High Court vindicates RSA on ‘in-house’ repair deals
An insurance company was entitled to set its own rates for vehicle repairs after claimants suffered accidents, a High Court judge has ruled.
In his preliminary judgment on the case of Coles v Hetherton released today, Mr Justice Cooke said RSA Insurance was entitled to use MRNM garages, a member of the RSA Group, and charge the bill to the insurer of the at-fault driver.
Two of those insurers, Allianz and Provident, last year launched actions to contest the principle related to 13 separate cases where RSA had been the claimant’s insurer.
The case comes as the industry is under scrutiny following the Office of Fair Trading’s decision to refer the motor insurance market to the Competition Commission. A report last month found evidence that some companies were taking advantage of the system to add inflated costs to claims and push premiums up for all motorists.
In defending the claim, RSA said its costs reflected what the policyholder would have to pay individually for such repairs, even if they were arranged and paid for by the insurer – an argument accepted by Mr Justice Cooke.
The company admitted that the model generated income for a company in the same group as itself, though it was not a subsidiary.
But RSA, which insures around two million vehicles in the UK, disputed the Allianz and Provident claim that charges were made even where no service at all had been provided by MRNM.
Mr Justice Cooke said that where a vehicle is damaged but can be repaired, the measure of the claimant’s loss could be taken as the ‘reasonable cost of repair’.
He added: ‘That reasonable cost is not necessarily the repair cost actually incurred, whether by the claimant or its insurer or indeed by anyone else who pays a repairer.’
Adrian Brown, chief executive for RSA in the UK and western Europe, said: ‘RSA’s motor repair practices have come in for a lot of criticism recently. I am pleased about the ruling on the legal principles and not surprised that RSA's approach has been vindicated.
‘If necessary we will continue to pursue our claims through the courts, however, given the clarity of the judgment, I hope this can now we brought to an agreed solution.
‘We remain keen to resolve the issues that exist within the motor market and are actively working with the government and OFT's efforts to find a solution.’
- Hundreds attend legal aid protest rally
- Small business spurning legal services – LSB research
- HMRC proposes crackdown on LLP ‘disguised employment’
- PCT will mean the death of Welsh justice, lawyers warn
- Poor will suffer from court fee changes, MoJ warned
- Overwhelming public backing for legal aid: poll
- Fight PI changes, says MASS chair
- Mass meeting of barristers takes a stand on QASA
- Pannone turns to fixed-price mediation post-Jackson
- Grayling asks for quality standard for PCT firms
- 7,000 lawyers to hit the streets for free legal advice
- Pilot aims to limit clinical negligence solicitors’ fees
- Will-writing could still be regulated
- In-house growth accelerating
- Appeal Court applies Russian law in dispute
- Insurers to revamp third-party code
- Court interpreters reject new contract deal
- European data plan labelled ‘demented’
- Saudi Arabia accepts registration of female lawyer
- Don’t worry about Jackson fallout – judge
- North-west paralegal initiative
- French revolution
- ‘Google’ asylum refusals
- Criminal legal aid cuts to reach £370m
- SRA’s popularity slips
- Traffic courts to be set up
- Economy 'testing access to justice'
- MoJ plans crackdown on ‘so-called’ experts
- Midlands ABS issues ‘join us’ offer to insurers
- Law Society Excellence Awards now open for nomination
- Desperate PI firms breaking referral fee ban – AXA chief
- Jurors ‘confused’ on new media contempt
- End-to-end negligence defence practice sets up as ABS