Purco Fleet Services, Inc.

Revdex.com Complaint Department
Revdex.com of
Utah
South Redwood Rd #
Salt Lake City, UT
RE: Complaint Case
#: [redacted]
Renter: [redacted]
PurCo Claim No.: [redacted]
Damage Incident With: Thrifty
Car Rental, Spokane Washington
Revdex.com Complaint Department:
I am
in receipt of the above-referenced complaint dated January 29, and I
appreciate the opportunity to respond to you on behalf of PurCo Fleet Services,
Inc("PurCo"). PurCo received this
particular damage claim by assignment from Thrifty Car Rental Located in
Spokane, Washington ("Thrifty"), and will answer in the capacity of assignee
PurCo
is a risk management company that has serviced the car rental industry for more
than yearsIn that time, PurCo has handled over 350,recovery claims for
rental vehicles in all statesPurCo has received comparatively few
complaints in the last two decades, which is particularly notable given the
fact that renters rarely believe they should be responsible for damage or other
outstanding obligations concerning their rental vehiclesWe are very proud of
our record and reputation in the industry
I
have had the opportunity to review this file.
[redacted] rented a Chevrolet Cruze (the "Vehicle") from
Thrifty for the period of December October 7-15, 2015. When Ms[redacted] rented the Vehicle, she had
the opportunity to inspect it and note any pre-existing damage. Indeed, Ms[redacted] signed a "Pre-Rental
Vehicle Inspection Form" at the time she took the car, on which she indicated
no damage. Ms[redacted] returned the
Vehicle at or about 3:pm on October
15, 2015. She states that the
Vehicle was inspected at the time of return and no damage was pointed out to
her.
I
would like to take this opportunity to explain our inspection processCar
rental damages are recorded through a series of inspections and documentation
by both the renter and the rental agencyDamages can be a large portion of
rental agency costs; therefore, the agency is particularly careful in keeping
accurate records of all damages to their vehiclesVehicles are inspected at
the time of rental and return by several different people at several different
places to ensure accurate documentationIt is often not convenient nor is it
necessary for the renter and rental agent to inspect the vehicle together
Please be assured that these vehicles are inspected with a great deal of care
In this case, the
inspection and detailing took place on the lot at 4:pmThe Vehicle was
returned dirty. When it was returned the
service agents found drawings in the dirt on the Vehicle and took photographsWhile
cleaning the Vehicle, Thrifty employees discovered scuffs in the paint on many its
panelsThe scrapes were covered by dirt and could not be seen at the time of
return with the renter presentThe damage appraisal was done by a company with
corporate offices in FloridaBecause Thrifty needed to rent the Vehicle, they ordered
the damage appraisal
When she rented the Vehicle, Ms[redacted]
expressly agreed to pay, regardless of fault, "for all damage to or loss
of
the Vehicle during Your rental period resulting from any cause
" Rental Agreement Terms & Conditions. Ms[redacted] also agreed to pay for loss of
use and administrative fees, in a manner and amount specifically described in
the rental agreement's Terms and Conditions
Although Ms[redacted] is disputing this claim, nothing changes the fact
that the damage to the Vehicle is real.
Ms[redacted]'s contractual obligations regarding damage are very clear,
and the rental agency's documentation in this case is strongHowever, although
the claim is valid, PurCo will close the claim as a customer service to Ms
[redacted]
Sincerely,
Tony S[redacted]Associate General CounselPurCo Fleet Services, Inc

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Revdex.com Complaint Department Revdex.com of Utah 5763 South Redwood Rd #22 Salt Lake City, UT 84123 RE:      Complaint Case #: [redacted] Renter: [redacted]  PurCo Claim No.:  [redacted] Damage Incident With: Hertz Rent A Car, Fayetteville, AR Revdex.com Complaint Department: I am in receipt of Ms. [redacted]’s continued rejection of PurCo’s offer to negotiate this claim.  That is unfortunate.  PurCo concedes that Ms. [redacted] returned the Vehicle on July 25, 2016.  The damage was notated first thing in the morning on July 26, 2016.  The Hertz Rental Agreement that Ms. [redacted] agreed to provided that she would remain responsible for damage to the Vehicle until Hertz inspected and accepted it.  This process was completed first thing in the morning on July 16, 2016.  The damage was noted and became Ms. [redacted]’s responsibility.  The fact that photos showing damage have different mileage does not matter.  The damage was pointed out to Ms. [redacted] in a timely manner and documented before photos were taken.  In any event, the mileage can be explained, at least in part, by the fact that the Vehicle was used to shuttle Ms. [redacted] to her home.  This is a non-issue, and does not affect the more important fact that she agreed to be responsible for the damage in the rental agreement. Renters are held contractually responsible because they have many ways of protecting or covering themselves – insurance, credit card member benefits and the optional purchase of the loss damage waiver, as previously outlined.  If Ms. [redacted] failed to take advantage of all or any of these, that is unfortunate, but it does not affect the damage claim. PurCo stands by its offer to negotiate this claim.  The claim will not be dropped.  It is valid and made in good faith.  However, as I have noted previously, we are willing to accept a mutually negotiated amount.  It is unfortunate that Ms. [redacted] refuses to discuss the claim with PurCo.  My contact information is included below. Best regards, Tony S[redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. (801) 794-6243 [redacted] Admitted in Nevada Utah admission pending

To whom it may concern:  I have talked with the customer and have settled the dispute directly.  Please contact me with any questions. Thank you,Shayne

Revdex.com Complaint Department 3703 W. 6200 S. Salt Lake City, UT  84129  ...

