The RHA has been authorised by the Competition Appeal Tribunal in London to bring the only collective claim to secure compensation for any person or business that purchased or leased trucks since January 1997. The European Commission decision in the Truck Cartel case (see below for further details) will prove before the Competition Appeal Tribunal that the truck manufacturers are liable for a violation of EU competition rules and it will therefore be necessary for the RHA to show that the Truck Cartel caused operators loss and the amount of that loss.
Any firm, company, partnership, or individual who between 17 January 1997 and 31 January 2014 entered into a contract for the purchase or lease a new truck, or between 17 January 1997 and 31 January 2015 entered into a contract for the purchase or lease of a used truck, provided the truck was registered in the UK for road haulage operations (both hire and reward and own-account).
Excluded from the RHA’s collective claim are: (1) truck manufacturers and their group companies; (2) trucks registered outside of the UK; (3) businesses already bringing an individual action against the truck manufacturers unless they discontinue or stay those actions; (5) representatives acting on behalf of any person who died before 17 July 2018; (6) companies that have been dissolved for a continuous period of more than 6 years since 17 January 1997; and (7) any operator engaged in road haulage services exclusively on a cost-plus (also referred to as open book) basis (although you can still join the RHA’s claim even if at times you were engaged in road haulage operations on a cost-plus basis provided that you were also engaged in road haulage operations not subject to cost-plus arrangements).
You do not need to be an RHA member to join the claim.
Note that you cannot join the RHA’s collective claim if you purchased or leased trucks as a consumer (e.g., for transporting horses). For more information, please contact Backhouse Jones on 08450 30 50 30.
There are real benefits to joining the RHA’s collective claim rather than seeking to bring an individual case or joining another group of potential claimants:
There will be no cost to your business in joining the claim. The RHA has secured a significant amount of funding from a specialist litigation funder. If the RHA loses the claim, the funder will lose all of its investment. To offset that risk, the litigation funder will take a fee from the compensation awarded if the RHA is successful on behalf of the claimants. Based on conservative estimates by the RHA, your business should still receive 91% or more of its proportionate share of the compensation. If the RHA loses the claim, the RHA will not charge your business for its time or the costs it has incurred on your behalf. The funder will simply lose its investment.
Usually in litigation, the losing party is ordered to pay the winning party’s costs. In the case of the proposed collective proceedings before the Competition Appeal Tribunal, as the RHA is bringing the matter on behalf of your business, any such order would generally be made against the RHA. There are more limited circumstances in which your business might be ordered to pay costs where issues arising in the litigation apply only to your business. In any event, the RHA is taking out a significant level of insurance cover to insure against this risk both in relation to itself and in relation to your business and each individual claimant. Your business agrees to be bound by the insurance policy wording. Your obligations under the insurance policy are explained in more detail in the Claim Summary Brochure.
Your business can claim for any trucks of 6 tonnes or more purchased outright or on finance and for any leased trucks. Leased trucks covers operating leases of any length and also spot hire. The claim is not limited to brand new trucks but also covers second-hand trucks. The trucks must be registered in the UK and used for road haulage operations (on a hire and reward or own-account basis). You can claim for any new trucks where you entered into a contract for the purchase or lease between 17 January 1997 and 31 January 2014 and for any used trucks where you entered into a contract for the purchase or lease between 17 January 1997 and 31 January 2015. Since the cartel operated between 17 January 1997 and 18 January 2011, it is possible that you will not have a viable claim for the additional period of time beyond 18 January 2011 (known as the “run-off period”), or that the run off period will be shorter. This will be determined in the legal claim.
The RHA will be seeking to reclaim the difference between what the trucks should have cost in a competitive market as compared with the cartel prices, together with any other increases in operators’ costs – for example in relation to fuel – resulting from the cartel. The RHA is also claiming for interest on the damages.
The RHA is adopting a cautious approach to estimating the level of damages mindful of the fact that key details about the cartel remain hidden in secrecy and will not become available until later in the process. Hidden details include, for example, the amount by which the truck manufacturers actually agreed to increase their gross list prices at various points during the 14-year cartel and the cost that truck purchasers should be charged for emissions technologies.
