Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi   With a SAR all you have to do is ask for 'ALL DATA' (this way it does not matter what format they hold that data whether it be digital, email, telephone calls (recorded), written etc).   They then have 30 Days to comply once they have acknowledged your SAR Request (that is unless they require ID Verification) which the 30 Days time limit does not start until they have verified your ID if requested)   Also can I add in DHL response in post#36 I hate it when any Company/Business etc. has the nerve to use the get out clause of 'Human Error'.    This is not the case as it was 'Maladministration' by DHL' not 'Human Error' as stated to you, irrespective of who/which employee of DHL made the 'Human Error' the buck stops with DHL as who/which employee made that error was Employed by DHL.
    • pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform. [if mcol is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] .  register as an individual  note the long gateway number given  then log in .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform .  defend all  leave jurisdiction unticked   goto the defence filing section  file the following:     1 The Claimant's claim was issued on (insert date).  2 The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act 1980.  . If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant. .  3 The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £[insert figure from their POC]  or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied. .. ..ends..   dx          
    • I passed on the article and link to friend. Between us we will now try get the required info to the correct location so that they (whoever in the Govt) can sort out what he is owed. I will keep you updated.  This thread may help others in similar situations. Ethel Street - very helpful research.  Thank you.  Seems like you came up trumps!
    • numerous erudio/drydens claimform threads here already - use our search top right.   your appears to be statute barred as you've never heard of erudio so would not have deferred since your last direct deferment to SLC in 2013    if you wish to bother to even send CCA/CPR that's upto you but the bottom line is to erudio you've ignored everything to date yoy might also ignore a claimform.   but ofcourse you are not!!   if the above is true   pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform. [if mcol is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] .  register as an individual  note the long gateway number given  then log in .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform .  defend all  leave jurisdiction unticked   goto the defence filing section  file the following: 1 The Claimant's claim was issued on (insert date).  2 The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act 1980.  . If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant. .  3 The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £[insert figure from their POC]  or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied. .. ..ends..   dx      
    • Well I would want my £50 back also but hey ho if your satisfied its been resolved.....there was no way you could ever be liable anyway as your contract was with TC not RC.   Thread title updated.   Andy
  • Our picks

bigkahuna666

Sixt car hire charging for damage that I didn't do

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 959 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

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.

Screen Shot 2017-06-06 at 22.09.35.png

Screen Shot 2017-06-06 at 22.12.49.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

simply tell them the damage was there when you took the vehicle

 

 

they will have to prove by photos that it was not


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

unfortunately I signed something on the agents PDA on our return to acknowledge the damage. Can I still refuse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have drafted an email response to SIXT telling them the course of events and that I am not assuming liability. Furthermore, that I know the damage was there before and that they would have to prove to me in photos that it wasn't.

 

I just wanted to double check that I should send it, even though I put my signature under the agents comment on his PDA on the return of the vehicle. I hope they didn't trick me into assuming liability with that signature. :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i would doubt it.

 

 

the truth will out..


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...