Court clarifies credit hire claims in personal injury case

Introduction

The County Court at Bradford recently delivered a judgment in the case of Mr Mazahar Hussain vs EUI Ltd, addressing important issues related to credit hire claims and personal injury damages. The case, presided over by HHJ Malek, involved a road traffic accident that occurred on 27 May 2021, in which the claimant, Mr Hussain, sought damages for personal injury and various costs associated with the accident.

Background

Mr Hussain, a self-employed private hire taxi driver, was involved in a collision that led to a claim for personal injury, vehicle damage, storage and recovery costs, credit hire charges, and other fees. The defendant, EUI Ltd, had already admitted liability and paid for the vehicle damage, leaving the court to decide on the remaining issues of credit hire and storage and recovery costs.

Credit Hire Claims

The primary focus of the court was the claim for credit hire charges amounting to £33,140.52. Mr Hussain had entered into a credit hire agreement with Bespoke Credit Hire for a replacement vehicle. The court examined whether Mr Hussain acted reasonably in hiring a replacement vehicle at a cost exceeding his potential loss of profit, given his status as a self-employed driver.

Legal Considerations

The court referred to the established principles in Hussain v EUI Ltd [2019] EWHC 2647 (QB), which outlines exceptions where claimants may recover costs exceeding loss of profit. These include situations where a claimant acts to maintain important business relationships, uses the vehicle for both business and personal purposes, or is unable to afford not to work due to impecuniosity.

Application of Exceptions

Mr Hussain argued that he fell within the first and second exceptions. However, the court found that he failed to provide sufficient evidence of his profitability or the potential impairment of his business. The court also questioned the credibility of a letter from Barkerend Taxis, which Mr Hussain used to support his claim of business necessity.

Conclusion on Credit Hire

Ultimately, the court concluded that Mr Hussain did not meet the criteria for the exceptions outlined in Hussain and was not entitled to recover the full credit hire charges. The court determined that Mr Hussain was entitled to hire a vehicle for personal use but not at the cost of a taxi-plated vehicle.

Storage and Recovery Costs

The court also addressed the claim for storage and recovery costs. It was found that Mr Hussain had space on his driveway to store the damaged vehicle, and thus the storage costs were deemed unreasonable.

Personal Injury Damages

Regarding the personal injury claim, the court awarded Mr Hussain £4,000 for pain, suffering, and loss of amenity, based on the medical evidence provided and the relevant guidelines.

Learn More

For more information on personal injury claims, see BeCivil's guide to Medical Negligence.