Whether out of malicious intent or as something of a prank, sabotaging motor vehicles is a serious crime that can have massive repercussions. Little changes, like pouring sugar in a gas tank or putting a potato in an exhaust pipe, can cause major damage to the motor vehicle and potentially cause bodily harm to the owner or driver of the vehicle. For some, namely those out to cause extreme, if not fatal, injuries, cutting a brake line or causing engine failure can seem like a way to get revenge on an enemy. However, all of these actions constitute a variety of illegal actions, not necessarily labeled under a single umbrella charge of tampering.
™
In the case of damages that cause more property-based expenses as opposed to real bodily harm, such as keying a car door or slashing tires, there are still severe penalties. Even in instances where the intention was clearly to execute a prank, the damage done to a motor vehicle can not only be expensive in repair costs, but wages or opportunities may be lost as well. In these situations, the law does not grant leniency simply because no one was physically harmed. Destruction of property and vandalism can lead to heavy fines, civil suits, and a criminal record.
With more serious offenses, the law is even harsher. Cutting brake lines can not only cause substantial damage to the motor vehicle, but drivers caught unaware may find themselves in real danger while on the road. Not only can accidents cause harm to the driver of the vehicle, but anyone caught in the path of destruction can be injured as well. Charges brought against this kind of tampering can even include counts of attempted murder or murder.
If your vehicle suffered substantial damage as a result of a road traffic accident resulting in the need for it to undergo some repairs; and assuming that you cannot go without a vehicle, so you are left with no choice but to look for a replacement in the meantime, below I cover the main choices that are likely to be available to you and discuss some of the risks involved that you should be aware of.
1. You Are Offered A Courtesy Car
There are 2 situations in which you may be offered with a courtesy car:
i. Your own vehicle insurance covers you with the provision of a courtesy car in the event that your vehicle is off the road for repair because of an accident.
ii. The fault driver's insurers offers you a courtesy car for the interim period that you are without vehicle due to repairs.
Either of these situations are probably the most desirable options to be discussed in this article. The advantage in either of the above situations is you won't need to go through the trouble and stress of trying to source a suitable replacement hire car. And more importantly, it won't cost you anything as the insurance company in either in either of the above situations will be paying for the cost of the hire vehicle.
2. You Are Offered A Replacement Vehicle On Spot Hire
If responsibility for the accident is in issue, you may be faced with the situation that you need to find your own replacement vehicle as your own insurer doesn't cover you with a courtesy car and the third party insurers may be denying liability and therefore not prepared to make any offers.
A spot hire is where you have to pay for the vehicle as it is being hired. In other words you need to pay up front for the replacement car before you receive any form of compensation from the opposing driver's insurers. The cost of the hire car is added at all other losses that you may have suffered as a direct result of the accident which your solicitor serves on the opposing side for payment. If the outcome of your claim by your solicitor results in only partial victory, you mean end up with having to pay some of the vehicle hire costs yourself.
3. You Are Offered A Replacement Vehicle On Credit Hire
This situation often arises in circumstances similar to the above in that your own insurer doesn't provide courtesy motor vehicle accident cars and liability for the accident is disputed so there is no offer of a courtesy car by the opposing party.
Often, your insurer or the garage responsible for repairing your vehicle may offer to pass on your details to a vehicle leasing company which offers a credit hire service.
How this works is that the lease company offers you a like for like replacement vehicle and whilst your own vehicle is being repaired it negotiates with the third party insurers in an effort to agree responsibility for the cost of the hire charges. If those negotiations do not bear fruit, the vehicle hire company works with you to seek recovery of the hire costs by passing on the details of your hire car charges to your nominated solicitors.
Some credit hire companies offer insurance to cover the cost of hire so if you do win in recovering any or all of the vehicle hire charges, then you will not personally have to pay those hire costs. If liability is in issue it is advisable to take any offer of insurance cover for credit lease.
4. You're Offered A Replacement Vehicle From The Third Party Insurer Which You Refuse And Instead You Arrange Your Own Car Hire.
While this is not a forth option as such, this merits addressing here because it has important implications. Let's say that you are offered a replacement vehicle by the third party insurer. The main question is, is it reasonable for you to refuse that offer and go out and hire your own vehicle either on spot hire or credit hire?
This issue was recently addressed by the Court of Appeal in the case of Copely. The court decided that whether or not an innocent party in a claim for damages is entitled to reject the replacement vehicle offered by a third party insurer, is an issue relating to the duty to mitigate loss.
So let me explain the concept of duty to mitigate loss. In all claims for compensation for loss and damage, there is a duty on the innocent party to avoid loss whenever reasonably possible. The court reasoned that a party cannot recover damages for a loss (i.e. hire car charges) which he could have avoided if he'd accepted the opposing party's offer of a free replacement vehicle.
The rationale is that if an innocent party had the chance of not incurring loss by accepting the offer made of a free replacement vehicle, if he fails to take up this offer and goes out and incurs costs on another replacement car, in effect he has failed to mitigate his loss. In the circumstances, he may not recover any costs incurred as a result against the party at fault.
Whether it is reasonable or not to reject a free vehicle offered by a third party insurer is a question of fact. You would be well advised therefore to take independent legal advice if you wish to avoid incurring unnecessary costs which you may not be able to recover.
In closing and would just like to clarify an issue that causes a lot of confusion among innocent victims of motor accidents. It is well known that insurance companies mislead its policyholders as to their right to instruct their own solicitor if they so wish. Insurance companies will want to persuade you to go with their own panel solicitor as they have a significant financial interest, since many receive a financial kick back from the panel solicitor for each case they refer. I would not advise you to go along with this as you have no say as which firm of solicitors are instructed or whether they possess the required expertise for your claim. Make your own choice and go with a firm that you feel will have your best interests at heart.