Fargo Rental

I am rejecting this response because: There are several errors in the reply I'm not surprised Rental missed the prior damage to the hood in the walk around, as Rental failed to note the following issues as well: Lift was covered in paint spatters (including the hoods), The lift's man bucket had a defective air hose connection, and one of the two tires on the lift's tongue jack was flat I didn't mention any of these defects to Paul during the walk-around as every item I have rented were used and not in prime condition This lift was no exception Per the contract, the lift was acceptable to me for use as is.Rental claims I towed the lift milesI don't know where that mileage figure comes from, as I never discussed with Paul how far away my home was that I re-shingled The lift was towed a mere miles round trip Neighbors are willing to testify that the lift was on my North Fargo property the entire week I rented it Neighbors are willing to testify the lift was used only for shingling my roof, and was not used for painting Neighbors are willing to testify I was the only person operating the lift The lift was not near anything that was being painted I have receipts for the purchase of the shingles, nail gun, air hoses, and, nails.Paul miss-states the year of manufacture for my vehicle by a decade.I was on Rental's display lot / parking lot to gather evidence by taking pictures of the lift Some equipment such as the lifts are on display in this open, combined customer parking / display lot Other equipment is behind a locked fence Rental has two of these lifts The lift I rented was not available for me to take pictures of, until my third visit to Rental Unfortunately for me, the hood was replaced before I could capture pictures of the paint spatters on top of the witness marks I do have pictures of the paint spatters all over the lift The picture submitted by Rental also shows the paint spatters on the damaged hood The paint spatters on the lift is crucial evidence, as the paint spatters were also on top of the witness marks that were made when the damage occurred.Rental exacerbated the hood damage for a more dramatic picture, by spreading the cracked hood apart Regrettably, the Rental picture does not show the witness marks It is important to note that the Rental picture does not show any marring to the paint spatters, which is consistent with the hood damage occurring prior to the paint spattering.I am unable to lift or move an entire bundle of shingles, and had to break them apart to transport the shingles I only put bundles of shingles in the man bucket, The only other thing in the man bucket beside myself and the shingles was an air powered nail gun Nothing fell out of, or was dropped from the man bucket Nothing slid or fell off of the roofThe nail gun had a safety strap tying it to the man bucketPaul spoke to me once, and only once about the damaged hoodThis was a face to face conversation Paul informed me of the damage he believes I allegedly caused, when I returned to Rental later that morning with the tow vehicle certification document This is the only time Paul spoke to me regarding the damage Paul told me that he had already submitted the claim It was at this time that he said how much it would costI never said to him "good Luck" as he claims, because this was a face to face conversation, and a reply like that is not part of my personality (He never said I was to pay for the repair, nor did he tell me he had placed a charge on my card.) He had already made his decision even before talking to me! It was not until after I returned home that I saw a message from Paul on my phone "inquiring about the lift" The message did not mention anything about damage, or costs Paul has a unique interpretation of what constitutes gross negligence, misuse, or abuse Paul made his decision based upon his guesses or assumptions before obtaining the facts ("guess" is used twice in his reply) When I showed him the facts, he dismissed all of them, and stated "don't insult me"When I pointed out there were paint spatters over the damage witness marks, his response was that he didn't know what I used the lift for, and inferred that I was probably responsible for the splattered paint all over the lift after I allegedly damaged it I do not believe this is how Rental expects their locations to conduct business, by basing it upon guesses What if a storm broke a tree branch which then caused the damage? (There was a storm that week forcing me to suspend re-shingling due to the high winds.) If I had damaged the lift, I would have told them so If a damage waiver can be so easily voided, why does Rental even offer a damage waiver? The damage waiver was a significant expenseI find it disturbing that Paul considers dropping off a certification document and requesting that said document be part of my file as harassment The certificate was in response to Paul stating at the time the lift was returned, that a note would be put in my customer file indicating not to rent any tow behind items to me I also find it disturbing that he considers viewing equipment set out for display on a lot open to the general public as trespassing Even if that review happens to be outside of Rentals operating hours Not everybody has the same schedule as Rental.I also did not authorize Rental to make additional charges to my card at the time the contract was signed, nor did Paul inform me that Rental might post additional charges to my card at their discretionPlease note:A design or document certified by a Professional Engineer is a legal document Professional Engineers are legally held responsible for the public's safety for any designs/documents they certify The tow vehicle is certified capable to safely tow pounds The tow vehicle is irrelevant to the damage that Rental claims I allegedly caused to the lift's hood