RE:                                      �...⇄ Complaint Case #:  [redacted]             Renter:                                    [redacted]              PurCo Claim No.:                   [redacted]             Damage Incident With:           Advantage Rent A Car, Santa Ana, CA   Revdex.com Complaint Department:   I am in receipt of your email dated April 10th, 2018, concerning the above-referenced claim and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to you on behalf of PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. (“PurCo”).  PurCo received this particular damage claim by assignment from Advantage Rent A Car, Nashville, TN (“Advantage”), and will answer in the capacity of assignee.   PurCo is a risk management company that has serviced the car rental industry for more than 24 years. In that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all 50 states. PurCo has received comparatively few complaints in the last two-plus decades, which is particularly notable given the fact that renters rarely believe they should be responsible for damage or other outstanding obligations concerning their rental vehicles. We are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry.   [redacted] rented a 2018 Toyota Camry (the “Vehicle”) from Advantage on October 7th, 2017.  At the time Ms. [redacted] rented the Vehicle, there was no pre-existing damage on her pre-rental vehicle inspection form.  Ms. [redacted] was offered, but declined to purchase, the loss damage waiver (“LDW”), by which Advantage and PurCo ordinarily waive the right to hold renters responsible for any damage to their rental vehicles.   Ms. [redacted]’s declination of LDW is important, because when she rented the Vehicle, she agreed to be “responsible for all damage to or loss or theft of the Vehicle during the Rental Period resulting from any cause, including damage caused by collisions, weather, vandalism, theft, road conditions and acts of God. By declining LDW, Ms. [redacted] agreed to be responsible and to pay for any and all damage to the Vehicle.   Ms. [redacted] returned the Vehicle at 12:51 PM on October 8th, 2017, having driven it 119 miles over the course of her one-day rental.  When Advantage employees inspected the Vehicle shortly after its return, they discovered a scratch on the front passenger side corner of the front bumper.  It is also important to note that this was the first rental of this vehicle.   While we believe this claim to be valid, we have upon further review of this claim and after consultation with PurCo management, however, decided to close this claim as a customer service to Ms. [redacted], who is a valued customer of PurCo’s valuable client.  This letter will serve as notice that the claim will be closed and no further action will be taken.   I trust this will resolve your concerns.  If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 801-794-6243.   Sincerely,   Tony S[redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. tony.s[redacted]@purco.com Admitted in Utah and Nevada

Revdex.com Complaint Department Revdex.com of Utah 5763 South Redwood Rd #22 Salt Lake City, UT  84123  ...

RE:                                      �...⇄ Complaint Case #:  [redacted]             Renter:                                    [redacted]              PurCo Claim No.:                   [redacted]             Damage Incident With:          Alamo/National Car Rental, Belgrade, MT   Revdex.com Complaint Department:   I am in receipt of your email dated January 2, 2017, concerning the above-referenced claim and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to you on behalf of PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. (“PurCo”).  PurCo received this particular damage claim by assignment from Alamo/National Car Rental, Belgrade, MT (“National”), and will answer in the capacity of assignee.   PurCo is a risk management company that has serviced the car rental industry for more than 23 years. In that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all 50 states. PurCo has received comparatively few complaints in the last two-plus decades, which is particularly notable given the fact that renters rarely believe they should be responsible for damage or other outstanding obligations concerning their rental vehicles. We are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry.   [redacted] rented a 2016 Chevrolet Equinox (the “Vehicle”) from National on October 1, 2016.  There was no pre-existing damage on the Vehicle at the time Ms. [redacted] rented it.  See PurCo Claim Packet, which includes a copy of the Rental Agreement, attached as Exhibit A. Ms. [redacted] was offered, but declined to purchase, the loss damage waiver (“LDW”), by which National ordinarily waives its right to hold renters responsible for any damage to their rental vehicles.  Id.   Ms. [redacted]’s declination of LDW is important, because when she rented the Vehicle, she agreed to accept “responsibility for damage to, loss of or theft of Vehicle … regardless of fault or negligence of Renter or any other person or act of God.” Exhibit A, Rental Agreement Terms & Conditions, para. 6. By declining LDW, Ms. [redacted] agreed to be responsible and to pay for any and all damage to the Vehicle.   Ms. [redacted] returned the Vehicle on October 8, 2016, having driven it 1153 miles over the course of 7 days.  Exhibit A, Rental Agreement. When National employees inspected the Vehicle within 10 minutes of its return, they discovered damage to the Vehicle’s windshield. This damage did not pre-date Ms. [redacted]’s rental of the Vehicle, as demonstrated by the inspection slips PurCo provided in the Claim Packet, Exhibit A.  By the terms and conditions of the rental agreement, as outlined above, this damage was Ms. [redacted]’s responsibility.   Ms. [redacted] has contended she has photographs purporting to demonstrate no damage to the windshield.  Unfortunately, Ms. [redacted] has thus far failed to share such photos with us here at PurCo.  PurCo’s evidence of the damage is the inspection slips both pre- and post-Ms. [redacted]’s rental.  These act as bookends for the damage claim, and so far, nothing Ms. [redacted] has argued changes the fact that the windshield was damaged and that the discovery of such damage coincided with the return of the Vehicle after Ms. [redacted]’s rental.    This is a valid claim. Ms. [redacted] never presented anything to support her denial, while PurCo presented strong documentary evidence of the damage. The damage to the windshield is real and undisputable. It was repaired.   Although this is a valid claim, and PurCo always acted within its rights to recover on the rental car damage claim, Ms. [redacted] is a valuable customer of our client.  Given this fact, and after consultation with our management, we will agree to close this claim as a customer service to Ms. [redacted], effective immediately.   I trust this will resolve your concerns.  If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 801-794-6243.   Sincerely,   Tony S[redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. tony.s[redacted]@purco.com Admitted in Nevada Utah admission pending

