Purco Fleet Services

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: Hertz Rent A Car, Fayettevill, AR Revdex.com Complaint Department: I am in receipt of your email dated August 23, 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 the Hertz Rent A Car licensee in Fayetteville, Arkansas (“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 yearsIn that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all statesPurCo 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 vehiclesWe are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry [redacted] rented a Toyota Camry (the “Vehicle”) from Hertz on July 11, 2016, returning it in the morning of July 26, At the time of Ms [redacted] ’s rental, the Vehicle did not have any damage Hertz does not rent out damaged cars, and it is a renter’s responsibility, upon commencement of his or her rental, to take note of any pre-existing damage on the Vehicle, or risk being held responsible for it This is true whether a specific form is provided or not, and whether or not an employee is present One does not need a specific form to bring to the rental company’s attention pre-existing damage Accordingly, there was no damage on the Vehicle at the time of Ms [redacted] ’s rental Indeed, she conceded this fact when she acknowledged and admitted that she “failed to look over the car or take any pictures of it either.” See Letter from Ms [redacted] to PurCo, dated July 6, 2016, attached hereto as Exhibit A See also Ms [redacted] ’s Incident Report, attached hereto as Exhibit B In her Incident Report, Ms [redacted] admits not inspecting the Vehicle before or after her rental Id Inspecting the rental car prior to the commencement of a rental is the responsibility of the renter – Ms [redacted] , in this case Very soon after Ms [redacted] returned the Vehicle on July 26, 2016, Hertz employees discovered new damage to its driver’s side rear door and quarter panel Pursuant to the Rental Agreement that she executed when she rented the Vehicle, Ms [redacted] agreed to be responsible for all damage, regardless of fault: “[Y]ou are responsible for any and all loss of or damage to the car resulting from any cause ” See PurCo Claim Packet, which includes a copy of the Rental Agreement and Terms & Conditions, para4(a), attached in Exhibit C Pursuant to the Terms & Conditions, Ms [redacted] ’s responsibility also includes “ an administrative charge and a reasonable charge for loss of use Id., Exhibit C, Terms & Conditions, para4(b) Accordingly, pursuant to the express terms that she agreed to, Ms [redacted] became responsible for this new damage to the Vehicle Ms [redacted] makes the bizarre contention that the photos that were sent to her as a part of the claim packet, and that are attached to this Response, are not that of the Vehicle that she rentedThe Vehicle Ms [redacted] rented was a Toyota Camry, license plate noAR 430SRE This was a very dark-colored car, and it is the same car that was noted in the estimate Ms [redacted] ’s reference to “Michigan” appears to be based solely on a typographical error on one part of the estimate The provided photos clearly show a car with that Arkansas license plate, with the described damage Ms [redacted] ’s argument is based on supposition and guesswork, not any actual facts All documentary evidence indicates that a dark-colored Vehicle was that rented by Ms [redacted] and became damaged, somehow, at some point during her rental We are not contending that Ms [redacted] intentionally damaged the VehicleThe damage to the Vehicle is real, however, and all facts point to the conclusion that it occurred at some time during Ms [redacted] ’s rental Hertz (and by the assignment, PurCo) are the only injured parties here It is our chattel that has been damaged, and by the terms and conditions of the Rental Agreement that Ms [redacted] freely signed, she is responsible, even if he had nothing to do with the damage or was unaware of it Lastly, it should be noted that Ms [redacted] was offered, but declined to purchase, the loss damage waiver (“LDW), which is a contractual product that would have covered any and all damage, provided the renter complied with the terms and conditions of the rental There is no reason to conclude that the LDW would not have applied here, had Ms [redacted] purchased it Renters are free, however, to decline the LDW option, as they often have coverage through their own personal insurance or through credit card member benefits However, by declining LDW, Ms [redacted] became personally responsible for the Vehicle, regardless of fault, as described above In conclusion, PurCo stands by the claim as originally submitted We know Ms [redacted] disagrees with the claim, and so PurCo invites her 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 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- Sincerely, Tony S [redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inc [redacted] Admitted in Nevada Utah admission pending

