Car Hire Problem - any advice?

Hoenir

brianposter said:

 I suspect that a court would normally accept what you say if you provide evidence in respect of the car that you did hire.

A court cannot side with one party or the other on the basis of a verbal statement. 

More compelling would be proof of arrival at the airport at a given time as evidenced by the flight ticket/boarding pass etc. 

brianposter

Civil courts spend most of their time deciding in favour of one party or the other on the basis of verbal statements.

Evidence of the flight arrival time would be more appropriate - I believe that one of the places to find such information is Flightaware. 

DullGreyGuy

Hoenir said:

brianposter said:

 I suspect that a court would normally accept what you say if you provide evidence in respect of the car that you did hire.

A court cannot side with one party or the other on the basis of a verbal statement. 

More compelling would be proof of arrival at the airport at a given time as evidenced by the flight ticket/boarding pass etc. 

How do you think liability in Motor accidents is normally determined? Certainly in my day CCTV/Dashcams were very rare and quality poor even when they did exist. The judge does ultimately decide what is the most likely to have happened based on the verbal descriptions and, realistically, some of their personal prejudices. 

Statements, verbal or written, will be key but the OP seems to have failed to gather anything from the hire car company to say that their system showed it as cancelled. Its therefore onto circumstantial evidence like the pickup sheet of the neighbouring car hire company shortly after but that will depend too... if the first hire was £600/day for a luxury vehicle and the fill in hire was for a £20/day 3 door 1.1 it may be speculated that this has been concocted as a way to avoid the high hire car costs. If it's almost the identical vehicle then it becomes harder to rationalise why the OP has done it other than the story they are telling. 

Hoenir

DullGreyGuy said:

Hoenir said:

brianposter said:

 I suspect that a court would normally accept what you say if you provide evidence in respect of the car that you did hire.

A court cannot side with one party or the other on the basis of a verbal statement. 

More compelling would be proof of arrival at the airport at a given time as evidenced by the flight ticket/boarding pass etc. 

How do you think liability in Motor accidents is normally determined?  

Not normally in a court of law for good reasons.  

DullGreyGuy

Hoenir said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Hoenir said:

brianposter said:

 I suspect that a court would normally accept what you say if you provide evidence in respect of the car that you did hire.

A court cannot side with one party or the other on the basis of a verbal statement. 

More compelling would be proof of arrival at the airport at a given time as evidenced by the flight ticket/boarding pass etc. 

How do you think liability in Motor accidents is normally determined?  

Not normally in a court of law for good reasons.  

Any when they do? For example if there are high value injuries involved so the parties dont want the standard 50/50 as there is no evidence to support one over the other. 

Hoenir

DullGreyGuy said:

Hoenir said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Hoenir said:

brianposter said:

 I suspect that a court would normally accept what you say if you provide evidence in respect of the car that you did hire.

A court cannot side with one party or the other on the basis of a verbal statement. 

More compelling would be proof of arrival at the airport at a given time as evidenced by the flight ticket/boarding pass etc. 

How do you think liability in Motor accidents is normally determined?  

Not normally in a court of law for good reasons.  

Any when they do? For example if there are high value injuries involved so the parties dont want the standard 50/50 as there is no evidence to support one over the other. 

Hence why I said normally.  Totally off track with what's being discussed.