Visa has issued the chargeback and credited [redacted] back his money with a statement that we should go after him by other meansAttached is a copy of the signed contract [redacted] signed accepting responsibility He is being charged due to the fact that the damage was done to the machine was thru gross negligence by either dropping a item on the hood from height or from backing the machine into another objectHis chargeback has been turned over to our office for collection procedures

Fist to start *** has already issued charge back on credit card which we are currently showing visa the records on why *** was charged on the card that he had on the contract, Still waiting for visa's Decision on thatIf visa does continue on charge back we will be forced to submit ***
to collections***(customer) started this contract by calling and asking for information on a lift, In the reservation process *** told us that he was using a early 2000's Ford car to tow the LiftWe informed him that according to the manufactures data that car cannot pull this lift*** went into a rant about how he had modified his car so that it could tow moreWe informed him that it didn't matter because it is our policy to go off of manufactures data on tow ability for safety reasons*** proceeded to go rent a truck from U-haul in order to tow the lift.( after the fact we are guessing that he took the lift out of our yard and hooked up to the vehicle that we told him could not tow the lift and returned the U-haul truck) The contract was signed and paid for with putting ***'s credit card on file for the rental*** was showed how to use the lift, did a walk around and retold that he cannot haul it with his carA week later *** comes into the yard with the lift in tow behind his carWe retold him that that was unacceptableHe then told us that he taken it over miles away with no problemWhile we were checking in the lift we came across the damage on the hood of the liftWe asked *** what had happened and he immediately denied it happened while the lift was in his possession for a week We informed him that it was not there before he had taken it into his possession, and we know that because its on part of the lift we look at every time it comes in because that is where the battery charger isThis damage was not caused under use of the lift so it goes under the part of our contract where the customer is responsible for all damage due to gross negligence, misuse, and or abusewe do not know how he damaged the hood of the lift but are guessing he either backed it into something or dropped something on it from some heightWe told him that we would have to call the manufacture and get pricing and that he would be responsibleWe called him after we had gotten pricing on fixing the lift and told him what the cost wasHe said good luckWe have not taken any profit on the fixing of this machine and only charged *** what it cost us to replace the hood We have a contract signed by *** showing that he is responsible for all rental charges and all damage done by abuseThis is why we was chargedHe has continued to harass our company after the fact by dropping off paperwork showing how we were so wrong because he is a certified engineer that has rebuilt his car to higher capacity then the manufacture and we should have let him use his car, He was also been seen tresspassing in our lot after hours looking thru our machinesHe is on our do not rent list going forwardAttached is a photo of the damage caused by ***

I rented a foot articulated arm from Rentall weighing lbsRentall claimed previous damage to a cover on said unit was by meI am a Board Certified Engineer,with training in root cause analysis,& fracture analysisThe cover was cracked before I picked up the unit There was a large abrasion witness mark on the cover that caused the damageThere ware spatter markings similar to paint on top of the abrasion witness markThe crack was old,in places displaying wear from rubbing together
1)Rental submitted a $repair charge to my credit card on 7/8/prior to discussing the situation with me
2)Rental never informed me that they were charging me for the full cost of replacing the cracked cover
3)I was unaware of the charge until I received my credit card statement on 8/5/
4)My credit card was in my possession at all times on 7/8/
5)My credit card provider stated that Rentall submitted a charge to my account by one of two methods: phoning it in,or by

