Car collision with a Hertz rental car

[itsmehuey]

Hi everyone,

just to give a bit of background, I was involved in a collision back in April with a guy in a Hertz rental car, which happened at a crossroads intersection - I was coming up towards the intersection behind another car (Car A) in front of me who was indicating his intention to turn right, and I too was also indicating to turn right. When Car A got to the middle of the intersection it started turning right and I too had started turning behind him. However, as soon as he started turning right, he swerved back into the left lane which caused a blindspot to both myself and another car from the incoming side of traffic (Car B ) which collided with me.

In terms of road rules, I am at fault due to the fact that I am turning right and had to give way to the incoming traffic, regardless of the douchey move of Car A. However, I have received a request for reimbursement of the driver of Car B, who rented the car from Hertz but declined and therefore did not pay for any of the optional accident damage coverage and incurred an excess of $2xxx and is now trying to claim these additional expenses he incurred from me. I discussed this with my insurer, and they informed me that I am not legally liable to pay these additional costs (excess) that he incurred because this was a contract between him and Hertz. And that the only legal obligation I have is with Hertz and their car that was damaged in the collision. I discussed this with the other party driving Car B, and he says this is total Bull**** and that it's my fault because I hit him and almost killed him (think that was a full on exaggeration) so it's my responsibility to pay him for these costs.

just wanted to know if anyone here knows from a legal standpoint as to whether I am liable to pay for his Accident Damages Excess and other related costs? He is saying that if I don't pay him, that he will take the matter to court. My insurer will be representing me in the first instance that he tries to get this money from me via legal avenues and will deny that AAMI or I am responsible for the costs. However, we believe that he may try come after me personally, if he loses in the first instance. I'm worried whether or not he would have a strong enough case to claim these costs against me.

Thanks in advance.

[RollaRollin]

I have no legal experience, but I am doing legal studies at school and this is just my thoughts on it.

The key to what you and your insurance company is saying is that

'additional costs (excess) that he incurred because this was a contract between him and Hertz'

I'd say your insurance company is 100% on the money with that. Car B did not take out insurance or whatever they call it on the hire of the car, which leaves him to deal with the excess that Hertz implies because he was involved in this accident.

If he had of taken out the extra cover, no problems.

He has no grounds to make you pay the money, I would think, his problem is with Hertz.

On your second thought of him taking civil action on YOU personally,

I think he's having it on and trying to put the wind up you to pay up.

Your insurance company is representing you in the first instance, which will have the very best lawyers that money can buy. If he wins, he wins, your insurance company pays out the 2k. No loss to you I'm assuming?

But if he looses I doubt he would continue to pursue it as a civil matter against you personally, especially after having to pay court costs for losing

He'll be flat out broke from pursuing you if he loses the first instance and I can't see him continuing the fight against you, unless he has deep pockets, in which he would pay the 2k anyway.

He has no 'friends' in this, if he takes the matter further, it will be out of his own pocket and probably a lot of his time

And after just paying 2k in excess, its probably a pretty light pocket.

Just my .02

Goodluck and keep us posted

Edited June 14, 2011 by RollaRollin

[DJKOR]

I don't have any legal experience in such so I am only stating what I think. Do not in any case treat this as truth.

I think that you are in no way responsible for his excess. As far as that goes, that I'm sure that is a contract between the driver of the rental car and Hertz themselves. You should not be responsible to pay for their excess.

Personally, I wouldn't think he could stand a chance in court to try and make you pay.

On a side note, anyone ever renting out a car, it is always wise to pay the extra charge for insurance during the period of hire.

[itsmehuey]

Thanks for your opinions on this matter guys. I will be treating them all as opinions rather than legal advice (that is unless someone who replies has a legal background as a lawyer or solicitor lol).

Another thing the guy said when I mentioned to him that my insurer says I'm not liable for paying his accident damages excess costs is that when he takes the legal action route, he will also be making me accountable for all his legal expenses that he racks up??? What the heck is with this guy? Does he really think he can do that??

[the-converter]

I would seek help from Insurance Ombudsman Service (IOS), their service is free.

[arc]

What the-converter said, Let him rack up his legal bills he will be paying them haha.

[Ozzcaddy]

Also I have no legal experience, but I have rented many many cars in Australia, US and England over the years. As a renter, you pay these additional fees to reduce the amount of excess that you would be required to pay in case you do have an accident and your at fault. As previously mentioned, B Driver made that agreement with the rental company (Hertz). Driver B is not claiming the damage, Hertz are claiming against Driver A insurance company. Driver A sounds like they have a good Insurance Company who is providing legal advice and representation in court on their behalf. I doubt the presiding judge or magistrate will rule in Driver B favour for legal fees.

