The latest car rental scam: hail damage?

A few years ago, car rental companies made a small but profitable change to their contracts. They said if one of their vehicles was damaged by an Act of God, you were on the hook for the car.

Since then, I’ve received reports from time to time about hail damage claims that may or may not be legit. Usually they get worked out long before I have to get involved — after a little back-and-forth, the claim is quietly dropped because the car rental company can’t be sure the hailstorm happened before or after the drop-off.

But Spencer Gorman’s case was a little different. In September, he rented a Nissan SUV from Enterprise in downtown Philadelphia. When he returned it, he says an Enterprise representative told him he needed to fill out a damage claim form since there had been a hail storm in the area. He says he began taking pictures of the vehicle, which he claims was undamaged by hail.

“I knew something was wrong,” he says. “I was asked to leave and she threatened to call the police when I started [taking] the photos.”

Gorman says Enterprise moved quickly on its claim. By the time he phoned his insurance company half an hour later, the car rental company had already filed a claim, saying there had been hail damage to the vehicle.

“The next day I noticed a $500 charge on my credit card, which had also been charged at around 4 p.m., just after my insurance company was called.”

Gorman searched for evidence of hailstorms within a 150-mile radius of his home, but couldn’t find any. His insurance company had doubts about the validity of the claim, and after conducting its own investigation, refused to cover it.

Then Gorman received a package from Enterprise with copies of photos of his car, none of which showed any damage to the car, he says.

I received a bill for $2,575, which had the $500 already deducted, and a nasty threatening letter saying I was responsible for damage to the car. There was nothing about hail being mentioned.

I am accused of damage to the right fender, the left fender, the liftgate, the hood, the roof, the pillars rocker and floor, headliner right and left sun visor and the map lamp, as well as the left and right inside panel.

No point of impact is mentioned, no accident, but the odometer is logged in at 15,968. I turned the car in at 15,216 miles.

Gorman thinks this is a scam. I asked Enterprise if it could review his case.

A representative called him back and here’s how the conversation went, according to Gorman.

The person you called on my behalf called me. He was rude and said, ‘Enterprise has every right to use black lights or whatever methods they deem necessary to see damage that a customer may not see.’

He said, ‘Enterprise has every right to charge renters for this damage.’

He said, ‘Just because damage is not visible at the time of rental does not excuse the renter. The contract is ironclad and Enterprise does not negotiate.’

That’s a strange response.

Certainly, a car rental company has the right to inspect for damage any way it sees fit, although black lights seem a little over the top. I agree, too, that Enterprise has the right to charge for damage to a car.

But there’s no excuse for being rude about it. And driving a car another 700 miles before making the repairs strikes me as odd.

This isn’t the first car rental hail damage claim I’ve received in the last few weeks. Are car rental companies capitalizing on the weather? If they are, it seems like a stupid way to make extra money. The law will catch up to them, eventually. Indeed, Gorman has taken this case to the FBI, asserting that Enterprise is engaging in insurance fraud.

I’m not sure. I haven’t seen photos of the car, and Enterprise’s response to my request for a review is so out of character, I just can’t believe it would act that way.

Is Enterprise trying to scam Spencer Gorman?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • TonyA_says

    He went incognito now. Changed his name to Guest.
    I hope Enterprise does not fire him for speaking his mind.

  • TonyA_says

    LOL! Not Rich but drowning in debt.

  • Cybrsk8r

    I’ve used this too. It’s a flat charge for up about 30 days, and about 52,000 vehicle value.

  • Cybrsk8r

    What exactly is the point of a black light. I mean, are they accusing him of relieving himself on the car?

  • Cybrsk8r

    Wow. That a whole lot of “belief” on your part.

  • LeeAnneClark

    I strongly suspect it was Enterprise that made him delete his profiles and stop speaking as an Enterprise employee in here. Most corporations don’t take too kindly to employees using social media to speak on their behalf without permission. And given the severely anti-customer slant of his posts, I highly doubt Aaron Miller was approved to represent Enterprise on social media. Just take a quick look at the Enterprise Facebook page – the staff who run that page take a completely opposite, customer-oriented approach, far more in line with the way most corporations want to be represented on social media.