Revdex.com Complaint Department Revdex.com Serving Utah 3703 W. 6200 S. Salt Lake City, UT 84129 RE:      Complaint Case #: [redacted] Renter: [redacted]  PurCo Claim No.:  [redacted] Damage Incident With: Avis Rent A Car, Kalispell, MT Revdex.com Complaint Department: I am...

in receipt of your email dated March 23, 2017, concerning the above-referenced claim and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to you on behalf of PurCo F[redacted]t Services, Inc. (“PurCo”).  PurCo received this particular damage claim by assignment from Avis Rent A Car in Kalispell, MT (“Avis”), and will answer in the capacity of assignee.   PurCo is a risk management company that has serviced the car rental industry for more than 23 years. In that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all 50 states. PurCo has received comparatively few complaints in the last two-plus decades, which is particularly notable given the fact that renters rarely believe they should be responsible for damage or other outstanding obligations concerning their rental vehicles. We are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry.   [redacted] rented a 2016 Subaru Crosstrek (the “Vehicle”) from Avis on August 20, 2016.  There was no pre-existing damage on the Vehicle at the time Mr. [redacted] rented it.  See PurCo Claim Packet, which includes a copy of the Rental Agreement, attached as Exhibit A. Mr. [redacted] was offered, but declined to purchase, the loss damage waiver (“LDW”), by which Avis ordinarily waives its right to hold renters responsible for any damage to their rental vehicles.  Id.   Mr. [redacted]’s declination of LDW is important, because when he rented the Vehicle, he agreed to accept “responsibility… and pay us for all loss of or damage to the car regardless of cause, or who, or what caused it.”   Exhibit A, Rental Agreement Terms & Conditions, para. 8.  Mr. [redacted] also agreed to pay for the loss of use of the damaged Vehicle, as well as an administrative fee.  Id.   Mr. [redacted] returned the Vehicle later in the evening on August 20, 2016. Avis employees were able to inspect the Vehicle early the next morning and found damage to the Vehicle’s hood.  This damage did not pre-date Mr. [redacted]’s rental of the Vehicle, as demonstrated by the inspection slips PurCo provided in the Claim Packet, Exhibit A.  By the terms and conditions of the rental agreement, as outlined above, this damage was Mr. [redacted]’s responsibility.   Mr. [redacted] contends that the damage happened subsequent to his rental.  He is wrong.  The car was inspected as soon as possible following its return late in the evening on August 20, 2016.  Mr. [redacted] takes issue with the fact that two additional miles were put on the car before the damage was discovered.  This is irrelevant, however.  As the PurCo claims specialist already explained, on multiple occasions, the two mile distance is the total distance to drive to the Vehicle’s maintenance center.  This is the normal procedure for each of this Avis location’s rentals.  This kind of damage did not happen while being operated during this very short time.  Mr. [redacted] has completely ignored this explanation.   This is a valid claim. Mr. [redacted] has failed to present anything to support his denial, while PurCo has presented strong documentary evidence of the damage, as well as an explanation of the 2-mile discrepancy that Mr. [redacted] has disregarded. Meanwhile, the damage to the hood is real and undisputable.  It was repaired. The rental agreement places responsibility for this damage upon Mr. [redacted].   PurCo stands by this claim.  It is valid.  Nevertheless, PurCo is always willing to work with renters and engage in good faith negotiations for the damage claim.  In order for that to work, Mr. [redacted] must be willing to step up to the plate and discuss this claim in a mutually beneficial way with PurCo.   He can do this by reaching out to the PurCo claims specialist.   I trust this will resolve your concerns.  If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 801-794-6243. Best regards, Tony S[redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. (801) 794-6243 tony.s[redacted]@purco.com Admitted in Nevada Utah admission pending

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:  I stand by the fact that the car was not damaged while it was in my care, custody or control.  As stated before, I have submitted 5 affidavits to Purco from people who were with me during the course of the rental of the car, all of whom signed, under oath, that there was no damage to the car.  My wife, mother-in-law and sister-in-law were with me when we returned the car to the Cedar Rapids Airport and we all had a chance to walk around the car and inspect it.  There was no damage to the car.  Purco states that they inspected the car within a relatively short time after I returned it.  This is simply not true.  The car was not inspected until after it had sat in the rental car lot for over an hour, and then driven to and through the car wash.   I will not pay for damage that I did not cause, nor will I pay for damage that was caused after I returned custody and control of the car to Avis.  It is not my fault that they had no one to inspect the car at the time I returned it.  I recently traveled to Cedar Rapids again (in June 2016) and rented another car at the Cedar Rapids Airport.  Upon returning the car - this time to Budget - I insisted that the gentleman behind the counter come out and inspect the car at that time.  He was quite upset by my request because that would mean leaving the counter unattended, but after dealing with Purco on this issue and realizing that anything can happen to the car while it is sitting in the lot, I insisted that he inspect the car.  I believe that if I had made this request back in September 2015 (knowing what I know now), that I would have been greeted with the same hostility about inspecting the car that I received in June 2016.  However, if nothing else, this has been a big lesson to me, my family and my friends.  Never, ever leave a rental car until it has been inspected!!
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Revdex.com Complaint Department Revdex.com of Utah 5763 South Redwood Rd #22 Salt Lake City, UT  84123  ...

