contracts do vary and have become complicated over time to deal with issues that have been raised by the courts. Eg these things used to say that as long as you support them you wont have to pay a penny but that was then challenged in court as to if the bill was really your loss then as unlike insurance there is no automatic subjugation rights for credit hire... hence these days they normally say you are liable up to what the TP is deemed liable for... ie if you have a bill for £24,000 and the court says £15,000 is a more sensible number your liability is £15k and thats extinguished when the TP insurer pays the £15k. Same impact as the original wording to you but gets around a legal issue the old wording had.

If you are unclear on the wording/concerned etc then speak to them for clarification... most are straightforward enough if you think it through. The downside is you may have to provide payslips, bank statements etc to substantiate the need to rely on credit hire but its too late now to decide you wouldnt want to. 

Thank you very much for your advice and explanation. I can see it basically says as long as I continue to support them and cooperate that I won’t have to pay anything. Also yes they have asked me for things like bank statements etc. I feel very bad about the situation now, it looks like I’ve just gone out and got myself a ridiculously expensive car to drive around and am now taking the other guy to court for it, which just isn’t me. I will certainly learn my lesson with this. Thank you again 

Sandtree

obstreperous4 said:
 I’ve just gone out and got myself a ridiculously expensive car to drive around and am now taking the other guy to court for it, which just isn’t me. I will certainly learn my lesson with this.  

Dont get me wrong... I sign up to hundreds of sites without reading their T&Cs etc but there are times when reading the paperwork is important, like when someone gives you a car for free or a fraction of its price.

As to you -v- the other guy... its a bit of a technicality because you were the two parties involved but in reality its the two companies arguing. Academically some of these arguments can be interesting and some are legal tests on business practices of insurers and accident management companies etc even though the two people named on the court papers dont have a clue about any of it (eg there was a recent case where an insurer has set up a sister company to manage vehicle repairs and so the insurer pays their sister company the repair invoice + £75... the insurer then claimed from the TP insurer the full total cost but the TP insurer said they shouldn't have to pay the extra £75. Their insured is clearly going to have no idea about this practice and £75 isnt worth the other person's time probably but its two large company with thousands of cases a year and so will certainly add up) 

obstreperous4

Sandtree said:

obstreperous4 said:
 I’ve just gone out and got myself a ridiculously expensive car to drive around and am now taking the other guy to court for it, which just isn’t me. I will certainly learn my lesson with this.  

Dont get me wrong... I sign up to hundreds of sites without reading their T&Cs etc but there are times when reading the paperwork is important, like when someone gives you a car for free or a fraction of its price.

As to you -v- the other guy... its a bit of a technicality because you were the two parties involved but in reality its the two companies arguing. Academically some of these arguments can be interesting and some are legal tests on business practices of insurers and accident management companies etc even though the two people named on the court papers dont have a clue about any of it (eg there was a recent case where an insurer has set up a sister company to manage vehicle repairs and so the insurer pays their sister company the repair invoice + £75... the insurer then claimed from the TP insurer the full total cost but the TP insurer said they shouldn't have to pay the extra £75. Their insured is clearly going to have no idea about this practice and £75 isnt worth the other person's time probably but its two large company with thousands of cases a year and so will certainly add up) 

I actually noticed in the documents that it states the solicitors directors do have an interest in the hire company and also in a medical examination company. So is it likely that other driver won’t even know about any of this? Are you a solicitor yourself? 

Sandtree

obstreperous4 said:

Sandtree said:

obstreperous4 said:
 I’ve just gone out and got myself a ridiculously expensive car to drive around and am now taking the other guy to court for it, which just isn’t me. I will certainly learn my lesson with this.  

Dont get me wrong... I sign up to hundreds of sites without reading their T&Cs etc but there are times when reading the paperwork is important, like when someone gives you a car for free or a fraction of its price.

