Jump to content

Showing results for tags 'sixt'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums


  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web


  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start




Found 11 results

  1. I hired a van from Sixt Car Hire in Leeds in early June in order to move my belongings to a new house. I hired the van just for the day and used Sixt as the prices were competitive and they were located nearby. When I picked up the van I was shown around it and giving a considerably long list of pre-existing damages. It was clear the van had been in quite a few incidents before as there was considerable dents, scuffs, scratches etc. When I rent a car I usually take my own pictures of the car but stupidly didn’t in this case mostly due to the tight time schedule I had for being able to access the loading area near my flat (my fault). I used the van for the day without incident. When I returned the van, the office was closed and there was no one there to receive me or check the van. There was only a locked drop box for hire keys. The van could only be left in the car park which has no gate or fence, just open to the public. The next day I received an email from Sixt saying thank you for using them and my deposit was returned. A few weeks later I received an email saying there was damage to the van and that I was liable to pay £586 pounds in damages. They attached a form which had a box for me to state whether or not I believed I was responsible for the damages. I said that I wasn’t and that there were no incidents whilst the van was hired to me. About a month passed and I received an email from Sixt stating that they reviewed my response and decided I was responsible for the damages and that I had two weeks to pay them the money. In response I requested that they please send me time stamped photos of the damages before and after I hired the van and proof that the van wasn’t damaged after I left it in the drop off area. Sixt didn’t acknowledge my email and just responded that I had 14 days to pay the damages. I again replied requesting the data and attached the previous email I had sent to them and stated that I formally was disputing the claims. Sixt then responded with photos of the van which when I looked at the files had no time stamp on them. There is also no photo which shows the claimed damages as well as the van in the same photo. Only far away photos of the van I hired and then very close up photos of the damages where you can’t see any distinguishable details of the van. They also have not responded about how no one was there to receive and check the van when I dropped it off. Two days later I received an email from Sixt stating the following: Further to our previous letters regarding the above damage, we have still not received your payment for the claim. This account will now be passed to our external solicitors to commence recovery action against you unless you make a payment within 14 days. I have no idea what I can do to refute this, I didn’t damage the van and feel that I have no way of defending myself. I feel like if I don’t pay the damages the fees will just get larger. If anyone could please advise I would be very grateful. Steph
  2. Hello All, I'm posting this as a form of warning or advice, but in turn hope to glean some extra information based on CAGers' own experiences of either this abysmal company, or other car hire company 'bashing head against the wall' experiences. Apologies in advance for the essay. Sixt, it seems, will live and die by their "Terms and Conditions" contract, which, not unlike many other global and arrogant companies, seek to impose very harsh terms on their consumer; terms which would, in a court of Law, fall foul of the Unfair Contract Terms Act (UCTA), or the EU Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR). Having looked around extensively online for a car rental deal for a holiday in Holland and Germany this summer, I finally decided on a deal from Sixt Rental. They offered the car class I wanted, and the best cashback rate through Quidco. So, doing what I always do after researching on my MacBook, I used a Windows session on the same machine and browsed to their site via Quidco, in order to guarantee that the tracking worked and my cashback registered. So far it has tracked but not been paid, but that is not the reason for my issue. The car was booked in mid-June, for a rental starting in early-September, this giving Sixt nearly three months to 'prepare' my rental car for my arrival. Now, when booking the car online at sixt.com, Sixt has a section on the form that specifically asks where you intend to drive it. So, I answered "Netherlands and Germany", because I was staying with friends near Utrecht, then moving on to Bremen, then Berlin, then Cologne, and back near Utrecht before coming home. I arrived at the desk in Schiphol and (fully expecting to be shafted) I actually got the car I booked, plus some extra loading included (sat nav and bluetooth) so I was very pleased. The assistant did try the obligatory up-sell of a higher class of vehicle, but at £10 a day for 17 days hire, and having already spent around £650 hiring the car it was too much for my budget, so I politely declined. The only issue to arise was the fact I didn't have the card with me that I had used to pay for the car some three months prior, which the assistant was most annoyed with. The truth is, I had lost/misplaced it (not reported at that point in time), but she said she could apply the 'damage deposit' to it still, as an unattended sale. Here's the important bit. Looking at