RE:                                      �...⇄ Complaint Case #:  [redacted]             Renter:                                    [redacted]             PurCo Claim No.:                   [redacted]             Damage Incident With:          Hertz Rent A Car, Columbus, OH   Revdex.com Complaint Department:   I am in receipt of your email dated November 15, 2016, concerning the above-referenced claim and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to you on behalf of PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. (“PurCo”).  PurCo received this particular damage claim by assignment from Byers Car Rental, LLC, Hertz System Licensee in Columbus, OH (“Hertz”), and will answer in the capacity of assignee.   PurCo is a risk management company that has serviced the car rental industry for more than 22 years. In that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all 50 states. PurCo has received comparatively few complaints in the last two-plus decades, which is particularly notable given the fact that renters rarely believe they should be responsible for damage or other outstanding obligations concerning vehicles they rent. We are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry.   [redacted] rented a 2016 Toyota Camry (the “Vehicle”) from Hertz on June 4, 2016, returning it at some time before 4:30 am on June 7, 2016, a time Hertz was not open.  At the time of Mr. [redacted]’s rental, the Vehicle did not have any damage.  Hertz does not rent out such damaged vehicles, and Mr. [redacted] did, in fact, have an opportunity to inspect the Vehicle before taking off the Hertz lot.  Whether Mr. [redacted] availed himself of this opportunity or not, what is clear is that he did not inform Hertz of any pre-existing damage.  Following Mr. [redacted]’s after-hours return in the early hours of June 7, 2016, Hertz employees discovered damage to the Vehicle’s front bumper.  This was new damage and Hertz employees discovered it within seven minutes after opening for business on June 7, 2016.  The Vehicle had not been moved in the time between when Mr. [redacted] returned it after-hours and the damage was discovered, and the Vehicle was inspected in the return spot.   At the time he rented the Vehicle, Mr. [redacted] signed a rental agreement with Hertz, a copy of which is included in Exhibit A to this Response (the “Rental Agreement”).  Pursuant to the Rental Agreement, Mr. [redacted] agreed to be “responsible for any and all loss of or damage to the car resulting from any cause, including but not limited to collision, rollover, theft, vandalism, seizure, fire, flood, hail or other acts of nature or God, regardless of fault.”  Rental Agr. at ¶4(a).  Mr. [redacted] also agreed to pay “an administrative charge and a reasonable charge for loss of use.”  Id., ¶4(b).  The Rental Agreement Terms and Conditions also read, in pertinent part, “The car will remain subject to these terms and conditions until Hertz has inspected and accepted it; if you return the car after hours … you are responsible for any damage to the car until Hertz has inspected and accepted it on the next day that the return location is open for business…”  Id., ¶3, emphasis added.   At the time of his rental, Mr. [redacted] was offered, but declined to purchase, the loss damage waiver (“LDW”), a contractual option by which Avis ordinarily waives its right to hold renters responsible for any damage to their rental vehicles.  Mr. [redacted]’s declination of LDW is important, because without LDW, he agreed to be responsible and to pay for any and all damage to the Vehicle.  Rental Agreement, paras. 3 and 8, supra.   Mr. [redacted] cites unnamed and vague “industry standards” that Hertz allegedly failed to meet with regard to reporting damage at the start of his rental.  However, when the PurCo claims specialist first contacted Mr. [redacted] mere days after he returned the Vehicle, he immediately contended that the damage must have happened after he dropped it off in the early hours of June 7, 2016, thus conceding that there was no damage on the Vehicle when he rented it on June 4, 2016.   Mr. [redacted] also alleges that Hertz failed to meet “industry standards” with regard to its method of taking in cars at the conclusion of a rental period.  While failing to name or cite such “industry standards” in either scenario, Mr. [redacted] ignores the express provision in the Rental Agreement’s Terms and Conditions, as cited above, that govern damage discovery in the event of his choice to return the Vehicle at a time the location was not open.  This is not to concede that the damage occurred in the lot after Mr. [redacted] returned the Vehicle.   Quite the contrary, the damage to the Vehicle in the form of a scrape on the bumper could only have occurred while the Vehicle was being driven, and it was not moved after its return.  See Photos, attached as Exhibit B.  As the damage was discovered by Hertz personnel before moving the Vehicle, and as Mr. [redacted] had sole possession of the Vehicle from June 4, 2016, to June 7, 2016, it is far more likely and reasonable to conclude that the damage occurred at some point during his rental.   Mr. [redacted] has made some other allegations that PurCo would like to address.  First, at no time did Mr. [redacted] issue any sort of written “cease and desist” to PurCo, or its representatives.  PurCo received nothing in writing from Mr. [redacted] prior to PurCo sending him the Claim Packet (Exhibit A) with the photos of the damage.  And in certain correspondence Mr. [redacted] sent to PurCo well after his receipt of PurCo’s Claim Packet also did not include a “cease and desist” or any language like that.  In short, Mr. [redacted] did not, in fact, demand that PurCo cease pursuit of the claim, but rather he merely threatened PurCo with complaints should PurCo do so.    This damage claim is valid.  The Vehicle had no damage on it at the time of Mr. [redacted]’s rental, but was discovered seven minutes after the Hertz location opened for business, following Mr. [redacted]’s after-hours return.  This damage is Mr. [redacted]’s contractual responsibility.  However, on this claim, and in this instance, given the small amount of damage, PurCo is willing to dismiss this claim and will close it, as a customer service to Mr. [redacted].   I trust this will resolve your concerns.  If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 801-794-6243.   Sincerely,   Tony S[redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. tony.s[redacted]@purco.com Admitted in Nevada Utah admission pending

