[Rhodgie]

A cautionary tale if you get a hire car… makes sure you take plenty of photos on collection and when returning, and always do the handover face to face.

Long story incoming so get ready… my car went into the garage for a repair (Hyundai ICCU replacement) and motability got me a hire car sourced through Swift. I wanted an EV which took longer to find but one arrived (a 23 reg BMW iX1, YK23PPD) on Friday 10th Apr. Once my car was fixed I arranged to collect it on Monday 20th Apr at noon. I said I could deliver the BMW back to Swift as their depot wasn’t too far from the garage or they could collect it from my house, I was told to leave it at the dealers and they would collect it from there so as not to inconvenience me, very nice I thought. Swift knew I was leaving it there at noon but didn’t collect it until late afternoon the next day, Tuesday 21st… obviously they weren’t desperate for it but that’s their business not mine.

Fast forward 3 weeks to the 11th May and motability get an email claiming damage to the rear passenger door, a 10cm scratch?

Now I am disputing this with DLM that any damage occurred while I had the car and this is still on-going. I am raging with my own stupidity for not taking dozens of photos when I dropped it off but we both walked around and checked it, and because there was nothing wrong I stupidly trusted the hire company would find it in the same good condition they delivered it? If they’re not going to do a face to face handover surely there has to be an element of trust between both parties?

The car had been left in a charging bay at the dealers (Arnold Clark Glasgow) where I had been directed to by garage staff to park it, the dealership was busy except for these bays which have chevron markings all around so nothing is parked near to you… I’m a wheelchair user so this is why they directed me to these bays.

I have subsequently found out that the BMW that had a damage claim submitted on the 11th May, was MOT’d on the 14th (at 2yrs 9 months) and a new V5 was issued on the 15th May… so has it been sold?

Now was the car damaged in the 24 hours before collection, are they very very slow with their admin, or are they looking for a payout to get some money back tidying up a car that is being sold off 🤔

I’ve told DLM that if Swift want a car parked and left for 24 hours before they collect it there has to be some mutual trust here (I once had a car left parked in my driveway and the keys put through the letterbox) and that once I collected my own car I’m no longer responsible for theirs, Swift claim I am responsible until they collect it.

Anyway this is still an ongoing issue cause if motability accept me being at fault it becomes an insurance claim against me and as I plan to leave the scheme next year I’ll have to declare that to my future insurers.

So again… hirer beware 🧐

Topic

[kezo]

I always take photo’s and when leaving a hire vehicle at the dealers for it to be collected (useually next day), I always get one of the service desk bods to come and check it over with me and sign on the hire agreement there is no damage. Most dealers will oblige, if you ask.

In your case, I’d point blank refuse any liability based on the hire company waiting 24hrs before collection and if necessary, I’d be emailing A Miller of your refusal to except liability.

Edit: How much are Swift claiming for the damage?

• This reply was modified 3 weeks ago by kezo.

[Glos Guy]

What a nightmare. Swift sound like chancers.

[kdwolf]

Dear Sir/Madam,

I write regarding the alleged damage claim relating to hire vehicle BMW iX1 registration YK23PPD, supplied through Motability and collected by Swift following the completion of repairs to my own vehicle.

I formally dispute any liability for the alleged damage to the rear passenger door.

The facts are straightforward:

I returned the vehicle on 20 April at approximately noon, exactly as instructed by Swift.

I was specifically told to leave the vehicle at Arnold Clark Glasgow rather than return it directly to your depot or arrange a face-to-face handover.

The vehicle was parked in a designated charging bay at the dealership, as directed by dealership staff.

The vehicle was not collected by Swift until late afternoon on 21 April, more than 24 hours later.

No issue or damage was raised with me at the point of return.

I was not contacted regarding any alleged damage until approximately three weeks later.

Given these circumstances, it is entirely unreasonable to suggest I remain liable for a vehicle left unattended for over 24 hours in a public dealership environment after I had surrendered possession in accordance with your own instructions.

