Car Rental company claiming damage

youcancallmeal

So my Dad rented a car in Manchester over 3 months ago in early February. He got a bill out in the post today claiming that there was £500 worth of damage done! The damage detail is a bit vague saying saying stuff like "Front bumper damage", "Front left panel damage" etc.

I was there when we picked the car up, it was really nasty out with heavy snow and we just wanted to get in the car quickly and go. The rental car guy did a quick lap of the car with us and we pointed out a couple of scratches here and there which he noted, when we checked the boot it wouldn't open. He said he could get us a new car but with the cold we just said make a note of it and we'll take it anyway. Nothing happened the car during the 4 days we had it and when my Dad dropped it back he said the car rental guy looked it over and said everything was fine.

My Dad has rang the bank today and instructed them to put a stop on the card in case they try to take the money. Haven't rang the car rental company yet as my Dad wants to try and figure out the best way to go about this. Is there any way to fight these cowboys without our own evidence? Also only the most basic insurance was taken out on the car.

Cuddlesworth

Its a common <SNIP> with car rentals and makes them a good some of money. When a car is damaged they simply bill every customer of the preceding couple of months. Ask for pictures to be sent to you of the damage. Check the Metadata for when the picture was taken.

youcancallmeal

Yeah thats exactly what I was thinking of telling him to do except get him to ask specifically for timestamped photos of the damage and then check it against the metadata. Also can they claim the damage was done by us even though they checked the car on return?

They are looking for payment on or before the 29th of May. I wonder what happens if we just flat out refuse to pay it and change the credit card details?

Faolchu

eh when you return a car do they not inspect it there and then and sign off on it? when tehy inspect it at teh start they get you to sign for existing damage and I'm pretty mush certain they compare this to the car to asses for additional damage. I would think if they okayed it when you came back and it was rented out again you are not liable for it.

dudara

The first thing your father should do is ask for the supporting documentation. Once you have that, you can start to figure out where to go.

youcancallmeal

dudara wrote: »

The first thing your father should do is ask for the supporting documentation. Once you have that, you can start to figure out where to go.

What do you mean by supporting documentation? Do you mean a list of existing damage that was noted by the car rental guy when we took the car? If that doesnt have any of the damage they are claiming then there it isn't going to be much use to us?

Anyway I've got the photos now and according to the timestamp data they were taken literally half an hour after the car was returned. The weather in the background and the light would suggest this is accurate. Why they didn't bring this 'damage' up when my Dad returned the car I don't know?

They claim they sent an email about this a few days after the car was returned which explains the 3 months wait time to be notified by letter. I checked the email and there is nothing there from them for the time it was sent.

The damage looks bizarre, looks almost like rust or dirt? They also have a picture of a slightly scratched hubcap :rolleyes:







At this stage they said we can send them a registered letter contesting the claim but not sure what happens after that? He's thinking about just getting a new credit card and ignoring any more correspondence from them. Not sure what repercussions this would bring though?

Duiske

Ridiculous pictures to send as evidence. Ask them to send more pictures, but this time have the car moved away from the yellow lines and blue/green parking spaces. You might actually be able to make something out then.

youcancallmeal

Duiske wrote: »

Ridiculous pictures to send as evidence. Ask them to send more pictures, but this time have the car moved away from the yellow lines and blue/green parking spaces. You might actually be able to make something out then.

I know! And they are actually the best out of about 15 they sent!
Most of them are very poorly focused, basically like this:

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Duiske wrote: »

. Ask them to send more pictures, but this time have the car moved away from the yellow lines and blue/green parking spaces. You might actually be able to make something out then.

I don't think they have a Time Machine. The photos were taken at the time. Taking photos today wouldn't prove anything.

youcancallmeal

I'm thinking there might have been existing small scratches on the car. It was snowing at the time we rented it and we would of been driving on gritted roads. The salt could of gotten into the scratches resulted in what looks like rust damage?

clint_silver

when you get a rental you get a docket stating any damage.
when you return a rental you get a docket stating any damage.

This is to protect both parties.

have you got these dockets?

Its pretty irrelevant to the point in question but Id also ask them for proof that they sent you an email and who they sent it to. Email server will have logs and/or their own client will have as well.

MOH

There's absolutely nothing in those photos proving what car that is?
Plus the reflection of the yellow lines makes it hard to work out what the actual "damage" is.

youcancallmeal

MOH wrote: »

There's absolutely nothing in those photos proving what car that is?
Plus the reflection of the yellow lines makes it hard to work out what the actual "damage" is.

I'm an idiot I didn't realise the 'marks' on the car was actually the reflection of the yellow lines
There are other photos at a wider angle where you can see it was the car we had but no visible damage. Seems like they really are clutching at straws with this damage claim. We are definitely going to fight it all the way.

maryk123

the damage looks like the reflection of the yellow lines. oh i would contest this - something doesnt add up. best of luck

BrianD

The "damage" that I see is what you would expect with normal wear and tear with use of a car.