Tell us why her Complaint DepartmentRevdex.com of UtahSouth Redwood Rd #22Salt Lake City, UT RE: Complaint Case #: [redacted] Renter: [redacted] PurCo Claim Number: [redacted] Damage Incident With: Advantage Rent a Car, Phoenix, AZ Complaint Department: I am in receipt of your correspondence dated May 17th, 2017, about the above-referenced claim and appreciate the opportunity to respond to youPurCo Fleet Services Inc, is a risk management firm which services the vehicle rental industry PurCo has been assigned this damage claim from the Advantage Rent a Car location in Phoenix, Arizona and will answer in that capacityI will begin with the loss of use The fleet utilization that Ms [redacted] and Mastercard ask for from us to substantiate our claim are considered confidential and proprietary, and even if we presented them, our experience shows they would somehow not ultimately be what they need We have provided such documents to them in the past only to be told what we sent doesn’t rise to their level of documentation It is a game we are not forced to play under any law or statute anywhere in the country, so we do not wish to as a matter of course Let me be very nowhere in any state is there any law, statute, or other legal authority stating loss of use is only owed after a fleet utilization log is produced This is simply a fabricated hoop made to make our recovery of loss of use more difficult Ultimately our loss of use is the simple fact that while the vehicle was in for repairs, the use of it was lost It is a rather simple legal doctrineIt is important to note that Ms [redacted] had the opportunity to purchase a loss damage waiver (“LDW”) for a small per-day cost that would have absolved her of her responsibility for any damage that happens while she had the car Ms [redacted] declined to purchase LDW Accordingly, she agreed to bear complete responsibility for the vehicle, including loss of use and the administrative feeIn conclusion, the claim was billed fairly and PurCo stands by it The typical rental rate for this vehicle is $per day and was billed accordingly However, in the spirit of compromise we are willing to accept $for one day loss of use as Ms [redacted] refers to in addition to the $administrative fee for a total of $to settle this claim in its entirety and put this matter behind all of us If this is agreeable to Ms [redacted] she can forward payment of said amount to our office to conclude this claim If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further you can reach the claims specialist assigned to this file Michelle H [redacted] at 801-794-or by email at michelle.h***@purco.com or you can email me directly or call me at 801-794-Sincerely, Jamie *D***ManagerPurCo Fleet Services, Inc.jd***@purco.com