Sixt.com's own web site detailing "driving in Germany" it states that many major cities in Germany now require an emissions sticker to be displayed, but they reassure their customer by providing the warranty: "... when you rent a car with Sixt this is no concern as our vehicles are kept up-to-date and carry the necessary sticker." Off I went to collect the car, and walking through the parking lot I could see all kinds of cars in the Sixt area, with registrations from all over Europe. My car was there, bearing a Dutch registration, immaculate and nearly brand new. I was still pleased. In all honesty, although I now recall reading about the emissions sticker whilst doing my car rental research, like all of the other information I'd absorbed from Sixt and other sites, the issue of the "Grüne Plakette" was completely forgotten as three months had passed, but in my mind the reassurance that everything would be ok with the car, because somewhere on their site, Sixt had assured the world in general that was the case. I got to Berlin about five days into my holiday (13th September) and parked on the roadside in the hotel's allotted on-street parking bay, and within an hour I noticed the car had a piece of paper jammed under the wiper blade. The last thing I expected was any kind of fine, as I'd displayed the permit the hotel had given me. My German friends who were with us in Berlin read the notice and were convinced there was some sort of error. The car had been fined €80 for not displaying the required emissions sticker. There was no option to pay it there and then, but reference to the fact the authorities would write to the registered keeper to demand payment. My friends have the green sticker on their car, as every German gets one (they cost €6, are valid for the life of the car, and are issued on production of the car's registration documents, or can be obtained online for €15 - 14 day wait - again by submitting the car's registration documents). My friends couldn't believe that if the car wasn't somehow exempt, that Sixt would not have included the sticker at the time they bought it, considering the minimal cost, and that their cars would inevitably be used all over Europe. I was of course in agreement, and then the memory of the reassurance on their web site came back to me. Immediately I wrote to Sixt's customer services telling them what had happened, and that there must have been some sort of administrative error as the car wasn't showing the sticker their web site stated it would, nor was it included in the car (after making a thorough search of the car, all it had been supplied with in terms of 'legal' stuff was a parking timer disk and a European Traffic Accident Report Form). Sixt didn't respond for 4 days, by which time the car had been given a second fine, but in the ensuing conversation, the person replying appeared to be apologising that I should have been reminded of the need for the sticker by the person who gave me the keys, and then stated that because it was a Dutch car, it didn't need one. I reminded them that they asked me specifically where I was taking the car, and as I'd said Germany, I'd expect the car to be adequately licenced for the purpose. Their response was to send me the link to the TÜV site to apply for the sticker (fat lot of use that was as I didn't have the registration documents anyway) and said it's the 'driver's responsibility'. I felt particularly miffed that I'd been badly let down, given the claims on their web site. In a later exchange of emails, Sixt 'customer services' even tried to claim that the car's registration documents are supplied 'for this purpose' - an incredible lie! Knowing how car hire firms love to whack fines and extra charges onto the card you used for the 'security deposit', plus their opportunistic additional fee for the pleasure, I formally reported my card lost. This worked, because Sixt were unable to whallop my card for their fees as I predicted they would try. I received two emailed invoices from Sixt 16 days after the fines were issued to the car, one for each fine notification, which appear to have been processed on the same day. They have 'grassed me up' to the German authorities (who incidentally still haven't contacted me almost three weeks later) in which they say that they are charging me €24 for each of my "parking violations". Naturally, I have disputed that I am at fault at all, on the basis that: - I hired the car from their web site, where it claimed "... when you rent a car with Sixt this is no concern as our vehicles are kept up-to-date and carry the necessary sticker." - I could not have obtained a sticker without the registration document, which to my knowledge is never supplied with a rental car. In any case, it was disproportional to expect me to lose half a day of my holiday to obtain a sticker valid for the life of the car, when I was only hiring it for 17 days. - I informed them on their web site where they specifically asked me where I intended to drive the car and were told "Germany", and the assumption is that they would supply a car fit for that purpose (or tell me otherwise). Of course, they are now throwing in the extra 'hidden text' that 'of course' the reference to the stickers is ONLY for cars hired for pickup in Berlin (what?!) and that I hired my car in Holland, so got a Dutch car (this is despite there clearly being German cars available for re-hire at the airport as there were dozens there, at or above the class I'd hired). However, their golden 'get out' is that they are saying my claim against them is irrelevant because I've agreed to their Terms and Conditions, they