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:Buried in the response is the fact that the Rental agency does not acknowledge the fact that there was no inspection of the vehicle.  The car is returned to a lot that is not attended at any hour.  On top of this, the Rental Agency (AVIS) does not inspect the vehicle until the next renter rents the vehicle.  They assume the fault is not with the Rental Agency (AVIS) employee handling the car or that damage did not occur in an unattended lot.  I do not have to present external evidence because the evidence is already in Purco's claim.  The claim provided by Purco shows the damage was discovered at mileage 4600.  The rental receipt show me having returned the vehicle at 4598.  Purco would like to gloss over the fact that having a 2 mile discrepancy, stating this is normal insinutating damages during this period doesn't happen.  They do happen.  It happened with the car they were handling.  Purco does not consider for a moment that this damage occurred during the Rental Agency's (AVIS)custody.So the salient fact are:1. Rental agency does not have any facility to inspect car2. Rental agency leaves car in an empty lot until the next day. 3. I return the car at 4598, I see no damage on the vehicle.  I have a receipt provided by agency saying it was returned at 4598. 4. Purco presents me with a damage claim based on a receipt with mileage at 4600.  I agreed to be responsible for the car during the rental period.  I did not agree to be responsible for the car after I rented the car.   This damage occurred after I returned the car either directly by the Rental Agency (AVIS) or indirectly by the Rental Agency (AVIS)having returned cars sit in a dark parking parking lot without attendees.   Sincerely,
[redacted] PS:  I have a string of emails with the Purco Specialist so it is an untrue statement that I've not spoken with a Purco Specialist.  His name is Keith N[redacted] and I have correspondences with him via email dating back to 9/26 and phone conversations on the same dates. And regarding a settlement, none of offered in any of my conversations.   Also, I'm not sure why I should have to negotiate a settlement for damages on a claim that I know to be false.

Revdex.com Complaint Department Revdex.com of Utah 5763 South Redwood Rd #22 Salt Lake City, UT  84123  ...

RE:                                      �...⇄ Complaint Case #:  [redacted]             Renter:                                    [redacted]              PurCo Claim No.:                   [redacted]             Damage Incident With:          Hertz Rent A Car, Redmond, OR   Revdex.com Complaint Department:   I am in receipt of your email dated July 24, 2016, concerning the above-referenced claim and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to you on behalf of PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. (“PurCo”).  PurCo received this particular damage claim by assignment from Hertz Rent A Car in Redmond, Oregon (“Hertz”), and will answer in the capacity of assignee.   PurCo is a risk management company that has serviced the car rental industry for more than 22 years. In that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all 50 states. PurCo has received comparatively few complaints in the last two-plus decades, which is particularly notable given the fact that renters rarely believe they should be responsible for damage or other outstanding obligations concerning their rental vehicles. We are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry.   [redacted] rented a 2016 Hyundai Elantra (the “Vehicle”) from Hertz on May 17 – 23, 2016.  It is undisputed that Mr. [redacted] hit an animal while operating the Vehicle during the course of his rental, thereby causing significant damage.  Pursuant to the Rental Agreement and Terms & Conditions, Mr. [redacted] agreed to be responsible for the damage to the Vehicle, regardless of fault.   Central to Mr. [redacted]’s complaint is the fact that Visa Card Member Services (“Visa”) has failed to pay for all of the damage to the Vehicle on Mr. [redacted]’s behalf.  Mr. [redacted] argues that Visa’s failure is somehow justified by some vague “industry standard” for applying an arbitrary parts discount of 10% off of the Vehicle’s damage estimate.  Mr. [redacted] frequently mentions this “industry standard” in his complaint (at least three times), yet he fails to provide any evidence that there is such an “industry standard,” or how much such “industry standard” might require or suggest for a parts discount.  PurCo would be very interested to have an opportunity to review support for some blanket “industry standard” that applies to all rental companies.  In our 22+ years of working these claims, however, and even after many requests of Visa on hundreds (or thousands) of claims similar to the one against Mr. [redacted], Visa has failed to provide support for its arbitrary 10% discount.   Contrary to Mr. [redacted]’s (and Visa’s) opinion, car rental companies do not automatically get a parts discount at a given body shop, whether 10% or some other figure.  Such 10% figure should never be arbitrarily deducted from the damage claim amount.  Even if Visa has a prerequisite, in its benefit agreement with its Mr. [redacted], with regard to the extent of the benefits it will pay upon a damage claim, such would be between Visa and Mr. [redacted], and would not affect PurCo’s damage claim against Mr. [redacted].   It is important to remember that Hertz is not obligated to repair its car within any given time.  That would not change Mr. [redacted]’s obligation to pay for the damage, however, as Oregon law does not require that.  Mr. [redacted] and Visa are attempting to impose upon Hertz and PurCo a duty that does not exist.   In fact, although the actual time the Vehicle was in the shop was nine (9) days, PurCo only billed 6 ½ days’ loss of use.  This represents a claim for loss of use already discounted by $76.77!  Visa only offered to pay $61.10 for loss of use (that is, loss of use only for 2 days – a discount of $215.29!) and $100.00 for the administrative fee, which PurCo initially billed at $250.00 – a further discount of $150.00.  Added to this is the arbitrary 10% “industry standard” discount of $227.93 that Visa and Mr. [redacted] are attempting to impose upon PurCo.  This is ludicrous.  PurCo was willing to accept $61.10 for loss of use and $100.00 for the administrative fee, but never the damage discount.  As it stands, PurCo is under no obligation to accept any discounts whatsoever and is free to pursue Mr. [redacted] for the entire amount of the damage claim, if it so desires.   In conclusion, PurCo stands by the claim as originally submitted.  We know Mr. [redacted] disagrees with the claim, but PurCo invites him to work with us and find a mutually satisfactory resolution.   Our track record with regard to disputes supports the fact that we are always willing to work with renters on disputed claims.  Indeed, although under no obligation to do so, PurCo has already waived its right to recover contractual loss of use on this claim, as well as halving the contractual administrative fee.  PurCo reduced or waived these items as a customer service to Ms. [redacted], in a good faith effort to resolve this claim.   I trust this response has adequately addressed your concerns.  If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at ###-###-####.   Sincerely,   Tony S[redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. [redacted] Admitted in Nevada Utah admission pending

