Sixt van hire scam

[des8]

As mentioned much earlier in this thread all they are entitled to is the loss of value caused by your single scratch.
As there was pre existing damage what extra devaluation has taken place? None
Don't get distracted ... it is for them to prove

[Minxi]

Hi Des8

Yes I remember. I have this big email I'm just dying to send them (but I'm holding fire) which makes points about their bullying tactics, the fact that they're running a scam, etc, and in it, at point 7:

7) Sixt's legal entitlement. We are advised that in law Sixt is entitled to receive compensation only for the loss of value to the van. But in this case, with the panel already significantly scratched, the loss of value due to any extra minor damage is zero. And while Sixt would alternatively be entitled to the cost of repair if less, that would be an impossibility since the figure would have to be less than £0. Therefore, under the law, no compensation is due.

That's what you mean right?

Minxi

[des8]

Just remember that if this does progress to court the correspondence will be read by the judge.
You do not want to appear unreasonable by berating them for their attitude or bullying etc.
None of that is important in disputing their claim
Keep calm, clinical and to the point

[Minxi]

DES8

Hi Des8

I have to reveal my details to you now as their docs contain my name and address etc., hope this is okay.

9053858408 etc is their cover note, which I see is not an invoice.

677414694 is the till receipt they give you at time of rental, supposedly showing pre-existing damage. As you'll see, it's incomplete, and until today it's all I've had to go on in relation to understanding the damage they say I caused.

677416083 is their pre-rental check sheet that they will say they have shown me. In fact, I've never seen this doc in full until today, and if it was ever shown it was on a hand-held device, with a tiny screen, in sunlight, that you scratch your signature on so that they'll let you take the vehicle out. The 'copy' I received of it is the till receipt 677414694 above with incomplete data. If you compare the two you'll see what I mean. Not sure it's significant though, as what I thought was positional info (down to ...) turns out to be just 'down to primer' etc.

677696487 is the return check sheet that shows the alleged new damage (at number +34 in red). As I might have said before we were bullied into signing this, with the guy accusing me of having not refilled the fuel so as to distract me etc, and again I signed in bright sunlight, without seeing any of the data, if it was ever there, and I signed just to get away from them, without realising the scam they were just about to pull.

Please note their damage item number +9, side panel, rear, centre, scratch, clearly shows that there was existing damage to the panel they are trying to make me pay £600 to fix.

Please also see my photos, in the next post. They don't have these. The damage they said I caused, or to which my attention was drawn on the day, is actually NOT the scuff on the wheel arch, but the almost invisibly thin line above it. I fully expect they will be trying to claim that it's mine however.

As usual, I'd just like to know what to do next. Seems we are getting to the crunch now. Please note I have not thus far made them any offer, nor mentioned the legal stuff about their entitlement to compensation.

Many thanks
Minxi

[Minxi]

Photos:

[des8]

Amethyst or Kati Can you redact these documents please

[des8]

I wouldn't do anything.
Let them do the chasing.
At the moment all they do is to demand an amount which you dispute.
You have played letter tennis with them to no avail.
IF and WHEN you get a proper Letter before Action would be the time to respond.
Others will probably have an alternative view!

[Minxi]

Thanks Kati for redacting that stuff - sorry!

Okay then DES8 I will follow your advice. I get the feeling they have someone with a bit more nous on the case now, so they should follow up. Curious that they didn't send the invoice this time. They usually do when they correspond.

Many thanks for your help.

[Minxi]

Hi DES8

I have received another email from them:

Dear customer,

Please get in contact with us immediately regarding outstanding payment due on your account. However if we do not recieve contact from yourself we will escalate matter further. Please email- inshaal.khan@sixt.com or call us on 0207 0188 360.

Yours faithfully
Sixt rent a car
Damage department
Email: Damage-UK@Sixt.com
Tel. : +44 (0) 207 0188 264 (Mon-Fri 08:30-17:30)
Sixt Rent a Car Limited
Sixt House,
5 Langley Quay
Waterside Drive
Langley Slough SL3 6EY
www.sixt.co.uk

Shall I continue to wait for their letter before action?

[des8]

Email back that you are still awaiting a response to your letter of dd/mm/yy (the letter in post 18).
Nothing more, nothing less!

[Minxi]

Hi DES8

They did reply to that one eventually (after 15 months), sending the response as per post 34 above.

They're saying that we caused damage at dent number #34 (the red one in the second doc in the list on post 34 above). But from the legal standpoint regarding what they're entitled to as to loss of value, that panel (side, rear) had already suffered damage at dent #9.

You can see the damage we're alleged to have caused in the photos, just above the wheel arch.

Should I respond?

[des8]

Well you could acknowledge their email, remind them you are in dispute and ask them for their proposals to settle the matter.
Suggest they may like to try mediation.

If they refuse and it reaches court, it won't do you any harm

[Minxi]

Thanks DES8 I will do that.

Help me with the legal though. This thing about them only being entitled to receive, for damage caused, the loss of value to the van, and since the panel concerned was already damaged, the loss of value due to any extra minor damage, alleged or otherwise, would be zero. Or the cost of repair if less, which would be an impossibility at less than £0. First, is that right, second, should I mention it yet.

MInxi.

[des8]

Your understanding is correct, unless the extra minor damage cause an extra loss of value which extra would then be a liability for the person causing the damage.
eg panel already damaged but serviceable is by reason of further damage render unserviceable.
In this case though they are wanting you to pay for a respray which the panel already required

I wouldn't mention your defence at this point

[Minxi]

Thank you DES8

I said:

Dear Damage

Thank you for your latest email. The attached note seems quite threatening. Could I remind you that we are as yet in dispute.

We'd like to enquire as to your proposals to resolve this matter. We could suggest mediation as a way forward, for example.

Regards
Minxi
Sixt Customer