Woman racks up £400,000 replacement car credit hire bill
Discussion
https://www.thesun.co.uk/money/10313662/driver-pay...
Crashes her £10,000 Audi
Gets talked into taking a £300/day Merc C220 by dubious credit hire firm
Three years later, case is finally settled in court and she's found liable for the £400,000 car hire on account of the accident having been deemed her fault (seems she drove into a parked car but claimed he reversed out into the road)
Could have bought a dozen new C220s for that!?
Granted there seems to have been some dubious behaviour on the part of the credit hire firm as the judge decided the witnesses were connected to them.
Story mentions that she has some other "after the event" insurance policy but I'm not sure what that is, maybe pays the bill for her, not sure.
Anyway, is this sort of shenanigans why everyone's car insurance is so high?
Crashes her £10,000 Audi
Gets talked into taking a £300/day Merc C220 by dubious credit hire firm
Three years later, case is finally settled in court and she's found liable for the £400,000 car hire on account of the accident having been deemed her fault (seems she drove into a parked car but claimed he reversed out into the road)
Could have bought a dozen new C220s for that!?
Granted there seems to have been some dubious behaviour on the part of the credit hire firm as the judge decided the witnesses were connected to them.
Story mentions that she has some other "after the event" insurance policy but I'm not sure what that is, maybe pays the bill for her, not sure.
Anyway, is this sort of shenanigans why everyone's car insurance is so high?
kev1974 said:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/money/10313662/driver-pay...
Crashes her £10,000 Audi
Gets talked into taking a £300/day Merc C220 by dubious credit hire firm
Three years later, case is finally settled in court and she's found liable for the £400,000 car hire on account of the accident having been deemed her fault (seems she drove into a parked car but claimed he reversed out into the road)
Could have bought a dozen new C220s for that!?
Granted there seems to have been some dubious behaviour on the part of the credit hire firm as the judge decided the witnesses were connected to them.
Story mentions that she has some other "after the event" insurance policy but I'm not sure what that is, maybe pays the bill for her, not sure.
Anyway, is this sort of shenanigans why everyone's car insurance is so high?
One of my neighbours reversed into my car earlier this year. Phoned my insurance company who, and I can't quite remember how they worded it, offered me the choice of either organising my own basic spec replacement car and reclaiming the cost myself from the insurance company, or getting a similar-spec car by allowing ClaimFast to process my claim. So in place of my 9-year-oId Passat I ended up with a Merc C200. I had to sign a declaration that I would be willing to appear in court to help Claimfast pursue the case against my neighbour's insurers.Crashes her £10,000 Audi
Gets talked into taking a £300/day Merc C220 by dubious credit hire firm
Three years later, case is finally settled in court and she's found liable for the £400,000 car hire on account of the accident having been deemed her fault (seems she drove into a parked car but claimed he reversed out into the road)
Could have bought a dozen new C220s for that!?
Granted there seems to have been some dubious behaviour on the part of the credit hire firm as the judge decided the witnesses were connected to them.
Story mentions that she has some other "after the event" insurance policy but I'm not sure what that is, maybe pays the bill for her, not sure.
Anyway, is this sort of shenanigans why everyone's car insurance is so high?
Luckily in my case the other side coughed up, although it took eight months before it was all settled. In the interim I'd informed Claimfast that I was perfectly happy to go to court to back up the validity of my claim, but not just to settle a lawyers' bunfight.
A bit of digging reveals that this is Claimfast's modus operandi, supplying pricey hire cars as replacement cars and reclaiming the cost from wherever they can, and apparently the other side's insurers are perfectly entitled to contest the cost of the replacement car, leaving the claimant to pick up the bill. Claimfast could then ask me to appear in court on their behalf, for God knows what reason other than to possibly justify my need for the replacement car.
In the end I had the Merc for about three weeks, never did find out how much it cost.
Starfighter said:
Could someone please explain why credit hire is so expensive. I am sue I could get a C220 for under £100 per day with a reputable rental company. Where is the extra £200 going?
In the robbing b
d's pockets. An outrageous practice which I'm amazed is allowed still.Years ago someone drove into a mate's boxster so the credit hire people provided him with a brand new 911 carrera s for a week.