It is nevertheless worth noting that, in the individual claims brought by Royal Mail and BT against DAF, the Competition Appeal Tribunal has already determined that the level of overcharge amounted to 5% of the cost of each new truck. Although the evidence to be presented in the RHA collective claim will not necessarily show the same level of overcharge – it might be lower or higher – this does indicate that haulage operators are owed significant sums as a result of the cartel. Also, the interest element of the Royal Mail claim doubled the damages owed by DAF, while the interest element of the BT claim increased it by 1.5 times. The significant impact of interest on the amount of damages owed is because the cartel started to operate over 20 years ago.
How much compensation owed to your business will actually be paid to you will depend on a number of factors, including the overall loss, the number of truck operators that sign up to the RHA’s claim, the amount of time the claim takes, the volume of documents disclosed, and the complexity of the expert evidence.
However, based on conservative estimates, the RHA believes that you will retain 91% or more of the damages owed to you. This means, for example, that if compensation was awarded at the level of £6,000 per truck (including interest), you would obtain £5,460 or more per truck.
The RHA’s collective legal claim relates to the purchase of both new and used trucks given that the cartel may have had an impact of the prices of both of these.
Assuming that the cartel did have an impact on the prices of new and used trucks, road haulage operators will have lost out through paying higher prices when purchasing new trucks but might on the other hand have achieved higher prices when it came to selling them on. If you purchased new trucks which you then sold after a few years and it is demonstrated that the cartel increased the prices of both new and used trucks, it will be necessary to subtract the higher prices you achieved when selling your used trucks from the loss you suffered when paying higher prices for those new trucks. For example, if the overcharge when purchasing a new truck was £6,000 but you subsequently sold that truck for £2,000 more than you would have because of the cartel, your primary loss would be £4,000. If you also purchased used trucks during the claim period, you will be able to claim for your losses when purchasing those used trucks at higher prices.
You should be specifically aware that, in its decision to allow the RHA's claim to proceed, the Tribunal noted that, while purchasers of new and used trucks both want the overcharge on new trucks to be as high as possible, there may be an underlying divergence of interest between (a) purchasers of new trucks and (b) purchasers of used trucks as to the extent to which the overcharge on the new truck was passed on when the truck was resold. The impact of the cartel on the prices of new and used trucks and the relationship between the two will be a matter considered by expert witnesses during the legal claim and the position which the RHA adopts on the appropriate level of overcharge pass-on between new and used trucks will be based on the objective advice it receives from its economic expert. Moreover, the Tribunal will ultimately determine the matter unless the case settles before final judgment.
It is worth noting that, even if used trucks were not part of the RHA’s collective claim, it would still be necessary for an assessment to be made as to whether new truck purchasers obtained a benefit when selling on their trucks since the truck manufacturers will be arguing that there was such a benefit.
In agreeing to be part of the RHA’s collective claim, you agree to accept the determination of the RHA, following expert advice, not only as to how the impact of the cartel on the prices of new and used trucks should be presented to the Tribunal but also as to the appropriate relationship between new and used truck prices in any settlement discussions.
We appreciate that you may well not have records dating back to 1997. This should not stop your business joining the RHA’s collective claim. To the extent that you do not have complete records, we consider that we may be able to obtain the information we need from other sources (such as dealers or the manufacturers themselves). Equally, it may well be possible to persuade the Competition Appeal Tribunal to accept less evidence given how many years the cartel dates back.
TThe European Commission has fined the six major European truck manufacturers (MAN, Volvo/Renault, Daimler/Mercedes, Iveco, DAF, and Scania) over £3.4 billion for cartel activities. The collective fine is the highest fine by far ever imposed by the European Commission. The manufacturers – at their own admission except for Scania – were party to a cartel from 1997 to 2011, with senior managers involved at HQ level. The manufacturers (including Scania) engaged in various coordinated practices, including:
The RHA is the UK trade association that is dedicated to the interests of the road haulage sector. The Truck Cartel is one of the key issues facing the road haulage sector at this point in time. Not least after many RHA members contacted the RHA about the Truck Cartel, the RHA believes that it was incumbent upon it to take action on behalf of its members and the road haulage sector more generally in the UK. The RHA is mindful of the fact that many of its members are micro and small businesses that would not be capable of taking legal action on their own against the truck manufacturers. Indeed, competition law claims for compensation are notoriously expensive to bring. However, the truck manufacturers have engaged in a serious abuse of EU competition rules that will ultimately have affected truck operators’ bottom lines. In bringing a legal claim on behalf of the UK’s road haulage sector, the RHA will be able to achieve economies of scale that individual truck operators would not be able to achieve on their own, thereby enabling truck operators to claim the compensation they deserve.
