Misled While Renting Van and Buying Additional Insurance

Arklight

The usual helpful responses to some poor guy getting rinsed by a 70 billion dollar corporation because he didn't take his solicitor with him to the rental counter. 

I have used rental cars a lot in the US and a collision damage waiver is exactly that: a waiver for damage caused by a collision. With zero excess, an immediate exchange at the site of the accident, and pretty much no questions asked on return.

Naturally, back in rip-off Britain, it becomes a waiver for damage caused by a collision, with a hefty excess, minus any form of damage they don't want to cover. 

Unfortunately OP, your best bet is probably to try and get Enterprise to agree a lower amount and lenient repayment. 

I've actually heard far worse than £12k for damaging a van roof from rental companies that just wrote the whole vehicle off and then applied the supposed lost revenue as well. 

DullGreyGuy

Arklight said:

I have used rental cars a lot in the US and a collision damage waiver is exactly that: a waiver for damage caused by a collision. With zero excess, an immediate exchange at the site of the accident, and pretty much no questions asked on return.

Naturally, back in rip-off Britain, it becomes a waiver for damage caused by a collision, with a hefty excess, minus any form of damage they don't want to cover. 

Unfortunately OP, your best bet is probably to try and get Enterprise to agree a lower amount and lenient repayment. 

I've actually heard far worse than £12k for damaging a van roof from rental companies that just wrote the whole vehicle off and then applied the supposed lost revenue as well. 

You sound as if you dont know what you are buying... CDW waives the excess and does still have exceptions. Looking at enterprise in particular it also has exceptions similar to the UK CDW...

 damage is caused intentionally by an authorised driver or as a result of wilful and wanton misconduct of an authorised driver; damage arises out of the use of the vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, illegal drugs, a controlled substance or any other intoxicant that impairs driving ability;

Wilful and wanton misconduct sounds very similar to reckless behaviour thats excluded under Enterprise UK. There are more exclusions that go on but you get the gist. 

In the US there is a much more scary issue though, the minimum insurance liability cover in most states is tiny and hire cars can have as little as $30,000 cover. You need to buy SLI or EL and even then you are still carrying risk... SLI typically extends the cover to $300,000 and EL to $1,000,000. You however are also in the land of punitive damages and insurance is legally not allowed to cover punitive damages. The biggest Motor claim I ever came across happened to be a hire car (though driven by the company not a hirer) which was on track to settle at circa $75,000,000 after they hit and killed a toddler in front of the parents and grandparents. 

You say "rip off britain', in the UK that would have been fully covered by the insurance and would have been more like £20,000 than $75m. In the US you'd be making yourself bankrupt, which unlike here, does avoid injury claims.

Arklight

DullGreyGuy said:

Arklight said:

I have used rental cars a lot in the US and a collision damage waiver is exactly that: a waiver for damage caused by a collision. With zero excess, an immediate exchange at the site of the accident, and pretty much no questions asked on return.

Naturally, back in rip-off Britain, it becomes a waiver for damage caused by a collision, with a hefty excess, minus any form of damage they don't want to cover. 

Unfortunately OP, your best bet is probably to try and get Enterprise to agree a lower amount and lenient repayment. 

I've actually heard far worse than £12k for damaging a van roof from rental companies that just wrote the whole vehicle off and then applied the supposed lost revenue as well. 

You sound as if you dont know what you are buying... CDW waives the excess and does still have exceptions. Looking at enterprise in particular it also has exceptions similar to the UK CDW...

 damage is caused intentionally by an authorised driver or as a result of wilful and wanton misconduct of an authorised driver; damage arises out of the use of the vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, illegal drugs, a controlled substance or any other intoxicant that impairs driving ability;

Wilful and wanton misconduct sounds very similar to reckless behaviour thats excluded under Enterprise UK. There are more exclusions that go on but you get the gist. 

In the US there is a much more scary issue though, the minimum insurance liability cover in most states is tiny and hire cars can have as little as $30,000 cover. You need to buy SLI or EL and even then you are still carrying risk... SLI typically extends the cover to $300,000 and EL to $1,000,000. You however are also in the land of punitive damages and insurance is legally not allowed to cover punitive damages. The biggest Motor claim I ever came across happened to be a hire car (though driven by the company not a hirer) which was on track to settle at circa $75,000,000 after they hit and killed a toddler in front of the parents and grandparents. 

You say "rip off britain', in the UK that would have been fully covered by the insurance and would have been more like £20,000 than $75m. In the US you'd be making yourself bankrupt, which unlike here, does avoid injury claims.

Nonsense.
...............

Goudy

DullGreyGuy said:

mr_stripey said:

as Ayr_Rage says, I am sure this has cropped up before (several times). 

IT has been argued that Enterprise not pointing out that damage to the roof is excluded from the cover is somewhat sneaky but I couldn't find any thread where anyone having damaged the roof has come back and updated on the situation.

For a start, what Enterprise sell you isn't insurance, it's a CDW which simply reduces/eliminates your liability.  

This is probably the most relevant point made anywhere when it comes to car/van rental.
CDW's and LDW's can mean anything the company likes.

The giveaway in it the name, waiver.
The company are giving up some rights for a cost.
What they are and aren't giving up will be in the contract T&C's and no two companies will be alike.

It's not an insurance policy so isn't regulated as one, they are just an agreement between company and the hirer and they can stick whatever limitations in there they see fit.