When I lived in the US for 6 years I owned a car and my car insurance also covered any rental cars that I may have rented within the US. This made renting cars so much easier and cheaper. It's a shame that Insurance companies here don't have similar policies.

All the best with this.

Edited June 14, 2011 by Ozzcaddy

[itsmehuey]

Also I have no legal experience, but I have rented many many cars in Australia, US and England over the years. As a renter, you pay these additional fees to reduce the amount of excess that you would be required to pay in case you do have an accident and your at fault. As previously mentioned, B Driver made that agreement with the rental company (Hertz). Driver B is not claiming the damage, Hertz are claiming against Driver A insurance company. Driver A sounds like they have a good Insurance Company who is providing legal advice and representation in court on their behalf. I doubt the presiding judge or magistrate will rule in Driver B favour for legal fees.

When I lived in the US for 6 years I owned a car and my car insurance also covered any rental cars that I may have rented within the US. This made renting cars so much easier and cheaper. It's a shame that Insurance companies here don't have similar policies.

All the best with this.

Thanks. when you say "As a renter, you pay these additional fees to reduce the amount of excess that you would be required to pay in case you do have an accident and your at fault." - wouldn't you also have to pay the excess if you aren't at fault? I think I read that in some of the Terms & Conditions of rental agreement.

Driver A is actually the guy who caused this mess (the one who swerved back into the left left after he had already started turning right, in front of me, causing the blindspot between me (who was also turning right), and the guy who was coming from the other side of traffic (driver B ) but Driver A just drove off - hence why the blame had to be put on me (Driver C).

I'm just worried about why this guy thinks he can hold me accountable for his excess - yes the police report says I'm at fault - but don't the legalities lie between me being obligated to Hertz directly for damages to their vehicle, rather than me being obligated to the driver and the excess he incurred for not taking up the accident coverage options and also as to why he would think he has the right to ding me with all his legal fees if he takes the legal route?

And thanks, the-converter; I will have a look at the Insurance Ombudsman Service if he does end up trying to take legal action against me.

[Ozzcaddy]

Have a read of Hertz Terms and Conditions - https://www.hertz.com.au/rentacar/misc/index.jsp?targetPage=Hertz_Australia_Terms_and_Conditions.jsp

Go to Item 6 and beyond. The following is copied from the T&C - Item 6 (a). The renter is responsible for any damage whether at fault or not.

6. Your Liability

(a) Subject to this clause 6, You are responsible, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, for all Damages regardless of fault which occur during the Rental Period or which result from Your rental or use of the Vehicle or Accessories. Notwithstanding anything in this clause 6 or any other clause, there is no cap or limit on Your liability to Hertz resulting from any use of the Vehicle for, or incurred whilst the Vehicle is being used for, any Prohibited Use or by any Prohibited Person or for any Full Responsibility Use referred to in clause 5 (Full Responsibility).

[lateralus]

sorry mate, but the financial ombudsman service will do jack for you in this instance. this free service is there to aid in the resolution of disputes between financial service providers and consumers. it will NOT assist you in private civil matters, such as driver B pursuing you for their contractual obligations to Hertz. however, if AAMI were to not do anything in mitigating the loss and honouring the legal liability component of your insurance contract (highly unlikely unless you have already attempted negotiations with the third party directly), then you could go to the FOS for AAMI's lack of action. but again, the likelihood of that is pretty damn low.

unfortunately, due to the date of loss falling in April, the amendments to the Civil Procedure Act 2005 were not in effect at the time. essentially, this means the courts will not penalise him for not taking reasonable steps or comply with his overarching obligations to negotiate a pre-litigation settlement. for you, this means you could be liable for legal fees IF the plaintiff (ie. driver B) gets a judgement in their favour.

even so with that aside, if your claim with AAMI was indemnified and you have fulfilled your policy obligations such as paying your excess, repairing the vehicle, etc., you will not be liable for any legal fees resulting from a third party instituting legal proceedings. the only time you may be liable for legal fees and/or interest is if you were not co-operating with AAMI, or were negotiating settlement on their behalf without their consent.

as others have mentioned, the excess driver B is paying is a binding policy condition between him and Hertz. neither you personally or your insurer are directly or even vicariously liable for this. this is a fee he would pay regardless of whether or not you were liable for the accident and so is a non-recoverable amount. for example, if he was stupid enough to be in a single vehicle loss of control type accident, he would still have to pay the excess.