    As for whether or not he got fired…if he was, then he should have considered that risk before he came in here and basically called Mr. Gorman a liar, and spoke to us Enterprise customers as if we were nothing more than annoyances to him and his company. What happens when you tell a customer that they are nothing more than annoyance? They stop being your customer.

  • Julie Northrop

    I’m sure that LeeAnne is going to be so hurt by your insult. You must be a he-man woman hater who has to resort to insults every time a strong and intelligent woman has something to say. Run along little boy, I’m sure mommy and daddy want their computer back.

  • Julie Northrop

    Hey LeeAnne,
    Apparently you have multiple personalities. Mr. Guest here called you a women. I guess they’ll let anyone work at Enterprise. I always thought that the singular form was WOMAN, but I guess Mr. Guest got his diploma from a Cracker Jack box. Mr. Guest, I suggest going back to school and take an English class or two. Or, better yet let’s sic Raven on him.
    DISCLAIMER: The opinions stated are mine and mine alone. They do not reflect the views of the posters on this blog.

  • LeeAnneClark

    LOL Julie the funniest part about his “insult” is that I couldn’t possibly be offended by being accused of calling TSA agents evil. I’m proud of the fact that recognize evil when I see it standing around in a blue smurf suit, wearing a fake tin badge, snapping its nasty blue gloves before it forcibly gropes the sexual organs of innocent passengers.

    Now if he’d called me a TSA agent…THAT I would find offensive!

    Nor am I offended by being called a “left-wing lunatic”. Given the outcome of last week’s election, it would appear that we lefties are in the majority…or, to put it another way, we lunatics are now running the asylum! ;-)

  • jmastron

    I have overregulation as much as anyone, but I think it’s time for a clear law spelling out the rights and responsibilities in alleged damage cases. This one is very clearly a scam (to the point that I wish the police would show up and arrest the individual employees for criminal fraud).

    I’d suggest:

    1) Damage must be clearly substantiated by the one alleging it, with dated photographs at rental and return time clearly showing the difference. Yes, we should still take our own photos, but that doesn’t absolve the company of proving their claim. Many companies do this already with multiple cameras at the exit station, so there’s no technological bar to this; if they’re prevented from claiming damage otherwise they will install them.

    2) Damage must be “real”, not wear and tear. Minor scratches and dings are simply part of owning and using a car, especially in a city. I’d suggest it has to be obvious from, say, 10 feet away. This would mean that most “hail damage” doesn’t really need to be repared; nobody cares if there are some minor dents on the roof of the car that they don’t look at anyway. It would have to break through the paint to matter, IMHO.

    3) Costs must be in line with the incremental damage and need to fix. Unless the company never rents out a car with a scratch (or offers a substantial discount for taking such a car), they simply don’t need to spend $800 to fix it right then and there (and they usually don’t anyway). Costs should be discounted by the fact that normal people would be fixing a handful of issues at once before selling the (now 3-4 year old) car.

    4) Damage from “acts of god” has to be a result of the actions of the renter, and something that wouldn’t have happened to the car otherwise. Parking a car outside is a normal activity. If a city has a hailstorm, or a flood, and all of the other cars the agency chose to leave on the lot are “damaged”, then perhaps the renter isn’t responsible. I’m open on this one, but again, while a flooded out car does need to be totaled and replaced, one with a few pockmarks on the roof doesn’t.

    If the agencies aren’t willing to police themselves and be fair to their customers, then unfortunately a law like this is going to be necessary.

  • Red Hunt

    Wow, scary stuff. I like the ‘go ahead call the cops’ approach. I hear about these scams a lot, but have never had trouble with rentals. I even had one that did have damage (just some rubber stuff torn), I showed the guy right away and he could tell it wasn’t my fault…no worries. My on-the-road scam came from driving for ‘Hit the Road’ car delivery last year, sketchy operations there, worse than rental companies.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jason-Hanna/100000038010477 Jason Hanna

    Totally disagree with you that hail damage is “Minor dings and scratches”. Google images of hail damage to a car, and tell me if you’d consider that ‘minor’ to your own vehicle.. It’s not normally one hail ball that hits.. It’s hundreds. So, while you might have a ‘little ding’.. It’s hundreds of ‘little dings’.

    Your point 4.. Is very good.. Something I was thinking of myself.. So.. Let me expand on that a bit, and I’d be curious to others’ thoughts on it..

