Budget threatens customer with lawsuit, garnishment after he questions damage claim

Just in case you thought my recent critique of the car rental industry’s damage claims practices was over the top — and I assure you, it wasn’t — let me introduce you to Jonathan Kiluk.

He rented a late-model, four-door Toyota Camry from Budget Rent-A-Car in Ontario, Calif., earlier this year and is now being pursued by the company in a way that you might find a little troubling.

Kiluk had researched his insurance needs and determined that he’d be covered under his auto policy. So when he picked up his rental on March 11, he decline the optional (and for Budget, highly-profitable) coverage.

“I signed all of the paperwork, gave them my ID and credit card and was given the key at the counter,” he says. “The man at the counter told me where the car was parked in the lot, and the guard at the gate verified my paperwork.”

That’s it? Weren’t they going to do a walkaround, to inspect the Camry for any pre-existing damage? No.

Kiluk assumed everything was “fine” with the car. After all, it was a 2012 model with 4,659 miles on the odometer — what could possibly be wrong with it? He didn’t conduct an inspection of his own or take any pictures of the vehicle.

That proved to be an expensive mistake.

When we took the car back, the young kid in the parking lot stated that he found a small dent and would have to fill out an incident report.

I was upset at this point because they didn’t check the car before and I know we didn’t have any issues on the trip. I filled out the incident report stating “I believe that the small dents were present at check-out.

We did not hit anything.

Still, Budget sent him a bill for the damage. And it was firm — maybe a little too firm — in its demand. It insisted on being paid $689 to repair the ding (see photo, above) which included a $100 “administrative” fee.

And if he didn’t? The letter seems to suggest something horrible would happen, although I’m not a lawyer. Read it yourself (PDF).

Something didn’t look right to me. I can’t imagine that little ding costing $689 to repair, but beyond that, Budget hadn’t really shown that the damage happened on Kiluk’s watch.

I contacted the company on his behalf. It didn’t respond directly to me, but send him the following letter (PDF).

Here’s an excerpt:

We must demand payment in the above amount. This sum is PAYABLE IMMEDIATELY.

Should this office find it necessary to seek a judgment against you, and same is entered, that judgment will be recorded and a lien on any real property you own may result. Additionally, we will be forced to pursue other legal remedies such a wage garnishment, motor vehicle levies, execution upon your real and personal property wherever located.

Contact this office immediately to make arrangements to pay or arrange for payments on your outstanding debt.

Kiluk just wants a better explanation for this bill. If he makes a claim on his auto insurance, it’ll probably affect his rates. And besides, if he didn’t damage the vehicle, why should he have to pay?

Both parties made mistakes, the way I see it. Kiluk should have inspected the car and if the dent was discovered at the end of his rental, he needed to take responsibility for it. The $100 “administrative” charge — sometimes referred to as a “junk” fee — is negotiable. The rest? Probably not.

Budget’s approach to this customer is so aggressive and borderline hostile, it’s no wonder people have grown to dislike car rental companies. It needs to tone things down if it wants to stay friendly with its own customers.

Update (4:15 p.m.): We have a resolution. Budget has contacted me, and Kiluk confirms the fix.

They had admitted that they were wrong for not completing a walk around and stated that they could not see the dent on video when I left, or returned the car. They still tried to get me to pay a part of the bill, but I did not give in.

I asked the man, “If you were in my shoes and felt like you were not responsible for the damage would you feel it was fair to pay a portion of the bill?”

He replied “No.”

I said, “Okay, there is my answer.” He said he would get back to me at the end of the day.

Budget did get back to him, and has dropped this claim.

  • SooZeeQ

    Even after reading your site, I cannot guarantee that I would think of walking around or taking pictures, either.
     
    Maybe rental agencies need to have paperwork where the client signs after *both* the agent and the client do a check of the car.

  • ClareClare

    How anybody can blame the OP in this case is beyond me.  If Budget KNOWS that the “damage did not exist at time of rental,” PROVE IT!  Show the OP that the damage was NOT there when he rented the car!  And if you can’t prove it, Budget, shut up and leave this poor guy alone!

    Fact is, they DON’T know, and to hide their own incompetence (because they should have done an inspection with the OP before he took the car), they are blustering in order to intimidate the OP into paying.  They’re acting just like my Italian cousins in NYC.  All that they’re missing here is a baseball bat and a Brooklyn accent.  Kapeesh?

    The burden is on Budget to prove that the OP did the damage.  It’s NOT on the OP to prove that he didn’t!  This is a shameless scam, pure and simple.  Thank you Chris, for linking to the PDF of the letter, so the whole world can see the sleaze-bags that call themselves a rental-car company.  You’re shining a light on slime that normally prefers to hide its activity under rocks. 

