Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've just taken another look through the stuff they sent me in response to the CPR request, the notice of assignment isn't the original , it's on a plain sheet of non letterhead paper, in fact it could have easily been typed up by Overdales, or anybody really.  On the other side of the paper are standard Lowell terms and conditions that are only half on the page. Should this be part of my defence?
    • I agree with my site team colleague above. We need to know all the facts including which company you are dealing with and an explanation of the problem. It really is too difficult to start giving speculative advice on some speculative problem that you have laid out as a generalised scenario
    • Moorcroft are sending a rep round to my house this week. What is the best way to handle this? Ignore and not answer the door or engage with them? I haven't acknowledged anything since I started on this journey and defaulted on my cards in December 2022
    • Very sorry but with the best will in the world, I don't think we can at all understand what the situation is here. Please can you try rewriting this on a word processor and maybe send a copy of what you have written to a friend and working out together so that the story is complete but as brief as possible. Maybe a list of dates as well. If you can do that and then repost your story we can have a look
    • Hi, I am a local authority tenant and was in a 3 bed house. At the end of last year, my last child moved out and so did my spouse as we are now going through a divorce which meant that I was in the house alone and decided that I needed to downsize not only for myself but to offer the property to a family that needed it. I registered on the local authority housing bidding site as i was asked to do and I was accepted and given a priority banding as I was downsizing and they were desperate for my house. I have been extremely lucky and after about 6 weeks was accepted for a new build from a housing association via the housing gateway. I viewed the property 2 weeks ago and had to sign the tenancy last week when they were doing bulk signups for the houses and that is the day I moved. In between viewing and sign up, I contacted my current local authority landlord and asked how I give notice as I had been accepted for a property I had bid on and was moving.  The lady told me how to do it online and then said that I needed to give a full weeks notice which wasnt a problem as I had enough time.  (I was also told a weeks notice was what i would need to give by another staff member about a month ago when I phoned up for another housing related question.  I dont have any of this in writing.) I have now moved, handed back the keys and I am now being told that I need to give 4 weeks notice which I cannot afford. I hav e spoken to the council again explaining that I was told a week and that to be honest, if I knew they were going to charge me 4 weeks I would not have been able to move and would have stayed in the other house.  I thought I was doing the right thing. They said that calls are recorded and they asked me when I called in and was told a week and they would listen to the telephone conversation and if it was correct what I was told, they would see what they could do to reduce the notice period. They have now emailed me back and said that they have listened to the conversation and the lady said 4 weeks notice and I am liable for 4 weeks rent.  Now I may well of misheard her when I thought she said a full weeks notice she may have said 4 weeks notice but I am sure she said a full weeks notice and i was told a week by another member of staff a few weeks ago. I have emailed her back and said that I may of misheard but I would like to listen to the phone recording myself.  As yet they havent responded. I think its unreasonable for them to make me give 4 weeks when I had to sign the new tenancy with little notice or loose the property.  And it was all done through their gateway, and they will have a tenant in there pretty much straight away getting rent from them. I am on a very low income, I am on my own, I have serious medical issues and I am really getting myself stressed out over this. Any advice would be so appreciated.  Can I insist they let me listed to the recording? RH  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Sixt - post rental hidden costs ** Settled **


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3561 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please have a look at the Supply of Goods and Services Act http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1982/29 – in particular section 15 which says that where a price for services has not been agreed then a reasonable price is all that can be charged.

 

If they gave no indication of the price in the contract then you would only be liable to pay reasonable price for cleaning. I agree that £50 +20% VAT seems extremely excessive.

 

I think that it is reasonable for you to want to challenge this even if it meant taking a claim of it. I can imagine that they would back down. I can't imagine that they would want people to know that they have been successfully challenged because I expect that this is a standard revenue stream for them. For instance, even if it has been cleaned – how does one know that they will then say will yes the cleaning is up to our standard.

 

I suggest that you go round to two or three cleaning/valet services and get quotations for a standard cleaning of that make and model car. Make it clear that you simply want to cleaned, you aren't asking for it to be renovated.

 

I would suggest that you take the cheapest of the quotes and use that as the basis for reclaiming your money. Its up to you how much trouble do want to make but it seems to me that the system is so clearly open to abuse that it would be worth deciding to make a point of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello it's a reasonable question. No definitely not, no smoking. If people smoke they are knowingly breaking rules because the car clearly had no smoking signs in it so that may be a reasonable cost but definitely not in my case. I have a dog so there was some dog hair, we were on holiday in Somerset and had kids in the car with muddy feet and our feet from walking so there was some dirt brought into the car around the foot-wells - but nothing extraordinary, just the results of regular family car use. I accept the car was not clean when I returned it - I just didn't know it had to be or I'd get charged £50+VAT. Whenever I've rented a car in the past from companies like Avis I've always used it in the same way, always returned it in the same kind of 'used' condition, they always clean the car between rentals and don't pass the cost on to the next customer; there was nothing about this situation that gave me any clue this company's policy was any different. This has all come as a very unpleasant surprise.

 

Just out of curiosity, Do you smoke? or did anybody smoke in the car whilst on hire? some companies charge extra to 'de-contaminate' or deep clean a car after hire. If so then this might be a reasonable cost.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Same for me. Hired a car from Montpellier railway station - collected out of hours on a Saturday evening and dropped key 15 days later on a Sunday morning - all as agreed. When invoice came through there was 83 Euro plus 20% tax additional cleaning charge. Apparently sand on the carpets after 15 days at the seaside with two children falls out with normal between hire cleaning. Not a cheap hire at 1000 Euro for auto BMW 320 GT, could at least include basic cleaning. Sixt have rebated 50% of the charge (but not 50% of the tax ...) have now passed the dispute to American Express on the basis that I had not consented to the charge. Watch this space.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...