If Swift chooses to operate a return process without a face-to-face inspection or immediate collection, then Swift necessarily assumes responsibility for the risks associated with delay, storage, third-party access, and intervening events occurring after the customer has relinquished control of the vehicle.

I also note the significant delay between collection of the vehicle and notification of the alleged damage. This raises serious evidential concerns regarding:

when the alleged damage actually occurred;

whether the damage existed prior to collection by Swift;

whether the vehicle was inspected immediately upon collection;

and whether any intervening use, movement, storage, preparation for sale, or third-party handling took place before the damage was identified.

I therefore require the following evidence before this matter can proceed any further:

Timestamped photographs of the alleged damage.

The full vehicle inspection report completed at collection.

Confirmation of the exact date and time the damage was first identified.

Confirmation of who identified the damage.

Collection logs showing when the vehicle was collected from Arnold Clark Glasgow.

Any chain-of-custody or tracking records for the vehicle after collection.

Copies of any repair estimates or invoices.

Confirmation of the vehicle’s status, including whether it was prepared for sale, sold, transferred, MOT tested, or re-registered shortly after collection.

For the avoidance of doubt, I do not accept liability and I do not consent to any insurance claim being recorded against me unless and until clear evidence establishes that the alleged damage occurred while the vehicle was in my possession and control.

Please also note that any attempt to hold me responsible for damage identified only after an extended delay and following an unattended return procedure may be considered unreasonable and procedurally unfair.

I await your full response and supporting evidence.

Yours faithfully

Sent from a mobile device.
Apologies for briefness and spelling mistakes.

Motability Skoda Enyaq SportLine 85x April 2024 (unhappy customer - Ombudsman pending)
Motability Mazda CX-60 PHEV July 2023 (unhappy customer - early termination on mechanical grounds)
Motability VW Touran Family Pack May 2019 (happy customer)

[Rhodgie]

@kezo I am point blank refusing to accept liability but still raging at myself for not taking photos cause there was nothing to take photos of 🤷🤦.  No idea how much they are trying to claim but can’t fathom why a new V5 was issued if it hadn’t been sold (hasn’t had a reg plate transfer, a change of taxation class or colour?) Surely they should have kept the vehicle in case motability want to inspect it themselves????

@kdwolf  that’s brilliant, thank you. I’ve made most of those points already to DLM but there’s a few other things there I can use, seemingly there are photos but haven’t seen them yet, I will be following it up this week for copies.

@GlosGuy  first time I’ve dealt with them but not impressed with this behaviour, did I mention the BMW had done another 600+ miles in the 3 weeks between me returning it and its MOT?

Either way I’ll get it sorted but just a reminder to others to record everything and keep copies.

 

[MFillingham]

Unfortunately it’s not just one company, most will blame several customers if they can get away with it.

I always make a point of being extra pedantic when picking up a car, especially in front of their staff.  I make a loud and clear point if every blemish, even if it’s below their usual reportable level.  Since I’ve started doing that, nobody has tried anything.

It looks like you’ve plenty of help, that suggested letter will show them they’re not going to just walk over you.  I’m also glad they’re sorting ICCUs quicker now.

I'm Autistic, if I say something you find offensive, please let me know, I can guarantee it was unintentional.
I'll try to give my honest opinion but am always open to learning.

Mark

[Southamman]

I rent a car every six months in the USA for a coupke of weeks, mostly from Hertz and always video the outside and inside.

Hertz have now introduced a new process, rgey photograph the underneath of the car with on collection and return.

It’s not something you can easily check, but if they swy under carriage damage, I would request tined under body photo copies of said pre and pist damage

Ask them for pictures of tge area prior to your rental, tinestamped and check exit data

If they cannot produce such pictures, deny liability die to lack of egidence

[Glos Guy]

@Rhodgie If the car had done a further 600 miles after your lease before they reported the damage, I’d be telling them to do one. The alleged damage probably occurred on a subsequent rental. It would be wise to get Motability on board and the proposed challenge from @kdwolf is an excellent start. Good luck. Let us know how it ends up.