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] ***

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 The rental receipt show me having returned the vehicle at Purco would like to gloss over the fact that having a mile discrepancy, stating this is 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:Rental agency does not have any facility to inspect carRental agency leaves car in an empty lot until the next dayI return the car at 4598, I see no damage on the vehicle I have a receipt provided by agency saying it was returned at Purco presents me with a damage claim based on a receipt with mileage at 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/and phone conversations on the same datesAnd 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 South Redwood Rd #Salt Lake City, UT 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 yearsIn that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all statesPurCo 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 rentWe are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry [redacted] rented a Kia Forte (the “Vehicle”) from Avis on July 31, 2016, returning it late in the day on August 12, 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 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, para8, 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 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 MrC [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 MrC [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, MrC [redacted] reached out to Mr [redacted] on August 16, – only 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 MrC [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 at no time did MrC***, 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- 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 South Redwood Rd #Salt Lake City, UT RE: Complaint Case #: [redacted] Renter: [redacted] PurCo Claim No.: [redacted] Damage Incident With: Avis Car Rental, Gwinn, MI Revdex.com Complaint Department: I am in receipt of your email dated October 23, 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 at Sawyer International Airport in Gwinn, MI (“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 yearsIn that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all statesPurCo 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 rentWe are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry [redacted] rented a Kia Sorrento (the “Vehicle”) from Avis on May 14, 2016, returning it on May 17, At the time of Mr***’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 Exhibit A This constitutes a representation that the Vehicle had no damage on it at the time of Mr***’s rental Mr [redacted] returned the Vehicle at approximately 4:a.m– a time this Avis location was closed As soon as Avis could conduct an inspection of the Vehicle after opening for the day on May 17, 2016, Avis employees discovered damage to the Vehicle’s windshield This was new damage The Vehicle had not moved between the time Mr [redacted] returned it and the damage was discovered It 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 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***’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 Terms and Conditions, para8, supra Mr [redacted] appears to contend that he should not be held responsible for the damage if he did not “cause” it However, nothing Mr [redacted] has presented serves to contradict his contractual responsibility to pay for the damaged windshield, regardless of fault See Rental Agreement Terms and Conditions, para Indeed, pursuant to the Rental Agreement’s Terms and Conditions, Mr [redacted] would also be responsible for any and all damage to the Vehicle that occurred after he dropped it off before hours See Rental Agreement Terms and Conditions, para3: “If you [return the car at a time when we are closed], your responsibility for damage to or loss of the car will continue until the return location reopens and [Avis] retake[s] actual possession of the car.” Because he did not purchase the LDW and because the damage clearly occurred, at some point during his rental and before Avis was able to take possession of the Vehicle, he is responsible for the damage and obligated to pay for the repairs, loss of use and administrative fee, per the Terms and Conditions Mr [redacted] next takes issue with the mileage listed on the Safelite invoice The Safelite invoice is in error, most likely a typographical error Obviously, Avis had no part in listing the mileage on the Safelite invoice as “***.” This is an incorrect figure Let us be very clear – the Vehicle was not driven 8,miles in the nine days after Mr***’s rental concluded on May 17, It is incredible that Mr [redacted] even suggests this In actuality, the Vehicle’s subsequent history shows a much different – and – mileage: 15,See the Vehicle’s Unit History, attached to this Response as Exhibit B Mr [redacted] contends there was no loss of use of the Vehicle, arguing that it was driven 8,miles after his rental First, by this argument, Mr [redacted] severely misunderstands and misrepresents loss of use Loss of use has nothing to do with how a car may be used, but is to compensate the owner of damaged chattel for the time it cannot be used when it is in the shop Because the Vehicle was damaged, it had to go into the shop for repairs An owner cannot use his/her car while it is in the shop due to repairs This loss of use is compensable in every state, and certainly in Michigan, where Mr [redacted] rented the Vehicle Further, as discussed above, the Vehicle was not, in fact, driven for 8,miles between Mr***’s rental and when the windshield was repaired Exhibit B Mr [redacted] argues that he was entitled to inspect the damage prior to repair He is wrong He has no such right; he is not the Vehicle’s owner Some states do impose upon rental car companies the duty to let a renter inspect the rental carMichigan is not one of those states Mr [redacted] has pointed to no authority to support his contention in this case, however In conclusion, PurCo stands by the claim as originally submitted PurCo insisted that Mr [redacted] pay for the damage because he agreed to do so The damage claim is valid and the damage is Mr***’s responsibility, pursuant to the Rental Agreement he signed As always, PurCo has always been 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 In this case, however, PurCo has re-assigned this claim back to the Avis licensee for further action, whether such action be legal proceedings or collections Accordingly, PurCo will not be taking any further action on this claim, leaving it to Avis to sue Mr [redacted] or refer it to collections PurCo reserves all rights I trust this will resolve your concerns If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 801-794- 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 South Redwood Rd #Salt Lake City, UT 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 yearsIn that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all statesPurCo 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 vehiclesWe are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry [redacted] rented a Hyundai Elantra (the “Vehicle”) from Hertz on May – 23, 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 ½ days’ loss of use This represents a claim for loss of use already discounted by $76.77! Visa only offered to pay $for loss of use (that is, loss of use only for days – a discount of $215.29!) and $for the administrative fee, which PurCo initially billed at $– a further discount of $ Added to this is the arbitrary 10% “industry standard” discount of $that Visa and Mr [redacted] are attempting to impose upon PurCo This is ludicrous PurCo was willing to accept $for loss of use and $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***, 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

