More Discovered Damage, More Scams

Originally Posted by jaded1234

ERAC did the wrong thing, was caught, and fessed up.

For the walkaround (the employee held the inspection form), the employee did not want to note the damage. Obviously the renter did not get the insurance.

ERAC then tried to charge existing damage to the renter. Only when corrected did ERAC fix the situation.

Again I don't understand how the RENTER is respoinsible for the inspection. ERAC does the inspection (holding the form). The renter just watches. I understand at the end of the day the form is the final document, but most renters like me trust that the level on inspection done going out is the same going in.

In addition - All rental I have done with Hertz and Avis, there are no inspections. You are supposed to note any major issues on a form when leaving. Vehicle check-in is quick.
The other companies do not use "damage" as an income source.

Completely wrong on so many levels...first the walkaround:

You are the one renting the car, you should be looking for damage. The ERAC rep could be thinking about the nights happy hour while hes walking around the car for all you know. If theres something wrong with the car make the rep write it on you contract or get another car, if there isnt one then leave...or buy the damage waiver because you are responsible for what evers on there when it returns if you sign for the car. Doesnt matter if you do it, if someone else does it, or if it was done before you even rented the car.

Secondly...my favorite erac using damage to "make money"

ERAC makes money by RENTING cars

When a car is in the shop ERAC cant rent it.

ERAC doesnt own the shops the cars are fixed at...ERAC pays these shops their estimate before you even get the bill so that we can get the car back and RENT it to make some money.

How the fuck would we make money by having our car in a shop that we dont own unable to rent for a week or two?

[jaded1234]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Completely wrong on so many levels...first the walkaround:

You are the one renting the car, you should be looking for damage. The ERAC rep could be thinking about the nights happy hour while hes walking around the car for all you know. If theres something wrong with the car make the rep write it on you contract or get another car, if there isnt one then leave...or buy the damage waiver because you are responsible for what evers on there when it returns if you sign for the car. Doesnt matter if you do it, if someone else does it, or if it was done before you even rented the car.

Secondly...my favorite erac using damage to "make money"

ERAC makes money by RENTING cars

When a car is in the shop ERAC cant rent it.

ERAC doesnt own the shops the cars are fixed at...ERAC pays these shops their estimate before you even get the bill so that we can get the car back and RENT it to make some money.

How the fuck would we make money by having our car in a shop that we dont own unable to rent for a week or two?

How is it in the shop when it is being rented with damage? Outside of the disputed damages, many have noted other damage the car had at rental. I doubt the cars are sent in for repairs for each "damage" report. How could it be if the damage is documented on a previous rental.

The discussion is not about crumpled fenders or broken bumpers. It is about items not noticeable by the average person. Why would you send it to the shop for days for repairs?

[iluvEcars]

It has to go for repairs because when a customer is dx'ed for damage, we must provide an estiMate of the cost otherwise the claim is dropped.

Originally Posted by iluvEcars

once again ERAC does the right thing! they researched the situation, found they were in error, apologized and refunded your money! great service!

i would agree the charging of your card is a little much without contacting you first though

While I usually agree with most of your posts, I'm going to have to disagree with you here in terms of Enterprise doing the right thing and providing great service. In light of this situation, wouldn't "doing the right thing" have involved researching the problem before charging the customer for it? Wouldn't "great service" have involved employees communicating with each other and discussing the situation prior to writing up a DX and charging the customer for it? Wouldn't even decent customer service involve keeping the customer informed of the situation and of charges being placed on their card? This is just my opinion, but I would say that this isn't great service, it isn't even bad service. It's a blatant disregard of the entire concept of customer service. Yes the response and refund may have been prompt, but in the end Enterprise only did what they were required to do, and only did so after having to be told so by the customer.

I absolutely understand that Enterprise eats the cost of damage they are not responsible for way more often than they mistakenly charge a customer. But for a company that prides itself on customer service, situations such as the one described simply happen too often. It's not a scam on the part of Enterprise, as in I don't think anyone purposely sets out and says "I know you didn't do that but I'm gonna get you anyway, just because I feel like it". I just think the "charge them first and figure it out later" concept ERAC employs is a bad business practice.

[iluvEcars]

i appreciate your compliment.

i do agree that at the rental level, we dont always have the tools to make a correct assesement (like being able to pull up previous contracts). however i disagree with the OP in that the branch was out to get him so to speak.

i got ox'ed last week from loss control for a stupid scratch i dx'ed a customer with coverage. he didnt care or even know. all it does it help spread my loss over 12 months. dxing a customer without CDW is a esqi nightmare and completely unethical.

