RHA attacks lawyer's claim
Page 8
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• The Road Haulage Association has dismissed as a 'red herring" a transport lawyer's claim that its new conditions of carriage have a loophole that could cost operators thousands of pounds (CM 23-29 May).
Last week solicitor Martin Jones criticised the wording of one clause which he says could allow consignors to claim massive compensation from hauhers if loads are damaged.
He says that if customers agree a liability with their carrier which is higher than the £1,300 a tonne recommended in the conditions, there is nothing to stop them insisting on being paid the whole value of the load which could be much greater.
But RHA operating director Tim Inman says a later part of the key clause, clause II, requires the customer to state the exact value of the load if a higher liability is agreed. If he does not, he negates the entire contract, he says.
The section says: "The customer shall be required to agree with the carrier the carriage charges appropriate to the value of the consignment where the limit of liability is increased above £1,300 per tonne."
Inman says this section protects the haulier. "My advice to Mr Jones is to read on," he says, adding that he is prepared to discuss the wording fully with Jones, an adviser to the Midlands RHA.
Jones, however, says the section means the consignor can still agree a charge "appropriate" to the value of the load, without stating the actual value, which he would claim in compensation if the load was damaged. "Tim is trying to cover up an error in the wording," he retorts,