Armstead v RSA

The Supreme Court has delivered a unanimous verdict in favour of Auxillis/Helphire in a judgement handed down at 10.00am this morning. Details in the  press summary link here.

A statement from The CHO, on the decision, is below:

“We welcome the Supreme Court decision, which in our view establishes an appropriate principle of ‘good law’ in the event of a loss, rather than the economics, which are of minimal importance because there is not a lot of revenue associated with these claims.”

“The ruling is a fair outcome for the recovery of reasonable losses resulting from a loss that, as with credit hire overall, contributes very little to the overall cost of insurance.”

Mr Hughes noted that in 2015, the CMA found during an inquiry into the operation of the credit hire market that it adds less than £5 to the average motor premium. 

He added: “Our members serve up to 500,000 people a year, to make sure they can still get to work, or get their kids to school, while their own car is being repaired. The majority of hires come about through supplier relationships between our members and their insurer partners.

* The case relates to a claim by Lorna Armstead, who was issued a hire car by the credit hire company after being involved in a road accident in 2015. She was struck by another car, driven by a man named Pawel Galewski, while at the wheel of her hired vehicle. Armstead received a bill for the credit hire company’s lost rental income while the vehicle was repaired as well as for the repairs to the hire car.

Galewski’s insurer, RSA, accepted liability for the repair of the vehicle, refused to pay for the lost rental income. The Court of Appeal ruled in favour of RSA in March 2022, stating that the amount of income said to be due was the result of a contractual obligation between Armstead and Helphire, rather than something directly caused by the negligence of Galewski’s