‘A hire car blocked my drive and made me miss work – can I sue?'

Telegraph

05-03-2025

Do you have a legal question to put to Gary? Email [e-mail] or use the form at the bottom of the page.
Dear Gary,
I arrived home on foot last week and saw a car blocking my garage where I park, but expected it to be gone by the morning.
At 7.30am the next day, when I had to leave to go to work as a nurse at a local GP surgery, it was still there. I didn't recognise the car, so ended up calling the non-emergency police number 101, and they were able to identify that it was a hire car.
Unable to find a way to get the car moved, or get my own car off my drive, I was unable to get to work.
The car did eventually move, and I ended up getting into work over three hours later than planned, having had to cancel a home visit. I was still paid in full.
It transpired that an employee from a car rental company had 'delivered' the car, but had put the keys through the wrong neighbour's letterbox.
What I have found especially disappointing about my contact with the company is the total lack of any care about the consequences for me, including the impact on my ability to get to work. It's also obvious that if we had needed to get out in an emergency, that would have been a problem.
While I am not the customer of rental company in this case, is there anything I can do to make them accountable for their actions?
–Mary, by email
Dear Mary,
You have described a shocking series of events arising from the apparent incompetence of an individual acting on behalf of a car rental company.
In theory, a company can be held responsible for the actions of its employee conducting business on its behalf.
However, you are correct to mention that you do not have a direct relationship with the company yourself as, in this case, you were not a customer. If you had been, you would have the right in contract law to pursue a claim arising from its performance of the contract.
However, the legal doctrine of 'privity of contract' stipulates that you cannot either enforce the benefit of a contract or be liable for any obligation under a contract to which you are not a party. In short, you cannot sue the rental company in contract law because you do not have a contract with it.
As an aside, it is likely the customer who hired the vehicle and did not receive the keys will have a claim against for non-delivery of the service they contracted for, and possibly any additional losses arising from that failure.
Back to you, and what may assist is the legal territory known as 'tort'. The word tort arises from the latin 'tortus' meaning twisted or crooked. Something twisted or crooked is wrong, and hence a legal tort is a legal wrong in civil law – not criminal – that occurs when one party unfairly causes another party to suffer loss or harm.
In this context, tort law is the parent of the legal concept of negligence and the duty of care owed by one party to another. There is not a general duty of care owed by everyone to everybody. Rather, the law has explored and developed the situations and relationships where a legal duty of care exists.
Learning the case of Donaghue v Stevenson heard in 1932 is a rite of passage for all law students.
Mrs Donaghue sued the manufacturer of ginger beer she drank in a cafe, after she found the residue of a dead snail in her glass. She got a stomach upset. She had not bought the ginger beer herself (her friend had) so could not sue the café. The Court found in her favour and said the manufacturer of the ginger beer had a duty of care to her.
Other situations where there is an established duty of care is between a doctor and patient, and between a teacher and pupil. Therefore, the question is – does the car rental company owe you a duty of care?
I am not aware of a case which has been heard on facts similar to yours, but readers are invited to comment if they are. However, I can say the factors to consider are:
Whether with reasonable foresight it could be seen that a failure to take care could cause you loss or damage. Here, most people would agree blocking your drive could cause you loss or damage and indeed the company is, in a sense, lucky there was not a emergency situation which could have made the situation worse;
That there was a 'relationship of proximity' – namely, some connection – between the parties. I fear you may struggle on this requirement as, so far as the rental company is concerned, it would likely say you are just a random member of the public;
It is fair, just and reasonable that the law should recognise a duty of care. Again, here many people may feel aggrieved on your behalf and say there should be a duty, but you may struggle here. Though I caution we need to hear from the company if it has an explanation or defence as to what happened (for instance, did their customer provide the correct address?).
If you cannot establish a duty of care, your potential case would fall at this first hurdle. If a duty is established, you then need to prove it was breached and that the breach was the cause of loss or injury to you.
Again, on this last point you may struggle to show the actual loss or injury which occurred. You were still paid even though you were late for work, and mere inconvenience is not enough.
I regret therefore that, on an analysis of the legal situation, you may not have a claim.
However, the treatment you have described, especially the company's apparent dismissal of your personal inconvenience, is very shoddy.
In my view, businesses should not just seek to behave in a way which is 'just about' lawful, but rather should exceed such expectations.