Mental. I actually returned my hire car after 6 days after someone crashed into me. Over a grand for that week for a basic A1. Crazy. Should be outlawed.
They also kept phoning me telling me I'm intitled for longer until I have a new car etc etc.
15 daily phone calls from dubious injurys claim companies ever since that know every single detail of my crash. Hmmm I'll never ever use this insurance company again.
They also kept phoning me telling me I'm intitled for longer until I have a new car etc etc.
15 daily phone calls from dubious injurys claim companies ever since that know every single detail of my crash. Hmmm I'll never ever use this insurance company again.
hotchy said:
Mental. I actually returned my hire car after 6 days after someone crashed into me. Over a grand for that week for a basic A1. Crazy. Should be outlawed.
They also kept phoning me telling me I'm intitled for longer until I have a new car etc etc.
15 daily phone calls from dubious injurys claim companies ever since that know every single detail of my crash. Hmmm I'll never ever use this insurance company again.
Who was it? My insurance was with Acromas, through the AA. Interestingly, Claimfast share their address with Acromas...They also kept phoning me telling me I'm intitled for longer until I have a new car etc etc.
15 daily phone calls from dubious injurys claim companies ever since that know every single detail of my crash. Hmmm I'll never ever use this insurance company again.
Halmyre said:
hotchy said:
Mental. I actually returned my hire car after 6 days after someone crashed into me. Over a grand for that week for a basic A1. Crazy. Should be outlawed.
They also kept phoning me telling me I'm intitled for longer until I have a new car etc etc.
15 daily phone calls from dubious injurys claim companies ever since that know every single detail of my crash. Hmmm I'll never ever use this insurance company again.
Who was it? My insurance was with Acromas, through the AA. Interestingly, Claimfast share their address with Acromas...They also kept phoning me telling me I'm intitled for longer until I have a new car etc etc.
15 daily phone calls from dubious injurys claim companies ever since that know every single detail of my crash. Hmmm I'll never ever use this insurance company again.
A few years ago our parked Audi A4 was reversed into whilst we were indoors at our in-laws. The driver was one of their neighbours, knocked and apologised etc. I contacted his insurers directly to deal with the claim and they got an AMC involved. We had a brand new Merc B Class for a month. The total bill for the work and the hire car came to more than the value of our Audi.
The insurance company then tried to pursue us for the cost of the hire car, stating that it was an unreasonable bill! They stopped when I informed them that it was them that told me to use their AMC!
Fast forward to last week and someone reversed into my wife whilst driving. Our insurers (Churchill) are using their own (well, Direct Line) repairers and will be dropping off a small 3 door hatchback whilst they do the work.
I'd definitely stick to the big insurers with their own repairers if possible
The insurance company then tried to pursue us for the cost of the hire car, stating that it was an unreasonable bill! They stopped when I informed them that it was them that told me to use their AMC!
Fast forward to last week and someone reversed into my wife whilst driving. Our insurers (Churchill) are using their own (well, Direct Line) repairers and will be dropping off a small 3 door hatchback whilst they do the work.
I'd definitely stick to the big insurers with their own repairers if possible
kev1974 said:
Story mentions that she has some other "after the event" insurance policy but I'm not sure what that is, maybe pays the bill for her, not sure.
When a credit hire firm provides a car, they do so on the understanding that they will get their money back from the third party. And they buy insurance to cover the costs in case they don't. The person receiving the car is not liable for the costs provided they cooperate with the credit hire firm in recovering the outlay, namely going to court if required to fight the case. because the insurance only pays out if the credit hire firm have done all they can to recover their outlay. In this case, she went to court, cooperated with the credit hire firm, and lost. So she won't be liable for the money.
Starfighter said:
Could someone please explain why credit hire is so expensive. I am sue I could get a C220 for under £100 per day with a reputable rental company. Where is the extra £200 going?
