Crash Insurance claim / Hire car court case advice needed

Bambino_17

I appreciate this isn't really about a parking fine but I hope this is the right forum for advice.

Basically the driver is in a situation where they are being asked to appear in court as after someone reversed into the drivers parked car, and a hire car was given to the driver whilst their car was being repaired (organised by the insurance company), the other drivers insurance company is refusing to pay and so Canford Law are involved to try and sort the issue.

I think the claim by the opposing party is that the driver had sufficient funds to pay for the hire car themselves so the insurance company shouldnt pay.

Has the driver made a mistake in cooperating so far? Is there any way the driver can get out of the court hearing? If not, is there any advice on how they should prepare? And if they did have the funds to pay for the hire car can they be made to pay for it? 

Following letters include one stating that it has gone to defence stage, and then a recent one with a court date set.

Find attached the letters of communication between the driver and Canford Law (with details removed).

This is the original email received from Canford Law...

_________________________________________________

I am contacting you today from Canford Law. We are attempting to contact you regarding a matter relating to a non-fault accident on XXXXX. Following this incident, we understand that a hire vehicle was arranged to temporarily replace your vehicle whilst repairs were undertaken. We have been passed this case by Enterprise Rent A Car (ERAC), who provided this hire vehicle. This is as they have been unable to receive the costs owed to them for this hire period. We intend to bring forward litigation against the insurer of the at fault party, known as the Third-Party Insurer (TPI), for the outstanding charges.

As you signed this rental agreement with ERAC however, we are unable to do this without your signed authority to act. The correspondence we have previously sent out includes a place for a signature, which provides us with this authority.

For clarity, the rental agreement created between yourself and ERAC prior to the hire, contains a clause which states should this cooperation be required, you will be willing to assist us in this matter. As this agreement exists between you individually and ERAC, we are unable to resolve this through liaising solely with your insurance, as they cannot provide the authority which we require. Furthermore, not providing us with this cooperation at this stage would be a breach of the hire agreement and would mean these funds remain outstanding.

The most common query we receive in relation to matters such as this are those surrounding your financial details at the time of the incident. We understand that finances are a personal matter and would not enquire unless it was directly relevant to resolving the case. The reason this is asked is in relation to a component of Credit Hire law known as Impecuniosity. Impecuniosity is an argument that is put forward by the TPI in an effort to work out the most reasonable price ERAC are entitled to recover.

In short, if an individual was in the position to self-fund their own hire at the time of the incident, the courts will find that it is reasonable for the TPI to pay ERAC in line with the basic hire rates that the individual would have found on the market at that time, rather than the rates that ERAC is currently charging. This means if an individual was able to fund their own hire, that the TPI is able to pay a discounted rate as opposed to the full amount ERAC is requesting.

 If it is deemed that an individual was unable to finance their own hire at the time of the incident, then the courts will find it reasonable that the TPI should pay the rates at which ERAC are claiming, as there was no other option to the individual at the time of the incident. Either way you would not be asked to pay anything towards these charges, please take this as our written confirmation of such.

We kindly ask that you look to complete and return the questionnaire at your earliest convenience. This has already been emailed out to you.

It is also important to know that if you choose not to cooperate at this stage, Enterprise Rent A Car may choose to pursue you for the outstanding funds instead, in accordance with your agreed terms with Enterprise Rent a Car explained above.

Please note; the above statement is not a scare tactic, we are obliged to inform you of this information so you are fully aware of all possibilities in this situation. 

For the avoidance of any doubt, this was a non-fault incident on your behalf, and we are not pursuing you for the costs associated with this hire, nor will you be subject to any of our legal fees. All we require is your cooperation on this matter, which comes in the form of the correspondence we have sent over. This involves a short questionnaire relating to the facts of the incident and is designed to prepare our file handlers for litigating this matter, and your signature.

Should you wish to further verify these circumstances, or our relationship to Enterprise, please contact their customer service line directly on 0800 111 4312.

We appreciate that this may have been a drawn-out process which has arisen through no fault of your own and thank you for your patience at this time. With your help, we endeavour to have this matter resolved as effectively and time efficiently as possible.

James_Poisson

It seems to me that the argument is between the two insurance companies, in that yours provided a hire car and claimed it against the other parties insurance company who do not want to pay.