  • Michael__K

    A checkout process like the OP describes is unfortunately too common.

    You’re told authoratatively (before you’ve seen the keys or the car) that you’re receiving a car with a full tank and no damage and asked to put your iniitials in 5 or 8 places.   If you’re lucky, the rental agent advises you to double check the condition of the car, but they may not even do that.

    If when you reach the car you do notice a discrepancy (and in my experience, it’s more often a discrepancy with the fuel level) there is no penalty or deterrent to the car company for their sloppiness.  And it’s often clear that they KNOW they were being (at least) sloppy because they often don’t even bother to double check the fuel or damage discrepancy when you come back and report it to them.

    I’m all in favor of cameras at checkin and checkout.  But there’s a low-tech solution that I believe would greatly reduce this problem real fast: if they make you sign first, and you find a blatant discrepancy when you check for yourself, they should owe you a little cash back for their mistake.

  • jennj99738

     Sounds like “protection money,” doesn’t it?  I have auto insurance and use a credit card that provides primary coverage as well.  I would advise my credit card  company and insurer about my doubts and let them handle it as they see fit.  I don’t need to give more money to the rental agency. 

  • http://twitter.com/johntbaker John Baker

    Their prove is his signed contract where he states there is no damage

  • Michael__K

    Interesting.  I’m not sure I can blame them for continuing to rent out the car with minor damage.

    But I’d love to see all the rental agreements after the OP’s and before any repairs were made.  If any of those rentals didn’t notate the damage either, then that would be evidence of a systemically broken process.

  • Michael__K

    I would call that one piece of evidence, not proof.

    Chances are he had to initial that before he ever had access to inspect the car.

  • sershev

    I had a couple of rental car damages in the past. However, I immediately notified my insurance company and credit card company. Both have highly trained professionals dealing with rental car damages on daily basis. I didn’t have to deal with rental car company, the insurance company and/or credit card were able to solve all the issues and remove all administrative and loss of use fees, they also send payments directly and between both coverages there were any out of pocket expenses.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

     not hardly.

  • emanon256

    I believe this statement to be false. 
     
    I worked in A/R for many years and went through much training on payment legality.  While cons are legal tender, there is no law requiring a business to accept all forms of currency.  After all, I could go to a restaurant and only have a $50 and when they tell me they don’t accept any bills over $20, I could simply walk out and say my debt is discharged; they refused my money which was legal tender.  I was trained that we could refuse payment if accepting it would cause undue hardship (such as the cost of sorting and a courier service for all the pennies, or not being able to make change for other customers after breaking a $50) or if we suspected criminal activity (Payments just under $10,000 to avoid a Form 8300 or refusal to accept form 8300 on a payment over 10,000).
     
    I’m curious as to what Carvers stance is as an attorney, this was all at training courses run through the US Department of treasury, which conform to policy, but not actual law. 
     
    And in Ravens case, Good for you!  I hate trailers that stink like feet and I hate the out-of-towners tax.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

    Why?

    That doesn’t make sense.  You the customer are perfectly capable of inspecting the car yourself..

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

     That’s an awful lot of money to spend on crappy insurance.  Why not simply get a credit card with primary insurance or lower the deductible on your regular auto insurance.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

    It wouldn’t matter.  They would simply introduce their business records and state that its their policy to note and damage found on the cars on into the records.  The lack of any notations would shift the burden to the OP.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

    If he initialed it before he inspected the car that’s his fault.  Besides don’t most places do that at the guard shack?

    But John Baker is more or less correct.  By signing the document and failing to note any damage, he’s sunk as far as any visible damage is concerned. 

    He might stand a chance against the type of damage that a regular inspection wouldn’t reveal such as damage to an SUV roof, or something that required you to crawl underneath the car.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

    My experiences are very different.   The damage report, full gas, etc. all occur at the gate, after I am in the car, having had a chance to inspect for damage, etc. I’ve rented cars all over the country from Hertz, Budget, Dollar, and Alamo.

    The one exception was at on of the low rent places in Los Angeles.  They were the only people with cars.  The cars were in a dark alley without a guard gate. I couldn’t see the car enough to inspect it.  I drove to a gas station and did the inspection there.

  • judyserienagy

    STUPID.  These companies are behaving STUPIDLY.  They’re getting away with this stupid behaviour because they don’t have to deal with their customer face to face. I have probably rented 500 cars in my lifetime and I’ve never checked one of them before I left the lot; I counted on the integrity of the company I rented from.  Never have I had a single problem.  From now on, I’m going to print up a form and have the agent sign it before I leave the lot.  Grasping morons.