    I hate to have talked myself into siding with a rental company here, but, I think I have.. Let’s stick with the hail damage here.. Take rental car out of the equation. Let’s say you were driving your car, were at a hotel, and a hail storm hit. If you have collision.. Your insurance is paying for it. It doesn’t matter that it’s not your fault. If you don’t have collision then you are paying for it out of pocket. When you rent a car, you accept that you’re responsible for it. So, while it’s not your fault, someone has to pay for it. God’s insurance company is really good.. It doesn’t pay out on any claims even when he’s liable for the damage. He’s probably got really low premiums, too.

    I think we have to look at it like this.. If it were YOUR car.. Who would pay for it? If the answer is your insurance company, then either your insurance company pays the damage or, if they don’t cover you in a rental.. You do. That.. Just reading it, i’m sitting here going “That sucks”, however.. Life sucks sometimes. Minor dings.. I agree.. That should be looked at as ‘cost of doing business’.. However.. Who rules what is ‘minor’? You’re calling hail damage minor, and pending on the type of hailstorm, it’s anything but minor.

    Let me clarify that i’m not siding with them in THIS case.. Something smells about this whole thing, but.. Generically siding with them when it comes to actual ‘act of God’ events.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jennifer.black.589 Jennifer Black

    I have no problem with a rental agency using black lights to detect damage as long as I have access to those same black lights to document said damage BEFORE I roll the car off the lot.

    The inspection methods have to be the same, or they are meaningless….

  • emanon256

    Wow, a lot of his posts were deleted, I wish I had a chance to see them. Darn. The stuff I missed in the last 6 hours.

  • jmastron

    Fair feedback; I kind of threw those out there to see how far is really reasonable.

    My only experience with hail damage was a Neon I bought in 1995, at a discount because it had been hail-damaged on the lot; under the right light you could see some dimples if you put your eye right on the same plane. I agree that if there’s real pockmarked damage visible from afar, that isn’t minor. I’m still torn on the “who’s responsible”, but can see both sides of that.

    Either way, an employee making up a story about possible hailstorms is bogus — only clear photographs showing the damage (and none before the rental) should even trigger the start of the paperwork.

  • GrantRitchie

    You didn’t miss much, Em. Most of the deleted posts weren’t his. They were personal attacks against him.

  • emanon256

    Yesterday morning I clicked on his picture which linked to Facebook to see if he worked at Enterprise, this was before he disclosed he worked there. It brought me to his Facebook page, which showed his name as Aaron Miller and his username as Colgan102001. I just had a crazy idea, the page is still in my history, so I can see if he updated it and no longer works at Enterprise. Well I went through my history and back to his Facebook page and it says the account can not be found. Not only did he delete his Disqus account, But FaceBook too.

    Why would he complete delete all of his on-line accounts? I wonder if he did get in trouble and Enterprise asked him to remove everything, though I do think he severely overstepped his bounds.

  • ChasMan

    Checked the name out with a friend of mine who works at an Enterprise office. Aaron Miller is a management trainee at Reagan Intl.

  • LeeAnneClark

    Yeah, I had a feeling he was young. Anybody who’s been in business for any length of time knows you don’t go blasting your real name all over the internet speaking for your employer…especially not in such an obnoxious, belligerent fashion. I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if his training is now officially over.

  • http://elliott.org Christopher Elliott

    I think Aaron may be in enough trouble already. Let’s not make this any more difficult than it already is.

  • LeeAnneClark

    I have no doubt whatsoever that Enterprise demanded that he delete his accounts. I also wouldn’t be a bit surprised if he lost his job. Someone else just posted that they know someone at Enterprise who learned that he is (or was) a management trainee at Reagan Intl. That confirms my suspicion that he was young and new in the business world, as anyone who’s been around for a while knows better than to blast their real name all over social media speaking on behalf of your employer in such an obnoxious, belligerent, anti-customer manner.

    The most interesting part of this entire comment thread has been the revelation of Mr. Miller’s views on customers, rental car contracts, and Enterprise’s approach to dealing with perceived damage. The fact that he’s a management trainee is even more illuminating – obviously he’s getting his views from the training he’s receiving. This seals the deal for me that I will never ever ever use Enterprise or any of its affiliates again. Like, ever.