I am rejecting this response because: There are several errors in the reply.  I'm not surprised Rental missed the prior damage to the hood in the walk around, as Rental failed to note the following issues as well:  Lift was covered in paint spatters (including the hoods), The lift's man bucket had a defective air hose connection, and one of the two tires on the lift's tongue jack was flat.  I didn't mention any of these defects to Paul during the walk-around as every item I have rented were used and not in prime condition.  This lift was no exception.  Per the contract, the lift was acceptable to me  for use as is.Rental claims I towed the lift 165 miles. I don't know where that mileage figure comes from, as I never discussed with Paul how far away my home was that I re-shingled.  The lift was towed a mere 6 miles round trip.  Neighbors are willing to testify that the lift was on my North Fargo property the entire week I rented it.  Neighbors are willing to testify the lift was used only for shingling my roof, and was not used for painting.  Neighbors are willing to testify I was the only person operating the lift.  The lift was not near anything that was being painted.  I have receipts for the purchase of the shingles, nail gun, air hoses, and, nails.Paul  miss-states the year of manufacture for my vehicle by a decade.I was on Rental's display lot / parking lot to gather evidence by taking pictures of the lift.  Some equipment such as the lifts are on display in this open, combined customer parking / display lot.  Other equipment is behind a locked fence.  Rental has two of these lifts.  The lift I rented was not available for me to take pictures of, until my third visit to Rental.  Unfortunately for me, the hood was replaced before I could capture pictures of the paint spatters on top of the witness marks.  I do have pictures of the paint spatters all over the lift.  The picture submitted by Rental also shows the paint spatters on the damaged hood.  The paint spatters on the lift is crucial evidence, as the paint spatters were also on top of the witness marks that were made when the damage occurred.Rental exacerbated the hood damage for a more dramatic picture, by spreading the cracked hood apart.  Regrettably, the Rental picture does not show the witness marks.  It is important to note that the Rental picture does not show any marring to the paint spatters, which is consistent with the hood damage occurring prior to the paint spattering.I am unable to lift or move an entire bundle of shingles, and had to break them apart to transport the shingles.  I only put 2 bundles of shingles in the man bucket, The only other thing in the man bucket beside myself and the shingles was an air powered nail gun.  Nothing fell out of, or was dropped from the man bucket.  Nothing slid or fell off of the roof. The nail gun had a safety strap tying it to the man bucket. Paul spoke to me once,  and only once about the damaged hood. This was a face to face conversation.   Paul informed me of the damage he believes I allegedly caused, when I returned to Rental later that morning with the tow vehicle certification document.  This is the only time Paul spoke to me regarding the damage.  Paul told me that he had already submitted the claim.  It was at this time that he said how much it would cost. I never said to him "good Luck" as he claims, because this was a face to face conversation, and a reply like that is not part of my personality.   (He never said I was to pay for the repair, nor did he tell me he had placed a charge on my card.)  He had already made his decision even before talking to me!  It was not until after I returned home that I saw a message from Paul on my phone "inquiring about the lift".  The message did not mention anything about damage, or costs.   Paul has a unique interpretation of what constitutes gross negligence, misuse, or abuse.  Paul made his decision based upon his guesses or assumptions before obtaining the facts ("guess" is used twice in his reply).   When I showed him the facts, he dismissed all of them, and stated "don't insult me". When I pointed out there were paint spatters over the damage witness marks, his response was that he didn't know what I used the lift for, and  inferred that I was probably responsible for the splattered paint all over the lift after I allegedly damaged it.  I do not believe this is how Rental expects their locations to conduct business, by basing it upon guesses.   What if a storm broke a tree branch which then caused the damage?  (There was a storm that week forcing me to suspend re-shingling due to the high winds.) If I had damaged the lift, I would have told them so.  If a damage waiver can be so easily voided, why does Rental even offer a damage waiver?  The damage waiver was a significant expense. I find it disturbing that Paul considers dropping off a certification document and requesting that said document be part of my file as harassment.  The certificate was in response to Paul stating at the time the lift was returned, that a note would be put in my customer file indicating not to rent any tow behind items to me.  I also find it disturbing that he considers viewing equipment set out for display on a lot open to the general public as trespassing.  Even if that review happens to be outside of Rentals normal operating hours.  Not everybody has the same schedule as Rental.I also did not authorize Rental to make additional charges to my card at the time the contract was signed, nor did Paul inform me that Rental might post additional charges to my card at their discretion. Please note:A design or document certified by a Professional Engineer is a legal document.  Professional Engineers are legally held responsible for the  public's safety for any designs/documents they certify.  The tow vehicle is certified capable to safely tow 5000 pounds.  The tow vehicle is irrelevant to the damage that Rental claims I allegedly caused to the lift's hood.

Visa has issued the chargeback and credited [redacted] back his money with a statement that we should go after him by other means. Attached is a copy of the signed contract [redacted] signed accepting responsibility . He is being charged due to the fact that the damage was done to the machine was thru gross negligence by either dropping a item on the hood from height or from backing the machine into another object. His chargeback has been turned over to our office for collection procedures