[Oscarmax]

I always photo and video my vehicle (including mileage) before it is collected or dropped off, I always check it over when it is returned.

Unfortunately I have suffered a brain injury and occasionally I get confused and often say the wrong thing.

[Dragonfly]

If Swift can prove that the damage had already taken place prior to the time you dropped off the car, as per their instructions, then your probably on the hook for the cost of the repair.

if swift cannot provide any evidence and taking into consideration the elapsed time between you dropping off the car and Swift picking it up then they will have to bear the cost of repair.👍👍👍😂

Far away is near at hand in visions of elsewhere.

[kdwolf]

Dragonfly wrote:

If Swift can prove that the damage had already taken place prior to the time you dropped off the car, as per their instructions, then your probably on the hook for the cost of the repair. if swift cannot provide any evidence and taking into consideration the elapsed time between you dropping off the car and Swift picking it up then they will have to bear the cost of repair.

1. There is no way they can prove “damage had already taken place prior to the time “, unless they sent a drone to follow the car whilst he was driving and took pictures on a daily basis.

2. Even if they can provide an evidence that upon collection there was a damage, the onus in on Swift to prove the damage was caused by the driver and not whilst waiting for the collection i.e. they will have to request video recordings from the dealership and I will struggle to believe it will be easily provided by them.

Hence my conclusion as long as @Rhodgie caused no damage to the car without noticing it, which I believe it is not the case here, the chances Swift will take the matter forward are extremely slim.

Sent from a mobile device.
Apologies for briefness and spelling mistakes.

Motability Skoda Enyaq SportLine 85x April 2024 (unhappy customer - Ombudsman pending)
Motability Mazda CX-60 PHEV July 2023 (unhappy customer - early termination on mechanical grounds)
Motability VW Touran Family Pack May 2019 (happy customer)

[Dragonfly]

1. There is no way they can prove “damage had already taken place prior to the time “, unless they sent a drone to follow the car whilst he was driving and took pictures on a daily basis.

2. Even if they can provide an evidence that upon collection there was a damage, the onus in on Swift to prove the damage was caused by the driver and not whilst waiting for the collection i.e. they will have to request video recordings from the dealership and I will struggle to believe it will be easily provided by them.

Hence my conclusion as long as @Rhodgie caused no damage to the car without noticing it, which I believe it is not the case here, the chances Swift will take the matter forward are extremely slim.

Of course Swift  will not be able to provide any evidence swift are just chancing it 😂.      Hence my thumbs thumbs up and smiley face 

Far away is near at hand in visions of elsewhere.

[H.K_R]

I’m guessing you mean Switch? If you’re going to complain to them you might as well spend a little more effort to get their name right.

[kdwolf]

H.K_R wrote:

I’m guessing you mean Switch? If you’re going to complain to them you might as well spend a little more effort to get their name right.

Home

Sent from a mobile device.
Apologies for briefness and spelling mistakes.

Motability Skoda Enyaq SportLine 85x April 2024 (unhappy customer - Ombudsman pending)
Motability Mazda CX-60 PHEV July 2023 (unhappy customer - early termination on mechanical grounds)
Motability VW Touran Family Pack May 2019 (happy customer)

[H.K_R]

I didn’t know that Motability expanded into the Maltese market…

It’s definitely Switch, Swift is for Malta.

[wmcforum]

Switch is now the hire company used by Motability. But it’s okay – we all understood.

What to expect with Switch: Your new hire car provider​

[Rhodgie]

H.K_R wrote:

I’m guessing you mean Switch? If you’re going to complain to them you might as well spend a little more effort to get their name right.

@H.K_R you are absolutely correct 🤦 It is Switch and that’s what I’ve got written down on my notes, I think I typed it wrong to start with or autocorrect done me and it’s stuck ever since, gutted I never picked it up as things like that annoy me 😠

Anyway called DLM today and they’ve emailed Switch disputing the claim. So they are waiting to hear back from them… could take a week, could take a couple of months. If they don’t hear back the claim will dropped but I’ll be phoning weekly to check.

