Van rental and possible damages

ajdias · Post by **ajdias** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 5:27 pm

TL DL March 2015: As advised by other users below, anyone renting a vehicle, whether from a company that operates remotely (such as 24 Rent) or even a regular company, is well advised to document carefully the state of the car at both the start and end of lease, this can usually be done with a regular phone camera.

This thread reports my dealings with a van rental company ( 24 Rental Network Oy aka 24rent.fi ) after the company detected scratches in both the left and right bumper, following a 3 hour rental in the summer of 2013, and charged me 150 Eur one year later. While I am sympathetic towards companies that get screwed by costumers, I asserted that it is highly unlikely for both bumpers to be damaged in such a short period without me noticing, and that is up to 24Rent to demonstrate that it was me, which IMNSHO they haven't. I took the case to the consumer dispute board (a free service to companies and consumers that issues recommendations); 24 Rent engaged in the process and made their case to the board.

For reasons that are unknown to me, I was informed by the consumer dispute board, that 24Rent had withdrawn the case, and would be taking the case to Espoo court.

----
Follows the original 2013 post and replies, which I haven't edited.

Hi,
I am facing a claim for damages from a rental company, which I am not sure should be my responsibility.
Two weeks ago I rented a van for 3 hours. The van has installed one of those satellite tracking systems, so I picked and delivered it using only a web interface on my mobile - no human communication at all. One week later I got an email from the company, claiming that I was responsible for scratches on both the left and right site front bumper; according to the company the scratches weren't there before my booking nor was the company informed (by me?) when returning the van: "Vaurioita ei ollut ajoneuvossa ennen varausta, eikä niistä informoitu meitä myöskään autoa palautettaessa."

I did check the van, both before and after, and did not noticed anything - which doesn't mean that the scratches couldn't be there or weren't caused while I drove the van. I did notice and took a video of a big crack in the windshield, but they aren't claiming anything about that. I have no recollection of driving into a situation that could have caused the scratches and I've only let it out of sight while parking in my house's patio and at Ikea.
I have no information of when the damage was detected or when it was inspected (the email claims that the delay in contact is due to holiday of the person in charge.) However, I also have no reason to suspect that the company is not acting in good faith.

The company asks me to fill in and return a vahinkoilmoitus (report of damage) that is partially filled. After the field "who do you think is responsible? (blank)" The question "Does (s)he admit responsibility" is preselected "yes" (but it is possible to change to "no".) If I don't return the report the company promise to report the incident to the police (" joudumme tekemään asian selvittämiseksi poliisi-ilmoituksen".)

Has anyone been involved in such a situation and how did it turn up? What are my options in this case? I did send them a quick email promising to sort this out after returning to Finland, but I'd like to know my options (if any )

**Sponsor:**

riku2 · Post by **riku2** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 5:44 pm

fill it out based on your version of events. that you didn't see the scratches when collecting it, didn't get involved in any scrapes and didn't notice any at the end of the rental. mention that you specifically walked around the vehicle to inspect it (start and end of the rental). Under other person involved mention a similar thing - person is unknown and so they cannot accept/deny responsibility. Then see what they say.

As a lesson for the future - take photos of all sides and wheels of the vehicle at the end of rentals especially if there is nobody there to sign off the contract and give you the final bill. I do this even with well known companies such as Hertz.

AldenG · Post by **AldenG** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 6:43 pm

One possibility would be to make a pre-emptive report to the police and ask them to investigate whether you are being scammed.

The police could almost certainly find out quickly and easily (from company paperwork and possibly from calling previous renters) whether the same claim was made against any of the previous renters.

I know that some American car rental offices have been caught charging customer after customer for the same damages, with bonuses to personnel who flag them. Whether that level of corruption has spread to Finland I don't know.

ajdias · Post by **ajdias** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:03 pm

Thanks for your answers.
I'll follow your advice riku2 and fill in the report as you suggest. Btw, by "Under other person involved mention a similar thing - person is unknown and so they cannot accept/deny responsibility"- should I add any other witness?
I had someone help me at home but he was in no condition to check for any scratches. I'll make sure to check and take pics of the cars I take, in the future.

Alden, I appreciate your input but I have no reason to suspect from this company. Such a scam, while possible, it's pretty far fetched, at least here in Finland. I have also had previous experiences with this rental and all went fine. I'll be filling paper work to be sent to the insurance company and I have to pay anything I'll ask for slips from insurance and repair work.

Pursuivant · Post by **Pursuivant** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:10 pm

Such a scam, while possible, it's pretty far fetched, at least here in Finland.

Bollocks, happens all the times. They can stick their scratched bumpers up their ass. I walk three times around the van and get all the fly crap marked up (these days take photos) as they do this all the time.

zax · Post by **zax** » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:51 am

Was the cracked windshield listed on the "pre-existing damage" section on their rental form? Did they even have such a report? If not I'd say they are pretty lax about damage recording and are probably trying it on.