Revdex.com Complaint Department Revdex.com of Utah 5763 South Redwood Rd #22 Salt Lake City, UT  84123  ...

RE:                                      �...⇄ Complaint Case #:  [redacted]             Renter:                                    [redacted]               PurCo Claim No.:                   [redacted]             Damage Incident With:          Advantage Rent A Car, Fort Lauderdale, FL   Revdex.com Complaint Department:   I am in receipt of your email dated August 30, 2017, concerning the above-referenced claim and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to you on behalf of PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. (“PurCo”).  PurCo received this particular damage claim by assignment from Advantage Rent A Car, Fort Lauderdale, FL (“Advantage”), and will answer in the capacity of assignee.   PurCo is a risk management company that has serviced the car rental industry for nearly 24 years. In that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all 50 states. PurCo has received comparatively few complaints in the last two-plus decades, which is particularly notable given the fact that renters rarely believe they should be responsible for damage or other outstanding obligations concerning their rental vehicles. We are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry.   [redacted] rented a 2017 Hyundai Accent (the “Vehicle”) from Advantage on August 3, 2017, dropping it off later that same day the Advantage location in Fort Meyers, FL.  In fact, Ms. [redacted] had dropped the Vehicle off at a time that the location was closed.  Upon opening and checking the Vehicle in the next day (August 4, 2017), however, Advantage employees at Fort Meyers discovered certain damage to the rear of the Vehicle.  As this Vehicle was “one-way” from Fort Lauderdale to Fort Meyers, the documentation regarding check in and damage was not readily available, and the claim was assigned to PurCo.  PurCo is Advantage’s assignee for damage claims, and acts as claim oversight, as well as claim recovery.  PurCo began its investigation of the claim.   As Advantage’s assignee on this claim, PurCo sent Ms. [redacted] a simple letter on or about August 16, 2017, informing her only that the Vehicle “had sustained some damage.” Exhibit A.  This is a normal procedure, that places a renter on notice of damage that he/she may not be aware of.  Importantly, this initial letter is not a demand for money or an accusation that Ms. [redacted] had caused such damage.  Ms. [redacted] has disputed the damage in total.    In subsequent communications with Ms. [redacted], PurCo made very clear that we were investigating the damage claim and her allegations and that if the claim warranted closing, we would do so.  Unfortunately, Ms. [redacted] failed to omit this pertinent detail in her complaint, but this investigation is still ongoing.  PurCo’s and Advantage’s investigation into this matter would normally be completed before now, if it weren’t for the pending hurricane bearing down on southern Florida.  We would ask both Ms. [redacted] and the Revdex.com to keep these facts in mind.   There are two very important facts to remember here: (1) no demand has been made to Ms. [redacted] to pay for any damage to the Vehicle; and (2) if PurCo’s investigation reveals that Ms. [redacted] is not responsible, contractually or otherwise, we will close this claim. I made this very clear to Ms. [redacted] by phone on August 21, 2017.  Unfortunately, this fact, too, was omitted in Ms. [redacted]’s complaint.  We ask for patience during this process.   I will supplement this response as more information becomes available to PurCo.  I trust this will resolve your concerns.  If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 801-794-6243.   Sincerely,   Tony S[redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. tony.s[redacted]@purco.com Admitted in Nevada and Utah

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me with the following provision:Purco is to provide the form of release of any claims against me in regard to the contract.  Once I approve the form of the release Purco needs to sign the original and send the form to Revdex.com to forward to you upon receipt of your cashier's check.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Revdex.com of Utah 5763 South Redwood Rd #22 Salt Lake City, UT  84123   RE:    Complaint Case #:  [redacted]           Renter:  [redacted]           ...

