Car hire attempted ripoff

ch750536

Seems I have a lot of car hire issues, this may be because I use a car hire insurance policy rather than pay the CDW....

Anyway, hired from Stansted via Ryanair. Car hire is green motion, a good bus journey away in a back room of a Hilton hotel.

On returning my phone died. In car charger didn't work. Couldn't find Hilton hotel. Did the usual stopping & asking for 1 hr - no luck, had to get the flight.

Parked the car in the airport car park. Left keys in the car with car park stub.

Once checked in went on one of the online terminals, got number & called them to tell them about the car location.

4 days later they sent me an invoice

I have copied the conversation below to show that knowing your rights, being polite but firm & never giving up is often all that is needed.

Dear Mr Xxxx,
As you will be aware, you returned the car to the orange car park at the airport.
As per the terms and conditions of your rental, the car has to be returned to the Hilton Hotel.
We have had to secure your pre - authorisation of £400.

I ask for a breakdown of the costs & I get

The total recovery costs are made up as follows:

Item 1: Recovery Fee - £210.00
Item 2: Loss of use at one day - £30.00
Item 3: Fuel Charge - £25.00
Item 4: Damage Service Fee ( DSF ) - £48.00


Total Price - £313.00

This is for a 2.4km journey from one part of Stansted Airport to another part.
I ask for more details

Dear Mr Cooke

Thank you for your reply.

The DSF is the admin fee for dealing with this case.

Our recovery costs are based on our pricing matrix which is approved by all our broker partners.

The fuel was down by a quarter, hence the charge of £25.00.

"Just to confirm, you charged £48.00 as an administration fee & £210 collection fee for a car that was parked at the airport that I hired it from? I wouldn't argue the fuel or the days hire, that is fine.

From my perspective I have to justify to the company if this charge is excessive or not. Is this proportionate to the cost incurred? I appreciate what you can charge but I'm asking did it cost you that for one of the guys to jump into the car and collect it from the airport you are located at as you didn't use a recovery vehicle?"

The charges that we have highlighted on the pro forma invoice are correct. The days loss of use and the fuel you have accepted. The recovery costs of £210.00 and our administration fee of £48.00 are our fixed costs for this type of charge.

In fact our standard cost for recovery is £295.00, but it was agreed to reduce it as the vehicle was at the airport location.

Please also note that we have not charged any fees for the actual parking costs on this occasion.

"Hi Xxxx, thanks for the clarification. Having reviewed the contract I'm entitled to ask what the cost of recovery was, itemised, as this is what is specified in the contract. Can you relay that detail to me please."

Breakdown of the costs are as follows:

2 x recover drivers @ £25.00 per hour (min 2 hours each) = £100.00
Shuttle car = £55.00
Fuel = £10.00
Parking costs and payment invoice = £45.00

Total £210.00

"Thanks for the detail as per the contract. I'm probably going to dispute these costs on the following grounds:

The contract states that you may recover costs, not profit from the situation. As such I doubt that:

2 x recover drivers @ £25.00 per hour (min 2 hours each) = £100.00
#1 - Your employees cost £25 per hour. - You can prove this with paperwork.
#2 - It took 4 man hours to recover a car from the airport I hired it from to the airport I hired it from. - You must have a record for this time. Google maps shows it as 4 mins by car, 2.2 miles.

Shuttle car = £55.00
#3 That as a car hire company you charge yourself more for a car for 30 mins than you charge a customer for 3 days

Fuel = £10.00
#4 You have previously stipulated fuel to be £25, which is it? Can you provide an invoice?

Parking costs and payment invoice = £45.00

I have previously taken Hertz to the small claims court over excessive charges where they decided to settle during the hearing. This case is starting to smell really bad.

I am happy to pay the following:
£20 fuel fee
£30 days hire
£30 admin & collection fee

£80 charge in total.

In 10 days time if we don't have agreement I will take this firstly to Mastercard as I believe you are not being truthful of costs and therefore in breach of contract and then to small claims court where evidence of costs will be required. These costs need to make sense to the judge & I can tell you now that anything over £80 extra cost for moving a car from the airport it was hired from will deem to be excessive."

