|
| Enterprise Rent-A-Car damage, noticeable, hood, consistent, supposedly, claim, dent, pre, post, inspection, previous, non-existent, illustrate, minor |
| 9th of Oct, 2011 by User814535 |
On June 20, 2011, my wife picked-up a 2010 Red Chevrolet Cobalt at the Enterprise Rent-A-Car located at 1506 South First Street in Lufkin, TX and noticed no “issues/imperfections†in the car. The car drove well and had no problems. We in fact liked the rental car very much. (This was a rental car that our Kia dealership set us up with while our 2009 Kia Borrego was in their shop for some warranty work.) The pre-inspection with rental agent – “Lauren Spencer†was quick and went well with no “issues/imperfections†noted on the outside of the vehicle. The interior of the vehicle was annotated by Lauren on the “Pre-inspection/rental agreement†paperwork as “Int lightly stainedâ€. My wife left the rental location on June 20, 2011 at 08:29 am and returned the car on July 12, 2011 at 3:23 pm. When checking in/returning the vehicle, the manager – Robert Calhoun went over the vehicle with enough detail to point out only two small “dents†in the upper right portion of the hood near the drivers side door (See attached Vehicle Accident Report as proof). My wife stated that she did not cause the non-visible “dentsâ€. Robert then told her that he would check to see if this “damage†was reported at an earlier time from a previous rental and a few days later he of course reported that no damage had been previously reported and that “you are responsible for the damageâ€. First of all, these two small dents are not even noticeable (see attached pictures as taken by the body shop). I went to the body shop (S & W Collision in Lufkin, TX) for myself and with “Cory the shop representative†right there at the hood (already removed from the car) pointing them (the two dents) out to me and I could not see them. All I saw were the five circles drawn on the hood (see attached pictures) indicating that there were supposedly five “dentsâ€. On the “Vehicle Accident Report†Manager Robert Calhoun clearly stated there are only 2 dents. In addition, BEFORE this vehicle was taken to S & W Collision on Friday July 15, 2011, this same 2010 Red Chevrolet Cobalt was rented out to another individual either late on July 12th (after my wife returned this car) or the next business day on July 13th. This particular rental was returned to the Lufkin, TX Enterprise location on Friday July 15th. Maybe these other three circled dents came from this rental??? Were “dents†annotated on this rental contract as pre-existing??? Maybe it is possible that they caused these 3 extra dents??? Anyway, to show as proof of my claims that the two “dents†are virtually non-existentâ€, I retrieved (with permission of Corey from the body shop) from the body shops’ scrap metal pile; the original hood from this vehicle to illustrate to anyone that will listen to me what we have been trying to say since day one of this entire episode. That being… there is no visible / noticeable damage that can be seen on this hood by any customer that is performing a “normal / routine†pre and post rental vehicle inspection. In my opinion, the accuracy of the vehicle accident report completed by Manager Robert Calhoun is questionable because he only noticed two dents while the body shop indicated there were indeed five dents. My point is that ALL five of these so-called “dents†are so minor and virtually non-existent that even Manager Robert Calhoun did not notice the three “extra†dents on his post rental vehicle inspection. If Manager Robert Calhoun from Enterprise can miss these three extra dents; is it not possible for a “regular person†(customers) to miss all five of these dents? I say yes it is possible. Yes for the customer and yes for Enterprise employees. Honestly, I think that what happened is that (if indeed there are “dents†as circled in the attached photographs) possibly some event occurred prior to my wife renting the vehicle on June 20, 2011 and because these “issues/imperfections†are so minor and un-noticeable the two “dents†as outlined in the Vehicle Accident Report (see attached file) were not highlighted until the vehicle was returned to the Lufkin, TX Enterprise location on July 12th. Having said all of the above, I can say for certainty that if Enterprise Rent-A-Car in Lufkin, TX and the Enterprise Rent-A-Car in Dallas, TX (Damage Recovery Unit) wants some sort of resolution on this claim to satisfy their needs, then they will “take care†of this claim and stop sending my wife and myself these claim letters asking us to send them $1166.16. I can tell you that this will not
happen. It will not happen for the following reasons: 1) We did not cause the “issues†as stated in the attached claim number DX5107V96. 2) We certainly will not be paying for any/all of the detailed charges (see attached file) as outlined in the body shops estimate/bill for charges like: left fender mud guard, right fender mud guard, left fender outside, right fender outside, front bumper cover, lights, etc. THE HOOD WAS “SUPPOSEDLY†THE ISSUE NOT ALL OF THESE “EXTRA†ITEMS WHICH JUST INCREASES THE BILL! 3) The pre and post inspection process is not (and was not in this case) thorough and consistent. 4) The Vehicle Accident Report is not accurate, 5) This vehicle in question was rented to another party after my wife returned the car and BEFORE if was turned over to S & W Collision in Lufkin, TX for repair. This action leaves open the possibility that the three “extra dents/issues†could have been caused by this party. This was the first AND last time I/we EVER have any association with Enterprise Rent-A-Car. I (we) look forward to your response Enterprise….
|
|
|
|
Post your Comment
|
|
|
