Hi all. Here's hoping that you can help me with a legal-ish problem
From 29-31 March this year we hired a car at a uk airport from deleted.
It was undamaged when we collected it, and undamaged when I returned it at 7am on 31st.
Imagine my horror when the £550 damage excess had been charged to my partner's Mastercard. The hire car company said that there was a scratch on the rear nearside panel, which we swear we didn't cause.
I rang the branch and asked what time the car had been checked, and the reply was at 10am that morning. Therefore there appears to be a 3 hour time gap where any damage could have occurred.
Please can anyone help us with how we can get our money back. The hire car company are 'looking into it' at the moment.
Thanks in anticipation.
{Hire car company name removed as you are making an accusation against them, and thus breaking the no naming / shaming policy of this site - DD
|
what happened to cdw?
i havent hired a car for years but always paid for this
you have named a company and this is not alowed for obvious reasons it says this quite specifically in the posting box
you could be liable
i have pm"d a moddy
{Already actioned - DD}
|
|
|
On the odd occasion when I hire a car I either have it inspected and signed for by a rep of the hiring company or I take a lot of photographs of the car, from many angles, either with my digital camera or my phone camera. Was £550 the amount you were not covered for on the Insurance with the hire agreement, ie the XS? £550 is a pretty high bill for a scratch on a panel ie paint damage with no dents or torn metal. If the car was 3 hours in their car park how do they know, and can they prove, that it was not done while parked in their car park?
|
|
|
I would simply put the transaction into dispute with Mastercard, you will need to ring them and ask for a charge-back form, if they have no idea what youre on about, ask to speak to someone who does.
You should then inform the hire car company - DD in writing that you dispute this, and will take steps to recover any of your losses.
Hopefully Mastercard will sort the matter out. If not I would take them to small claims court, as even if you did scratch it, they would have to show due diligence and inspect it in your presence and with you given a chance of negotiation. Also, if was a small scratch that would cost £100 to repair, they can only charge you this & a day's hire while it is out of action. These hire companies generally don't have cosmetic damage until they sell them and they all get done at once, so the cost is likely to be even smaller, as done in bulk.
|
|
|
I hired a car in San Francisco last October and six months later received a letter asking for information about alleged damage on it.
So far they don't seem to have taken this any further.
I am renting a car at the moment; I marked every tiny little scratch on the form when I picked it up, minutely checked all the glass and lights for chips, etc.
When I take it back I am going to be photographing every panel on the car with the day's WSJ clearly visible in each shot
As much as there are unscrupulous and careless renters, the same surely seems to apply to the rental firms themselves, or at any rate their franchisees.
|
I rent a lot of cars, in UK and overseas. Unfortunately this sort of thing is quite common - more in UK than abroad. I think it is seen as a way of increasing the rental income. I have had to argue on a number of ocassions. Ideally get them to sign off the car as you drop it, so you are there with them (not always possible, I know).
I have excess insurance with 'insurance4carhire' - not had to try claiming on it yet though.
Late last year I had a Merc c-class and they tried to nail me for £150 for a chip to the windscreen (despite I checked it very thoroughly). I sent a letter asking for a photo of the chip and heard no more- draw your own conclusions.
Ask them for a picture of a scratch and also the quote for repair. £150 should cover the cost of painting a panel.
|
Two experiences:
Milan
--------
I hired a car from Milan Malpensa via Holiday Autos last year (I keep telling this story) and the hire company was Hertz. Hope I can name them as they were fine.
There were scratches on the car and as it was in a car park area without staff I (a) took pictures for 5 minutes, (b) phoned them to tell them of scratches and they were happy. So we drove on.....
within 30-40 minutes rear-ended by an HGV with major damage. Still surprised I was not killed or the wife. I was knocked unconscious etc.
Had taken out Holiday Auto damage waver cover at £6/day which meant I'd pay excess (reduced via HA) and they'd pay back, Within a month they'd paid back.
Now I had photo'd scratches (irrelevant as car 9 inches shorted 40 minutes later) and Hertz happy with minor damage anyway.
Spain
--------
Hired a car in 2003 on Majorca. Scratched on delivery (lots) but had paid small extra amount for damage waiver. Told hiring agent (via hotel) and they told me do not worry as I had damage waiver.... no problems later.
Bottom line for me is CDW cover. You might not think you will damage a car but someone else might.
|
|
|
|
Same old story I am afraid, and it has been raised on this forum and in motoring press before. I have to say that I would never, ever, return a hire car unless it had been inspected and signed off.