As per our terms and conditions of rental, it is the responsibility of the hirer to return the car to the same location as stated on the rental agreement and at the time noted. You have failed to do this and in so doing are in breech of your rental contract, as a consequence we have had to arrange the recovery of our vehicle, once we actually knew what had happened.

I'm sure that you will appreciate that we cannot stop our operation to go and collect a vehicle that should have been returned to us at the time and date stipulated. We have our offices staffed for the business that we are undertaking on any given day and cannot drop everything there and then to recover one of our vehicles.

It is for this reason that we have to outsource the recovery and we are charged at premium rate for this service. We have to get the car back as soon as possible to prevent the costs escalating uncontrolably.

Therefore to reiterate our costs:

Recovery - £210.00
Fuel £25.00 - your hire car was down by 1/4 tank
Loss of use - £30.00
DSF - £48.00

Total - £313.00

Whilst I do appreciate your offer of £80.00, it is just not enough to cover our costs.

However, in the interest of customer service and in order to bring your case to a close, I am happy to reduce my costs as follows:

Recovery - £150.00
Fuel - £25.00
Loss of use - £30.00
DSF - £20.00

Total - £225.00

Please note that this offer is only valid for the next 5 days and that your acceptance of this offer will be accepted by a return email confirming the costs as set out above. Your refund will then be actioned immediately to the tune of £175.00.

"Xxxx, thanks for the movement in the figures. It's still way too high and as I already know there wasn't a recovery vehicle used I'm going to stick with my original figure of £80. Do you have an invoice you can send to me for the recovery vehicle to persuade me one was used? Can you give more detail on how it took 2 staff 2 hours each to recover a vehicle when a recovery service was used?

Many thanks,"


Nothing for 8 days so I....
"Morning Xxxx,

If this isn't resolved by the end of today I'll escalate this to Mastercard \ Small claims."

Dear Mr Cooke

I have arranged your refund of £320.00 today so as to bring your case to a close.

coylemj

You're obviously pleased with yourself but having typed up that seriously long post, do you still think it's worth dealing with those small time car rental companies with all the hassle that they put in your way? Like, was the monetary saving really worth all that grief? Even with a smooth collection and return, you have a serious amount of time added to your travel time at each end of your trip to the UK because they're not located at the airport.

This is a consumer rather than a legal matter.

Indricotherium

Seems a bit unfair to blank out your name and leave in the respondents.

GerardKeating

So Quick Summary.

• OP does not follow instructions and terms of rental agreement
• Companies follows terms of contract and changes OP accordingly.
• OP complains about this,
• Company offers a reduction to placate OP
• OP still complains and threatens to file a false chargeback
• Company gives up

GerardKeating

Indricotherium wrote: »

Seems a bit unfair to blank out your name and leave in the respondents.

"Mr Cooke" did not blank out his name is all places.

irishgrover

well personally I think this is great and thank the OP for sharing and congratulate him on his persistence.
All too often people are all too happy to be ridden senseless by exorbitant additional and unwarranted fees, be that phone companies or insurance companies or car hire or whatever. If more people were as determined as the OP then companies would be less likely to try to screw their customers for easy profit....

irishgrover

GerardKeating wrote: »

So Quick Summary.

• OP does not follow instructions and terms of rental agreement
• Companies follows terms of contract and changes OP accordingly.
• OP complains about this,
• Company offers a reduction to placate OP
• OP still complains and threatens to file a false chargeback
• Company gives up

I think you are missing the point...

Indricotherium

irishgrover wrote: »

well personally I think this is great and thank the OP for sharing and congratulate him on his persistence.
All too often people are all too happy to be ridden senseless by exorbitant additional and unwarranted fees, be that phone companies or insurance companies or car hire or whatever. If more people were are determined as the OP then companies would be less likely to try to screw there customers for easy profit....

