Sixt van hire damage charge

[n20998]

Hi, I'm hoping to get some thoughts on a van hire charge for damage that I'm trying to negotiate/challenge/fight at the moment.

I hired a van from Sixt to help move my mum into supported accommodation. When I went to pick up the van it was parked terribly up against a vertical pillar and against a back fence (impossible to check the back of the van). I wasn't shown around the van by staff just given the keys - I took photos before getting in the van. When I went to move the van - it was a struggle to get in - I hit the vertical pillar when pulling away damaging the right side of the van. The staff came out, took photos, I took photos, and they said everything was 'fine' and 'no problem'. I left.

When I returned the van, the different staff member took more photos but no mention of a charge for the damage.

A week or so later I got an email asking me to report what had happened to cause the damage on the van, which I did, and that it happened on the premises and they should look at the CCTV.

I had a damage waiver of £1,000 which as I understood I had to pay the first £1,000 of any damage. I received a letter, invoice, and breakdown of the charges, saying the bill came to £1,600 and I had to pay £1,000.

I'm not happy with this for a few reasons
1. The incident was caused in large part because of how the van was parked and positioned.
2. I didn't confirm before the rental no damage and Sixt staff didn't try to do any pre-rental checks of the van.
3. I've asked Sixt for the CCTV footage but they say it's deleted after 14 days - I asked before the 14 days was up. I can't believe they've done this following an incident on their premises.
4. I've asked for statements from the staff members who said it was 'fine' and 'no problem' but Sixt refuse to provide these.

I've made a subject access request so let's see what's on that.

I've got no idea if the quote for the damage is reasonable - when I returned the van it was recorded as a 'scratch' but to my layman's eye it looked like quite a bit of damage.

When I tried to complain I was instantly referred to the BVRLA - no idea who they are and I've told Sixt I can't do that until I have all of the information from the subject access request.

The only document I have from Sixt is a signed rental agreement which states the following:

I confirm that I will check the vehicle for any damage prior to the commencement of the rental and will report any damage not recorded to the pick up location or service hotline before leaving the branch.

I feel that I have done this! I couldn't check the van for damage without moving it and in moving it there has been some damage, which was reported!


Any thoughts on my rights and position here would be great. I've already offered Sixt £100 without liability to resolve the issue and they have refused. If I'm forced to pay the £1,000 I'd be happy to take them to small claims court if I have an argument. I've told them this and asked for the details of the legal department and they say they don't have one...

[ostell]

Look for other threads about Sixt. They charge but don't seem to get the work done.

[des8]

To save you a long hunt I think this is the most appropriate thread for you: https://legalbeagles.info/forums/for...-van-hire-scam

I assume that in accordance with their normal practice Sixt have only provided you with an estimate of the repair costs and not the bodyshop's actual invoice


excerpt here:

Obviously you are only liable for reinstatement of the paintwork you damaged.
The ESTIMATE is not a reflection of the damages the hirer has incurred

If the scratch is not repaired they are only entitled as damages to the amount the vehicle's sale value has been diminished by the scratch.
If the scratch is actually repaired they would be entitled to claim the cost of the repair, but that wouldn't necessarily be the cost of a complete respray.
Try telling them you want to obtain another quote from your own panel repairer to repair the damage you caused, and this must be before they proceed with the full panel resparay with which you disagree.

I would offer Zilch, and see what ther reaction is.

[n20998]

Hi both, thank you so much for the quick responses. Just to note it does look to my completely untrained eye to be more than a scratch, but that was how it was noted by them.

Yes, what they've sent is an estimate. I'll ask if the repair has been done and if not ask for further estimates, or a receipt for the completed repair. For info attached is a couple of extracts from the estimate as well as a pic of the damage.

[n20998]

So I asked Sixt if the repair has been done and is so to send me the receipt showing the actual cost, and if not that I don’t consent to the repair and wanted more estimates or access to the van to get my own estimates.

Their response is below - as usual ignoring the questions. Can anyone advise what my rights are here and any ideas for next steps? I’ve read through that other thread - thank you.




When you have rented the vehicle, you have signed your rental agreement, agreeing to the terms and conditions of rental. The terms and conditions outline your responsibilities and also the responsibilities of Sixt.

We must ensure we adhere to the agreement stipulated within our terms and conditions of rental, as this is the mutually agreed contractual methods for calculating the cost due.

Based on the engineers report we have sent to you, Sixt have adhered to:

14.9 We work with appropriately qualified experts who use a damage matrix to work out the estimated cost of repair to or replacement of the Vehicle, keys, any accessories or any Vehicle documents that are damaged or lost or stolen during the Rental Period (and any additional period until termination under clause 6.2 above). The damage matrix uses an average repair cost for the Vehicle Group selected, which takes account of different makes and models in that group. We work this out using:
(a) industry standard labour rates and job duration, according to an industry standard estimating tool;
(b) the price of any original equipment manufacturer parts; and
(c) loss of use (being the amount the Vehicle reduces in value and interest, costs and loss of rental).

14.11 We will calculate the compensation due to us for any other damage by asking an appropriately qualified expert to provide an estimate of our losses resulting from the damage and such losses will include the reasonable fees charged to us by that expert. The expert will base that estimate on the reasonable cost of the repairs to the Vehicle necessary as a result of the damage. The estimate is intended to reflect the loss measured by the open market rate of repairs to the Vehicle at an appropriate dealership or authorised repair centre of the Vehicle. If the Vehicle is beyond economic repair then the estimate will be based on the reasonable market value of the Vehicle less the reasonable market rate salvage value for the Vehicle and may include any anticipated costs associated with writing off the Vehicle, registration and/or de-registration.

[n20998]

Any thoughts on what I should do now? I replied asking again for answers to my questions from Sixt and waiting for their reply.

I read through the other thread again today and feel I know a lot more about my position. However I note that took 3 years to finally resolve which is a little daunting. Happy to dig in but would be good to know broad thoughts on how strong or otherwise my position is.

Many thanks

[des8]

In law you are only liable for their actual losses, not their estimates.
Those clauses are possibly unfair terms in the contract
Their losses are either the actual cost of repair or the provable diminution in value of the vehicle when it comes to be sold/scrapped
So stand your ground and tell them that if they want you to pay according to their estimate you want to verify the accuracy of that estimate by obtaining your own estimate. They don't give up easily
There are other threads on here which might be worth looking at.. just search Sixt Hire

[Manxman]

That photo shows more than a "scratch". Did you do all that just moving the van from where it was parked - up against a pillar? Did you notice any previous damage there when you got in the same side to move it?

The £1600 may only be an estimate but could be accurate looking at thet photo...

[n20998]

Hi Manxman, thanks for your reply. Yes, did that moving at a very slow speed into the pillar. I was surprised at the amount of damage...I took pictures before and there was no damage.

Yes, it’s just an estimate based on a ‘desk assessment’. I’ve asked Sixt several questions and waiting for them to get back to me.

While I wait, would anyone be able to provide the actual piece of law that says they are only entitled to the actual losses?

I’m not giving up on this without a fight as I think there’s a lot Sixt has done wrong and the way they’ve handled this thus far has been very poor. Buckle up for a long thread!

[des8]

It is a basic principle of law that damages are intended to compensate a claimant for losses suffered as a result of the incident

[Manxman]

They could argue that irrespective of whether the damage is repaired, the damage diminishes the value of the vehicle by £1600.

Looking at that photo, if all of that damage was caused by the OP (and he does not appear to dispute that it was)) I'd suggest £1600 is a reasonable figure.

Plus if the hire firm do get it repaired, they'd be entitled to claim for loss of profit while the vehicle was out of commission.

[des8]

Agree Manxman but we know from other posters that Sixt do not appear to have their vehicles repaired.
Their general modus operandi is to use the vehicles for a couple of years and then dispose of them
Any damage is charged to customers on basis of estimates, but no repairs are put in hand

However that scenario might not operate in every case, and the OP will have to decide whether or not to dispute the estimate or not.

Regarding possible "loss of profit" claim... might not be claimable if it is not a term of the hire contract

[Manxman]

Agree Manxman but we know from other posters that Sixt do not appear to have their vehicles repaired.
Their general modus operandi is to use the vehicles for a couple of years and then dispose of them
Any damage is charged to customers on basis of estimates, but no repairs are put in hand

However that scenario might not operate in every case, and the OP will have to decide whether or not to dispute the estimate or not.

Regarding possible "loss of profit" claim... might not be claimable if it is not a term of the hire contract

Why would they be restricted to a contract claim? The OP admits they caused the damage simply moving the van in SixTs own car park - as I understand it. I don't think the basis of any claim made by SixT would necessarily be restricted to contract terms. The OP negligently damaged the claimant's van and if they get it repaired any loss of profit from when it is off the road would have been clearly foreseeable and a direct consequence of the OP's negligence. It would be a tort claim.

(Not being funny and trying not to be judgmental but the OP admits that there was no damage on the van before he moved it. That photo shows a massive amount of damage and the OP apparently accepts he caused it. At the end of the day the damage has a cost - whether repair or loss in value - and it seems clear to me where blame lies. Of course, if the OP refuses to pay up SixT may or may not pursue it further.)

[des8]

Note the "might not" ....... I wasn 't sure !!

My poor understanding was that economic loss claims were traditionally available under contract, but not under tort.

Again there is the matter of remoteness in contract where losses are only permitted if in the contemplation of the parties at the time the contract was made.

But basically agree that OP has to make a decision on the way forward...pay up or continue to dispute in the hope of more favourable outcome.

[n20998]

Hi, bit of an update. I went back-and-forth with Sixt and eventually was given the CCTV footage. I showed what I expected about the positioning of the van, me driving and of course the collision with the pillar. This was after Sixt lied about it in emails 10+ times saying it had been deleted. I've been through the BVRLA process citing several breaches of the code of conduct. They didn't ask for the CCTV footage or much eivdence and basically said that as I was driving anything else doesn't matter. I expected this especially after looking at the remit of the BVRLA.

I received the BVRLA outcome on Friday and Sixt have given me until Tuesday (2 working days) to make the payment otherwise they will "start formal legal action". They also still refuse to say what they've done with the van and if it's been repaired what was the actual cost.

Hoping to get some thoughts on what my options are here? Is it just to pay up or wait to see if they actually start the court action?