No. The RHA’s group claim is open to RHA members and non-members alike. Allowing non-members to join the RHA’s claim will benefit RHA members. Indeed, the more truck operators that sign up to the RHA’s claim, the larger the return to individual truck operators and therefore every truck operator benefits.
No. While the RHA is being given funds to cover its costs associated with bringing the claim, the RHA will not benefit financially from the claim, thereby maximising the level of compensation that will be returned to those affected by the cartel.
The European truck manufacturers have been found guilty of a serious violation of EU competition rules and have collectively been fined £3.4 billion. We believe that you paid too much for trucks you purchased or leased during the cartel and for a period afterwards and that you are entitled to compensation.
Broadly speaking, your business is entitled to claim for the difference between what you paid for your trucks and what you would have paid if the cartel had not existed. In the claims brought by Royal and BT against DAF, the Competition Appeal Tribunal determined that the overcharge amounted to 5% of the cost of new trucks. Although this figure of 5% will not necessarily apply to your claim – it might be lower or higher – this shows that you are likely to be owed a significant sum of money even before interest is taken into account.
Since the truck manufacturers also jointly delayed the introduction of more fuel-efficient emissions technologies, your business may also be able to claim for increased costs of delayed access to such technologies (including higher fuel costs).
We are asking you to sign up to the RHA’s group claim by completing the sign-up process on this website. You will first be asked to answer some questions about your business (if you have not already done this) and then you will be asked to confirm your business’ agreement to three key documents:
More details on the content of these agreements will be provided during the sign-up process. You can also read the Claim Summary Brochure.
There will be no cost to your business in joining the claim. The RHA has secured a significant amount of funding from Therium, a specialist litigation funder. If the RHA loses the claim, the funder will lose all of its investment. To offset that risk, the litigation funder will take a fee from the compensation awarded if the RHA is successful on behalf of the claimants. Based on conservative estimates by the RHA, your business should still receive 91% of more of its proportionate share of the compensation. If the RHA loses the claim, the RHA will not charge your business for its time or the costs it has incurred on your behalf. The funder will simply lose its investment.
See the response to “Who can join the RHA’s group claim?" above.
The aim of the compensation claim will be to put your business in the same position you would have been in if the Truck Cartel had not existed. You will be able to claim for any losses that have resulted for you from the Truck Cartel. This will include, for example, claiming for higher truck prices you paid because of the Cartel and any increased level of interest you might have needed to pay in relation to financing truck purchases, as well as higher operating lease charges. In delaying the introduction of more fuel efficient emissions technologies, you may also be able to claim for increases in your cost base through higher fuel consumption.
Your business can claim for any trucks of 6 tonnes or more purchased outright or on finance and for any leased trucks. The claim is not limited to brand new trucks but also covers second-hand trucks. The trucks must be registered in the UK and used for road haulage operations (on a hire and reward or own-account basis).
The cartel itself lasted between 17 January 1997 to 18 January 2011, but your business can also claim for trucks bought or leased after this period. Indeed, the RHA’s collective claim will cover trucks purchased or leased after 18 January 2011 until prices returned to competitive levels. That is why the claim period currently lasts until 31 January 2014 in respect of new trucks and until 31 January 2015 in respect of used trucks.
However, it is possible that you will not have a viable claim for any trucks purchased after 18 January 2011. This is an issue that will be determined in the legal claim.
The aim of the compensation claim will be to put your business in the same position it would have been in if the cartel had not existed. If your business has had higher fuel costs or your cost base increased because of the cartel, you will be able to claim for these elements. We will update you with more details as we examine these issues in more detail with the legal team and expert economists.
Yes, your business can claim for second-hand trucks.
No, the RHA’s collective claim does not relate to trucks that are less than 6 tonnes.
The relevant brands include (but may not be limited to):
Although Scania chose not to admit its guilt or to settle the case with the European Commission in 2016, Scania was subsequently found guilty of participating in the cartel and was fined £770 million on 27 September 2017. While Scania is currently appealing the European Commission’s decision to the European Courts, we believe that Scania trucks can be included in the RHA’s collective claim for compensation.
No, it does not matter if your business purchased your trucks on finance. What you paid under a finance contract would have been based on the price of the truck and because the truck price was artificially inflated, you will have paid more under the finance contract than you would have paid in normal competitive conditions.