[redacted] Revdex.com of Utah South Redwood Rd #Salt Lake City, UT RE: Complaint Case #: [redacted] Renter: [redacted] PurCo Claim Number: [redacted] Damage Incident With: Advantage Rent A Car, Austin, TX Complaint Department: I am in receipt of your email dated May 11th, 2016, concerning the above-referenced claim and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to the Revdex.com on behalf of PurCo Fleet Services, Inc(“PurCo”) PurCo received this damage claim by assignment from the Advantage Rent A Car licensee located in Austin, Texas (“Advantage”), and will answer in the capacity of assigneePurCo is a risk management company that has serviced the car rental industry for more than yearsIn that time, PurCo has handled over 395,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 industryMr [redacted] rented a Toyota from Advantage on May 22, He was subsequently involved in an unfortunate incident with the vehicle on May 25, He filed a claim with his automobile carrier [redacted] General Insurance Co [redacted] paid for the replacement of the vehicle which was a total loss, less Mr***’s $deductible, the loss of use and administrative fee which were apparently not covered by his policyThe deductible is self-explanatory and undisputed so I will begin with the loss of use Loss of use is owed by contract – the rental agreement that Mr [redacted] executed The fleet utilization log that Mr [redacted] is demanding contains confidential and proprietary information Moreover, such information is irrelevant to PurCo’s loss of use claim, and no state law, statute, or other legal authority requires production of fleet utilization information of any kind before loss of use must be paid This is simply a fabricated hoop made to make our recovery of loss of use more difficult Ultimately PurCo’s loss of use claim is substantiated by the simple fact that because this vehicle was totaled and subsequently sold for salvage, during that time, the use of it was lost That loss is compensable in every state Loss of use is well-settled legal doctrineIn addition to the loss of use, Mr [redacted] also agreed, in the rental agreement, to pay an administrative charge if the vehicle was returned in a damaged condition Advantage and PurCo have now spent over months seeking recovery on this damage claim PurCo’s mere $administrative fee is patently reasonable under the circumstances, given the time, effort, and expense in undertaking the same, especially in light of Mr [redacted] complaining about his contractual obligations While I regret that Mr [redacted] had an unfortunate experience, he is responsible for the balance remaining on this damage claim His contractual obligations are very clear, and the rental agency’s documentation cannot be disputed It is important to note that Mr [redacted] had the opportunity to purchase a loss damage waiver (“LDW”) for a small per-day cost that would have absolved him of his responsibility for any damage that happens while he had the car Mr [redacted] declined to purchase LDW Accordingly, he agreed to bear complete responsibility for the vehicle, including loss of use and the administrative feeIn conclusion, the claim was billed fairly and PurCo stands by it However, in the spirit of compromise we are willing to accept Mr***’s offer of $to settle this claim in its entirety and put this matter behind all of us Upon receipt of payment from Mr [redacted] of the $as agreed upon we will remove the derogatory report made against him with regard to this matter If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further you can reach the claims specialist assigned to this file Anjan L [redacted] at ###-###-#### or by email at [redacted] or you can email me directly or call me at ###-###-####Sincerely, Jamie *D [redacted] Manager PurCo Fleet Services, Inc [redacted]

