WWYD? Enterprise Car Rental

MalMonroe

Hi, I think this is outrageous. BUT you have the backing of someone from their Head Office and so hopefully all will soon be satisfactorily resolved. 

They cannot possibly charge you for anything without proof of damage. And even if there IS damage, how are they going to prove that you caused it? Especially as it's now been fixed.

I also don't think you should cancel your card because even if they do take any money, they'll have to give it back once they realise that there's no case here.

You have done the right thing, sending a complaint to Head Office and now it's just a waiting game. 

You shouldn't think that you are responsible in any way because they should have checked for damage while you were there, after you'd returned the car. That was the time for them to take photos and advise you that they would have to charge you for any damage. You are the customer, they're running a business and they should have acted professionally at the time of return.

The fact that they won't/can't provide proof seems to indicate that they haven't any.

I'm really disappointed to read about this, as Enterprise is a really large, well known company. Shame on them.

Don't pay them a penny though, you are in the right here. 

Obviously just my own thoughts and opinions but their actions are really not on. 

HillStreetBlues

SatsumaCod said:

Sorry the tyre was "fixed" 19 days after we gave car back, not 9 days.

Also the invoice was the first we had heard of any issues.

If it took 19 days to notice it (and longer to inform you)  then I wouldn't be worrying.
You only had it 5% of that time so can't see them winning on BoP

DullGreyGuy

HillStreetBlues said:

SatsumaCod said:

Sorry the tyre was "fixed" 19 days after we gave car back, not 9 days.

Also the invoice was the first we had heard of any issues.

If it took 19 days to notice it (and longer to inform you)  then I wouldn't be worrying.
You only had it 5% of that time so can't see them winning on BoP

That's a massive leap... 19 days after its fix means it was 0-19 days earlier that the problems found. 

Love to understand your logic that they had to move heaven and earth to fix it within 6 hours of finding the problem @HillStreetBlues

Alfrescodave

SatsumaCod said:

Sorry the tyre was "fixed" 19 days after we gave car back, not 9 days.

Also the invoice was the first we had heard of any issues.

Could it be that someone hired the car after you (within the 19 days) caused the tyre problem? I'd be asking for assurances that the car wasn't hired out in that 19 day period.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

OP we had an issue with a rental car and a rather large bill but for scratches I'm adamant we didn't cause. 

They did provide photos pretty quickly but I noticed they'd move and cleaned the car before taking the pictures. Pointed this out and they said there wasn't any need to pay. 

Waiting 3 weeks to raise an issue with you isn't going to be in their favour, I'd keep pestering head office and hopefully they will cancel the charge. 

Manxman_in_exile

Alfrescodave said:

SatsumaCod said:

Sorry the tyre was "fixed" 19 days after we gave car back, not 9 days.

Also the invoice was the first we had heard of any issues.

Could it be that someone hired the car after you (within the 19 days) caused the tyre problem? I'd be asking for assurances that the car wasn't hired out in that 19 day period.

I'm not sure I'd want to ask that question unless I knew in advance what the answer would be.  If the car had been hired out it's to the OP's advantage.  If not, it doesn't really help

I think I'd be inclined to stick with something like:  "I returned the car on dd/mm/yy; no damage to the tyre was identified either by myself or by your staff at the time of return; you then took nn days to notify me of damage that you allege had been caused by me.  In the nn days after I returned the car to you anything at all could have happened to the car and the alleged damage could have been caused by anybody - including by yourselves while moving the car.  You also didn't give me an opportunity to inspect the alleged damage myself before fixing it"

Then I think I'd wait for them to make a claim.  If they do they'll need to establish on the balance of probability that the OP caused the damage.  With an elapsed time of nn days between the car's return and them noticing it (or fixing it or notifying the OP - whichever it is) I'm not sure they have a very strong case.

SatsumaCod

Thank you all.

The question remains...would you cancel the card? What if they take the money for the "repair"? How would I get it back if they took it?

Manxman_in_exile

DullGreyGuy said:

HillStreetBlues said:

SatsumaCod said:

Sorry the tyre was "fixed" 19 days after we gave car back, not 9 days.

Also the invoice was the first we had heard of any issues.

If it took 19 days to notice it (and longer to inform you)  then I wouldn't be worrying.
You only had it 5% of that time so can't see them winning on BoP

That's a massive leap... 19 days after its fix means it was 0-19 days earlier that the problems found. 

Love to understand your logic that they had to move heaven and earth to fix it within 6 hours of finding the problem @HillStreetBlues

Notwithstanding what I posted about 10 minutes ago, isn't it a bit strange that the hire company could afford to wait 19 days to get the tyre fixed?

I may be wrong but I was under the impression that when hire cars get damaged and people get billed for it that one of the most costly items was for the lost hire income while the car was off the road.  Yet here the OP appears to be saying that they are only being billed for the replacement tyre.

I'd have thought if the car was off the road for 19 days then the OP would be getting billed for that lost income.

Does the fact that he (apparently) isn't, entitle him to infer that the car must have been hired out to others between him returning the car and it being fixed, and that therefore the damage could have been caused by someone else?

Or is that a sleeping dog that shouldn't be disturbed?  (In case the OP does then get charged for lost income too...)

Manxman_in_exile

SatsumaCod said:

Thank you all.

The question remains...would you cancel the card? What if they take the money for the "repair"? How would I get it back if they took it?

Both @Aylesbury_Duck and I have already answered that earlier in this thread.  If they want to charge your card, cancelling it will do no good and simply cause you more inconvenience and hassle replacing etc etc.

If the hire company charge your card, you challenge the charge with your card provider using the same argument you would against the hire company.  (ie they have no evidence that you caused the damage)

If that doesn't work you sue the hire company in court - using the same argument

Aylesbury_Duck

Indeed. Cancelling a card doesn't make the account vanish. The amount will be charged and the card provider will send a statement asking for payment.  Why should they pick up the bill?

If it was otherwise, people would be cancelling cards all over the place as soon as there was a concern about charging, and leaving debts sat with retailers or card providers.