  • judyserienagy

    STUPID.  These companies are behaving STUPIDLY.  They’re getting away with this stupid behaviour because they don’t have to deal with their customer face to face. I have probably rented 500 cars in my lifetime and I’ve never checked one of them before I left the lot; I counted on the integrity of the company I rented from.  Never have I had a single problem.  From now on, I’m going to print up a form and have the agent sign it before I leave the lot.  Grasping morons.

  • Raven_Altosk

    Yup. I was going to pay, but I wasn’t going to make it easy on them.

    The two women working in the trailer as “dispatch” or “reception” or whatever they were had less teeth than they had brain cells. They counted the coins and signed off on the ticket as soon as I threatened to call the state cops.

    Lesson of the day kids: Don’t get pushed around by redneck police forces in towns of less than 300 people where everyone is related.

  • TonyA_says

    Be careful what you ask for. The TSA might just grab the chance to inspect the car before you can get and return it. That would be a grand waste of time.

  • Fishplate

    Without getting too far off topic, the difference is between a debt and a payment for service.  See http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Currency/Pages/legal-tender.aspx for more information.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

    Good luck with that.

  • MarlaM

    I absolute agree with you.  In my opinion, if a car rental place wants to charge for damage, it is their responsiblity to do a walk around when renting the car.  It is in the renter’s best interest to also take photos, but I feel that if the rental company wants to charge a renter for damage, they have to have proof that the damage was done while the renter had the car.

  • ClareClare

    THANKS for posting the link!  I sent them an email saying much the same thing as you this afternoon, and within just 3 hrs had a response–about an hour before Chris added his update, indicating that Budget had finally seen the light:

    “Thank you for contacting Budget Customer Service.”I have read the article
    that you referred to and it is very disturbing, but you are only getting the
    customer’s side of the story. We are a large business and we have to protect
    our fleet of vehicles, these are our assets. You would not believe what some
    of our customer’s (sic) do to, leave in or use our vehicles for. We have a clause
    in our contracts that states the renter is responsible for returning our
    vehicles in the same condition that they rented them in or we will access
    further charges for repair or detailing.”You are definitely entitled
    to your opinion and it is your choice weather to ever rent from us again,
    but also be aware that there are two sides to every
    story.”Sincerely,Susan VelascoCustomer Service
    Representative”

    Well, Chris does tell us the customer’s side of the story, it’s true.  But the OP asked Budget for THEIR side of the story, and we can see in b&w what they told him.  Then Chris asked Budget for THEIR side, and he printed here what they told him.  It’s not as if they have never been contacted and given the opportunity to explain themselves–the whole problem is, they were, and they did!  And it’s precisely in giving us their side of the story that Budget has shown us how sleazy they are! 

  • MarlaM

    But why is it only the customer’s responsibility to inspect the car?  Shouldn’t the rental agency also have a responsbility? It seems to me that if they choose not to inspect, it seems to me that should mean they are waiving their right to claim damage when the car is returned. 

  • TonyA_says

     LOL. Sounds like you used to work for a car rental place. You know the ropes. Anyway I saved the note “minor damage — ding or dent or scratch or mark  — on each body panel” on my phone. I will use it next time.

  • Rebecca Jay

    Should you maybe black out Mr. Kiluk’s address on those letters?

  • Michael__K

    I’ve rented from several locations where they won’t give you the keys until you initial– even if you specifically request to see the car first.

    The guard method is generally used at large (usually airport) locations.  Not at tiny airports, small suburban locations, or urban locations with shared-public parking.

  • Michael__K

    I’ve rented from several locations where they won’t give you the keys until you initial– even if you specifically request to see the car first.

    The guard method is generally used at large (usually airport) locations.  Not at tiny airports, small suburban locations, or urban locations with shared-public parking.

  • http://www.talestoldfromtheroad.com/ Dick Jordan

    So, if you hadn’t intervened, Chris, would Budget have “made things right” with this customer? I doubt it. 

  • http://www.talestoldfromtheroad.com/ Dick Jordan

    So, if you hadn’t intervened, Chris, would Budget have “made things right” with this customer? I doubt it. 

  • Michael__K

    Sounds like most of your experiences have been at major airports. 

    I’ve sometimes rented weekly or monthly at small “lower rent” (or at least lower-taxed) suburban and urban locations.  Those hardly ever have gate attendants.

  • Michael__K

    Sounds like most of your experiences have been at major airports. 

    I’ve sometimes rented weekly or monthly at small “lower rent” (or at least lower-taxed) suburban and urban locations.  Those hardly ever have gate attendants.