He didn't even pay for the f ing car park

irishgrover

Indricotherium wrote: »

He didn't even pay for the f ing car park

a.) he offered to
b.) he did not dispute liability for the cost of recovery
c.) He did dispute inflated costs beyond those that could reasonably inferred to as being recovery costs
d.) The company was clearly inflating the cost of recovery (which was not as per the agreed contract)
e.) but I get your point :-)

Indricotherium

Why didn't they take the £80

Speedwell

Indricotherium wrote: »

Why didn't they take the £80

Someone would have to explain to someone what the charge was for and why it wasn't the original invoiced amount. A simple writeoff for customer service reasons could be accounted for some other way.

Valetta

Was it not highly irresponsible for the OP to leave the keys on the car?

If I was the rental company I would have taken him to the cleaners for this alone.

Kristopherus

Indricotherium wrote: »

He didn't even pay for the f ing car park

I say fair play to the OP. Ita a well-known ruse, by car hire firms particularly, to pile on rip-off charges, if you deviate one iota from their horrendous t & cs.

For Forks Sake

Kristopherus wrote: »

I say fair play to the OP. Ita a well-known ruse, by car hire firms particularly, to pile on rip-off charges, if you deviate one iota from their horrendous t & cs.

Which you have agreed to when you sign the rental agreement....

Sam Kade

The moral of the story is always keep your phone charged.

hullaballoo

It's an interesting high horse to be on, one that leaps to the defence of car hire companies.

Anyone who's ever dealt with even the larger companies will know it's like they see it as a firm duty to hide as many charges as possible from you and then spring them on you when you have no choice but to accept them.

It's not like you can rest easy once you've settled your "final" bill either, I've had one company put through an additional charge on my credit card 3 months after I'd returned the car. I rang the Dublin office (thankfully, they had a Dublin office) to query it and rather than provide any explanation, they just refunded it and said, "sorry!"

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if it was a deliberate tactic to hide their drop off point or make it practically inaccessible so that people are faced with abandoning the car or missing their flight just so they can load on these "recovery" charges.

The thing that really bugs me is that even if you book all the expensive stuff in advance, top of the range car, fully comp insurance, all the bells and whistles, they'll still try and diddle more money from you.

Imo, many of their practices are not just underhanded but many of them are certainly unlawful and some probably even illegal.

Fuck um, I say.

Valetta

hullaballoo wrote: »

It's an interesting high horse to be on, one that leaps to the defence of car hire companies.

Anyone who's ever dealt with even the larger companies will know it's like they see it as a firm duty to hide as many charges as possible from you and then spring them on you when you have no choice but to accept them.

It's not like you can rest easy once you've settled your "final" bill either, I've had one company put through an additional charge on my credit card 3 months after I'd returned the car. I rang the Dublin office (thankfully, they had a Dublin office) to query it and rather than provide any explanation, they just refunded it and said, "sorry!"

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if it was a deliberate tactic to hide their drop off point or make it practically inaccessible so that people are faced with abandoning the car or missing their flight just so they can load on these "recovery" charges.

The thing that really bugs me is that even if you book all the expensive stuff in advance, top of the range car, fully comp insurance, all the bells and whistles, they'll still try and diddle more money from you.

Imo, many of their practices are not just underhanded but many of them are certainly unlawful and some probably even illegal.

Fuck um, I say.

Have to say, from personal experience I would disagree with that.

Having rented cars in the UK and Europe over the last thirty odd years ( probably 4-5 times a year), I have yet to be charged for anything other than agreed.

I never take their full insurance; instead using one of the excess insurers to cover the excess.

I got caught out once on a fuel charge, but that was my own fault- arriving too late to Stansted and didn't have time to fill up. Cost me £125 rather than approx £50, but there you go. Lesson learned.

Most of those rentals were from the budget firms- cheap but unfortunately the ones that get slated.

I'll repeat that what the OP did in leaving the car in a public car park with the keys left in it was totally out of order.

Victor

Indricotherium wrote: »

Why didn't they take the £80

They initially took £400 (for a £213 charge) and returned £320. 400-320=80

Red Kev

Well done OP. But I read the whole thing in Joe Lycett's voice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gkiw7zpULo

DVD-Lots

And I have also read this post in the voice Louis CK ....well done.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b00-c-bk4U0

BTW, it's a bit freaky that I read your post earlier, then sat down to catch up on my Netflix watchlist and Mr CK was there, imagine my horror when he started talking about the exact same experience that he had? Spoiler alert, I'm not finding Mr CK as funny as hoped, may not last the hour tbh but hey, I'm off work for the week and have nothing better to do than drink some beers and catch up on my Netflix watchlist (which is a very short list I must admit....any recommendations ) :cool:

hullaballoo

Valetta wrote: »

Have to say, from personal experience I would disagree with that.

