Helphire wins legal case on replacement vehicles

by Gill Montia

Story link: Helphire wins legal case on replacement vehicles

Helphire has won a legal case relating to the provision of replacement vehicles to non-fault parties involved in motor accidents.

The accident assistance firm describes the ruling in the cases of Copley-v-Lawn and Maden-v-Haller, as a “landmark” in which its appeal against earlier judgments was upheld in full.

The appeal considered the common situation where, following a road accident, the at-fault insurer intervenes to offer a “free” car to the not-at-fault party.

In Copley v Lawn and Maden v Haller, the not-at-fault parties had hired cars from Helphire and the at-fault insurers refused to pay Helphire’s charges, having offered to provide alternative vehicles at no charge.

The at-fault insurers argued that the not-at-fault parties behaved unreasonably by not taking up their offer and should not be entitled to any recompense.

Helphire argued that, as an absolute minimum, the not-at-fault parties were entitled to recover the amount it would have cost the at-fault insurer to provide the replacement vehicle.

The judgment established that it is not unreasonable for a claimant to reject or ignore an offer from an insurer which does not make clear the costs of providing the hire vehicle.

In addition, if a claimant does ignore an insurer’s offer, the claimant is still entitled to recover at least the cost which the insurer would reasonably have incurred.

Helphire managing director, Martin Ward, says: “This clear judgment vindicates the position that Helphire takes in the provision of replacement vehicles to the innocent parties of non-fault accidents. In particular the judges were critical of the methods used by the third party insurers in approaching not-at-fault parties.”

He adds: “In light of recent publicity, the judgment clarifies the legal landscape and raises strategic implications for the future of intervention activity within the credit hire industry.”