No, it does not matter if your business leased its trucks. What you paid under a lease contract would have been linked to the price of the truck and because the truck price was artificially inflated, you will have paid more under the lease contract than you would have paid in normal competitive conditions. Leased trucks covers operating leases of any length and spot hire.
No, it does not matter if your business purchased its trucks from a dealer. If the dealer is owned by one of the truck manufacturers, this will be treated as a purchase direct from the relevant manufacturer who was engaged in the cartel and artificially inflating prices. If the dealer is a franchisee, there will be a presumption that any increase in prices imposed by the truck manufacturers would have been passed on to your business.
No, you do not need to have purchased your trucks direct from one of the truck manufacturers. Your business is entitled to claim in relation to both direct purchases from one of the truck manufacturers and purchases from franchised dealers or other intermediaries.
No, it does not matter if your business no longer has the trucks you purchased or leased during the relevant period. Generally speaking, your business is entitled to claim for any trucks you purchased or leased during the relevant period regardless of whether or not you have the trucks any longer.
The cartel operated from 17 January 1997 to 18 January 2011. Your business can claim for any trucks purchased or leased during this period. As prices will not have returned to competitive levels as soon as the cartel ended (and indeed the truck manufacturers were coordinating on the cost at which EURO 6 emissions technologies would be passed on to truck purchasers), you will also be able to claim for trucks purchased or leased after the end of the cartel. The overall relevant periods are 17 January 1997 to 31 January 2014 in respect of new trucks and 17 January 1997 to 31 January 2015 in respect of used trucks. However, it is possible that you will not have a viable claim for any trucks purchased after 18 January 2011. This will be determined in the legal claim.
In the vast majority of cases, we do not believe it will make a difference to your claim that as a general matter you may seek to pass on the costs of your business to your customers. The truck manufacturers will have the onus of proving that you passed on any increased prices to your customers. You know how fiercely competitive the haulage industry is and how difficult it would be to pass on an increased cost in your business to your customers.
You cannot, however, claim if you engaged in road haulage operations exclusively on an open book basis. This means that you supplied road haulage operations through a cost-plus contract whereby the entirety of the cost of purchasing or leasing the appliable trucks is paid for by the customer receiving the road haulage operations and where the customer van inspect your books to verify the charges. You can still join the claim if you were at times operating on an open book basis provided that you were also engaged in road haulage operations not subject to an open book contract but in this case you will not be able to claim for the trucks subject to the open book arrangements.
Backhouse Jones, our legal advisors on this matter, will need to analyse the facts of your case before we can give a clear response on this. If any potential claims were assigned to you when you acquired another haulage business, you may well be able to claim on behalf of the business you acquired as well.
If your business that purchased or leased trucks has been dissolved for a continuous period of more than 6 years since 17 January 1997, you will not be able to sign up to the RHA's claim. If your business has been dissolved for less than 6 years, it would be worth you contacting the RHA or Backhouse Jones, our main legal advisors, to explore in more detail whether you can be part of the claim. If you were a sole trader or partnership that no longer trades, you are likely to be able to be part of the RHA’s collective claim.
Merely because your business is in insolvency would not prevent your business from benefitting from the RHA’s claim. If your business is in insolvency, the RHA would recommend that you contact Backhouse Jones, our main legal advisors, to discuss this in more detail.
Backhouse Jones, our main legal advisors on this matter, will need to analyse the facts of your case before we can give a clear response on this. If any potential claim you had was not assigned to the purchaser of your business, you may continue to have a valid claim. We would recommend your contacting Backhouse Jones to explore this in more detail.
Yes, your business can join the claim if you purchased or leased trucks in Scotland or Northern Ireland.
You cannot claim for trucks registered outside the UK.
We appreciate that you may well not have records dating back to 1997. This should not stop you joining the RHA’s collective claim. To the extent that you do not have complete records, we consider that we may be able to obtain the information we need from other sources (such as dealers or the manufacturers themselves). Equally, it may well be possible to persuade the Competition Appeal Tribunal to accept less evidence given how many years the cartel dates back.
You should retain all records that you have relating to trucks you purchased or leased dating back to 1992, as well as records in relation to your business's own pricing and costing.