Revdex.com Complaint Department Revdex.com of Utah South Redwood Rd #Salt Lake City, UT RE: Complaint Case #: [redacted] Renter: [redacted] Complainant: [redacted] *** PurCo Claim No.: [redacted] Damage Incident With: Rent-A-Wreck of Philadelphia, Essington, PA Revdex.com Complaint Department: I am in receipt of your email dated September 27, 2016, concerning the above-referenced claim I will address the issues Mr [redacted] raises Mr [redacted] continues to take issue with the mileage figure of 60,that is listed on the Incident Report First, this argument ignores the photographic evidence PurCo presented in our response In fact, Mr [redacted] fails to address the photographs at all These photos clearly show that, at the time [redacted] took the Vehicle out on July 13, 2016, the front end damage was not there However, upon return on July 15, 2016, the photos show the damage to the front end The email thread PurCo previously provided also demonstrates that the damage occurred, somehow and at some time during Ms [redacted] ’s rental Mr [redacted] has failed to address this fact, as well Indeed, the notation of 60,on the Incident Report aside, Mr [redacted] has offered no explanation to counter the stated fact that his wife took the Vehicle out with no damage at the time of rental, but returned it with damage Moreover, the Rent A Wreck of Philadelphia provided an explanation as to why the mileage was listed at 60,on the incident report Mr [redacted] has simply chosen to disregard or disagree with that explanation It is unclear what “legal standard” Mr [redacted] is referring to A witness is permitted to state facts known to him or her The Rent A Wreck employee made such a statement – it would be admissible in any court Regarding the “fraud” issue, PurCo will refer all involved to the fact that we have adjusted any error, if indeed there was an error There is no “fraud.” We have made the adjustment, in good faith, and corrected any issue, if there was one In fact, PurCo’s track record for dealing with disputes demonstrates that we would be willing to entertain a reasonable counteroffer from Mr [redacted] regarding loss of use, if he and/or Ms [redacted] were willing to come to the negotiation table There can be no question that loss of use is owed, however, pursuant to the Rental Agreement and Pennsylvania law It should be noted that Geico paid a portion of this claim (minus Ms [redacted] ’s deductible and the loss of use/administrative fees that Geico does not cover) Geico vetted the claim and found no problems One wonders why Ms [redacted] is refusing to pay obligations she agreed to, in the face of overwhelming evidence Lastly, the issue of who is complaining is valid Mr [redacted] did not enter into the Rental Agreement – [redacted] did It does not matter, from a contract perspective, that they are husband and wife The underlying point is that it would have been more appropriate for Ms [redacted] to have brought the complaint, rather than Mr*** We do not fault Mr [redacted] for not fully understanding PurCo’s status as assignee, although it was clearly explained to Ms [redacted] in the initial claim packet Keith N [redacted] sent her on or about July 22, To reiterate, PurCo is the legal assignee of HBF Enterprises d/b/a Rent-A-Wreck of Philadelphia As assignee, PurCo is entitled to “step into the shoes” of Rent-A-Wreck and pursue the claim This fact does not adversely affect the damage claim at all, and Mr [redacted] has failed to present any reason why it should PurCo stands by the claim as originally submitted As we previously mentioned, PurCo is willing to negotiate the claim and find a mutually satisfactory resolution Such would require Mr [redacted] and/or Ms [redacted] to come to the table to talk, however I trust this will resolve any remaining concerns If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 801-794- Sincerely, Tony S [redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inc [redacted] 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:amNo 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 timeThey 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]

Complaint: [redacted] While I appreciate the time it took Purco to compose its response, I still reject their answer as I insist that the damage was done AFTER I returned the car to Alamo and therefore the contractual language in the Alamo contract is moot I have never wavered from this position In my previous conversations with Purco, I told them that when the car was checked in at the airport, the lot attendant and I were standing at the left front bumper of the car This was in the airport garage There was no damage noticed by either the lot attendant or me and we were both only a couple of feet from the bumper that was allegedly scraped during my rental periodThe exhibit attached to Purco's Revdex.com response noted the damage was noticed "in the lot" not at the garage, AFTER I had turned the car in.In addition MrS [redacted] 's response "invites" me to work with Purco and find a resolution to this problem I have sent three emails to Purco's Lorene S [redacted] in the last two weeks with no response Frankly, I thought that lack of response indicated Purco was no longer pursuing this claim There seems to be a disconnect between Purco's legal department and the front line personnel.I might add that on a personal note I am NOT trying to dodge paying this claim for monetary reasons as Purco's response implies Money is not the issue here Rather lack of communication and any form of reasonable business approach by Purco is the reason for my frustration and this complaint to the Revdex.com

/ [redacted] Style Definitions */ 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: Alamo Rent A Car, Wichita, KS Revdex.com Complaint Department: This is in response to Mr [redacted] ’s “rejection” of PurCo’s response to the above-referenced complaint When Mr [redacted] rented the Vehicle from Alamo on September 24, 2015, it had no pre-existing damage Immediately after Mr [redacted] returned the Vehicle and before it was moved, Alamo employees discovered that the Vehicle had sustained damage to its front bumper The contract language is not “moot” simply because Mr [redacted] feels it should be It is in force still Mr [redacted] agreed to be responsible for all damage to the Vehicle, regardless of fault The damage is his responsibility He apparently disagrees Mr [redacted] was also offered, but declined to purchase, the LDW coverage, by which renters are not held responsible for damage to their rental vehicles Mr [redacted] references certain communications to PurCo These came while this complaint was pending There is no “disconnect,” as alleged by Mr [redacted] We simply felt it best to respond to the Revdex.com complaint first Mr [redacted] ’s prior communications amounted to accusations that PurCo’s claim was “fraudulent” and he insisted on contacting a party that had no legal interest in this claim for some sort of assistance So far, we have not seen any willingness on the part of Mr [redacted] to comply with the terms and conditions of the rental agreement PurCo stands by the claim as submitted We are open to reasonable negotiation of the claim 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] @purco.com Admitted in Nevada Utah admission pending

