Drivalia Contactless collection and return

Hendo356

I'm sure I'm not the first, but on a recent trip to Edinburgh, 26th Feb I rented a car from Drivalia to collect city centre. I booked through third party online firm (that specialise in bookings) but wasn't advised that it was a contactless collection through an electronic key box. This rendered my collection over three hours late so not a good start. I returned the car the following day and returned the keys to the key drop as required. The following day I received a claim against my credit card, which fortunately didn't get paid as my credit card firm thought it was a scam. Then an email appeared from Drivalia telling me it was due to 'damage'. No evidence was supplied, no advice as to what the damage was, so I phoned them. I was told it was tyre damage. I asked for them to tell me specifically which tyre and to show me the pictures that they must have taken. I also used their website to upload pictures I had taken of the car at collection as it was so filthy, I couldn't even tell if there were any body marks so dirty and muddy was the car. I heard nothing so 10 days later (13th march) I contacted them again to hear that my photos had not uploaded, and was given an email to upload them to. I asked the agent to stay on the phone while I did it and he confirmed he'd got them. I also emailed again and asked for receipt of the images and whether the claim would be progressing or closed.  Heard nothing until 16 Apr and I am then emailed  that their claim is being passed to a collection agency. Called them again and asked why no one had given me proof of any damage, but they just asked for my pictures again. So in this new world of contactless collection and drop, how do the car hire firms demonstrate with a high degree of probability that any particular customer was to blame for any piece of damage. Is the customer expected to conduct a full scale examination of the vehicle prior to driving off in order to protect themselves or, as I've now concluded, don't rent from these companies as their practices seem shady at best. I'm also assuming that only customers who have not paid the direct additional (and over priced) excess insurance are on the receiving end of this.