Seemingly this isn’t unusual behaviour from all the hire companies DLM deal with, the 3 week gap from the date of the incident to the claim arriving isn’t unusual, them claiming for any little issue and then dropping the claim when DLM bite back and dispute it is par for the course.

A couple of people mentioned the 24 hours between me dropping the car off and Switch collecting it. They are saying as the car was still signed out to me then I am still responsible, I say once I collected my own car I am only responsible for that and they need to get their car back into their care?

 

[kdwolf]

Rhodgie wrote:

H.K_R wrote:

I’m guessing you mean Switch? If you’re going to complain to them you might as well spend a little more effort to get their name right.

@H.K_R you are absolutely correct It is Switch and that’s what I’ve got written down on my notes, I think I typed it wrong to start with or autocorrect done me and it’s stuck ever since, gutted I never picked it up as things like that annoy me Anyway called DLM today and they’ve emailed Switch disputing the claim. So they are waiting to hear back from them… could take a week, could take a couple of months. If they don’t hear back the claim will dropped but I’ll be phoning weekly to check. Seemingly this isn’t unusual behaviour from all the hire companies DLM deal with, the 3 week gap from the date of the incident to the claim arriving isn’t unusual, them claiming for any little issue and then dropping the claim when DLM bite back and dispute it is par for the course. A couple of people mentioned the 24 hours between me dropping the car off and Switch collecting it. They are saying as the car was still signed out to me then I am still responsible, I say once I collected my own car I am only responsible for that and they need to get their car back into their care?

One of my kids was hit by a lady with a dashcam in her car who claimed it is not her responsibility.  It was back in November and we still have no outcome.  Personally I don’t really care as we clearly called out we do not accept the responsibility without a clear proof.

So I wouldn’t hold your breath for a quick resolution.

Sent from a mobile device.
Apologies for briefness and spelling mistakes.

Motability Skoda Enyaq SportLine 85x April 2024 (unhappy customer - Ombudsman pending)
Motability Mazda CX-60 PHEV July 2023 (unhappy customer - early termination on mechanical grounds)
Motability VW Touran Family Pack May 2019 (happy customer)

[Rhodgie]

Update on my Switch story….

Switch have dropped their claim for any damages 😡 which means DLM won’t be pursuing me for any excess 🥳 which means I won’t have to declare this next year on my own insurance when I (most likely?) leave the scheme ☹️

While I’m happy this is over I’m still mad…. I’m mad at myself for not taking more photos when I left the car although DLM said the few I did take helped, but I’m really mad at Switch for what I feel is some shady business practice in sticking in a claim for damage to a car they’ve sold 🧐

However as I said, hirer beware and always CYA (cover your a…) when returning a vehicle 👍

[kezo]

Great news, they finally saw sense…

[Glos Guy]

@Rhodgie I’m relieved for you that it has been resolved, although it’s shameful that they put you through this stress and hassle. Don’t beat yourself up over not taking photos. Hindsight is a wonderful thing and we shouldn’t have to go through life fearful that everyone will be out to scam us.

Sadly, as evidenced by this and the two RAC stories, Motability now seem to be going with whoever is the cheapest provider, with no consideration of the fact that the needs of disabled motorists in the event of of an emergency are far greater and more complex. The only thing that they aren’t cutting back on is the gold plated pay and benefits package that all employees of Motability Operations enjoy at our expense.

[kezo]

Rhodgie wrote:

Update on my Switch story…. Switch have dropped their claim for any damages which means DLM won’t be pursuing me for any excess which means I won’t have to declare this next year on my own insurance when I (most likely?) leave the scheme While I’m happy this is over I’m still mad…. I’m mad at myself for not taking more photos when I left the car although DLM said the few I did take helped, but I’m really mad at Switch for what I feel is some shady business practice in sticking in a claim for damage to a car they’ve sold However as I said, hirer beware and always CYA (cover your a…) when returning a vehicle

Great news, they finally saw sense!

 

[Author]

Replies