No, your business does not need to join up to the RHA collective claim in order to claim compensation. You could consider bringing a claim on your own or joining another group. However, you should seek independent legal advice to make sure that you bring any alternative claim in time. Moreover, you should note that competition law claims tend to be expensive to bring and we would expect in most cases that your costs in bringing an individual claim would exceed the compensation you might win. The RHA believes that there are real advantages in you joining the RHA’s collective claim, including:
The RHA is bringing its collective claim in the Competition Appeal Tribunal in London. This is a specialist tribunal dealing with competition law claims. The RHA will utilise a new regime called “collective proceedings” that has been introduced for claims like this.
The Consumer Rights Act 2015 made it possible to bring collective proceedings, which are a form of court procedure that enable a class representative (such as the RHA) to bring proceedings on behalf of individuals and businesses affected by an infringement of competition rules. As a result of the 2015 Act, groups of individuals and businesses who have lost out do not each need to bring an individual claim to obtain compensation for their loss. Instead, these individuals and businesses may all receive compensation through a single collective claim brought on their behalf.
The core notion of collective proceedings is that they group together similar claims that raise common issues (i.e., the same, similar, or related issues of fact or law). The common issues will be dealt with during the proceedings and the judgment as regards the common issues will be binding on all claimants that opt into the RHA’s group claim.
Common issues will cover both how the law is applied to the case and how the compensation owed to road haulage operators should be calculated.
Issues as to how the compensation should be calculated in broad terms include:
There are four main stages to collective proceedings. The first phase involves applying to the Competition Appeal Tribunal for a collective proceedings order (“CPO”). The CPO authorises a person to act as class representative and certifies the class (i.e. confirms which claims are eligible for inclusion in the collective proceedings). The Competition Appeal Tribunal has agreed that a CPO should be granted in favour of the RHA and we are now waiting for the terms of the CPO to be finalised. Once the CPO has been finalised, the second stage of the collective proceedings will be a trial of the common issues. The third stage would be the determination of any individual issues. The fourth stage would involve distribution of compensation to the claimants that have opted into the collective proceedings.
The RHA is uniquely well placed to be the representative body in the United Kingdom in the context of bringing the claim for compensation against the European truck manufacturers. The RHA is a not-for-profit trade association dedicated to the interests of the road haulage industry. It is the only trade association dedicated to road haulage. It is a large, well-resourced association and is experienced in utilising its resources to benefit its membership and the sector at large.
It is important that you retain any documents from January 1992 that might be relevant to your case. This includes purchase documents, finance documents, lease documents, registration documents, annual accounts, information on the costs of your business, and price lists.
If you no longer have those documents, then you are still eligible to participate in the RHA’s collective claim.
In order to minimise legal costs, we ask that you do not send the documents to us at this stage. We will request them from you when they are required.
We appreciate that your business may well not have records dating back to 1997. This should not stop you joining the RHA’s group claim. To the extent that you do not have complete records, we consider that we may be able to obtain the information we need from other sources (such as dealers or the manufacturers themselves). Equally, it may well be possible to persuade the Competition Appeal Tribunal to accept less evidence given how many years the cartel dates back.
The core legal team working on this matter are the law firms Backhouse Jones and Addleshaw Goddard, as well as barristers from Exchange Chambers in Manchester and Brick Court Chambers in London.
Backhouse Jones is the UK’s leading firm of solicitors dealing with the transport industry. The firm has a strong heritage within the transport industry and provides industry-specific advice to its portfolio of transport clients ranging from multi-nationals to entrepreneurial start-ups. Backhouse Jones has worked on complex litigation cases, including representing operators in multi-million pound claims for compensation from the UK Government arising out of the foot-and-mouth crisis.
Addleshaw Goddard is one of the UK’s largest law firms with considerable experience in large-scale and complex multi-party litigation, including competition law disputes.
Exchange Chambers is an award-winning set of chambers, consistently ranked as a leading national set with a proven track record in all major areas of law. The team from Exchange Chambers includes David Went who has been recognised as a leading UK competition lawyer and has consistently been ranked in legal directories since 2010, including a top-tier ranking in Chambers & Partners.
James Flynn KC is one of the UK’s foremost competition law litigators. His wide experience at the Bar builds on his years of practice at a magic circle law firm in London and Brussels, together with his work as a Legal Secretary at the European Court of Justice.
The legal team has worked on competition matters for organisations such as the FIA (regulatory body for Formula 1), FIFA, Google, GSK, Samsung, Sky, and UEFA.
For more details on the RHA’s legal team, please see here.