but if he was utilising a hire vehicle as a result of the accident, then you may be liable for an uninsured loss(es) such as excess reduction premiums. Hertz could even go as far as to attempy recovery for loss of use of a fleet vehicle, providing their utilisation report could prove so.

having extensive and current industry experience in insurance law, i can tell you that getting your own solicitor involved whilst you've got a claim with AAMI for the exact same metter is one of the worst things you can do for your case. conflicting interests will create a legal nightmare on something like this.

your best bet is to give any and all information you receive to AAMI, and let them take care of it. AAMI have a pretty aggressive reputation in litigation within the insurance industry, and have the resources to properly defend your position.

good luck!

Edited June 14, 2011 by lateralus

[RollaRollin]

he will also be making me accountable for all his legal expenses that he racks up??? What the heck is with this guy? Does he really think he can do that??

Haha this guy obviously knows nothing with what he is demanding and is using his lack of knowledge to I guess scare you into paying up

6. Your Liability

(a) Subject to this clause 6, You are responsible, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, for all Damages regardless of fault which occur during the Rental Period or which result from Your rental or use of the Vehicle or Accessories. Notwithstanding anything in this clause 6 or any other clause, there is no cap or limit on Your liability to Hertz resulting from any use of the Vehicle for, or incurred whilst the Vehicle is being used for, any Prohibited Use or by any Prohibited Person or for any Full Responsibility Use referred to in clause 5 (Full Responsibility).

Pretty much sums it all up there mate, he cannot hold you liable for the costs he incurs for his contract with Hertz.

your best bet is to give any and all information you receive to AAMI, and let them take care of it. AAMI have a pretty aggressive reputation in litigation within the insurance industry, and have the resources to properly defend your position.

100% agree with what all lateralus has said, especially being a legal professional.

If he takes further action, let AAMI handle it.

They spend $$$ for the best lawyers so they dont have to pay and can avoid $$$ in legal claims

Hope hes not another member and is reading all this

Although on the other hand he might realize to back down

Edited June 14, 2011 by RollaRollin

[itsmehuey]

sorry mate, but the financial ombudsman service will do jack for you in this instance. this free service is there to aid in the resolution of disputes between financial service providers and consumers. it will NOT assist you in private civil matters, such as driver B pursuing you for their contractual obligations to Hertz. however, if AAMI were to not do anything in mitigating the loss and honouring the legal liability component of your insurance contract (highly unlikely unless you have already attempted negotiations with the third party directly), then you could go to the FOS for AAMI's lack of action. but again, the likelihood of that is pretty damn low.

unfortunately, due to the date of loss falling in April, the amendments to the Civil Procedure Act 2005 were not in effect at the time. essentially, this means the courts will not penalise him for not taking reasonable steps or comply with his overarching obligations to negotiate a pre-litigation settlement. for you, this means you could be liable for legal fees IF the plaintiff (ie. driver B) gets a judgement in their favour.

even so with that aside, if your claim with AAMI was indemnified and you have fulfilled your policy obligations such as paying your excess, repairing the vehicle, etc., you will not be liable for any legal fees resulting from a third party instituting legal proceedings. the only time you may be liable for legal fees and/or interest is if you were not co-operating with AAMI, or were negotiating settlement on their behalf without their consent.

as others have mentioned, the excess driver B is paying is a binding policy condition between him and Hertz. neither you personally or your insurer are directly or even vicariously liable for this. this is a fee he would pay regardless of whether or not you were liable for the accident and so is a non-recoverable amount. for example, if he was stupid enough to be in a single vehicle loss of control type accident, he would still have to pay the excess.

but if he was utilising a hire vehicle as a result of the accident, then you may be liable for an uninsured loss(es) such as excess reduction premiums. Hertz could even go as far as to attempy recovery for loss of use of a fleet vehicle, providing their utilisation report could prove so.

having extensive and current industry experience in insurance law, i can tell you that getting your own solicitor involved whilst you've got a claim with AAMI for the exact same metter is one of the worst things you can do for your case. conflicting interests will create a legal nightmare on something like this.

your best bet is to give any and all information you receive to AAMI, and let them take care of it. AAMI have a pretty aggressive reputation in litigation within the insurance industry, and have the resources to properly defend your position.

good luck!

thanks a bunch for your inputs mate. so what i've gathered from what you say, is that as long as I abide by my policy conditions with AAMI (i.e. not to negotiate or make any form of payment to him without any prior written consent from AAMI) that AAMI will be able to fully represent me and that I should not be held accountable for 1. his excess that he incurred and 2. the legal fees that he incurs due to instituting a legal proceeding towards this matter?

could you clarify what you meant by "but if he was utilising a hire vehicle as a result of the accident, then you may be liable for an uninsured loss(es) such as excess reduction premiums" ?