The damage to the alloys is wear and tear. Even so, there doesn't seem to be damage to the tyre. If you clipped a pavement there would be scuffing to the tyre that would be around for a few days.

Without naming companies is this a reputable car hire company?

In the UK most areas have Local Trading Standards and you may need to raise it with them.

Northern Monkey

BrianD wrote: »

The damage to the alloys is wear and tear.

I think that might even be a wheel trim! A lot of vauxhalls/opels now come with steel wheels and trims that look like alloys

youcancallmeal

I would happily name and shame but don't think its allowed? Maybe a mod can clarify?

Here is another ambiguous blurry photo which shows what could be scratch?

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

I can't see any car in that last photo youcancallmeal.

Looks more like a zoomed in snap of the pic you have in post #8.

Edit: Actually, you can see the keys top-center and your man to the left. The 'scratch' looks more like water on the camera.

whiterebel

Faolchu wrote: »

eh when you return a car do they not inspect it there and then and sign off on it? when tehy inspect it at teh start they get you to sign for existing damage and I'm pretty mush certain they compare this to the car to asses for additional damage. I would think if they okayed it when you came back and it was rented out again you are not liable for it.

No, they don't inspect it when you bring it back. You drop the keys back in, and unless you demand an inspection, they won't.

Drummerboy08

From the pictures shown here, the damage looks like wear and tear. However, with more detailed photo's my opinion on that could change.

OP, get onto the RAC website and get a copy of the fair wear and tear guide. Most rental/leasing companies will operate with the guidelines set out here.

That wheel is indeed a hubcap and not an alloy, it would cost buttons to replace.

Faolchu

whiterebel wrote: »

No, they don't inspect it when you bring it back. You drop the keys back in, and unless you demand an inspection, they won't.

bizare i would have assumed that the whole purpose of inspecting as you leave the yard is that upon return they can inspect in your presence and match one docket against the other to prove there was damage. I've rented in the US for the bast part of 10 years in various states and this is how it has happened. in each instance you sign the docket leaveing and sign again upon your return. to not inspect a car and then claim there was damage well ofter the client has left the area is not on, I'd be fighting this tooth and nail because there's no proof that these marks did not happen after it was rented again and again.

L1011

Do you still have the docket from when you picked it up? This should detail the damage that was on it when you took it out. You could easily find the claimed damage is already on that docket...

youcancallmeal

No we don't have the docket unfortunately. We've opened a dispute with them and are going to get write a letter basically arguing that the damage shown in the photos is inconclusive and ask for the docket from when we picked up the car. Also we are going to contact the regulator in England and see if they can offer any help?

BrianD

Would this be the case of an over zealous new employee?

I think you need to refute the claim in writing. You should also check to see if there is any arbitration facility in place.

I don't know if you got other photos but I hope you got one actually showing the car and the reg number!

All of the "damage" illustrated is the type of damage is base line wear and tear that you'd expect a hire vehicle to pick up over time.

whiterebel

Faolchu wrote: »

bizare i would have assumed that the whole purpose of inspecting as you leave the yard is that upon return they can inspect in your presence and match one docket against the other to prove there was damage. I've rented in the US for the bast part of 10 years in various states and this is how it has happened. in each instance you sign the docket leaveing and sign again upon your return. to not inspect a car and then claim there was damage well ofter the client has left the area is not on, I'd be fighting this tooth and nail because there's no proof that these marks did not happen after it was rented again and again.

Actually Hertz in Florida is the only one I have ever used that checks all cars on arrival back to the depot.

CoachTO

whiterebel wrote: »

Actually Hertz in Florida is the only one I have ever used that checks all cars on arrival back to the depot.

I rent a lot of cars especially the US and I sometimes have to ask for them to check the car when I return it to make sure its done. Its mad that if you look at the terms and conditions the return inspection is mentioned but yet many fail to do so.

AdMMM

Just tell them to move the car forward a couple of feet and the damage will be gone...

piperh

We rent regulary in England and its not uncommon to drop the car back at an un-manned point especially at airports. So it is possible this damage (if any) was done on moving the car by the employees back to the rental yard. I think you've done the right thing by opening up a dispute but make sure everything is in writing and not a telephone call or if you take a call follow it up with an email stating "following our earlier conversation" and reiterating what has been said.

And the moral to this story is always take date and time stamped pictures of the car your returning in the car park before you walk away.

edanto

I know this is an old thread, but I wonder if youcancallmeal would have an update on how it turned out?

Just came across the thread on a search about car rental in the UK and I'll be sure to take photos before and after having read this!

Nothing on those photos looks like more than wear and tear, imho, but I'm no expert. Hope it all went away for you after contesting it.

youcancallmeal

Not exactly sure, last I heard my Dad wrote a letter disputing it saying the evidence wasn't good enough and that he wasn't paying. I'll find out and report back