As to you -v- the other guy... its a bit of a technicality because you were the two parties involved but in reality its the two companies arguing. Academically some of these arguments can be interesting and some are legal tests on business practices of insurers and accident management companies etc even though the two people named on the court papers dont have a clue about any of it (eg there was a recent case where an insurer has set up a sister company to manage vehicle repairs and so the insurer pays their sister company the repair invoice + £75... the insurer then claimed from the TP insurer the full total cost but the TP insurer said they shouldn't have to pay the extra £75. Their insured is clearly going to have no idea about this practice and £75 isnt worth the other person's time probably but its two large company with thousands of cases a year and so will certainly add up) 

I actually noticed in the documents that it states the solicitors directors do have an interest in the hire company and also in a medical examination company. So is it likely that other driver won’t even know about any of this? Are you a solicitor yourself? 

No, I was a claims technician dealing with disputed liability and defending low value personal injury claims for some time and still work in the insurance industry but on the strategy and transformation side now so still get involved in claims occasionally (as a department not individual claims). 

obstreperous4

Ah I see. Well thank you for your help, it’s very much appreciated. Hopefully it will be over and done with soon and can be forgotten. 

obstreperous4

Sandtree said:

obstreperous4 said:

Sandtree said:

obstreperous4 said:
 I’ve just gone out and got myself a ridiculously expensive car to drive around and am now taking the other guy to court for it, which just isn’t me. I will certainly learn my lesson with this.  

Dont get me wrong... I sign up to hundreds of sites without reading their T&Cs etc but there are times when reading the paperwork is important, like when someone gives you a car for free or a fraction of its price.

As to you -v- the other guy... its a bit of a technicality because you were the two parties involved but in reality its the two companies arguing. Academically some of these arguments can be interesting and some are legal tests on business practices of insurers and accident management companies etc even though the two people named on the court papers dont have a clue about any of it (eg there was a recent case where an insurer has set up a sister company to manage vehicle repairs and so the insurer pays their sister company the repair invoice + £75... the insurer then claimed from the TP insurer the full total cost but the TP insurer said they shouldn't have to pay the extra £75. Their insured is clearly going to have no idea about this practice and £75 isnt worth the other person's time probably but its two large company with thousands of cases a year and so will certainly add up) 

I actually noticed in the documents that it states the solicitors directors do have an interest in the hire company and also in a medical examination company. So is it likely that other driver won’t even know about any of this? Are you a solicitor yourself? 

No, I was a claims technician dealing with disputed liability and defending low value personal injury claims for some time and still work in the insurance industry but on the strategy and transformation side now so still get involved in claims occasionally (as a department not individual claims). 

Sorry to bother you again. So I’ve just received a letter now saying the case has been issued to court and my opponent will be served with papers. So is this meaning the other driver will actually be served these papers or his insurance company? Also I have to fill In forms for help with court fees. It’s never ending 

Sandtree

obstreperous4 said:
So is this meaning the other driver will actually be served these papers or his insurance company? Also I have to fill In forms for help with court fees. It’s never ending 

It'll be served on the driver themselves who will pass it to their insurers who'll deal with it from then on... its likely they are unaware of the fact the claim isnt fully settled yet and court papers turning up out of the blue on their door step can result in customers giving their insurers a hard time and saying they just want it finished with etc which occasionally influences the insurers position. 

obstreperous4

Sandtree said:

obstreperous4 said:
So is this meaning the other driver will actually be served these papers or his insurance company? Also I have to fill In forms for help with court fees. It’s never ending 

It'll be served on the driver themselves who will pass it to their insurers who'll deal with it from then on... its likely they are unaware of the fact the claim isnt fully settled yet and court papers turning up out of the blue on their door step can result in customers giving their insurers a hard time and saying they just want it finished with etc which occasionally influences the insurers position. 

Ah I see. This won’t end with the other driver paying this bill though will it? 

Sandtree

obstreperous4 said:

Sandtree said:

obstreperous4 said:
So is this meaning the other driver will actually be served these papers or his insurance company? Also I have to fill In forms for help with court fees. It’s never ending 

It'll be served on the driver themselves who will pass it to their insurers who'll deal with it from then on... its likely they are unaware of the fact the claim isnt fully settled yet and court papers turning up out of the blue on their door step can result in customers giving their insurers a hard time and saying they just want it finished with etc which occasionally influences the insurers position. 

Ah I see. This won’t end with the other driver paying this bill though will it? 

They're free to if they want but no, their insurers pick up the cost.