    So I guess I should THANK him for exposing the true underbelly of Enterprise’s customer service philosophy!

  • LeeAnneClark

    Christopher I’m sure you feel some empathy for the trouble he is in, and I suspect you know more than you’re telling about it. But please understand that those of us who’ve been victimized by predatory car rental agencies did not appreciate this man defending these criminal practices, telling us that WE were in the wrong, and that rental agencies have every right to scam money out of us.

    Perhaps he should have given some thought to the consequences of publicly posting on behalf of his employer in such an obnoxious manner before he did so. I’m sure he’s giving it some thought now. If he really is a trainee, well then it’s a good lesson for him. And I hope he learns that pissing off customers is not the best business strategy.

    I almost feel bad for him…but then I go back and re-read what he posted, and I don’t.

  • y_p_w

    OK. It’s probably a common enough name. Strangely enough, I found a LinkedIn profile for an “Aaron Miller” who was a former (until 2010) asst sales manager at Enterprise. I don’t think this was the same guy though.

  • Bill___A

    Here we go with the car rental stuff again. I’ve photographed cars upon pick up and drop off each time, no one ever seems to have a problem with it. They let me click away. I’ve had two instances of minor damage to a car in my possession this year. One was the additional driver crunched a fender. Hertz looked up the charge and billed it to my credit card. In this case, I had feared it would be more but was pleasantly surprised it was not. The second case was someone scratched the car’s bumper in a corner while it was in a parking lot. This time, the charge was more than I had expected. I would have reasonably anticipated it to be about half as much. In any case, it was again processed through my credit card immediately. The claims process through my credit card’s insurance company is being processed, they purposefully are slow which is an issue to consider when renting in the future. However, not really any problem with Hertz. I might add that I brought Hertz’s attention to the damage both times and did not see if they happened to notice it.

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

    The story, as reported, represents the most outrageous example of a rental car company pursuing a damage claim that I’ve ever read.

  • Phil

    I’ve just read through all of these comments. While at first glance this customer’s treatment seems quite bad, I would think there is more to this story than meets the eye, and I am concerned we have not heard the other side to this story. Chris Elliot you should stick to your role as a mediator and fill us in a little on what the whole story is! I have read through the post attributed to the Enterprise employee, and while he may be a little defensive in places, I think his comments are perfectly reasonable in saying that he has only heard one side to the story and in his experience situations like this tend to have the customer behaving a little more erratically than they make out. I also find LeeAnnClarks comments to be very dismissive, obnoxious and grudging. It’s like she has some personal mission to trash everything this person says and hopes they get fired for taking what to me seems a pretty reasonable position. While the OP’s story may well be true, I don’t think the defenses offered by Mr Miler are particularly offensive in the light of no direct response from the other side of the original story, whereas this LeaAnnClark person clearly is quite offensive and has made up her mind that Enterprise is completely, 100% guilty as charged simply based on the single story of one witness.

    I have absolutely nothing to do with Enterprise. I have rented cars from them occasionally in the past and that’s it. While I hate to see people become victims of scams, I reserve execution judgement until I have the story from all angles

  • Phil

    I’ve just read through all of these comments. While at first glance this customer’s treatment seems quite bad, I would think there is more to this story than meets the eye, and I am concerned we have not heard the other side to this story. Chris Elliot you should stick to your role as a mediator and fill us in a little on what the whole story is! I have read through the post attributed to the Enterprise employee, and while he may be a little defensive in places, I think his comments are perfectly reasonable in saying that he has only heard one side to the story and in his experience situations like this tend to have the customer behaving a little more erratically than they make out. I also find LeeAnnClarks comments to be very dismissive, obnoxious and grudging. It’s like she has some personal mission to trash everything this person says and hopes they get fired for taking what to me seems a pretty reasonable position. While the OP’s story may well be true, I don’t think the defenses offered by Mr Miler are particularly offensive in the light of no direct response from the other side of the original story, whereas this LeaAnnClark person clearly is quite offensive and has made up her mind that Enterprise is completely, 100% guilty as charged simply based on the single story of one witness.

    I have absolutely nothing to do with Enterprise. I have rented cars from them occasionally in the past and that’s it. While I hate to see people become victims of scams, I reserve execution judgement until I have the story from all angles