think it's cast-iron that I have agreed to pay ALL fines, HOWEVER they are incurred. This presumably extends to the case that they may have not insured or taxed a vehicle correctly, or failed on some other construction and use matter. They think (or are arrogating) their T&Cs transcend common law. I've pointed out to them that under contract law they are liable for any of my losses arising from a breach of theirs, irrespective of what their T&Cs say, and that I am firmly of the opinion that they are in breach, given the circumstances, but they arrogantly and swiftly always revert the onus to pay back on me, as "it's in the Terms and Conditions". So, the matter is still 'pending', and I will update this thread with developments and any outcome. If I am sent demands by the German authorities, I will have little choice but to pay, although I WILL make a claim against Sixt to recover them, and similarly as I've told Sixt that the only way they will ever get a penny off me is if I am ordered to by a court, then I will be mounting a defence against any such claim. If anyone has any experience of making a claim under the European Small Claims Procedure (ESCP) then I'd love to hear from you. Thanks for taking the time to read my novel! GRMC
  3. Dear CAG members, I hope someone here could help us with something urgent. We only have been given 7 days for this. We hired a SIXT car from London for 1 week. When my partner and I collected the vehicle the vehicle was very dirty. I said I didn't mind it, as I didn't want to wait for 30 minutes for the agent to clean it. However, my partner said that we should have them clean it, so we could see the damages that are already present. "Fair point..." the agent said, "...but remember you have paid a premium for zero excess, so it doesn't matter what damages are present already, as any new damage would not be charged to you anyway". We thought great, but let's get it cleaned anyway as it's for mother in law's 60th birthday road trip... After the car was cleaned we were handed the keys back at the booth, told were the agent left it and sent on our way without any further taking note of anything. I was given a receipt that had all the existing damages on there. When we got home to pick up our luggage I noticed a large 10cm scratch on the rear bumper that wasn't on the receipt I've been given. It definitely wasn't us as it looked like a cast concrete bollard got it, or something with similar texture, and we didn't come past any. Anyway, we didn't have time to go back to the hire place to make this known as we had mother waiting at the train station and thought it wouldn't matter anyway as we paid for zero excess. Now, when we returned the vehicle Saturday just gone, the agent (different one this time) asked where we parked, then went to check the vehicle, noted the additional scratch, came back to us and asked me to sign the scratch on his PDA to acknowledge it. I said, we paid for Zero excess, what am I signing here? Will I be charged? He said, no, no, you won't be charged, as you paid a premium, you just need to acknowledge it. So I signed and my partner and I left. Today I had an email from SIXT saying that they are making a claim for the damage and that the online form needs to be filled in and submitted within 7 days. Because I have been registered as the main driver (mother in law was the additional driver) I now have to deal with this insurance claim and I am now worried that once the claim is submitted by SIXT, the insurers will make this known on the whole insurers network, so that next time I am looking to renew my own van insurance I will be hit with a much higher premium. I feel like SIXT have been waiting for someone like us, who they can lure into thinking that any damage unrecorded won't matter, so that they can make a claim for damages later on at my cost. Can somebody please advise what I should do? I was thinking of just writing in the statement that I am not assuming liability for the damage as it was already there. Attached is a screen shot of the form.
  4. In April 2016 I hired a 7.5t van from a company online. They did not deliver on the stated day and didn't tell me it would come the next. A driver from this company was waiting in a Sixt 7.5t van angry that I wasn't in when he arrived, made me sign the document threw the keys in the cab and drove off. I arrived at my destination (a few 100miles) and 2 days later 2 Sixt reps turned up to collect. They noticed old wear and cracking on one of the tires, they were very unhappy with the depot/yard in the south allowing it to be out on the road. The damage was photographed and noted as being old wear. They then saw the rear bumper was very slightly pushed in but the damage was rusted and old, photos taken and notes put on their handheld/mobile that it was not my fault. I asked them to ring their head office just to confirm, they understood why and did so to explain and then allowed me to talk to them. All was fine, notes were put against the account and it was agreed the vehicle should not have been released and they would take it up with the southern depot. Almost 12 months later 28/03/2017 I receive a call from Sixt solicitors regarding outstanding debt for the above damages. They have the wrong name but correct surname, the wrong address (old one), no email and only my mobile. I have no documents from the time and only remember signing their handheld/mobile and found out they have had a head office change since. I don't know what I need to ask for or what proof they need or if there is a precedent to void their claim as it has been almost 12 months. Please help.