The RHA is using Dr Peter Davis who is a partner at The Brattle Group for expert economic advice. The Brattle Group is one of the world’s leading economic consulting firms. Established in 1990, it has around 500 members of staff in 11 offices around the world. The Brattle Group answers complex economic, finance, and regulatory questions for corporations, law firms, and governments around the world.
Dr Peter Davis is an industry-leading expert in competition economics, European regulatory matters, and follow-on damages actions. In addition to his consulting work, Dr Davis has been a faculty member at the London School of Economics and MIT Sloan School of Management.
It is very unlikely that you or anyone from your business will need to attend court. Now that the RHA has been appointed as class representative, the next stages in the proceedings will include the Competition Appeal Tribunal examining the common issues across the class of claimants and ultimately reaching judgment on those common issues. While we will need you to provide some level of evidence to support the claim, only a very small number of claimants will actually be asked to attend court to provide oral evidence.
If you wish to address the Tribunal on any particular issues, you would have the opportunity of doing so, although you would need to cover any legal costs associated with that.
This claim is against a number of companies within the MAN, DAF, and Iveco groups of companies. The specific companies within the MAN group are TRATON SE, MAN Truck & Bus AG, and MAN Truck & Bus Deutschland GmbH. The specific companies within the DAF group are Paccar Inc., DAF Trucks N.V., and DAF Trucks Deutschland GmbH. The specific companies who within the Iveco group are Stellantis N.V., CNH Industrial N.V., Iveco S.p.A., and Iveco Magirus AG. All of these companies are collectively referred to as the Defendants. It is important to realise that, although the claim is not being brought against Daimler/Mercedes, Volvo/Renault, or Scania, the claim will also cover trucks manufactured by them, as well as all other makes of trucks.
The RHA will be seeking to reclaim the difference between what the trucks should have cost in a competitive market as compared with the cartel prices, together with any other increases in operators’ costs – for example in relation to fuel – resulting from the cartel. The RHA is also claiming for interest on the damages.
The RHA is adopting a cautious approach to estimating the level of damages mindful of the fact that key details about the cartel remain hidden in secrecy and will not become available until later in the process. Hidden details include, for example, the amount by which the truck manufacturers actually agreed to increase their gross list prices at various points during the 14-year cartel and the cost that truck purchasers should be charged for emissions technologies.
It is nevertheless worth noting that, in the individual claims brought by Royal Mail and BT against DAF, the Competition Appeal Tribunal has already determined that the level of overcharge amounted to 5% of the cost of each new truck. Although the evidence to be presented in the RHA collective claim will not necessarily show the same level of overcharge – it might be lower or higher – this does indicate that haulage operators are owed significant sums as a result of the cartel. Also, the interest element of the Royal Mail claim doubled the damages owed by DAF, while the interest element of the BT claim increased it by 1.5 times. The significant impact of interest on the amount of damages owed is because the cartel started to operate over 20 years ago.
The RHA’s collective legal claim relates to the purchase of both new and used trucks given that the cartel may have had an impact of the prices of both of these.
Assuming that the cartel did have an impact on the prices of new and used trucks, road haulage operators will have lost out through paying higher prices when purchasing new trucks but might on the other hand have achieved higher prices when it came to selling them on. If you purchased new trucks which you then sold after a few years and it is demonstrated that the cartel increased the prices of both new and used trucks, it will be necessary to subtract the higher prices you achieved when selling your used trucks from the loss you suffered when paying higher prices for those new trucks. For example, if the overcharge when purchasing a new truck was £6,000 but you subsequently sold that truck for £2,000 more than you would have because of the cartel, your primary loss would be £4,000. If you also purchased used trucks during the claim period, you will be able to claim for your losses when purchasing those used trucks at higher prices.
You should be specifically aware that, in its decision to allow the RHA's claim to proceed, the Tribunal noted that, while purchasers of new and used trucks both want the overcharge on new trucks to be as high as possible, there may be an underlying divergence of interest between (a) purchasers of new trucks and (b) purchasers of used trucks as to the extent to which the overcharge on the new truck was passed on when the truck was resold. The impact of the cartel on the prices of new and used trucks and the relationship between the two will be a matter considered by expert witnesses during the legal claim and the position which the RHA adopts on the appropriate level of overcharge pass-on between new and used trucks will be based on the objective advice it receives from its economic expert. Moreover, the Tribunal will ultimately determine the matter unless the case settles before final judgment.