Having rented cars in the UK and Europe over the last thirty odd years ( probably 4-5 times a year), I have yet to be charged for anything other than agreed.

Ah yeah well I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you about it but I've rented though cars to know full well that the companies, small and large, have newbie traps built in everywhere to extort money from people.

Sure, people who rent a lot have developed ways to know what's what before they get to that check in desk at the car rental company on the first day of their trip.

The reality is that no one reads the terms and conditions in full when they enter any sort of contract and I think the law protects that. Car rental companies flout that protection and I don't mind when someone stands up to that, even if they're not totally legally in the right.

I wouldn't leave a car abandoned with its keys inside etc. but I admire the person who does. Especially if they have the cojones to subsequently challenge the rental company about their recovery charges.

whomitconcerns

Well I prebooked a car with hertz last weekend. Waived all insurance and booked for 202€ when I brought it back it was €242, when I asked I was told yeh it's 30€ for waiving insurance and €5 credit card fee per charge. I have disputed with them as these circumstances were known when I made the booking. They say the booked prove is not the final price, even though there was no change of any circumstsnces, and I have to pay. I know it's only 40€ in my case but they are ba&tards

Little CuChulainn

Can't believe you got away with that. You hadn't a leg to stand on. It's a shame that companies are too willing to bow down to those that are loud instead of those that are right. Whoever gave you a refund should be fired.

Indricotherium

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Can't believe you got away with that. You hadn't a leg to stand on. It's a shame that companies are too willing to bow down to those that are loud instead of those that are right. Whoever gave you a refund should be fired.

The same person would be complaining if he arrived at the desk and his car wasn't ready.

irishgrover

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Can't believe you got away with that. You hadn't a leg to stand on. It's a shame that companies are too willing to bow down to those that are loud instead of those that are right. Whoever gave you a refund should be fired.

Hang on a sec, the company lied and inflated recovery costs, thereby breaking the terms and conditions of their own contract? The OP then defended himself against this breech of contract and the car company backed off?

What part if this is so hard for some people to understand?

Homer

In fairness car hire companies in my experience often offer very cheap deals when renting in the hope of making extra revenue from insurance and late fees etc.. It's quite similar to the ryanair business model. I know you think you got one over on the big company but personally I think you were totally in the wrong. It was your fault and nobody elses that you hadn't the time to find the returns location. Then when they charged you (albeit handsomely) for abandoning their property and the inconvenience you threw your toys out of the pram and wasted even more of the companies time whinging via email for days.. Hope I never have you as a customer in my business.

Little CuChulainn

irishgrover wrote: »

Hang on a sec, the company lied and inflated recovery costs, thereby breaking the terms and conditions of their own contract? The OP then defended himself against this breech of contract and the car company backed off?

What part if this is so hard for some people to understand?

The only contract breach was on the ops part. He didn't comply with his obligation to return the vehicle. This allows Hertz to assess for damages as per their usual contract. He should have been charged a minimum of €200 to cover recovery, parking fees and loss of earnings to the company.

irishgrover

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

The only contract breach was on the ops part. He didn't comply with his obligation to return the vehicle. This allows Hertz to assess for damages as per their usual contract. He should have been charged a minimum of €200 to cover recovery, parking fees and loss of earnings to the company.

no doubt that the OP breached the contract. However you appear to think that the car company can charge whatever punitive amount they like, and you (and I could be wrong), genuinely appear aggrieved that they were unsuccessful in screwing the OP in extra recovery costs.

I, on the other hand, think that the additional cost should be in some way related to the actual cost incurred of recovering the vehicle.

