Enterprise Fishing Story, damage I could not see

  • Hi Guest, welcome to the help forum. You can get fast answers to your customer service questions here. We have a dedicated team of advocates who are ready to help. Just go to the section that matches your question and ask us!
  • If you've posted a question or issue for our advocates to assist with, please be sure to check back frequently for responses and requests for clarification.
  • Did you know you can get email notifications when something new posts to your favorite forum? It's easy. Just click the "watch" link right next to the "post new thread" button at the top of your favorite forum. The rest is easy. Now you'll never miss another conversation.
  • Want to become an expert user? Drop by the How to use this forum section and all will be revealed. We'll show you how to make the most of your experience.
Mar 20, 2019
4
3
3
63
#1
I am seeking relief surrounding the alleged incident with an Enterprise Rental car.
Following the advice for Elliott Advocacy, I am forwarding to you, after I sent the attached to Care@enterprise.com in February and did not receive a reply or acknowledgment. I then sent a similar request to the first executive in the Elliott Advocacy and received word from the Enterprise claims department they were doing an investigation. About a week after the investigation began, I was called by the Enterprise Regional Manager indicating he had completed a thorough investigation, which consisted of looking back a the last 10 times the rental vehicle was rented and concluded there was no damage prior to my renting the car. Not much of an investigation was what I indicated since there was no consideration to the Enterprise Manager’s deceptive statements and the reason why the vehicle was recalled under deceptive circumstances. The following is what I sent to the first Enterprise Executive with the names and other information removed.

You may like this fish story; my friends thought it was plausible.

I am now fully confident that I did not cause the alleged rental damage to Rogue rental car. I only drove to and from work and did not park near or under any trees (seemed important to local Enterprise Manager), nor did I put anything on the roof have any objects that I would have placed on the roof. It would not have been convenient or plausible since I am not tall enough to put anything on the roof of the rental car.

The story summary is as follows:
I rented an Enterprise Car late December 2018, found the first car rented had a strong tendency for the back end to come around when I pressed the brakes at highway speed. Didn’t seem safe to drive, so I returned, identified the problem to the Enterprise employee, and was given 2018 Nissan Rogue, Sliver, SLAWD, Virginia tags VYE-7484. The car drove nice; I was pleased. Then something unusual happened. The local Enterprise called and said the car I was driving had been sold and needed to return for exchange, then the manager (Name Removed) called indicated the car was retired and needed to return it for an exchange. I found the calls curious, why would they sell a car that was actively being rented out. Now I was bummed since I needed a rental car for a lot more days. However, I thought if I returned while I was going to work, then it would be convenient. So I stopped on the way to work.

On return, the Enterprise Manager took the keys and approached the car, but he didn’t make it entirely to the car, and he returned and sent another employee out to the car instead. She approached the car, opened the left back passenger door, and stood up and looked across the roofline. Seemed curious, never seen that upon returning a car. When she came back into the office, she nodded, and the Enterprise Manager approached me. It was then he indicated to me the rental was damaged and claimed there was damage to the roof. I went to the car, opened the same back door and stood in the car door opening and could not see anything, even standing with the back door open, not really tall enough. The Enterprise Manager is likely over 6 foot 6 inches and can look over lots of things. I took lots of pictures. He asked if I had inspected the roof when I picked it up, and truthfully, I have never inspected a rental roof and had never been prompted to inspect a rental car roof. Nor did, the Enterprise employee, who walked me around this rental car when I picked it up. Besides any damage to the roofline, if I had been offered too look, would have been disguised since I had to wait while they washed the car, and it was soaking wet. Then Enterprise Manager said the following "I instruct all my employees to complete visual of all rentals, including the roof-line." Then I said well when I picked the previous rental on 16 Dec 2018, you (the Enterprise Manager) walked me around the Blue Hyundai Tuscon, along with my wife, and you didn't offer either of us that option to inspect that rental car's roof-line, nor did you inspect it yourself". At this point, the Enterprise Manager lost all credibility, and since the Enterprise Employee had not offered nor even attempted to look at the roof-line, it is apparent it was a deceptive statement. So again, very curious, caught Enterprise Manager in a deceptive statement and now I was suspicious of why the hurry to recall the Rogue for exchange.

Now the Enterprise Manager would not allow me to get another rental car until I had my insurance company complete a claims number. This seemed like blackmail to me. But I didn't have many options unless I wanted to wait until my wife got off work. So, I took a lot of pictures. But I cannot, even with the camera held over my head for the pictures do not see any damage.

