Does anyone have experience of Helphire?

[MrT]

Helphire operate their own rental subsidiary company, they boast that they have one of the largest rental fleets in the UK or some such. They also have another sister company, Albany Assistance. My wife used them earlier in the year when she was rear-ended.

The claims of 'like for like' replacement cars is a nonsense - she drives a 2-seat convertible and they sent a crap Fiat Bravo (which broke down despite only having 300 miles on it... typical Fiat).

Albany CS were useless ***** too - faxes and letters to them just disappeared, had to send the same faxes 3 or 4 times and even then, they sat in the post room for upto a week before being 'scanned' onto their CRM system.

Had to complain to the office of the MD to get any action in the end.

 

[Brett]

Just a quick update, I have checked with Helphire who have confirmed that i wont be liable for any costs either way as i am covered by Angel Assistance which is part of the policy.

Interesting...I was covered by Angel Assistance as well - it was them that put me onto Helphire...

 

[Brett]

You're probably an expert on this now, but as I understand it, it's not so much the rates for a given car that are a problem, it's whether you really needed that car.

Courts have held that people should try to minimise the other parties costs. OK, if you have need for a particular kind of vehicle then fair enough, but they've tended to take a dim view of people hiring expensive cars on a like for like basis when a Ford Ka would do for a while.

The trouble is that some of these discussions elsewhere get very polarised with one camp of people pushing the "we're entitled" argument. It's hard to argue against that, but at the end of the day, we all suffer from increased premiums to pay these sometimes £20K+ hire car bills.

I had the car I had at the time because I regularly took banking clients out and they had "certain expectations" at the time. Hence being provided with a like for like car. Funnily enough, five years later a Ford Ka probably would have met their "expectations"

 

[timskemp]

You're probably an expert on this now, but as I understand it, it's not so much the rates for a given car that are a problem, it's whether you really needed that car.

Courts have held that people should try to minimise the other parties costs. OK, if you have need for a particular kind of vehicle then fair enough, but they've tended to take a dim view of people hiring expensive cars on a like for like basis when a Ford Ka would do for a while.

The trouble is that some of these discussions elsewhere get very polarised with one camp of people pushing the "we're entitled" argument. It's hard to argue against that, but at the end of the day, we all suffer from increased premiums to pay these sometimes £20K+ hire car bills.

Indeed we all do, however insurance exists to indemnify against losses. If a milk float driver destroys my wifes 7 seater then I feel justified to rent another to ferry my family of 6 with one wheelchair around. Insurance companies understand this and probably have no problem with it, it's when the solicitors get involved and try to "save" money by reducing the claim (you should have seen the letter from them, if I can find it I'll scan it...) by stating that the bodyshop car (!) would do, that it didn't need to be insured for two drivers, that a smaller car would do, that as we have another car it was unreasonable etc.

As for me renting a merc, mine was hit one hour after me buying it...

 

[Dryce]

It seems to me that companies like helphire exist because the insurance companies seem to be incapable of striking a deal with a car hire company - they are making huge profits "re-selling" hire cars - and at our expense as it all filters back in to the insurance premiums.

Yes. It seems obvious that if you're a large insurer you basically do a corporate deal with an outfit like Enterprise.

But large companies can be stupid with money.