  5. Hi all I need some advice on an issue that I have with Sixt. I will put in all events to hopefully give the full picture. 15th Feb hired a car at my local Sixt car hire office for 24 hours. No excess waiver taken On checking the car with the employee I noticed some scratches on the front reg plate and bumper. I was told that these slight scratches did not count as damage. I signed the employees pda computer and was given the keys. No paperwork except the reciept that I signed in the office prior to going to collect the car. I did not have a camera to use at the time. The car was due back by 11am on 16th Feb 2017. As per agreement I parked the car outside the office at around half midnight on the 16th Feb and dropped the key in the 24 hour dropbox. I checked online and noted that the car was checked back in at 7.07hrs. I understand that I am responsible for any damage until it is checked in. I had to go to the office later that morning to resolve a separate fuel issue. The employee who checked the car in, informed me that he had to drive the car to the petrol station to put more fuel in. He was speaking very candidly with me. No mention of anything wrong with the check in. 5 days later I get an email stating that the car has new damage and I am liable. Upon investigation, I find out that the damage being refered to is the same scratches that were there already. After multiple emails back and forth. I have denied all liability. My reasons are as follows: 1) The damage was already there. I informed the employee before taking the car. As per terms and conditions. 2) The photograph taken by Sixt was taken later on that day, after the car had been moved. Even though the damage was there, any new damage claimed could have been caused after the car was checked in. The car was parked in a way that a picture could have easily been taken where I left it. Why wasn't it? 3) Lack of consistency of the employees. The state of the car on check out was described as slightly soiled interior and exterior. On check in the state was described as clean. This could be the exact situation with the scratches. One person says it's ok, the next say it's not. This is obviously what has happenned. 4) I've been sent 2 different invoice amounts, 354 and 360 pounds. On one of the invoices it details labour charges and specific time spent on the repair. When I checked the car after the invoices were produced, the repair has not even been carried out. 5) In one of my emails I suggested that Sixt give customers a sheet of paper that shows a diagram of the car and any damage no matter how minor. This would avoid any confusement in the future. To my amazment one of these sheets was emailed to me with my signature on it. I have never seen this sheet let alone signed it. I feel that this could be classed a fraud. 6) The pictures of the car that Sixt produced showed extra markings that seem to have been added for the picture. I'm not sure if these were markings to point to the scratches or simply to make it look worse. These markings are not there now. All in all I feel that they are trying it on with me. I have invited them to take me to court. I recieved another email today stating that as we are getting nowhere, they have no option other than to refer the case to their legal department, unless "we can come to an agreed settlement" . I feel very suspicious about this. If they are adament that I am liable, why would they want to reduce the charge? You opinions and advice would be very welcome. Do you think I should let them take me to court?
  6. I apologise if this is going to be a bit lengthy: thank you so much for reading this and I appreciate any advice I can have on my situation. I hired a car for a week before Christmas from LHR. I live in the middle east. Within one hour of collection, a flying stone on the motorway had caused a middle to driver side windscreen chip, about the size of a two pound coin. Upon arriving at my destination, I called teh accident hotline they supplied to ask for the chip to be examined and repaired because i was not sure that the car was roadworthy. They took details and promised to send someone out. Three phone calls and 24 hours later I was still waiting and asked for a new vehicle. At this point I was told to speak to Sixt!!?! (I thought that I was but it turns out I was speaking to Auto Fleet Solutions!). One call to customer services and they agreed that I could organise the repair myself since I had been waiting so long and I confirmed that I would not have to pay again. Within a couple of hours the chip was repaired by Autoglass, with guarantee. When I returned the vehicle I explained all that had occurred, produced a receipt for the repair and it was returned as "no new damage" Roll on two months and I have an invoice for £750++ for a replacement windscreen. I should state that this is not an insured amount for reasons that are not interesting (I thought that it was, but I was mistaken). It seems to me that the invoice and some other correspondence received at the time of hire is all generated from the Auto Fleet Solutions bunch, who despite being by telephone call that I was given permission to make the repair directly don't seem to have registered this in any of their correspondence. Anyhow, I want to know what I should do. - just pay - no chance of fighting this. - I live overseas, can i just ignore it? The rental was a debit card transaction not credit card. - agree a settlement whereby I deduct lost retail time and money already paid for repair. - refuse to pay on the basis that I already paid for the repair, which was all that was required according to Autoglass. If I take this last route, which I am most inclined to, what should I say or not say. Are there any relevant consumer protections which I should be aware of? Many thanks in anticipation
  7. Hi there, I am posting here as I have a bit of a dilemma which is getting me confused hopefully some of the learned forum members can help out. I went to Cape Town on holiday arriving on the 10th march. I booked a car online with orbitz for a BMW 1 series for 10days. The price for this was R4616.07- £256.08 I have an email which states it is my 'purchase receipt' 1. When I got to Sixt/First car rental at Cape town they told me thats a mistake we dont have that car at that price even though the payment hadnt gone through at that time it appears now looking back the payment went through 9 days later so in theory...I was entitled to that BMW at that price as I had already paid for it! BTW I paid for this on my TSB credit card! 2. After a 12 hour journey and no sleep I wanted to get the car and get the hell out so after an hour talking with the manager. I was sold another car a Toyota for R4040- £224.44. I paid for this on my Barclays debit card, by this time my TSB credit card was maxed out! and would not got through. 3. Now back home and going through my statements: I see the £256.08 Orbitz charged to TSB & £334.87 (R6192) charged to my Barclays Debit card as you can see this is not the R4040 which I was supposed to be charged for the Toyota. So I have two incorrect payments HELP! Credit card and debit card wont do anything until I contact said companies. Major gripe! and waste of my time Thanks for taking time to read and any help is really appreciated have a great day!