It is worth noting that, even if used trucks were not part of the RHA’s collective claim, it would still be necessary for an assessment to be made as to whether new truck purchasers obtained a benefit when selling on their trucks since the truck manufacturers will be arguing that there was such a benefit.
In agreeing to be part of the RHA’s collective claim, you agree to accept the determination of the RHA, following expert advice, not only as to how the impact of the cartel on the prices of new and used trucks should be presented to the Tribunal but also as to the appropriate relationship between new and used truck prices in any settlement discussions.
How much compensation owed to your business will actually be paid to you will depend on a number of factors, including the overall loss, the number of truck operators that sign up to the RHA’s claim, the amount of time the claim takes, the volume of documents disclosed, and the complexity of the expert evidence.
However, based on conservative estimates, the RHA believes that you will retain 91% or more of the damages owed to you. This means, for example, that if compensation was awarded at the level of £6,000 per truck (including interest), you would obtain £5,460 or more per truck.
The RHA will be aiming to win the optimum level of compensation for you and the other claimants. It is the RHA Board, advised by Backhouse Jones and specialist competition law counsel (including James Flynn KC), that will ultimately have the decision-making power in relation to any offers of settlement. One advantage of the collective proceedings regime is that the amount of compensation owed to operators can be calculated on a common basis across the entire class or across sub-classes within the collective claim. This may minimise the amount of evidence that operators like you need to provide and should ultimately speed up the legal process. The amount of compensation owing to your business should nevertheless be linked to the number of trucks you purchased and/or leased during the cartel period (and any run-off period until prices returned to competitive levels), together with any compensation owing because of other increases in the costs of your business, and your business will certainly be compensated appropriately for its loss.
Third-party funding is where a third party (not otherwise connected or interested in the claim) agrees to finance all or part of the legal costs of a claim. In return, the funder receives a fee payable from the proceeds recovered by the group of claimants if the claim is successful. Third-party funding is therefore a form of alternative investment which, although has a high degree of risk, can be well rewarded if a claim is successful. Third-party funding allows cases to proceed which otherwise would not be able to be run. It is worth noting that the Competition Appeal Tribunal has examined the funding arrangements in this case and approved them as acceptable for these proceedings.
The effect of the funding arrangements is that you will pay nothing unless the case is successful.
If the RHA obtains compensation on behalf of your business, then you will pay a fee that reflects the financial risk that the third-party funders have taken in financing the litigation.
The relationship with the third-party funder is governed by the Litigation Funding Agreement which the RHA has executed on your behalf. While the Agreement is commercially sensitive it may be inspected at Backhouse Jones’ offices.
Under the Litigation Funding Agreement, the third-party funders will pay any up-front insurance premiums, pay the disbursements associated with the case, and pay the fees due to the legal team and experts.
Based on the anticipated number of claimants signing up to the RHA action and assuming the level of compensation is in line with the RHA’s current conservative estimates, truck purchasers will retain 91% or more of the compensation owed to them. This means, for example, that if compensation was awarded at the level of £6,000 per truck (including interest), you would obtain £5,460 or more per truck. If the case settles early, there is a third discount on the percentage return to the funder resulting in an increased amount recovered to the operator – around 94% or more of the compensation would be returned to you.
This arrangement is reflective of the risk being taken by the third-party funder in agreeing to fund the claim.
Yes, the third-party litigation funding covers the costs of expert competition law economists who have forensic accountancy expertise. We would therefore envisage any forensic accountancy costs falling within the third-party litigation funding arrangement. We cannot exclude that we might need to seek further information from you during the course of the collective claim process that could potentially involve your accountants but we would seek to keep this to a minimum if this arises.
There will be no cost to your business in joining the claim. The RHA has secured a significant amount of funding from a specialist litigation funder. If the RHA loses the claim, the funder will lose its investment. To offset that risk, the litigation funder will take a fee from the compensation awarded if the RHA is successful on behalf of claimants. Based on conservative estimates by the RHA, your business should still receive 91% or more of its compensation. If the RHA loses the claim, the RHA will not charge your business for its time or the costs it has incurred on your behalf. The funder will simply lose its investment.