The car hire company are out of pocket but getting nowhere and their argument is that you should pay it if you have the funds to do so.

I think the wording of your insurance policy is the key if it states you get a free courtesy car or if they will arrange a hire car (which they get at bulk rates) with the latter you can be held liable for the hire costs and if you signed a credit hire agreement you will be held liable for the costs if the courts say so.

In cases like this, only if you can show a real need for a hire vehicle and you have no access to another e.g. another vehicle in the family will you win, as they state above, all seems unfair but there you are.

But this is only an opinion, and this forum isn't the place for legal advice on issues like this, you should speak to your insurer, and if you pay for legal advice use it.

You cannot refuse to go to court if they demand it you will be worse off.

ChirpyChicken

this is indeed a matter for your insurer however if they are unable to deal with this i can recommend a specialist who deals with credit hire cases which is a well known field within the county court system
https://thebarristergroup.co.uk/blog/credit-hire-and-need (not who i would recommend just a good read on credit hire)

MyRealNameToo

Bambino_17 said:

I appreciate this isn't really about a parking fine but I hope this is the right forum for advice.

Basically the driver is in a situation where they are being asked to appear in court as after someone reversed into the drivers parked car, and a hire car was given to the driver whilst their car was being repaired (organised by the insurance company), the other drivers insurance company is refusing to pay and so Canford Law are involved to try and sort the issue.

I think the claim by the opposing party is that the driver had sufficient funds to pay for the hire car themselves so the insurance company shouldnt pay.

Has the driver made a mistake in cooperating so far? Is there any way the driver can get out of the court hearing? If not, is there any advice on how they should prepare? And if they did have the funds to pay for the hire car can they be made to pay for it? 

Following letters include one stating that it has gone to defence stage, and then a recent one with a court date set.

Find attached the letters of communication between the driver and Canford Law (with details removed).

This is the original email received from Canford Law...

You've misunderstood what's happened unfortunately...

Your insurers did not provide you a hire car from Enterprise instead they sold passed your details to Enterprise because you had a conversation about needing a replacement vehicle whilst they dealt with the damage to your car. Enterprise offered you a hire car on credit and rather than there being an APR involved for having it on credit instead the day rate for the car was significantly inflated to cover the risks they are assuming. 

The TPI has disputed the cost of the hire and one of the standard arguments is that you didnt need to have the inflated credit price but could have afforded to pay the standard rate and then claimed back the cost. 


You need to read the agreement you signed with Enterprise, the standard terms will be that you are obliged to support their recovery attempts, as long as you do so you will have no actual liability but if you dont you have to pay the hire charges yourself. 

Your insurers have nothing to do with this, they just provided a referral to a third party. Normally it's done when someone hasn't paid for the courtesy car option on their policy or the courtesy car isnt available/suitable (normally a tiny 3 door car). 

James_Poisson said:

It seems to me that the argument is between the two insurance companies, in that yours provided a hire car and claimed it against the other parties insurance company who do not want to pay.

It's not, the OP's insurer has nothing to do with it other than saying the OP could contact Enterprise about Credit Hire if they need it and offer to contact them on the OPs behalf 

ChirpyChicken said:

this is indeed a matter for your insurer however if they are unable to deal with this i can recommend a specialist who deals with credit hire cases which is a well known field within the county court system
https://thebarristergroup.co.uk/blog/credit-hire-and-need (not who i would recommend just a good read on credit hire)

Its not. The only way you can make it something to do with your insurers is to register a complaint that the ERAC relationship wasnt clear when they offered the referral. At best you are talking a small cash payment for the error and being told you have to cooperate with ERAC on their recovery efforts. The insurer isnt going to pay a £6k hire bill that you have no cover for as a result. 

James_Poisson

MyRealNameToo said:

James_Poisson said:

It seems to me that the argument is between the two insurance companies, in that yours provided a hire car and claimed it against the other parties insurance company who do not want to pay.

It's not, the OP's insurer has nothing to do with it other than saying the OP could contact Enterprise about Credit Hire if they need it and offer to contact them on the OPs behalf 

I suspect the salient wording in all this is:

"As you signed this rental agreement with ERAC"

ChirpyChicken

@MyRealNameToo i stand corrected, i had only skim read the OP post, thanks for the detailed information
Credit hire is one of the reasons for the cost of insurance these days!