Common ones are glass, keys, driving off road, under body damage, misfueling, driving through floods and as we know, driving under low barriers, recovery and so on.

I've hired cars all over and often see some eye opening arrangements and T&C's, even in European countries.
I once hired a 4x4 in a country with around 120 miles of paved roads and hundreds of thousands of miles of tracks and the T&C's stated driving on unpaved roads wasn't covered.

I've also hired on a solely TP basis as that is all they offered in a country where it appeared I was the only one with any sort of driving training or experience.
I would have been liable for anything in case of damage that was my fault up to the cost of the vehicle and any lost revenue. There was no other option, they all hired like that.

If you are going to hire, head over to Money Maxim and get a quote for a standalone Excess or Excess and CDW insurance.
All the quotes will be up front about what is and what isn't covered and the limits in terms of amounts.

Most will cover things a hire companies CDW won't come near to covering, but high roofs and low barriers probably still won't be covered.
It's a fraction of the price of what the rental desk will sell you.

Herzlos

Arklight said:
I've actually heard far worse than £12k for damaging a van roof from rental companies that just wrote the whole vehicle off and then applied the supposed lost revenue as well. 

As much as I don't want to defend a rental company, but I don't think it's unreasonable to want reimbursed for the vehicle and the revenue. Even if you gave them the money to buy an equivalent van the day you damaged it, it could take them days/weeks to get the van from the supplier, get it liveried and then get it out of rentals.

How they calculate what the rental losses would be for the time the van is unavailable I don't know, because it's probably not constantly hired and or losing much business due to it being the only suitable vehicle in stock.

i.e. If they have enough vans in the yard to satisfy all of the renters, then there'd be no actual loss.

Goudy

DullGreyGuy said:

Arklight said:

I have used rental cars a lot in the US and a collision damage waiver is exactly that: a waiver for damage caused by a collision. With zero excess, an immediate exchange at the site of the accident, and pretty much no questions asked on return.

Naturally, back in rip-off Britain, it becomes a waiver for damage caused by a collision, with a hefty excess, minus any form of damage they don't want to cover. 

Unfortunately OP, your best bet is probably to try and get Enterprise to agree a lower amount and lenient repayment. 

I've actually heard far worse than £12k for damaging a van roof from rental companies that just wrote the whole vehicle off and then applied the supposed lost revenue as well. 

In the US there is a much more scary issue though, the minimum insurance liability cover in most states is tiny

Or non existent in the case of New Hampshire.

New Hampshire motor vehicle laws do not require you to carry motor insurance but you should still meet their financial responsibility requirement.
In other words, at fault or partial fault you're expected to pay up yourself.

Live free or die! 

justanotherguy2

another factor in the case, the witness is an acquaintance to me, friend of an ex, will this help my position significantly? Going to also speak to the staff at the enterprise i rented from over the phone and see if i can get them to confirm what i was told, probabaly be a long shot

DullGreyGuy

Arklight said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Arklight said:

I have used rental cars a lot in the US and a collision damage waiver is exactly that: a waiver for damage caused by a collision. With zero excess, an immediate exchange at the site of the accident, and pretty much no questions asked on return.

Naturally, back in rip-off Britain, it becomes a waiver for damage caused by a collision, with a hefty excess, minus any form of damage they don't want to cover. 

Unfortunately OP, your best bet is probably to try and get Enterprise to agree a lower amount and lenient repayment. 

I've actually heard far worse than £12k for damaging a van roof from rental companies that just wrote the whole vehicle off and then applied the supposed lost revenue as well. 

You sound as if you dont know what you are buying... CDW waives the excess and does still have exceptions. Looking at enterprise in particular it also has exceptions similar to the UK CDW...

 damage is caused intentionally by an authorised driver or as a result of wilful and wanton misconduct of an authorised driver; damage arises out of the use of the vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, illegal drugs, a controlled substance or any other intoxicant that impairs driving ability;

Wilful and wanton misconduct sounds very similar to reckless behaviour thats excluded under Enterprise UK. There are more exclusions that go on but you get the gist. 

In the US there is a much more scary issue though, the minimum insurance liability cover in most states is tiny and hire cars can have as little as $30,000 cover. You need to buy SLI or EL and even then you are still carrying risk... SLI typically extends the cover to $300,000 and EL to $1,000,000. You however are also in the land of punitive damages and insurance is legally not allowed to cover punitive damages. The biggest Motor claim I ever came across happened to be a hire car (though driven by the company not a hirer) which was on track to settle at circa $75,000,000 after they hit and killed a toddler in front of the parents and grandparents. 

You say "rip off britain', in the UK that would have been fully covered by the insurance and would have been more like £20,000 than $75m. In the US you'd be making yourself bankrupt, which unlike here, does avoid injury claims.

Nonsense.
...............

no               

DullGreyGuy

justanotherguy2 said:

another factor in the case, the witness is an acquaintance to me, friend of an ex, will this help my position significantly? Going to also speak to the staff at the enterprise i rented from over the phone and see if i can get them to confirm what i was told, probabaly be a long shot

No, it will damage your argument. They will say the witness is biased and so will dismiss it. 

Were it to go to Court the judge would decide if they believe the witness is giving a true account or manipulating it to support their friend. 

Ideally a witness is someone you've never met before.