  8. My initial impression of Sixt was great but within 1 week of receiving a final invoice for my rental has now been completely ruined. I will never use them again as their post-rental policy seems to just be all about making up profit margins. They advertise apparently cheaper prices to get the business but then claw the money back to be profitable afterwards. 1. No one explained about needing to return the vehicle clean - an omission which has now cost me £50+20% VAT. I've been sent emails since telling me they expect all customers to thoroughly check T&Cs before renting a car, so why was it the Return Fuel Fill was clearly explained to me by the woman at the desk, but the cleaning wasn't? I have received no receipts or evidence to justify how a car can cost £50+VAT for cleaning, they have just automatically taken it out of my £150 deposit. 2. Vehicle check process for pre-existing damages on car pick-up: I did the vehicle check together with a nice man who handed the car over to me. He was about to say everything was OK when I spotted the scratch in the paintwork down to the metal on the mirror on the driver's side. I was expecting him to do something on his hand-held device, for there to be a proper record taken of this, like with other car rental companies. So I was a bit surprised when instead he hand-wrote on the back of my Driver's Contract piece of paper "Scratch in paintwork on driver's side mirror" on the back of my contract, he signed it, and dated it (20th June 2014) and I also signed this at his request. He then told me when I dropped the car off to leave that same piece of paper on the dashboard of the car with an additional note on it to say "Reminder: this is your note on 20th to say scratch in mirror was pre-existing at time of pick-up" and for me to sign, date this and leave it in the car. His words to me were "This note will mean I will remember this was already done and I won't charge you for the scratch".This did not feel right at the time, but I trusted the nice man so just went along with his instructions. I was the one who spotted this damage at the point of pick-up and exactly followed to the letter all of the instructions provided by their member of staff. 3. 1 week later after I'd received a final invoice Head office emailed me a Damage Report claiming I had scratched the car - I hadn't, this had been the fore-mentioned pre-existing damage which was noted at the pick-up. After sending me a series of blunt automated emails, some of which were in very poor English, asking me what photos I'd taken etc - the head office team then bothered to contact the Shepherds Bush shop to check facts and the matter was cleared up. When I was contacted by head office with the Damage Report the head office had not spoken to the local office. The only good thing in all of this was the local shop staff did inform head office about the piece of paper and pre-existing damage, so this matter was cleared up, but could have been initially without having to involve me. 4. Only then I received another email saying I'm still going to be charged - an initially unquoted amount - for a full valet of the car - only now drawing my attention to Clause 11.3 of T&Cs (very buried on their website, not explained to me on car pick-up by anyone) to return the car clean "because other people want to use the car after you". Cleaning was never mentioned at pick-up. Returning with a full fuel tank for example was, but nothing about returning it fully cleaned. I've never heard of a car rental company who doesn't clean a car between hires or puts that cost onto the customer or uses this as an excuse to take money out of a deposit. Reminds me of unscrupulous estate agents who keep your deposit for 'cleaning' once you leave a rental property. 5. When I asked Head Office how much they were going to charge me for 'cleaning' they couldn't answer, they referred me to the local branch. This morning I woke up to an automated email ("We friendly ask for your understanding that we create the invoice in the language of the rental location" - just an example of poor English in communication) with an invoice for £50+VAT for cleaning which they'll just take out of my £150 deposit. Who pays £50 to clean a car?! 6. My total rental in the end was far more expensive than Avis would have been who I have always used before and would never have put me through this nonsense. 7. Their processes are flaky - it seems now on purpose so that they can put customers into a vulnerable position after the event where they can charge them - The rental contract which included a list of pre-existing damages was given to me by the lady in the shop. This rental agreement with these pre-existing damages only existed as a piece of paper, I have not received anything electronically. The gentleman who met me and handed the vehicle over to me had something on a hand-held device which also listed these items, so it looked like there was an electronic version of the contract there but nothing given to me. I was told to leave behind the only evidence I had which was the handwritten note.