  • bodega3

    This is my experience, too.  Now HNL no longer staffs the guard houses.  Hertz in HNL doesn’t worry about dents…even heard them say it a few weeks ago.  Also, with Hertz Gold, you don’t have to worry, but if there is a damage report paper in the glovebox, I fill it out and if there is a guard, have them sign it.  In PHL the guard actually filled it out and put an x everywhere on the diagram just to make me feel better :-)

  • jmastron

    While unfortunate that it took a while to get to this point, that the uncalled-for threats were issued and Chris had to get involved, the actual final answer is how *all* of these should be handled — rental company responsible for showing photo/video evidence that there A) is damage at return time (and not hours later after employees have driven it), and B) was not the same damage at checkout.  The surveillance video at checkout and checkin serves this purpose fine — anything not visible from a normal 5-10 foot distance on a good video camera really isn’t “damage” to begin with, in my book.

    That’s not to say you shouldn’t also take your own pictures as evidence, which I do, just that the rental company should have the primary burden of proof before they make their claim.

  • Joe_D_Messina

    This like a 1000 times over.  The fact that some people can’t grasp that simple fact shows why some people blindly sign any piece of paper they’re handed and drive away without looking at the car.

  • Joe_D_Messina

    I’ve ran across the street blindfolded 500 times before and never been struck by a car. Thus, I highly recommend you do the same.

  • TonyA_says

    In a truly decent world, what you are saying is what should happen. Customers do not expect their vendors to prey on them. And, vendors do not expect customers to be cheats either. Unfortunately, because transactions have become so impersonal, there is so much mistrust in common day to day dealings. Twenty years ago I would never have believed you if you told me I had to take pictures of my rental before I leave the lot and when I return it. Now, people are telling me I am fool if I don’t do it. So much for common decency and honesty. Looks like the bad genes are winning.

  • TonyA_says

    In a truly decent world, what you are saying is what should happen. Customers do not expect their vendors to prey on them. And, vendors do not expect customers to be cheats either. Unfortunately, because transactions have become so impersonal, there is so much mistrust in common day to day dealings. Twenty years ago I would never have believed you if you told me I had to take pictures of my rental before I leave the lot and when I return it. Now, people are telling me I am fool if I don’t do it. So much for common decency and honesty. Looks like the bad genes are winning.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

     But why is it only the customer’s responsibility to inspect the car?  Shouldn’t the rental agency also have a responsbility?
    —————————————

    That’s an easy one.  Just flip it around.  It’s the same as when you give your car to a valet.  Since the valet is liable for any damages, the valet, not you, inspects your car to make sure that he notes any damages. 

    If neither of you inspect the car, and the car is returned with damage, you’re going to want that fixed, and rightfully so.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

     But why is it only the customer’s responsibility to inspect the car?  Shouldn’t the rental agency also have a responsbility?
    —————————————

    That’s an easy one.  Just flip it around.  It’s the same as when you give your car to a valet.  Since the valet is liable for any damages, the valet, not you, inspects your car to make sure that he notes any damages. 

    If neither of you inspect the car, and the car is returned with damage, you’re going to want that fixed, and rightfully so.

  • TonyA_says

    I am quite shocked Ms.Velasco did not use a form letter. You know you are talking to a real person when she wrote ACCESS instead of ASSESS and WEATHER instead of WHETHER. Maybe calling India would have resulted in better service.

  • TonyA_says

    I am quite shocked Ms.Velasco did not use a form letter. You know you are talking to a real person when she wrote ACCESS instead of ASSESS and WEATHER instead of WHETHER. Maybe calling India would have resulted in better service.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

     My stance as an attorney is that you said it better than I could.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

     My stance as an attorney is that you said it better than I could.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

    The page that you mentioned doesn’t support that contention at all. However, I may be missing something.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

     Admittedly, my post was presupposing a US rental agency.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

     Admittedly yes.  I don’t rent where I live because I have a car, and when I travel I rent at the airport for convenience.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OEPJGQPIEB75YYDE5CJY6R3VFE Carver Clark Farrow II

    I guess the power of the press works.  

  • BMG4ME

    I agree.  In 30 years of car rentals I have rarely inspected the car before, and I should not need to and have not needed to.  When renting a car there is a mutual trust between the supplier and the user.  If the car company does not bother to check the car when it goes out then they are displaying either that they trust the customer to tell the truth or that they don’t care about damage. Either way, it’s not the customer’s responsibility to pay for damage that can’t be proven to be done by them.

  • Michael__K

    I defer to your knowledge of ONT (do you know if the other companies like Budget have adjacent lots with similar setups?)

    If memory serves, TYS and MCO (Avis) are examples of airports where I needed to sign to get the keys (though I probably could have asked for the plate and hiked to the locked car first if I insisted)

    Also had this experience a few months ago at a hotel/resort (in Nevada) that had a rental desk on site (there’s often only one person on duty and they are loathe to leave the desk).