CAR HIRE - Failed Experian Credit Check - Still had to pay for hire!

Thomas_Russell

Hello all.

Not sure if I'm in the right area of the forum but...

Last week my partner hired a van online through Car Trawler who referred her to Avis Budget. I think in all it came to £180. She turned up to collect the vehicle on Friday afternoon and was refused hire because she had failed an experion credit check. They couldn't explain why.

We subsequently hired form someone else and assumed we would have the money returned. We've just found out they will not refund the money.

This seems unfair. We definitely werent a no show, they refused to rent to us and then took the money...

Not sure what if any recourse we have.

Thanks

Tom & Ellie:money:

marcarm

Have you spoken to them at all? Why would they run a check if you paid up front?

How did you pay for the hire and why have they said they won't refund you?

[Deleted User]

Definitely unfair. You pay for van hire but it's a lottery whether you are allowed the van or not.

AdrianC

You paid CarTrawler for the hire, so your contract is with them. They will refund you, not Avis. Avis won't have seen any money from CarTrawler yet.

CT's Ts & Cs will say that you need to meet Avis's requirements - which your partner didn't do - so the refusal of the vehicle is within the contract. Avis are doing a credit check because they're handing the keys to £10k+ of vehicle to somebody...

Thomas_Russell

Thanks for everyone's responses. I Totally get why they do the credit check. We spoke to Car Trawler and their response was:

"I would like to confirm that the car rental agent was unable to release the booked vehicle as you did not pass the Experian security check which you must pass in order for the vehicle to be released. We include information about the security check requirement in your rental conditions. Therefore, unfortunately, we will not be able to process a refund of the funds paid."


It seems like they've got us here. I thought it worth asking around though. (need to feel enpowered in sone way or another) One thing could be to have the bank reverse the payement..unlikely though. I cant tell you how frustrating this is.

bod1467

Utter rubbish ... if you paid by CC then initiate a Section 75 claim; if by debit card then initiate a Chargeback for non-supply of goods/service.

The MOST CarTrawler can keep is an provable losses ... e.g. their cut/profit from the transaction. They weren't to be keeping the whole £180 therefore they have no right to retain it if the contract didn't complete.

If you paid by bank transfer ........ <shakes head in despair>

Cash-Strapped.T32

Thomas_Russell wrote: »

"We include information about the security check requirement in your rental conditions."


It seems like they've got us here.

Question; What information? Does it *tell* you that you will or will not pass the credit check?

Consider this a layman's question, but my understanding is that you will never know for sure if you'll pass a credit check with a given company (within reason), as you do not know the lending criteria which that company judges you on (this is private company information that is not made public).

Therefore, you cannot *know* for sure if you'll be allowed the take the van before you enter into the contract...

Is that not the case? If so, then how can any individual consumer know that they will not be stung in the same way?
If the facts of the case are that straightforward, how can it not be ripe for you to challenge? I think I would.

AdrianC

bod1467 wrote: »

The MOST CarTrawler can keep is an provable losses ... e.g. their cut/profit from the transaction. They weren't to be keeping the whole £180 therefore they have no right to retain it if the contract didn't complete.

If Avis can demonstrate that the van would otherwise have been rented to somebody else, then they are within their rights to charge CT for the loss of business, and CT pass that on.

usefulmale

AdrianC wrote: »

If Avis can demonstrate that the van would otherwise have been rented to somebody else, then they are within their rights to charge CT for the loss of business, and CT pass that on.

I can't see that being true. If Avis are fannying around with pointless credit checks, just for hiring a van, this should be done BEFORE any money changes hands.

Otherwise, I could set up a van-hire 'company', charging people rental in advance, then, when they turn up, just claim that they never passed the credit check and keep the cash. I wouldn't even need a van. This scenario has scam written all over it.

OP - do as bod1467 says and start a chargeback.

AdrianC

usefulmale wrote: »

I can't see that being true. If Avis are fannying around with pointless credit checks, just for hiring a van, this should be done BEFORE any money changes hands.

Otherwise, I could set up a van-hire 'company', charging people rental in advance, then, when they turn up, just claim that they never passed the credit check and keep the cash. I wouldn't even need a van. This scenario has scam written all over it.

Except you're forgetting one detail.

There are TWO separate companies involved here - the broker and the hirer. The broker have merely checked availability, made a reservation, and are processing the payment. The hirer are the ones who are checking entitlement to rent, and are then refusing that rental.

Cash-Strapped.T32

AdrianC wrote: »

Except you're forgetting one detail.

There are TWO separate companies involved here - the broker and the hirer. The broker have merely checked availability, made a reservation, and are processing the payment. The hirer are the ones who are checking entitlement to rent, and are then refusing that rental.

Of course, but surely that doesn't negate the need for the credit check to occur *before* money changes hands.

It may be reasonable for some kind of check to occur before a potential customer is given the keys to an expensive van, but it is of course unreasonable to take the money for a hire item and then for no item to be provided.

Indeed, if the credit check occurs before a particular vehicle-hire firm is presented to the customer, then that credit-check information can be used to weed-out the ones who's lending criteria would rule out the customer in question.

A van can be very expensive, let's say (for the sake of argument) that 15 grand isn't unreasonable.
Now, the customer is effectively being lent a van.
Are the lending criteria going to be the same as for someone walking into a highstreet bank & taking out a £15k loan?

Maybe not (but it's kinda hard to argue why not) - but if not, then that right there is an area of ambiguity, where the customer does not know if they will meet the opaque requirement of the lender (vehicle-hire firm).

It might seem odd me even brining that into the discussion, but the reason I do so is that it highlights the scenario whereby a customer cannot reasonably know if they will be allowed to avail themselves of a service - due to no fault or action of their own - after they have already paid for said service.

You say (and may well be right) that the broker consider that £180 merely to be a fee to be processed, but from any reasonable consumer's point of view, it is undeniably the price, the cost they will be charged for hiring the vehicle. To take that fee and then for the consumer to be denied the product or service they've paid for is seems to be the epitome of what this website is here to prevent...

Again, it seems ripe for the challenging to me..