  9. Hi, So I rented a car from SIXT. I took photos of every panel when in the car park before leaving. There were already 8 pieces of reported damage on the vehicle, so identifying anything new was tricky, hence the photos. Upon return, a "new" piece of damage was found (very small - less than 3mmx10mm surface paint scratch, looking like a bit of dirt), and indeed the panel it was on wasn't listed on the pre-hire damage form. I looked back at my photos, and, while quite blurry, they do show the damage pre-hire. So my question is, do the photos take away my liability, or am I still liable for the previous renters damage because I didn't report it at the start of the hire?
  10. I believe that Sixt is trying to rip me off. The facts were as follows: - The rental was for one day for £30 - I did not take the overpriced insurance. - The car was scratched / scuffed / damaged all over. - On return, the car was extremely thoroughly checked (delaying me needing to go to work) - Some non-recorded damage was found. - It was minor scuffing to the wheel arch. - I was asked to sign to check in - I did without being told what I was signing. - Having been informed by email, I complain to the full extent. - Several weeks later I received a bill for £338 for repair. - I have checked their terms and conditions. - The terms say that I am responsible for the "reasonable cost" of repair unto the excess for damage while in my possession. - Sixt say that I signed it in and out and that I am liable. - I have asked for evidence (10 that the repairs are or will be carried out, (2) a discount will be applied because of the the extensive cosmetic work required on the whole car, (3) the cost of the repair they claim is reasonable. - I have received no reply to this but weeks later (after my interim chasing) a further "reminder" to pay the £338 plus a late payment charge came through. My view is that (1) the likelihood is that I did not cause the damage, and (2) the charge is excessive. The whole process defeats the purpose of a convenience hire of a car local to me for the day for a short trip. A car hire cost of £28 with a bill of £338. I am also of the view that their contract and practices may be in breach of unfair consumer contracts legislation. I appreciate that I may be in a weak position re: their checking process and documentation. but my sense is that there is a possibility of sharp practice going on. I am minded to charge Sixt for my admin time - which as a busy professional is likely to significantly exceed the amount they will recover from me if successful in their claim. Has anyone else had similar experiences of Sixt? I had used them previously - mainly outside the UK - and found them to be excellent, with great cars, reasonable rates, smooth processes and polite employees. Sadly, I am unlikely to use them again.
  11. Hi guys, any advice here would be most welcome. Many thanks in advance. I hired a car from Sixt for two days. They are now trying to make me pay £182 for a scratch on the mirror which was there when we hired the car. When we hired the car we were told there was a chip in the windscreen and I walked around half the vehicle, my partner walked around the other side, and when he asked if I had mentioned the damage, I wrongly assumed that he meant the windscreen and so we hired the car under the impression that all damage on the car had been noted down correctly. Only when we returned the car did we determine that this was not the case but we were told by the Sixt staff that the damage was absolutely minimal, in fact only the paint was chipped on the mirror, an area 2cm long and only 3mm wide, and this would cost a maximum of £30. I signed a document to say that the damage was not my fault as this is the case, and I am prepared to defend this vigorously in court if this is necessary as the damage is not my doing and I should not have to pay for this. I wrote asking if they could check the CCTV footage of us hiring the damaged car in order to confirm that this is the true situation. I am also aware that it is normal under these circumstances to provide various quotes for any work, not simply to quote what I am sure you will agree is a ridiculous amount of money for a tiny scratch on a mirror housing. I have checked with trade professionals and for damage to a mirror as outlined, it would not cost any more than the £30 which was quoted by Sixt staff at the time of discussion the damage.I have asked Sixt about this and they have not replied. I emailed and spelt out the entire situation but they ignored my email and have now sent me a final reminder threatening court action. I am a good responsible customer who did my best to take good care of the vehicle I rented and I returned the car in the same state that I hired it. Any advice on what to do now would be good, I have emailed the person who sent the letter again and also emailed the general customer services. Do you think I will be liable to pay all of this huge and ridiculous amount? I am currently on JSA and this is a fortune for me!
  • Create New...