PurCo Claim Number:  [redacted]           Damage Incident With: Hertz System Licensee, Columbus, OH   Complaint Department:   I am in receipt of your correspondence dated February 21, 2017, concerning the above-referenced claim and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to you on behalf of PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. (“PurCo”).  PurCo received this particular damage claim by assignment from Hertz Car Rental located in Columbus, Ohio (“Hertz”), and will answer in the capacity of assignee.   PurCo is a risk management firm that has serviced the car rental industry for more than 23 years. In that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of damage recovery claims for rental vehicles in all 50 states with relatively few complaints for its volume of business in the claims industry, which is particularly notable given the fact that renters rarely believe they should be responsible for damage to their rental vehicles. We are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry.   Mr. [redacted] rented a 2015 Nissan Sentra from Hertz on November 19, 2016 and returned it on November 25, 2016.   The day he returned the vehicle it was inspected and discovered to have new damage that Hertz had no record of prior to this rental. During the rental period Mr. [redacted] drove the vehicle approximately 469 miles.  After its return, the vehicle had not been moved when the new damage was discovered.  It is much more likely that this damage occurred while in their possession rather than the short time it was parked on our client’s lot after it was returned.    I would like to take this opportunity to explain our inspection process. Car rental damages are recorded through a series of inspections and documentation by both the renter and the rental agency. Damages can be a large portion of rental agency costs; therefore, the agency is particularly careful in keeping accurate records of all damages to their vehicles. Vehicles are inspected at the time of rental and return by several different people at several different places to ensure accurate documentation. It is often not convenient nor necessary for the renter and rental agent to inspect the vehicle together. Please be assured that these vehicles are inspected with a great deal of care.   While I regret that Mr. [redacted] has had an unfortunate experience, I cannot agree that he is not responsible for this damage claim.  The contractual obligations are very clear, and the rental agency’s documentation is strong.  Based on the risk of damages the rental agency asks the renter to sign a contract which holds them responsible for all loss or damage to the vehicle despite fault.  The renter also has the opportunity to purchase a loss damage waiver for a small per day cost that would waive their responsibility for any damage that happens while they have the car, he declined that opportunity.   PurCo stands by the claim as submitted.  I honestly believe that Mr. [redacted] may not have been aware of the damage or how it might have occurred.  In any event, the damage was found and noted the day he returned it.  Accordingly, under the contract, Mr. [redacted] is responsible.   However, in this instance, we have decided to close the damage claim as a customer service to Mr. [redacted].  While we the feel the claim is valid, we will not pursue him any further in regard to the damage associated with this claim.    If you or Mr. [redacted] has any further questions feel free to call me directly at 801-794-6304 or by email if preferred.    Sincerely,   Jamie *. D[redacted] Manager PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. jd[redacted]@purco.com

Revdex.com Complaint Department Revdex.com Serving Utah 3703 W. 6200 S. Salt Lake City, UT 84129   RE:       Complaint Case #: [redacted] Renter: [redacted]  PurCo Claim No.:  [redacted] Damage Incident With: Dollar/Thrifty Rent A Car, Fairbanks, AK Revdex.com Complaint Department: I am in receipt of your email dated May 2, 2017, indicating that [redacted] has “rejected” PurCo’s second Response to the above-referenced complaint. Even if true, the fact that Dollar talked with Mr. [redacted]’s credit card company and its insurance company on phone "for more than half hour" is irrelevant.  There is no other clear way to demonstrate this.  It is up to the renter to procure his or her own insurance.  Dollar had NO duty to inform Mr. [redacted] what coverage he had from third parties.  Dollar cannot act as an insurance broker.  In this case, Mr. [redacted] had benefits through American Express.  PurCo fails to see any relevance to this continued argument.  It is not PurCo’s duty to waive portions of the claim that American Express fails to pay, for whatever reason. Mr. [redacted] is free to trust American Express.  That does not mean that the portions of the claim that American Express failed to pay, for whatever reason, are invalid.  American Express failed to pay the entire amount of the claim. These amounts remain outstanding.  PurCo and Dollar have no relationship with American Express that obligates the result Mr. [redacted] is demanding. Lastly, it is altogether unclear what point Mr. [redacted] is trying to make.  Mr. [redacted]'s sarcastic remarks about the exhibit he attached fail to address PurCo's legitimate concerns with the document.  In any event, PurCo categorically denies “blocking” Mr. [redacted]’s emails.  It would make no sense for PurCo to “block” the email address of a person we are trying to negotiate a damage claim with.  This did not happen the way Mr. [redacted] contends.  If his emails did not arrive in our inbox, it was not due to any action by PurCo or any of PurCo's employees. PurCo remains willing to work with Mr. [redacted], and engage in good faith negotiations for the damage claim.  Again, however, Mr. [redacted] must be willing to engage, as well. I trust this will resolve your concerns.  If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 801-794-6243. Best regards, Tony S[redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. (801) 794-6243 tony.s[redacted]@purco.com Admitted in Nevada Utah admission pending

Revdex.com: I apologize for taking so long in responding.  I’ve been waiting on direction from others that were working on this matter in my behalf.  Fortunately,  I have credit card receipts showing I was lodging in Cody Wyoming  on  August 14th  the date of the Rapid City hail storm, (lodging establishments require license plate number and vehicle make/model information to be recorded on all check –in  paperwork). I also have an email that Avis, sent to me  on August 17th, the day after I returned the car to the Rapid City Avis airport lot.  This E-Receipt from Avis stated the mileage driven and rental vehicle in question was inspected by Richard on August 16th at 6:47 am. No damaged reported or recorded  and….Thank you for renting with Avis.      That being said,  I accept that Purco has stated in their reply to this Revdex.com complaint # [redacted], that they will  close their claim and take no further action against me.    I have also requested that the Investigator with the Utah Division of Consumer Protection, and the South Dakota Division of Criminal Investigation suspend my complaints against Purco/Avis at this time. They will however keep this information on file, and have advised me to maintain all records regarding this matter should the need arise in the future.     Again Revdex.com, thank you for the precious gift of your time.    [redacted].  
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Revdex.com Complaint Department Revdex.com of Utah 5763 South Redwood Rd #22 Salt Lake City, UT  84123  ...

