Hertz car hire bills us for the 3,000 repair which in fact had never been conducted
When I hired a minibus from Hertz in High Wycombe in July I scraped the rear and was advised i always would be required to cash insurance overabundance 3,000, and when the last repair bill was less I’d be refunded.
I was told, soon afterwards, the bill might be 3,000 there can be no refund. I requested a dysfunction from the costs and was sent a bill, however it only mentioned the damage. I’m then told an itemised bill wasn’t available because vehicle would have been to be sold without having to be repaired.
I created claim in this little insurance to the 3,000 but my insurer regards the exact amount as extortionate and it has also called for that it is itemised. JD, Great Missenden, Buckinghamshire
There are several worrying aspects to your experience. Chief of these is usually that whoever served you after you collected the automobile used a biro to vary the actual payable from Hertz’ standard 1,000 to 3,000 around the receipt. There is this bill. It was from AMG Rentals which, as it turns out, is a Hertz franchisee from the person you hired your car, although office name and logo were all Hertz. Plus it seems a remarkable coincidence the 3,000 quoted to restore the back bumper and reinforcement bar comes to the 3,000 excess.
When that you were suddenly told how the vehicle isn’t to remain repaired but sold, Hertz couldn’t legally maintain your money unless it proved it created 3,000 loss over the sale due to the damage.
Hertz’s fact is not reassuring. It tells me it resolved your problem before I bought involved and confirms it’s t’s and c’s state the excess is 1,000. It declines to spell out why it was amended in your hand and the reason why you were charged triple that for unspecified repairs never accomplished.
You happen to be refunded the 3,000 and Hertz says there are “clarified” every piece of information featuring a franchisee “to avoid any similar issues in future”. It adds that “Hertz is strongly convinced of offer transparent and consistent information to customers throughout its corporate and franchise network”.
The kindly interpretation would be that the hire staff are guilty of incompetence