Little CuChulainn

irishgrover wrote: »

no doubt that the OP breached the contract. However you appear to think that the car company can charge whatever punitive amount they like, and you (and I could be wrong), genuinely appear aggrieved that they were unsuccessful in screwing the OP in extra recovery costs.

I, on the other hand, think that the additional cost should be in some way related to the actual cost incurred of recovering the vehicle.

Like I said, he should have been charged a minimum of €200 to cover third party recovery, parking fees and loss of earnings. That's not being screwed, it's just the cost of being lazy.

runawaybishop

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Like I said, he should have been charged a minimum of €200 to cover third party recovery, parking fees and loss of earnings. That's not being screwed, it's just the cost of being lazy.

There's punitive costs and then there is charging 4 hours for a 15 minute job.

Agent_47

OP took the lazy option and should know with hire companies they will always look to penalise you. I resort to photographs of the mileage and tank status when returning a hire car. Never had a problem. lesson to be learned is

* Arrive on time.
*deposit at agreed location
* fill up before you return the car
* have it vetted for any damage on return
* keep photos with a charged phone
* then return home happy in the knowledge that ones credit card will not be accessed for miscellaneous charges

Little CuChulainn

runawaybishop wrote: »

There's punitive costs and then there is charging 4 hours for a 15 minute job.

Have you ever hired a recovery company? You wouldn't get them to the scene for less than €100. People seem to be of the impression that the company should have used their working staff to recover the vehicle. The staff that are working have jobs to do already. At best you can argue that they should have retained people on overtime to perform a job outside their work contract and recover the car rather than retain a recovery firm. For all you know the employment contract guarantees a minimum two hours pay when overtime is worked.

runawaybishop

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Have you ever hired a recovery company? You wouldn't get them to the scene for less than €100. People seem to be of the impression that the company should have used their working staff to recover the vehicle. The staff that are working have jobs to do already. At best you can argue that they should have retained people on overtime to perform a job outside their work contract and recover the car rather than retain a recovery firm. For all you know the employment contract guarantees a minimum two hours pay when overtime is worked.

Yeah, and op asked for proof of this cost, which they couldnt produce. He felt it was high and challenged it, they then dropped it.

Yes to hiring a recovery truck btw, 80 euro.

edit: also note the op states "Having reviewed the contract I'm entitled to ask what the cost of recovery was, itemised, as this is what is specified in the contract. Can you relay that detail to me please.""

Nesta99

I worked for a franchised vehicle rental company at one time for my sins and absolutely the 'owner' did his utmost to add charges or create circumstances for withholding at least a proportion of deposits. They also on a number of occasions or when opportunity arose, particularly with younger drivers, charged company insurance to customers who would have been entitled to an excess/temporary transfer with their own insurance company hence loading the cost to the businesses benefit (assuming the car wasnt wrecked). A ploy was also to overlook minor damage existing on a vehicle hoping that the lessee would just sign off without walking 'round the vehicle themselves. The repair was then charged for (but never done) all sorts of costs added and the same vehicle was rolled out again days later to do the same thing. It was obvious enough who were experienced in renting cars and they got the VIP service and were often repeat customers then. I didnt stay too long there, mainly because I didnt do the little things to maximise earnings and my honesty didnt make me particularly popular. It was remiss of me not to have notified the franchise I suppose.

This doesnt back up the OP or that he wasnt in breach of contract no matter how extortionate add-ons may have been but it is not uncommon for vehicle rental companies to unfairly overcharge in the knowledge that few qeople ask the tough questions. Those that have mainly good experiences and avoid these charges are usually well versed in rentals due to experience as for example one poster above mentioning being once bitten due to not refueling a car. I obviously cant say for sure but id hedge my bets that the company involved with the OP sent a minion on minimum wage as the valet/carwasher/general skivvy walking the couple of ks to pick up the car and not a vehicle recovery company. Id also from experience say it is a common occurrence and suits the company down to the ground!

MadDog76

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

The only contract breach was on the ops part. He didn't comply with his obligation to return the vehicle. This allows Hertz to assess for damages as per their usual contract. He should have been charged a minimum of €200 to cover recovery, parking fees and loss of earnings to the company.