To Whom it May Concern:Our Claims Specialist Keith N [redacted] reached out to [redacted] on 09/01/regarding the concerns with the claim He negotiated a settlement with [redacted] that day reducing the claim to a total of $ [redacted] [redacted] agreed to pay that amount over the course of two payments, once which is to be mailed on 09/07/and the remainder which is to be mailed on 10/07/2015.Upon receipt of both payment this claim will be paid in full and closed At this time we believe this matter has been resolved to the satisfaction of all parties involved.If there are any further questions please feel free to contact me.Sincerely,Jamie D***Manager PurCo Fleet Services, Inc.###-###-#######-###-#### (Fax) [redacted] @purco.com

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 South Redwood Rd #Salt Lake City, UT 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 yearsIn that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all statesPurCo 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 rentWe are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry [redacted] rented a Toyota Camry (the “Vehicle”) from Hertz on June 4, 2016, returning it at some time before 4: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, 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 Agrat ¶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, parasand 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, 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- Sincerely, Tony S [redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inctony.s [redacted] @purco.com Admitted in Nevada Utah admission pending

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:Fact: Alleged damage to this vehicle is documented prior to our rental agreementThe Vehicle Damage Incident Report provided by PurCo states vehicle mileage at the time of the report is 60,922, the mileage prior to our rental periodThis document supports the fact that any alleged damage to this vehicle occurred outside the period of our rental agreementThis documentation is a legal document that will stand up in a court of lawFact: PurCo has made attempts to collect Loss of Use fees that exceed our rental agreement by 125%This practice is dishonest and deceptiveWhat PurCo deems “good faith” is no such measure, PurCo has agreed to honor the terms of the rental agreement we signedFact: No in person assessment of the vehicle was conducted at the time of piof drop-offThe photographic “evidence” provided by PurCo leaves a gap of several hours prior to our rental periodFurthermore, the repairs claim from Don’s Body Shop provided by PurCo, dated 7/22/2016, lists a parts cost of $to replace the GrilleThe photographic evidence demonstrates no damage to this portion of the vehicle What PurCo deems to be overwhelming evidence does not demonstrate the damage for which they seek paymentPurCo continues to argue that the issue of who is complaining is validMarriage is a legal contractI made this claim on the behalf of my wife, with her full knowledgeThis fact does not adversely affect the Revdex.com complaint at all, and PurCo has failed to present any reason why it should.The deceptive and dishonest practices of PurCo are clearly demonstratedOne: alleged damage is documented prior to our rental period; and two: the claimed damage is not supported by the photographs providedWe have no reason to believe the validity of this claim Sincerely, [redacted] ***