I don't intend on getting any personal legal representation until/unless he tries to further pursue me if he makes a first (and failed) attempt to take this matter to court where AAMI will be representing me. and I have made sure that I have sent all paperwork that I've received so far to AAMI, and if he does send me a legal letter of demand for the payment, I will also send this to AAMI too.

I guess the main thing that I wanted to gather, is whether or not he has any legal grounds to push a legal liability on to me for the excess he incurred?

Thanks a lot for everyone's help so far.

[lateralus]

thanks a bunch for your inputs mate. so what i've gathered from what you say, is that as long as I abide by my policy conditions with AAMI (i.e. not to negotiate or make any form of payment to him without any prior written consent from AAMI) that AAMI will be able to fully represent me and that I should not be held accountable for 1. his excess that he incurred and 2. the legal fees that he incurs due to instituting a legal proceeding towards this matter?

that's exactly right

long story short, that's exactly right

could you clarify what you meant by "but if he was utilising a hire vehicle as a result of the accident, then you may be liable for an uninsured loss(es) such as excess reduction premiums" ?

that was more so an FYI. a person is entitled to get a hire vehicle as a result of an accident. they can also 'attempt' to recovery any other extra fees, but the likelihood of their success in that is relatively small. everyone has a duty of care to mitigate their loss

I guess the main thing that I wanted to gather, is whether or not he has any legal grounds to push a legal liability on to me for the excess he incurred?

as a matter of civil law, any body and every body is entitled to attempt a recovery of anything they want to, in order to restore them to the same pre-accident condition.

therefore, he does have legal grounds to attempt to get it back. but the chances of him being successful in that are very very very unlikely.

[playwme]

The reason you pay your insurance is so that you don't have to deal with people like this.

You deal with AAMI

AAMI deal with HERTZ

HERTZ deal with him.

Sounds like he's trying to scare you into giving him money. I've worked with the rental car mobs and a lot of the time, if the renter was not at fault then they can get their excess back once the other parties insurance has paid up. His problem as it stands is with Hertz.

My advice would be not to speak with this person again. You've paid your excess to AAMI, it's now their issue to fight on your behalf. I once had a not at fault motorbike accident and once the other driver left the scene I never spoke to or saw him again. Everything was done through his insurance company.

Make sure you record every time he calls you demanding money, just in case you need to file a complaint or get a restraining order on him.

[playwme]

could you clarify what you meant by "but if he was utilising a hire vehicle as a result of the accident, then you may be liable for an uninsured loss(es) such as excess reduction premiums" ?

that was more so an FYI. a person is entitled to get a hire vehicle as a result of an accident. they can also 'attempt' to recovery any other extra fees, but the likelihood of their success in that is relatively small. everyone has a duty of care to mitigate their loss

This is a cost to be incurred by your insurance co, not you personally.

I guess the main thing that I wanted to gather, is whether or not he has any legal grounds to push a legal liability on to me for the excess he incurred?

as a matter of civil law, any body and every body is entitled to attempt a recovery of anything they want to, in order to restore them to the same pre-accident condition.

therefore, he does have legal grounds to attempt to get it back. but the chances of him being successful in that are very very very unlikely.

He obviously hasn't had any legal advice here cause if he had they would be telling him to put this claim in with AAMI as well.

[itsmehuey]

Haven't heard anything or received any letters of demand yet so I wonder if he's started to get legal advice yet or if he's still planning on taking this matter to court.

He actually told me previously when I spoke to him about how AAMI informing me that the excess he incurred isn't my responsibility, that he doesn't want to deal with my insurance company or Hertz.. only with me personally.

[playwme]

He actually told me previously when I spoke to him about how AAMI informing me that the excess he incurred isn't my responsibility, that he doesn't want to deal with my insurance company or Hertz.. only with me personally.

That sounds a bit sus. He's either misinformed and ignorant of the processes, or trying to extort some extra money from you.

[Ozzcaddy]

I would keep a record(date/time/subject matter) of all conversations and correspondence with this person and advise your insurance company. That way, your insurance company is well informed, so no surprises pop up if it happens to go to court.

[itsmehuey]

yeah I've mentioned each time that I have had correspondence with the guy to my insurance company.