I was very curious about the events since they did not make much sense for recalling the Rogue and then barely even looking at the car before claiming it was damaged. Unless it was all contrived plot to have a customer pay for a pre-existing condition (just my opinion).

Being curious, I later pulled a CARFAX on the Rogue. Now, the story becomes more curious. The CARFAX does not indicate any damage or repairs. And, it shows the Rogue was sold to rental car agency on 1 Nov 2018, a full two months before I rented the Rogue. Your insurance claims folks verified the Rogue was still in the Enterprise inventory. So now why would Enterprise Manager and the local Enterprise calls me to recall this Rogue on the guise of being sold or retired when the Rogue still remains in the Enterprise inventory. Perhaps my gut-feeling and this scenario it more probable than not. I have the voicemail recordings from Enterprise Manager and Enterprise employee requesting the recall fo the Rogue for an exchange. Between those recordings and the CARFAX makes a very tall fish story.
 
Sep 19, 2015
4,084
5,408
113
48
#2
I am a little confused. You wrote:

"Then Enterprise Manager said the following "I instruct all my employees to complete visual of all rentals, including the roof-line." Then I said well when I picked the previous rental on 16 Dec 2018, you (the Enterprise Manager) walked me around the Blue Hyundai Tuscon, along with my wife, and you didn't offer either of us that option to inspect that rental car's roof-line, nor did you inspect it yourself". At this point, the Enterprise Manager lost all credibility, and since the Enterprise Employee had not offered nor even attempted to look at the roof-line, it is apparent it was a deceptive statement. So again, very curious, caught Enterprise Manager in a deceptive statement and now I was suspicious of why the hurry to recall the Rogue for exchange.

Why is this deceptive? The manager may have instructed that visual inspection, does not mean that the employee does it. I consult at an office where staff are instructed to be there at 9:30 am, does not always happen. Some employees may be more responsible than others -- if an employee does not do the requested rood inspection that does not mean that the manager did not ask for it, or that there is deception/

I am also confused on the significance on the carfax. Maybe the sale was rescinded; maybe the buyer decided against it after a test drive --

What exactly is the claimed damage to the roof?

The discussion of the manager's alleged deception as well as the carfax distract from the issue of the alleged damage. What was it and how much are they claiming?
 
Likes: VoR61
Jan 6, 2015
2,686
2,536
113
#3
Looking at the timeline below . . .
  • When you picked up the car, it was freshly washed
  • They asked you to return the vehicle stating that it was being retired/sold
  • Upon return, they claimed damage to the roof that you could not see
  • You are not tall enough to place things on the roof
  • The CARFAX report shows no damages prior to the sale to this location just six weeks prior
  • The regional manager states that his investigation shows no damage reports for the previous 10 rentals
  • According to their claims department the vehicle is still in inventory
The strength of your case, I think, is this:
  • You could not see the damage upon return
  • You could not have seen the damage at pickup because it had been freshly washed
  • You are not tall enough to place things on the roof
  • The vehicle entered inventory "damage-free" just 6 weeks prior
  • The vehicle is still in their inventory.
Including phrases like "deceptive statements", "deceptive circumstances", "contrived plot", "the guise of being sold", and "very tall fish story" are accusatory and may hinder your case. Let the facts lead them to their own conclusions.

Read "How to Present Your Case" first and then submit your appeal to Enterprise (next level).
In your communications with them, it is important that you send only one email per week before escalating to the next level . . .

