Hired a van but company claimed the full excess

[bigjohn12]

Recently my father hired a van under his name, he signed all the paperwork and preinspection however I paid the deposit on my CC. After returning the van we heard nothing from them for 20 days. I contacted them repeatedly and they told me the deposit was being returned and to wait. Eventually after 20 days they claimed damage to the van and after much pestering provided evidence to my father, never once speaking to me

The deposit we paid was over £700. The company never provided any repair costs and their contract, which I believe to be unfair terms, state "The excess is owed for ANY damage or loss to the vehicle" another declaration on the contract states "I, the undersigned agree to pay the insurance excess cost of ___ in the event of any damage or theft claims on the vehicle"

Now tell me if I'm incorrect but the meaning of the term 'insurance excess' is well known and for a company to just immediately take all the excess without provided any damage costs or repair costs that were incurred to warrant the full excess is wrong and unfair.

Further to this I am aware that common sense may dictate that the excess is mine as I paid it. But nowhere in the legal documents does it mention my name and my binding to these terms. Surely they should be chasing the driver and not accepting deposits from people who are not the hirer?

Many thanks for your help

[Pezza54]

Please read the useful guidance "Renting a car: what to look out for" at www.gov.uk
Damage charges are the single largest cause of complaints
Advice is provided how to reduce this potential charge before signing the hire agreement
You stated the company eventually provided your father evidence of the damage. Did your father agree that this damage happened during the hire period?

The guidance also provides information on how to make a complaint and which organisation the complaint should be referred to

The guidance recommends the hirer to pay the deposit by credit card to benefit from S75 protection in the event of a dispute and claim

Unfortunately S75 is a tri-party arrangement (consumer-creditor-supplier) and when you used your credit card to pay you introduced a fourth party to the arrangement, losing s75 protection

[atticus]

And that is the point: your father hired the van, even if you paid in his behalf.