Credit hire advice

The law and practice of credit hire claims is surprisingly rich in knotty points of law. Whether it is dealing with concepts of damages, mitigation, market rates, betterment, loss of profits or enforceability of the underlying credit hire contracts, the role of hire cars in the 21st century is comparable to that of ships in the 19th century, in developing the substantive law of damages.

I regularly advise on points of law arising out of credit hire claims.

I have a deep knowledge and understanding of motor insurance law, including issues arising under the Road Traffic Act 1988.

I have advised upon arbitrations under the Untraced Drivers Scheme operated by the Motor Insurers Bureau and claims to overturn such decisions in the Commercial Court.


  1. Andrew
    I work in the House of Commons Library as a financial services ‘specialist’. I had something on CH come in which looks outrageous and wondered if you could give me a steer on whether it is. A constituent was told by a hire car company that “Following a decision in a House of Lords case and subsequent cases, anyone hiring a vehicle/bicycle following an accident is required to disclose all of his/her financial circumstances and in particular to disclose
    all bank/credit card/building society statements and wage slips for a period 3 months prior to the accident. […] Please forward list of transactions or
    statements for ALL accounts in your name (including savings/ISA’s/joint accounts) and copies of your payslips or Iast 2 financial year’s tax returns if you are self-employed.”
    Is this right? I thought it was a scam but trying to check I got lost in CH law of which I know nothing. Any help (from an answer to a ‘look here’) would be much appreciated. Regards Tim Edmonds

    1. What you describe would be regarded as standard directions in most courts. In London, the District Judges have agreed template standard directions for credit hire claims, and typically require financial disclosure of that sort of documentation, so that arguments on mitigation of loss are grounded on the evidence, of what steps to repair his vehicle or purchase a new one or pay for hire charges upfront, a claimant could actually have afforded to take.

  2. Is it correct to say that Rose v Co-op (2005) and Bee v Jenson (2007) are both out of date case law? If not, in both of these cases liability was admitted and the argument was on mitigation. I have a case where there is an argument on mitigation and liability is in dispute. Surely both/either case can’t be considered good law when the position on liability is the polar opposite. It is my position that the Claimant should have made/do make use of their own fully comp policy to prevent hire charges getting out of hand as liability in dispute & they have a duty to mitigate.

  3. Hi Andrew, fascinating reading as always,am I right in my line of thought that an injured party is still entitled to claim for the use of another vehicle even when they have requested a “cash in lieu” settlement of repairs?I am dealing with an insurer that sent an intervention letter with laughable rates on.6 Months later I have asked they arrange hire and they are now refusing. It is a relatively low value claim, and they are being a nightmare to deal with. Do I Just issue proceedings via claims on line with basic hire rates from providers in the area as evidence? as she does not wish to use a credit hire company.
    Kind regards Tim Kelly

    1. Someone whose car has been damaged, is entitled to the dimunution in value of their car, as measured by the reasonable cost of repairs. What they do with that money is up to them: have the car repaired, or blow the cash on drink and cigarettes. They are also entitled to damages for loss of use, the measure of which will be fact sensitive. A person who reasonably needs to hire a replacement car, will be entitled to recover a reasonable rate. In your case, the issue starkly in focus would be on how they have managed for 6 months without a car and why they “need” to hire now. You mention issuing proceedings: not personally I hope. The conduct of litigation, which includes the issuing of proceedings, by a person who is neither the litigant nor a lawyer acting on their behalf, is a criminal offence under section 14 of the Legal Services Act 2007.

Leave a Reply to Timothy Edmonds Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.