Nonsense, the Hire Car Company tried to profit from the situation, which is against their own contract, and were found out ........ that's why they dropped the cost, admitting guilt on their part.

TeaBagMania

Next time leave it in the passenger drop off lane with the keys locked in it and the engine running

Victor

TeaBagMania wrote: »

Next time leave it in the passenger drop off lane with the keys locked in it and the engine running[/SIZE]

Car hirer may not make their flight - or any flight.

ch750536

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

The only contract breach was on the ops part. He didn't comply with his obligation to return the vehicle. This allows Hertz to assess for damages as per their usual contract. He should have been charged a minimum of €200 to cover recovery, parking fees and loss of earnings to the company.

No, their contact states that if there are any issues they are able to recover costs (paraphrasing).

I thought £80 was reasonable to move a car 2.4 miles. Anything else is just profiteering, which their own contract does not allow.

ch750536

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Like I said, he should have been charged a minimum of €200 to cover third party recovery, parking fees and loss of earnings. That's not being screwed, it's just the cost of being lazy.

Why screw me for third party recovery when one of the employees drove over to pick it up? That's just scandalous behaviour and one I can't see anyone of reasonable mind trying to defend.

ch750536

Funny reading this thread back. There is a common theme, those that disagree with my actions seem to think they had a right to get what they could. Maybe this is the ugly face of modern commercialism.

For me, if a customer has an issue, no matter what, if you already have your profit you should be happy with level compensation for costs.

Someone in your hotel steals a towel, charge them the cost to replace it - then add e100 'to teach them a lesson' stinks and is simply greedy.

This is what happened here. I genuinely tried to find the hotel for over an hour. That's why the tank was low (I filled it up). I was about to miss my flight so I parked it in the safest place, under cameras and let them know as soon as possible. I was happy to pay for the parking, the next days hire & the time to collect it.

They then tried to get as much money as they possibly could from me showing their own mentality and attitude to customers. I won't return to Green Motion for hires, regardless of the price. They have shown a lack of morality that I don't like to deal with.

Indricotherium

ch750536 wrote: »

Funny reading this thread back. There is a common theme, those that disagree with my actions seem to think they had a right to get what they could. Maybe this is the ugly face of modern commercialism.

For me, if a customer has an issue, no matter what, if you already have your profit you should be happy with level compensation for costs.

Someone in your hotel steals a towel, charge them the cost to replace it - then add e100 'to teach them a lesson' stinks and is simply greedy.

This is what happened here. I genuinely tried to find the hotel for over an hour. That's why the tank was low (I filled it up). I was about to miss my flight so I parked it in the safest place, under cameras and let them know as soon as possible. I was happy to pay for the parking, the next days hire & the time to collect it.

They then tried to get as much money as they possibly could from me showing their own mentality and attitude to customers. I won't return to Green Motion for hires, regardless of the price. They have shown a lack of morality that I don't like to deal with.

I don't think they had a right to take more than they were entitled to. However I think you are misrepresenting the issues you caused the hire company.

You cost them a days use of their car and in all likelyhood problems with another customer and knock on problems from however they rectified those. Reputational as well as practical.

I'm sure you would cry foul of you arrived at the hire desk and they hadn't a car ready for you because some dope couldn't organise himself to get it back to the correct location.

Carawaystick

Has the OP read the Beavis judgement of the SCotUK? re penalty clauses

eezipc

Although I think you were both wrong here, I do applaud your perseverance.
I remember hiring a car in Edinburgh from Hertz and they charged for an extra day and loads of extras on top because apparently I did not return the car on the day I should have. In fact, i returned it a day early but someone seemed to have forgot to fill in the paperwork.
My moral of car hire stories is to take photos of everything related to the car. All scratches/bumps/fuel gauge etc need to be photographed beforehand and same again afterwards. Luckily in my case in Edinburgh, I had actually taken a picture of the car parked outside their office when I dropped off the keys.
They chased me for months looking for payment but I held out because I knew I was right.

ch750536

Carawaystick wrote: »

Has the OP read the Beavis judgement of the SCotUK? re penalty clauses

I am aware, nothing to do with this case though as it is in their own contract that they may recover costs.