Have you got proof of the time you left it with them versus time of inspection. Where did you actually drop the car versus where was the car when the "damage" was discovered. Room for manouver there I think.
|
Thanks so much to all who've replied so far.
We could not get them to sign the car off, as we left it at 7am to catch our flight, and they only opened at 8am. It was only in my phone conversation that an employee told me it had only been checked at 10am.
We left it at the hire company's car park, which is shared by about 5 other rental firms. We told them that we would be returning it at 7am, and on our invoice it does say 'Due back date: 31 March 2007 at 0700'.
|
Unfortunately this sort of thing is quite common - more in UK than abroad. I think it is seen as a way of increasing the rental income.
I suspect what Aprilia says is true, and not confined to the car rental sector. Another Beest used to work for a mortgage company, and tells me of internal memos explicitly acknowledging that income from straightforward lending was in decline, and that the company was trying to compensate by increasing income from penalties and other charges. The parallel seems strikingly clear to me.
|
|
|
|
If they are not there when you return the car, how can they prove you have caused the damage? Also, when you were hiring the car, did you not inspect the condition - do the company have any written records? Since they have charged you for the damage, they must provide proof they are right to do so. In the first instance, I would contact the head office, and, if they have no intention of helping, I would get a solicitor to send them a letter.
|
|
|
|
|
We have hired cars many times, and, before we hire, we carefully inspect cars with a company employee, and any damage is listed on a specific form. They even have forms now showing an illustration of a car, where they note any damage on the relevant car section. The latest car we hired, for example, had "S" on the wheel, to indicate a scratch on the alloy. Upon return, cars have always been examined in our presence.
The car you hired should have been inspected in your presence and any claims made while you were still there. Otherwise, it is their word against yours. They already confirmed to you that the car was checked at 10 am, and you returned it at 7 am, so anything could have happened during those 3 hours. I would definitely contest it.
|
"even have forms now showing an illustration of a car"
First time I had a hire car (due to work) was 1995... they had those forms in the UK then.
Trouble with inspections is you need staff there but they are not open 24 hrs at airports. So what do you do???? Ironically if my car broken down out of hours, via lease company the hire company would have to provide a car within 2 hours by opening a branch....
Someone once posted about annual car hire cover for CDW but if once a year pay CDW and rest at night. It seems if you do not they get more than CDW and you have to prove it! Wrong isn't it.
As I say I took pictures of the last hire car overseas thinking "aha I won't be caught" and the £14k of car was written of. So much for the scratch.
|
|
As for the form - we may have simply used different car hire companies, and I may not have even noticed them any earlier, as it is usually my husband who takes a closer look!! I would not use any hire company who are not there to inspect the car you return and then risk going through this headache. Or at least I would not hire if I cannot return the car during their working hours.
|
Unfortuantely there are often circumstances when you have to drop off a car and the office is closed. They say you are responsible for it until they check it in.
Last year I dropped a car off in France (major hire co). The car was dropped off in Bergerac and checked back whilst I was there and full tank of fuel noted. When I got my CC bill a month later there was a charge. I contacted the UK office and they sent me a print out showing the car checked back in Bordeaux the following day with half a tank of fuel!! I had to send them my flight coupon as evidence I was back in UK at time of 'their' check in - this was despite me having a return form signed and dated by their rep in Bergerac!! I did get the money back, but only after spending time on the phone with them. No compensation or apology either.
Never had a problem in Germany - they are very straight and honest. I once left some cash in a centre console and the agent came running after me into the airport with it!
France, Spain and UK are most dodgy IME.
|
i assume then from the 14 posts that collision damage waiver is dead
the last vehicle i had the "privilage" of hiring was a 7.5 tonne box van with all the extras
it was calculated that it came back later on a bank holiday than it really did
it wasnt true
i now would rather buy a vehicle to do a job rather than hire
so what happened to??????
CDW?
|
Nowadays CDW has an excess - up to 1000 Euro depending on the company. You would need to get 'Super Collision Damage Waiver' to reduce the excess to zero. This is quite expensive and so a lot of people don't take it. Even then it may not cover damage to underside of vehicle, tyres or glass.
