(Pontypridd County Court) The court considered the treatment of rejection of the offer of a car to the claimant for use whilst his own car was being repaired after an accident.
Held: Although the offer of the defendant’s insurers could be taken into account, it could (if unreasonably refused) only go to reduce the claim for loss of use to the cost that would have been incurred by the defendants’ insurers if the offer had been accepted. If, therefore, the claimant incurred a cost of andpound;100.00 per day for use of a replacement car, but the defendants’ insurers would only have had to pay andpound;60.00 per day, it would only be the latter cost that would be recoverable.
Judges:
HHJ Wyn Rees
Citations:
[2007] Lloyd’s IR 70
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Approved – Copley v Lawn; Maden v Haller CA 17-Jun-2009
The parties had been involved in a road accident. The insurer for the liable party offered a car for use whilst the claimant’s car was being repaired. The claimants had rejected that offer, and now appealed against a refusal to award them the cost . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Road Traffic
Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.375997