When you (person A) hire a car it costs you £100 a day. Suppose you (person A) were hiring a car for someone else to use (person B), on the understanding that they weren't going to pay for it, but you'd have to get the money back of person C, who crashed into person B and made their own car undrivable. And you hadn't even spoken to person C, hadn't got their side of the story, and didn't know if they were going to pay or not. How much would you charge over and above the £100 it was costing you? You've got all the hassle, you might have to wait months or years to recover your outlay, and if you fail, are you going to cover the loss yourself or buy insurance over and above the £100 to cover it? Edited by TwigtheWonderkid on Monday 11th November 09:11
hotchy said:
Mental. I actually returned my hire car after 6 days after someone crashed into me. Over a grand for that week for a basic A1. Crazy. Should be outlawed.
They also kept phoning me telling me I'm intitled for longer until I have a new car etc etc.
15 daily phone calls from dubious injurys claim companies ever since that know every single detail of my crash. Hmmm I'll never ever use this insurance company again.
I did the same when a company called accident express (or something like that) gave me a replacement BMW when mine was damaged in a non-fault rear end prang. They were proper arsey with me when I returned the car early; even though I made it really clear to them that in their t&c's it said you must return the car if you no longer require it - and that point I didn't require it (and I saw the daily hire charge!). The other parties insurer was cool about paying the ridiculous fee and asked if I'd like them to sort me out with a like for like car, something which they said they could do for a fraction of the cost. I declined, as I didn't need a vehicle for the remainder of the time mine was getting repaired. They also kept phoning me telling me I'm intitled for longer until I have a new car etc etc.
15 daily phone calls from dubious injurys claim companies ever since that know every single detail of my crash. Hmmm I'll never ever use this insurance company again.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
kev1974 said:
Story mentions that she has some other "after the event" insurance policy but I'm not sure what that is, maybe pays the bill for her, not sure.
When a credit hire firm provides a car, they do so on the understanding that they will get their money back from the third party. And they buy insurance to cover the costs in case they don't. The person receiving the car is not liable for the costs provided they cooperate with the credit hire firm in recovering the outlay, namely going to court if required to fight the case. because the insurance only pays out if the credit hire firm have done all they can to recover their outlay. In this case, she went to court, cooperated with the credit hire firm, and lost. So she won't be liable for the money.
Halmyre said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
kev1974 said:
Story mentions that she has some other "after the event" insurance policy but I'm not sure what that is, maybe pays the bill for her, not sure.
When a credit hire firm provides a car, they do so on the understanding that they will get their money back from the third party. And they buy insurance to cover the costs in case they don't. The person receiving the car is not liable for the costs provided they cooperate with the credit hire firm in recovering the outlay, namely going to court if required to fight the case. because the insurance only pays out if the credit hire firm have done all they can to recover their outlay. In this case, she went to court, cooperated with the credit hire firm, and lost. So she won't be liable for the money.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
When a credit hire firm provides a car, they do so on the understanding that they will get their money back from the third party. And they buy insurance to cover the costs in case they don't. The person receiving the car is not liable for the costs provided they cooperate with the credit hire firm in recovering the outlay, namely going to court if required to fight the case. because the insurance only pays out if the credit hire firm have done all they can to recover their outlay.
Isn't there any requirement for the preson receiving the car to have told the truth about the circumstances of the accident?Wow 
Actually I became aware (after the event) that there is a scam going on between insurers and hire firms.
A woman crashed into me and I was given an Audi Q5 whilst mine was being repaired.
All well and good until the other insurance company refused to pay the £1000+ per week hire fee (a quick Google search reveals the correct fee) that my insurer-appointed hire firm was charging.
It all went to court eventually.
Actually I became aware (after the event) that there is a scam going on between insurers and hire firms.
A woman crashed into me and I was given an Audi Q5 whilst mine was being repaired.
All well and good until the other insurance company refused to pay the £1000+ per week hire fee (a quick Google search reveals the correct fee) that my insurer-appointed hire firm was charging.
It all went to court eventually.
Tankrizzo said:
Doesn't help that your own insurance company usually offloads you to an AMC on reporting a non-fault claim - I'd turn it down but there are plenty who won't know what it means.
This is one of my biggest gripes. Insurance companies are playing their part in driving the cost of claims up. I'm sure they also get referral fees for it too.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff