SIXT Rental. False Damage Charges

[ParelJ]

Good Morning, I rented a car from Sixt in London in May of this year. After return, there were no attendants and I left the car in their return lot. They emailed saying there is a small scratch on the hood that needs to be paid for. I denied the damage, I didn't cause any damage, I sent them the form completed with my explanation. Now they have been harassing me and sent a letter from a debt collector in Florida to pay them 1200 pounds for the damage. I am sure this damage was not caused while I had possession. It's a very small scratch according to them that went into the primer. I couldn't see it and they claim it was not there. I live in the middle East, and from the US. They are now emailing me thru a debt collector from Florida. I don’t have a problem to pay for something I caused, but this is not the case. Can they legally come against me in US.

[R0b]

Hello,

SIXT have a reputation for doing this and typically it doesn't go anywhere. If you contracted for the hire of the car in London and not from Middel East or US, then your contract is likely to be governed by English law and although they could sue you in the US or Middle East, it would be very costly of them to do that and have them instruct an expert on English law.

I don't know what the laws are around harassment in the US or the Middle East but you may want to consider that as an option and write back to both the debt collector and SIXT directly, just make sure to keep all correspondence in writing.

[Clarence154]

Just building on this thread

I hired a vehicle from Geneva Airport in December 2025. The vehicle was handed over in a dimly lit airport car park where only a basic visual inspection was possible. No specialist lighting was used and, given the conditions, it was impossible to identify anything other than obvious damage.

On return, however, the inspection process appeared very different. Staff miraculously produced an ultraviolet light to inspect the vehicle. They subsequently alleged that a scratch had occurred during my rental period. This immediately raised suspicions for me. If specialised lighting was considered necessary to identify damage on return, why was the same inspection standard not applied when the vehicle was handed over?

From day one, I asked a simple question: where is the evidence that this damage was not already present when I collected the vehicle? Despite numerous requests, SIXT never provided any comparable evidence from the point of collection. Instead, they relied on photographs taken after the vehicle was returned and a remote "expert" assessment carried out from photographs.

What made the situation even more concerning was that SIXT's own description of the alleged damage changed over time. The return inspection report described the damage as a "superficial" scratch. Later, when seeking almost CHF 2,000 from me, SIXT described the very same scratch as being "down to the primer" and requiring extensive repair work. A superficial scratch and a scratch through to the primer are fundamentally different levels of damage, yet this contradiction was never satisfactorily explained.

After months of correspondence, invoices, payment requests, reminders and settlement offers, I am still no closer to receiving an answer to the fundamental question I had asked from the beginning. Rather than addressing the lack of evidence from the vehicle handover, SIXT continued to pursue the claim and eventually referred the matter to a debt collection agency despite the dispute having been raised from the outset.

I have stood my ground on this and if you're in the same situation I suggest you do the same

As earlier posts have indicated, the weight of proof lies with them. If approached by a debt collection agency (Riverty), confirm this is a disputed charge and not a debt. That they are to acknowledge this status and suspend further action. Also note they suggest they may be in contact with credit reference agencies so add the rider -

"Given that the alleged debt has been disputed from the outset and remains disputed, please confirm whether any information relating to this matter has been supplied to any credit reference agency, credit bureau or similar third party. If such information has been supplied, please provide full details and immediately take steps to correct, suppress or remove any entry that represents the alleged debt as undisputed, due or payable."