Allianz claims victory for industry in Darren Bent case

Allianz claims it has set a precedent for future credit hire cases despite losing its long-running case against England footballer Darren Bent in the Court of Appeal.

“While this judgment means that an individual claimant has achieved an increase in damages, the impact of the court’s wide analysis is a significant victory for the general insurance industry and we are confident this will bring significant benefits to similar cases in the future,” said Allianz divisional claims manager (technical) Martin Saunders.

The footballer hired an Aston Martin DB9 from credit hire company Accident Exchange after an accident in February 2007. This incurred charges of £63,406, which he sought to recover from Allianz.

Allianz insured the van owned by Highways and Utilities that was involved in a crash with Bent’s Mercedes AMG

Allianz disputed the period, the rate and the need for the hire. A February 11 decision by Judge Plumstead found that Bent should only recover £43,738 of the total, apparently handing victory to Allianz.

However the Court of Appeal overturned the February 11 ruling, allowing Bent to recover £55,719.81. The court found that Bent was not entitled to claim for a seven-day hire rate and should be limited to a lower 28-day rate, and so he could not recoup the full amount.

The case showed that the judge is allowed to look at how long repairs will take, and that the claimant can be responsible for asking the repairer how long it will take to repair their car, Saunders said.

The Court of Appeal also decided to move away from letting claimants automatically recovering the highest possible bracket.

“In this case, the Court of Appeal agreed that Darren Bent was not entitled to claim in respect of a seven-day rate of hire but should be limited to a lower 28-day rate,” Saunders added. “It was also agreed that the judge was still entitled to arrive at a discount of 12% on the seven-day rate to reflect the cheaper longer term hire charge, amounting to over £7,000 in this particular case.”