Thursday, July 16th, Revdex.com Complaint DepartmentRevdex.com of UtahSouth Redwood Rd #22Salt Lake City, UT Complaint Case #: [redacted] Renter: Willie D*** PurCo Claim Number: [redacted] Damage Incident With: Byers Car Rentals LLC, Hertz System Licensee, Vandalia, OHRevdex.com Complaint Department: I am in receipt of your email dated July 13th, 2015, about the above-referenced claim and appreciate the opportunity to respond to the Revdex.com on behalf of PurCo Fleet Services Inc, ("PurCo")PurCo is a risk management firm which services the vehicle rental industry PurCo has been assigned this damage claim from this Hertz System Licensee in Vandalia, Ohio ("Hertz"), and will answer in that capacity.Following my lead our Claims Specialist Sandy Pike reached out to MrD [redacted] regarding the loss of use and administrative fee associated with this claim We are always willing to work and negotiate with people to help resolve situations such as this On 07/14/Sandy and MrD [redacted] reached a settlementMrD [redacted] subsequently made payment of that negotiated amount to our office yesterday on 07/15/At this time our claim has been closed accordingly and we believe this matter has been resolved If that is not the case please let me know.Sincerely,Jamie *D***ManagerPurCo 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: Avis Car Rental, Duluth, MN Revdex.com Complaint Department: I am in receipt of your email dated September 19, 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 yearsIn that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of recovery claims for rental vehicles in all statesPurCo 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 rentWe are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry [redacted] rented a Kia Rio (the “Vehicle”) from Avis on May 1, 2016, returning it on May 18, At the time of Ms [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 Ms [redacted] prior to her taking the car off the Avis lot A copy of the pre-rental inspection slip is attached hereto in Exhibit A In her complaint, Ms [redacted] acknowledges inspecting the Vehicle prior to taking off the Avis lot After Ms [redacted] returned the Vehicle, Avis employees discovered damage to the Vehicle’s right front fender above the tire, and also to the rear bumper’s left corner This was new damageContrary to Ms [redacted] ’s contention, the Vehicle was not moved after she returned it It was inspected in the return spot Pursuant to the Rental Agreement that she executed when she rented the Vehicle, Ms [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 Also at the time of her rental, Ms [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 Ms [redacted] ’s declination of LDW is important, because without LDW, she agreed to be responsible and to pay for any and all damage to the Vehicle Rental Agreement, para8, supra Ms [redacted] contends that she noticed the damage to the Vehicle after having driven it for a certain distance It is not clear how much time had elapsed between the commencement of Ms [redacted] ’s rental and her alleged discovery of the damage In any event, it does not matter – the Vehicle left the Avis lot in Ms [redacted] ’s care under a bailment contract with no pre-existing damage It is admitted and confirmed that Ms [redacted] did, in fact, inspect the Vehicle at the commencement of her rental Any damage discovered after that point would be her responsibility, pursuant to the Rental Agreement Ms [redacted] alleges that the damage all pre-dated her rental, but she offers nothing further to substantiate this contention To the contrary, all documentary and contractual evidence indicates that the damage pre-dated her rental and is her responsibility Ms [redacted] appears also to argue that the damage on the estimate that PurCo provided includes damage to other parts of the Vehicle A closer look at the estimate, however, will reveal that all the work was related to the repair of the damaged areas The mirror, door handle and front bumper had to be removed and then replaced as a part of the repair process There is nothing to suggest that these parts had been damaged, as well Contrary to Ms [redacted] ’s contention, all damages were communicated to her by PurCo Claims Specialist Tyler C***, on May 27, 2016, as a part of the original claim packet See Exhibit A Ms [redacted] makes much of the communication between PurCo and MasterCard, but then confirms that she ordered MasterCard to not pay anything on her behalf It is our experience that MasterCard’s card member benefits would pay, at the very least, a portion or all of a renter’s deductible Ms [redacted] is free to disregard this option, of course, but it is to her detriment PurCo remained in regular contact with MasterCard, in any event, in an attempt to resolve this claim It proved to be fruitless, as noted above In conclusion, PurCo stands by the claim as originally submitted It is valid and the damage is Ms [redacted] ’s responsibility, pursuant to the Rental Agreement she signed 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- Sincerely, Tony S [redacted] Associate General Counsel PurCo Fleet Services, Inc [redacted] Admitted in Nevada Utah admission pending

Revdex.com of Utah South Redwood Rd #Salt Lake City, UT 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 yearsIn that time, PurCo has handled hundreds of thousands of damage recovery claims for rental vehicles in all 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 vehiclesWe are very proud of our record and reputation in the industry Mr [redacted] rented a Nissan Sentra from Hertz on November 19, and returned it on November 25, The day he returned the vehicle it was inspected and discovered to have new damage that Hertz had no record of prior to this rentalDuring the rental period Mr [redacted] drove the vehicle approximately 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 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 necessary for the renter and rental agent to inspect the vehicle togetherPlease 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*** 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-or by email if preferred Sincerely, Jamie *D [redacted] Manager PurCo Fleet Services, Incjd***@purco.com

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 meWhile I reject PurCo's characterization of the events and circumstances of this case, it appears our dispute has concludedI appreciate the Revdex.com's help in this matter Sincerely, [redacted]