RE:                                      �...⇄ Complaint Case #:  [redacted]             Renter:                                    [redacted]             PurCo Claim No.:                   [redacted]             Damage Incident With:          Avis Car Rental, Duluth, MN   Revdex.com Complaint Department:   I am in receipt of your email dated October 26, 2016, concerning the above-referenced claim and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to you on behalf of PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. (“PurCo”).  PurCo received this particular damage claim by assignment from Sonju Enterprises, Avis System Licensee in Duluth, MN (“Avis”), and will answer in the capacity of assignee.   PurCo is a risk management company that has serviced the car rental industry for more than 22 years. In that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all 50 states. PurCo has received comparatively few complaints in the last two-plus decades, which is particularly notable given the fact that renters rarely believe they should be responsible for damage or other outstanding obligations concerning vehicles they rent. We are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry.   [redacted] rented a 2016 Kia Forte (the “Vehicle”) from Avis on July 31, 2016, returning it late in the day on August 12, 2016.  At the time of Mr. [redacted]’s rental, the Vehicle did not have any damage.  This fact is demonstrated by the pre-rental inspection slip for the Vehicle, which was completed and signed by Mr. [redacted] prior to him taking the car off the Avis lot.  A copy of the pre-rental inspection slip is attached hereto in the claim packet, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A.  After Mr. [redacted] returned the Vehicle, Avis employees discovered damage to the Vehicle’s front bumper.  This was new damage.  The Vehicle was not moved in the time between when Mr. [redacted] returned it and the damage was discovered.  The Vehicle was inspected in the return spot.   Pursuant to the Rental Agreement that he executed when he rented the Vehicle, Mr. [redacted] agreed to be responsible for all damage, regardless of fault: “[Y]ou are responsible; and you will pay us for all loss of or damage to the car regardless of cause, or who, or what caused it.  If the car is damaged, you will pay our estimated repair cost … As part of our loss, you’ll also pay for loss of use of the car, without regard to our fleet utilization, plus an administrative fee…”  See Exhibit A, Rental Agreement, paragraph 8.   Also at the time of his rental, Mr. [redacted] was offered, but declined to purchase, the loss damage waiver (“LDW”), a contractual option by which Avis ordinarily waives its right to hold renters responsible for any damage to their rental vehicles.  Mr. [redacted]’s declination of LDW is important, because without LDW, he agreed to be responsible and to pay for any and all damage to the Vehicle.  Rental Agreement, para. 8, supra.   Mr. [redacted] appears to ignore the fact that damage was discovered on the Vehicle subsequent to the conclusion of his rental, and that such damage is his contractual responsibility.  Instead, Mr. [redacted] has erroneously contended that PurCo Claims Specialist Tyler C[redacted] somehow and for some unspecified reason “dismissed” the damage claim.  This is simply not true.    The damage claim is supported by the rental agreement’s terms and conditions and it is also supported by the fact that the damage did not pre-date Mr. [redacted]’s rental, but was discovered after his return of the Vehicle following his 12+ day rental during which he drove more than 540 miles.  The documents demonstrate that the damage somehow occurred at some time during Mr. [redacted]’s rental.  By the terms and conditions of the Rental Agreement that Mr. [redacted] freely signed, such damage is his responsibility.   Mr. [redacted] has made some other allegations that PurCo would like to address.  First, at no time did Mr. C[redacted] “represent” himself as any kind of “Officer.”  That would make no sense.  It is customary for PurCo’s claims specialists to inform renters that our “office” has received a damage claim by assignment from one of our rental car company clients, but our claims specialists never refer to themselves as any kind of “officer” or anything “official.”  It is more likely that Mr. [redacted] simply misheard what Mr. C[redacted] was saying about PurCo’s assignment.    Second, the timeline is important.  Mr. [redacted] alleges that he did not hear anything for a week after returning the Vehicle.  Mr. [redacted]’s rental period ended on August 12, 2016.  Mr. C[redacted] reached out to Mr. [redacted] on August 16, 2016 – only 4 days later.  Mr. [redacted] also neglects to mention that PurCo sent him the claim (Exhibit A) on August 17, 2016, which he then proceeded to ignore.  That is why Mr. C[redacted] contacted him some weeks later – to see what the delay was in responding to the claim demand.  Never was there any representation of a “dismissal” of this claim.   PurCo desires to be very clear: at no time did Mr. C[redacted], or any other PurCo employee, decide or agree to “dismiss,” “drop” or otherwise abandon this rental car damage claim.  There would be no reason to do so, as the claim is valid and will be pursued.    As always, PurCo is willing to negotiate the claim and find a mutually satisfactory resolution.   Our track record with regard to disputes supports the fact that we are always willing to work with renters on disputed claims.  This claim is no different.   I trust this will resolve your concerns.  If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 801-794-6243.   Sincerely,   Tony S[redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inc. [redacted] Admitted in Nevada Utah admission pending

Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because certain statements and assumptions are incorrect and/or not true.  I appreciate the ability to discuss this with PurCo Fleet Services, Inc.  They are free to contact me via the information they have on file.Sincerely,[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]