A cheaper option is annual car hire excess insurance from someone like 'insurance4carhire'.
|
|
You're right it's Super CDW you need and it's expensive - almost as much per day as the car. In 2005 I took it out and did not need it. In 2006 I hired via Holiday Autos and paid the extra (£6/day) to get their cover. And boy did I need it - car was a total right off. Then again paying the excess of £400 for a written off Fiesta is not as extortionate as £550 for some scratches!
|
|
|
|
From 29-31 March this year we hired a car at a uk airport from deleted. It was undamaged when we collected it and undamaged when I returned it at 7am on 31st. Imagine my horror when the £550 damage excess had been charged to my partner's Mastercard. The hire car company said that there was a scratch on the rear nearside panel which we swear we didn't cause. I rang the branch and asked what time the car had been checked and the reply was at 10am that morning. Therefore there appears to be a 3 hour time gap where any damage could have occurred.
One of my pet hates this, it's called "Claim Management". I used to get letters from rental companies accusing me of damaging their cars pretty much every time I rented a car in the UK. Wasn't peculiar to one particular company, but I've only ever had it happen to me in the UK, no other country. Admittedly they never had the temerity to take money from my credit card, I've only ever received a letter with a description of the damage and asking me to explain how it happened and admit liability.
My response varied with my temper, on one occasion I pointed out that they should watch the way in which their employees drove the cars around the car park if they wanted to know how damage got caused. Another time wrote to the HQ of the rental company concerned (a non UK based company), enclosed the offending letter and explained that this happened all the time at at least one of their UK franchises. I got a letter back saying they would look into it and then another letter with some free rental vouchers and an apology.
|
This happened to a friend of mine so he went to the small claims court to claim his money back.
It was successful as it was uncontested by the hire company and quite an easy procedure to go through.
|
The car may or may not be scratched.
If it is - then even IF you pay (please don't though !) the rental company will not repair it, all the cosmetic damage is repaired at the end of the hire company's ownership period (usually 6 months with the major brands) before the car is sold on .......................if the next renter spots and highlights the scratch then he's ok.............if not ...then another bill for £550 will be issued, and another, etc as many times as they can get away with it for the same scratch.
I've rented many cars and they often have many scratches which are clearly not recent.
It's a very competitive market, especially at major airports but the way customers are treated, after having chosen their hire provider ahead of the competitors, is a disgrace.
Jacks
|
I've had similar experiences.
A relative of ours used to work in the car hire business. She advised that their records weren't very good & if people challenged they would drop the claims as it was too administratively expensive to follow up.
I challenged the company (a different one) to provide proof of damage & proof of cost of full repair with a threat to take it further with my solicitor.
It was quickly dropped & my money refunded.
|
One of the major players in airport car rental has an appalling reputation for doing this, almost to the point of automatically adding on repair cost to each renter of a vehicle even though the repair doesn't get done until the end of it's time as a rental car.
TV's "Watchdog" programme has covered this and has no qualms about naming and shaming where the allegations can be substantiated.
|
TV's "Watchdog" programme has covered this and has no qualms about naming and shaming where the allegations can be substantiated.
yes and they have a monopoly where you have to buy a licence
so they arent really accountable them selves are they?
my fee pays for their lawyers.very tasty...........not
|
yes and they have a monopoly where you have to buy a licence so they arent really accountable them selves are they? my fee pays for their lawyers.very tasty...........not
Well, give it a few years and Mr Murdoch will probably have a monopoly - the BBC licence will look like a bargain then!
|
|
If the claims are substantiated, they can't be successfully sued - or has the world gone completely mad.
|
Thanks to all of you who replied. From all of the responses I had my battle plan worked out.
Last night the phone rang, and the hire company are going to refund the £550 in full. So I didn't even have to get started.
I will certainly take copious photos next time we hire. To do what they have done seems like a complete racket to me, and they must be making thousands.
Thanks again.
|
A good result Sall - I am glad than any comments and ideas posted here may have helped you and informed others of the scams and chicanery out there!
|
always worth taking lots of photos including the windscreen.
last time I hired a car was from Europcar and I was very impressed with their honesty when a 8 inch crack appeared in the windscreen. The lady taking it back said that there would be a charge but she asked one of her colleagues who remember there being a small star chip in the glass and all was sorted out without any problems.
|
Thanks to all of you who replied. From all of the responses I had my battle plan worked out. Last night the phone rang and the hire company are going to refund the £550 in full. So I didn't even have to get started. I will certainly take copious photos next time we hire. To do what they have done seems like a complete racket to me and they must be making thousands.
Great result!
|
|
|