Recapping your timeline . . .
  • I rented an 2018 Silver Nissan Rogue SLAWD, Virginia tags VYE-7484, in late December 2018 (after previously returning an unsafe Hyundai Tuscon).
  • Subsequently, two local Enterprise employees called to say that this car had been retired/sold and needed to be returned for an exchange
  • On return, an employee opened the left back passenger door, stood up, and looked across the roofline. She returned to the office, nodded, and the Enterprise Manager then indicated there was damage to the roof.
  • I went to the car, opened the same back door and stood in the car door opening but could not see anything. And I am not tall enough to haev placed anything on the roof of the rental car.
  • If I had looked when I picked it up, any damage would have been disguised since I had to wait while they washed the car, and it was soaking wet.
  • The Enterprise Manager stated the following "I instruct all my employees to complete visual of all rentals, including the roof-line." I countered that when I picked the previous rental on 16 Dec 2018, you (the Enterprise Manager) walked me around the vehicle, but did not inspect the roof yourself".
  • He (the Enterprise Manager) would not permit me to get another rental car until I had my insurance company complete a claims number.
  • Later I sent my concerns to the David Nestor and received word from the Enterprise claims department they were doing an investigation.
  • About a week later, I was called by the Enterprise Regional Manager indicating he had completed a thorough investigation, which consisted of looking back at the last 10 times the rental vehicle was rented and concluded there was no damage prior to my renting the car.
  • Being curious, I later pulled a CARFAX on the Rogue. There was no indication of any damage or repairs prior to being sold to this rental car location on 1 Nov 2018, just 6 weeks before I rented the Rogue.
  • Your insurance claims department has indicated that the Rogue is still in the Enterprise inventory.
The remainder of your points will not advance your cause, I think. While meaningful to you, they could have the opposite effect . . .
 
Mar 20, 2019
4
3
3
63
#5
Christina H,
I joined the forum to capture information that is helpful and instructive to my plight. Your input is neither.
So how about the following:
On two ordinary rental transactions, the Enterprise Manager and his trained employee did not follow the Manager’s own stated instructions for the customer inspection of rental vehicles. This establishes a pattern of behavior that is contrary to his stated training for employees and the Enterprise’s own instructions. Conclusion, the manager lied to me about rental inspections. This also establishes a culture and climate of cutting corners at this specific Enterprise location, under the leadership of this Manager. So, it is more than reasonable that the alleged damage went unnoticed because employees were not following specific guidance and instruction to not only protect the current customers but also Enterprise’s own liabilities. More specifically, the alleged damage to the roofline of the Rogue. Even my HD pictures did not reveal any scratched noticeable damage, though my insurance company on their review of my pictures said there might be tiny dent (small apple size), even in the sunlight, they could not be sure. Enterprise’s own pictures did not reveal any damage; they were of poor quality. The Rogue roofline is at 68 inches, well above the average person’s eye’s viewing point, unless you are about 6 foot 4 inches or taller. Even then, the roofline view is obstructed by the cargo rails on either side. So even after being advised, there was alleged damage to the roofline, I could not visually see any damage even standing on the backdoor threshold, in the bright daylight. So, it is very likely that previous routine inspections of the Rogue would not have revealed any damage to any customer so it was not noted on previous contracts. When I picked up the Rogue, they had just hand washed it, so it was wet and cloudy, so I would have never seen a potentially slight dent in the roofline from any angle.
The CARFAX is significant because of the ability to show previous damage, repairs, and sales; it shows the vehicle was sold 1 Nov 2018, I pulled the CARFAX in late March 2019.
So, the fact the rental was sold on 1 Nov 2018, confirmed by CARFAX and by DMV records, they just don’t identify the parties.
CARFAX claim to fame is they show previous damage or repairs to all sellable cars, so customers know the history of the vehicles they considering buying. The alleged damage should have been reported by Enterprise, and if they repaired, it should be documented in CARFAX. It was not, some would speculate that is fraud. A reason Enterprise may not report is so any future sale would be at a premium price since no damage or repairs are noted.
So, in conclusion, the manager lied about how vehicle inspections were being performed at this specific Enterprise. The Rogue roofline and alleged damage were so minimal even if proper vehicle inspections the damage would most likely have gone unnoticed to less than unusually tall customers or employees. Enterprise did not report the alleged damage and any subsequent repairs, so they can take advantage of a premium sale when the Rogue is or will be sold.
 

Neil Maley

Moderator
Staff Member
Advocate
Dec 27, 2014
16,794
15,414
113
New York
www.promalvacations.com
#6
Follow the information in this post on how to write and move up the Executive chain:

https://forum.elliott.org/threads/how-to-deal-with-a-car-rental-damage-claim.9703/

If you haven’t received a response after one week from Customer Care, move to the first executive.

Use VoR’s recap. You get more with sugar than vinegar and the wording in her response tells the story and is not antagonistic. You just need the facts and to take emotion out of it which isn’t not easy when you know you are right but the managers are not listening.
 
Mar 20, 2019
4
3
3
63
#7
Follow the information in this post on how to write and move up the Executive chain:

https://forum.elliott.org/threads/how-to-deal-with-a-car-rental-damage-claim.9703/

If you haven’t received a response after one week from Customer Care, move to the first executive.