Usually in litigation, the losing party is ordered to pay the winning party’s costs. In the case of collective proceedings before the Competition Appeal Tribunal, as the RHA is bringing the matter on behalf of your business, any such order would generally be made against the RHA. There are more limited circumstances in which your business as an individual claimant (i.e., a truck purchaser) might be ordered to pay costs where issues arising in the litigation apply only to your business. The RHA has taken out a significant level of insurance cover to insure against this risk both in relation to itself and in relation to your business and each individual claimant. Your business agrees to be bound by the insurance policy wording. Your obligations under the insurance policy are explained in more detail in the Claim Summary Brochure.
You will be provided with monthly updates on how the claim is progressing. If you have a question which is not answered on this website or by our monthly updates, you can contact the legal team via the website and the legal team will aim to respond within 48 hours. If you consider that it is important to speak with a member of the legal team, you will be able to do so.
TThe legal case is likely to last a number of years from the Competition Appeal Tribunal permitting the RHA’s collective claim to proceed, assuming that the case goes all the way to final trial. However, the RHA will be engaging on a transparent basis with the truck manufacturers throughout the case and there will be every opportunity to settle the case early.
As the case progresses, we will keep the group updated by way of email updates. We will also update the content and FAQs on our website. If, however, there is something you are not clear about and need a specific response to, you can ask the legal team via our website. The legal team will aim to respond within 48 hours.
Usually in litigation, the losing party is ordered to pay the winning party’s costs. In the case of collective proceedings before the Competition Appeal Tribunal, as the RHA is bringing on behalf of your business, any such order would generally be made against the RHA. There are more limited circumstances in which your business as an individual claimant (i.e., a truck purchaser) might be ordered to pay costs where issues arising in the litigation apply only to your business. The RHA has taken out a significant level of insurance cover to insure against this risk both in relation to itself and in relation to your business and each individual claimant. Your business agrees to be bound by the insurance policy wording. Your obligations under the insurance policy are explained in more detail in the Claim Summary Brochure.
We do not believe it likely that truck prices would increase merely because the RHA’s group claim is successful. Since the cartel was unearthed, the truck manufacturers have been competing with each other in the market and have not been able in a coordinated manner to influence the prices at which their trucks should be sold. On this basis, the RHA believes that truck prices will remain competitive in future.
Given that the truck manufacturers have admitted their guilt (or been found guilty in the case of Scania) and the European Commission decision proves before the Competition Appeal Tribunal that they are liable, we believe it is unlikely that the RHA will lose the case. In the unlikely event the case was lost, the funder would lose its investment. Your business would not, however, be required to pay any of the RHA’s costs or the funder’s costs in bringing the case.
Usually in litigation, the losing party is ordered to pay the winning party’s costs. In the case of the collective proceedings before the Competition Appeal Tribunal, as the RHA is bringing the matter on behalf of your business, any such order would generally be made against the RHA. There are more limited circumstances in which your business as an individual claimant (i.e., a truck purchaser) might be ordered to pay costs where issues arising in the litigation apply only to your business. The RHA has taken out a significant level of insurance cover to insure against this risk both in relation to itself and in relation to your business and each individual claimant. Your business agrees to be bound by the insurance policy wording. Your obligations under the insurance policy are explained in more detail in the Claim Summary Brochure.
Once you have completed the first part of the sign-up process and provided details on your business, you will be sent monthly updates automatically. You can also sign up for those updates in the News section of this website.
If your business has only expressed an interest in joining another group and you have not signed any documents, your business should be free to join the RHA’s collective claim. If your business has registered its interest in joining the RHA’s group claim, you should complete the necessary sign-up process on the registration website. If you have signed documents with another law firm or another group of claimants, we may not be able to accept your instructions. If you are unsure as to whether you are committed to another law firm or group of claims, you can contact the RHA’s legal team to explore this further or alternatively contact the law firm or group of claimants you have entered into agreements with.
We suggest that your business does not join the RHA’s collective claim unless you are committed to seeing the case through to the end. If your business does seek to leave the RHA’s collective claim once it has commenced, your business will need to pay a proportionate share of the costs of the claim being brought.
Registered Address:
RHA
Roadway House
Bretton Way
Peterborough
PE3 8DD
t: 08450 30 50 30
w: www.rha.uk.net
e: truckcartel@rha.uk.net
Backhouse Jones
The Printworks
Hey Road
Clitheroe
BB7 9WD
t: 01254 828 300
w: www.backhousejones.co.uk
2017 ® RHA & Backhouse Jones Solicitors. All rights reserved.
By 52 Digital