Too late now of course but I would never rent from a company with zero human interaction. Too much opportunity for this sort of problem to arise.

ajdias · Post by **ajdias** » Tue Jul 22, 2014 6:28 pm

One year on, I get news from the rental company: "We repaired and accounted for the scratches only now when the leased van was terminated from our service. Because the reparation was done together with other scratches, we were able to get the painting of the corner of the bumper to 150 euro, and we didn't accrue costs for transfer nor for (van's) down time. This invoice is arranged in a lump sum (soviteltu kertakorvaus) for the damage, and not based on the actual damage for transfer-, inactivity and repair costs (estimated about 600 euro.)

Have I got any other option than just cough up the money?

zax wrote:Was the cracked windshield listed on the "pre-existing damage" section on their rental form? Did they even have such a report? If not I'd say they are pretty lax about damage recording and are probably trying it on.

Apologies, I somehow missed this. Can't be sure, but I don't recall any rental form or report.

Pursuivant · Post by **Pursuivant** » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:51 pm

So you can answer them, that apparently the scratches had no effect on the renting of the van, and that their original claim was fraudulent to start with. As they themselves admit there were other scratches they repaired, basically they are trying to put other peoples damages to you.

ajdias · Post by **ajdias** » Mon Jul 28, 2014 9:23 am

Thanks. I think I'll just let them know that just because I didn't notice the scratches in the bumper it does not make me liable for it.
What is their likely next move? Pass on the bill to Juridia or try to charge me an extra fee for processing this?

ajdias · Post by **ajdias** » Tue Oct 28, 2014 11:45 pm

Well, I made it all the way to Kuluttajariitalautakunta.

I asked the company for a clarification and they send me a message telling me that they did check the car afterwards (the next morning) and got evidence; and that it was my duty to send them evidence that I had not done the scratches. I asked to know what times they checked and by whom but they didn't reply...

So I went and filled for a case with the consumer dispute board. In the meantime I got a reminder bill (5 eur more) and a dozen of sms reminding me that they were sending the bill to collection, which they did not (or perhaps the bill wasn't accepted, because of the dispute...)

This week I got their reply to the board, and they claim that
a) the scratches are so that they are impossible to miss (I wish I could upload here the pics, but this claim is greatly exaggerated)
b) the company got photo evidence from a 3rd party service the next morning (and before any other client used the van)
c) The company destroyed this evidence because I, allegedly, admitted the incident (myöntä tapauksen) and only later have I "canceled my statement" (peruutta lausuntosa.)

c) is where it gets dodgy because I did fill in the vahinkoilmoitus. But I also stated (and thankfully I kept a copy of the document) that En muista mitään tilanne joka voisi aiheuttaa yhtään vauriota, enkä usko todennäköistä että kaksi eri vauriota ilmeistäsi kaksi eri paikoissa niin lyhyt ajoissa. Lisäksi pidän erittäin epätodellista että vauriot olisivat ilmestynyt minun vastussa sekä oikealla puolella etupuskurilla että vasemmalla puolella samalla etupuskurilla, ilman siitä että minä olisin huomannut sitä. Olen hyviin kokenut kuljettajaa: minulla on ollut ajokortti jo 16 vuotta ja olen vuokrannut pakettiautoa kymmeniä kertoja...

I also unchecked the "does he admit to being responsible" that came pre-checked from the company; and left blank the field "who do you think is to blame."

Based on what I read from other cases I'd say that I've got a pretty good case: in a couple of the disputes I've read consumers got their way because the firm had not verified the car before or after, and here they just admitted to that. They also claim that they destroyed the video evidence because of my "admission" but that is their policy. The only question remaining is whether me filling in the damage report accounts for an admission of guilt, which probably won't as I am a layman. Besides, I did claimed there that I didn't believe that I had caused the damage. The bill, that I contested, only came after one year...

DMC · Post by **DMC** » Wed Oct 29, 2014 8:22 am

One other point to possibly cloud the issue is exactly how long was it before the bill came? Just less than or just more than a year? I can't quote details but I thought I read somewhere (possibly on here) that when a company doesn't follow up a dispute for more than a year the bill is automatically canceled. Could be worth checking that.

ajdias · Post by **ajdias** » Wed Oct 29, 2014 10:05 am

DMC wrote:One other point to possibly cloud the issue is exactly how long was it before the bill came? Just less than or just more than a year? I can't quote details but I thought I read somewhere (possibly on here) that when a company doesn't follow up a dispute for more than a year the bill is automatically canceled. Could be worth checking that.

Thanks. It was just before a year.

The company claims that they sent the bill later on in order to minimize the costs for me (and others) - that would be downtime for the van, that we are, apparently, liable to pay. So they only sent the bill when the van was taken away from service. It can also be because the company knows their checks to make for a weak case. They kept on hammering how the estimated cost would be 800 and how nice they were to bring it down...
True is, I could not contest a bill before it was sent.

Finland Forum

Find information about moving to, living in and life in Finland