Use VoR’s recap. You get more with sugar than vinegar and the wording in her response tells the story and is not antagonistic. You just need the facts and to take emotion out of it which isn’t not easy when you know you are right but the managers are not listening.
Thank you, i agree. I will use the recap to the next Enterprise executive. This is quite helpful.
 
Likes: VoR61
Sep 19, 2015
4,084
5,408
113
48
#8
The point was to minimize distracting and unnecessary editorializing which distracts from the issue.

CARFAX gets accident reports from police departments and some repair shops. If a kid's basketball or soccer ball puts a dent on the roof there will likely be no police report and repair shop may not report that -- CARFAX is a good tool but it is not perfect.

Calling the manager deceptive and digressing into that issue does nothing to advance the case. If the rental car manager is 6' 6" as stated the manager could easily see the roof of a Hyundai Tucson which is likely a foot shorter than the manager -- and the manager could have inspected it in the walk around.

Car rental damage recovery units are aggressive and this is a more recent problem. I now avoid renting a car if possible and film a walk around -- it is a hassle but that is the only way to protect oneself. I chose not to rent a car on a recent trip to the midwest because of this issue and but there are times a car rental cannot be avoided.

Using inflammatory language -- deceptive, fish story, etc does not help advance the case, especially if it is a corporate owned location, who may tend to side with the location over the renter.
 
Jan 11, 2019
7
3
3
52
#9
Christina H,
I joined the forum to capture information that is helpful and instructive to my plight. Your input is neither.
So how about the following:
On two ordinary rental transactions, the Enterprise Manager and his trained employee did not follow the Manager’s own stated instructions for the customer inspection of rental vehicles. This establishes a pattern of behavior that is contrary to his stated training for employees and the Enterprise’s own instructions. Conclusion, the manager lied to me about rental inspections. This also establishes a culture and climate of cutting corners at this specific Enterprise location, under the leadership of this Manager. So, it is more than reasonable that the alleged damage went unnoticed because employees were not following specific guidance and instruction to not only protect the current customers but also Enterprise’s own liabilities. More specifically, the alleged damage to the roofline of the Rogue. Even my HD pictures did not reveal any scratched noticeable damage, though my insurance company on their review of my pictures said there might be tiny dent (small apple size), even in the sunlight, they could not be sure. Enterprise’s own pictures did not reveal any damage; they were of poor quality. The Rogue roofline is at 68 inches, well above the average person’s eye’s viewing point, unless you are about 6 foot 4 inches or taller. Even then, the roofline view is obstructed by the cargo rails on either side. So even after being advised, there was alleged damage to the roofline, I could not visually see any damage even standing on the backdoor threshold, in the bright daylight. So, it is very likely that previous routine inspections of the Rogue would not have revealed any damage to any customer so it was not noted on previous contracts. When I picked up the Rogue, they had just hand washed it, so it was wet and cloudy, so I would have never seen a potentially slight dent in the roofline from any angle.
The CARFAX is significant because of the ability to show previous damage, repairs, and sales; it shows the vehicle was sold 1 Nov 2018, I pulled the CARFAX in late March 2019.
So, the fact the rental was sold on 1 Nov 2018, confirmed by CARFAX and by DMV records, they just don’t identify the parties.
CARFAX claim to fame is they show previous damage or repairs to all sellable cars, so customers know the history of the vehicles they considering buying. The alleged damage should have been reported by Enterprise, and if they repaired, it should be documented in CARFAX. It was not, some would speculate that is fraud. A reason Enterprise may not report is so any future sale would be at a premium price since no damage or repairs are noted.
So, in conclusion, the manager lied about how vehicle inspections were being performed at this specific Enterprise. The Rogue roofline and alleged damage were so minimal even if proper vehicle inspections the damage would most likely have gone unnoticed to less than unusually tall customers or employees. Enterprise did not report the alleged damage and any subsequent repairs, so they can take advantage of a premium sale when the Rogue is or will be sold.
I'm 5'7", 67 inches tall, so I'm not sure how 68" equals 6ft 4 inches? So I recommend you also leave that part out of your letter unless you mistyped and the math is all wrong? Five feet is 12x5=60, +8 more inches equals 68. So 68 inches is 5ft 8inches, not 6ft 4inches.
 
Likes: bignevermo