[In God's Own Image]

Originally Posted by jaded1234

How is it in the shop when it is being rented with damage? Outside of the disputed damages, many have noted other damage the car had at rental. I doubt the cars are sent in for repairs for each "damage" report. How could it be if the damage is documented on a previous rental.

The discussion is not about crumpled fenders or broken bumpers. It is about items not noticeable by the average person. Why would you send it to the shop for days for repairs?

If it's dx'd it has to go to the shop. If it's small damage it's normal wear and tear and nobody is charged.

[jaded1234]

Originally Posted by In God's Own Image

If it's dx'd it has to go to the shop. If it's small damage it's normal wear and tear and nobody is charged.

Then how come damage that is already noted by one renter is not fixed before renting to another (the reason for getting the 10 previous damage reports)? It doesn't sound like it gets fixed.

It sounds like they charge for the damage (maybe an estimate), but never fix it. Then it gets documented again. If no one asks for the 10 reports, it gets charged again.

[In God's Own Image]

Originally Posted by jaded1234

Then how come damage that is already noted by one renter is not fixed before renting to another (the reason for getting the 10 previous damage reports)? It doesn't sound like it gets fixed.

It sounds like they charge for the damage (maybe an estimate), but never fix it. Then it gets documented again. If no one asks for the 10 reports, it gets charged again.

Are you really this dumb or is it an act?

Let's Go over it again. When a car is rented, any damage is marked on the contract. If it's a small dent that is already on the car and was missed on a previous check in, the car will often be rented out because the branch manager doesn't want to pay to get it fixed and have that car out of service for a small ding. In that case, no customer has been charged. If a DX report is written in any situation, then the car HAS to be taken in and fixed. Branch managers don't want to do that because they lose money on the car not being rented. THEY DO NOT WANT TO DX CARS UNLESS THEY HAVE TO. If you are accused of damage you didn't think you did, you ask for the last ten contracts in case the damage was marked on a previous rental. If it was a scam Enterprise would have been caught by now because there would be no invoices from body shops that the car was fixed.

[ExGp2399]

Originally Posted by In God's Own Image

Are you really this dumb or is it an act?

Let's Go over it again. When a car is rented, any damage is marked on the contract. If it's a small dent that is already on the car and was missed on a previous check in, the car will often be rented out because the branch manager doesn't want to pay to get it fixed and have that car out of service for a small ding. In that case, no customer has been charged. If a DX report is written in any situation, then the car HAS to be taken in and fixed. Branch managers don't want to do that because they lose money on the car not being rented. THEY DO NOT WANT TO DX CARS UNLESS THEY HAVE TO. If you are accused of damage you didn't think you did, you ask for the last ten contracts in case the damage was marked on a previous rental. If it was a scam Enterprise would have been caught by now because there would be no invoices from body shops that the car was fixed.

Hertz actually was caught in a body shop damage scheme. They were writing their own estimates, not fixing the vehicles, charging the customers and then fixing it themselves for a much cheaper price. Google it. Its funny. The article actually points out how ERAC was much better at handling damage than other rental companies.

[jaded1234]

Originally Posted by In God's Own Image

Are you really this dumb or is it an act?

Let's Go over it again. When a car is rented, any damage is marked on the contract. If it's a small dent that is already on the car and was missed on a previous check in, the car will often be rented out because the branch manager doesn't want to pay to get it fixed and have that car out of service for a small ding. In that case, no customer has been charged. If a DX report is written in any situation, then the car HAS to be taken in and fixed. Branch managers don't want to do that because they lose money on the car not being rented. THEY DO NOT WANT TO DX CARS UNLESS THEY HAVE TO. If you are accused of damage you didn't think you did, you ask for the last ten contracts in case the damage was marked on a previous rental. If it was a scam Enterprise would have been caught by now because there would be no invoices from body shops that the car was fixed.

I am a pretty logical person, and this sounds like circular logic.

Here is the scenario:
I return the car. ERAC notes damage. ERAC send me a bill. I challenge them and ask for the 10 previous reports. They say oops, it was documented 5 reports ago.

Now please answer my questions (oh, you already did):

1. If the damage was noted five reports ago, why is it not fixed ?

"the branch manager doesn't want to pay to get it fixed and have that car out of service for a small ding"

2. Then why did they get an estimate now, and supposedly get it fixed?

"Branch managers don't want to do that because they lose money on the car not being rented. THEY DO NOT WANT TO DX CARS UNLESS THEY HAVE TO. "

3. So why did they wait? Why did they send it to the shop? Why did they keep renting it?

It's the same answer for all three, which does not compute. The same reasoning results in two different outcomes for the same scenario.


See the problem.

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH.