Avis Car rental Loss Damage Waiver LDW Fraud

Old Dec 16th, 2014, 06:15 PM
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Avis Car rental Loss Damage Waiver LDW Fraud

Hello guys, I was surprised to see a court letter today 17/DEC/2014 in my mailbox that I have been sued by Avis car rental an need to respond to court. Got bit worried and found out that it was related to me renting a car from them in jan 2014 for day. What surprised me is i did have any communication form them nor did i been asked to pay anything to them till this letter from court arrived saying i owe them some $9K for a minor damage that happened to the car the same day i took from them. Yes, it was reported by the cop and it was towed for repairing because the right front side wheel did hit a curbside post and i called them from the spot while cop was writing the report and in next half an hour I went to the place in person and gave them report number and towing details. I also confirmed them that since I have LDW, i don't have to pay anything on that and the guy over thee said that i did have ldw. so that's end of story, note that all these thing happened with in 4 hours since i drove the car on the day 1. So far so good. I did followup with them a week later when see additional charge around $200
( i don't remember exact amount) or so an they told it was for loss of service for no of days cars was not available. I didn't object on that. Now after 11 months i got this notice, so I am writing this here asking for if you have any comments/advice.
Straight to the point - I DID take LDW and paid additional 24.99/Day and in the contract it is clearly mentioned "Accepted" and MY initial. I see that clearly in the contact that is apache in the court document. But in the letter it is claimed that i have not taken LDW, hence i should pay the damage!!! I don't understand - I do have the same contact with me.

Of course I am going to talk to a lawyer and i am pretty sure i have my records to prove that too. It is really unnecessary news after 11 months and I am also looking forward to counter sue them. It is affecting my work and my studies too.
Any comments guys?
PK001 is offline  
Old Dec 16th, 2014, 06:21 PM
  #2  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
sorry, typos . read: >> i did NOT have any communication from them nor had I been asked to pay anything then
PK001 is offline  
Old Dec 16th, 2014, 08:55 PM
  #3  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 13,479
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
"I see that clearly in the contact that is apache in the court document."

I don't understand this statement. But call avis and tell them you have your receipt showing clearly that you paid for and accepted LDW.

The letter from Avis clearly states that they want you to pay for damage to the CAR? Or could it be for damage to the curbside pole that they ended up having to pay for???
clarkgriswold is offline  
Old Dec 16th, 2014, 10:17 PM
  #4  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks Clark. Sure, auto-complete ruined this line, while auto-suing ruined me

>> I see that LDW Accepted is clearly mentioned in the contract that is ATTACHED in the court document I received today. The letter from Avis seeks to pay for the expense for fixing the damages to the car. And that no. of is highly inflated too. Well, the curbside pole is very much intact, nothing happened to it
PK001 is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 12:15 AM
  #5  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just because they sue you doesn't mean they will win.
Ackislander is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 01:33 AM
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,876
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But it does come with a cost of the attorney.
Gretchen is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 02:10 AM
  #7  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 49,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You might be able to ask the court to award you punitive damages and for court costs. Speak to an attorney as soon as possible. Are you sure it's from Avis? Are they asking you to settle out of court first? Could it be a fraud?
nanabee is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 03:46 AM
  #8  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 42,574
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Why are you posting this troll-level BS?
Dukey1 is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 04:00 AM
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
^^^^^

This.
DonTopaz is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 08:09 AM
  #10  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@nanabee : Are they asking you to settle out of court first? >> No, the thing is i have never been contacted by them ever since until i got this letter. Are you sure it's from Avis? >> the letter and details match what i have. So i would say yes. I am calling them today too.
PK001 is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 08:13 AM
  #11  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@Dukey1: I took this rental service for my travel needs as per my trip plan and i think it is relevant in this site. You have a choice to ignore, or rather use some better mental algo to classify if this thread is troll BS or not.
PK001 is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 08:16 AM
  #12  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,876
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ignore him. I think it's interesting--and raises a question. I thought the fraud idea was also possible but then they have all that info. I would think you could clear this up very quickly with a high level customer service agent.
Gretchen is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 10:27 AM
  #13  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Everything about this is fishy. It's either entirely made up, or some critical information is missing. Avis just doesn't let you pay for the damage waiver and then, when you have an accident, turn around and say "ho-ho, you signed in invisible ink, you don't really have the damage waiver!"

First reason to be suspicious is that OP registers on Fodor's only to make this assertion. Maybe OP is an exception, but the overwhelming majority of people who sign up and then post a grievance don't have much credibility.

Next reason to be suspicious is that the OP posted from outside the U.S. If he's outside the U.S., exactly where is he going to pursue his legal claim?

Here's my guess: OP did something or other that invalidated the LDW. (For example, I believe the LDW does not kick in if the driver is guilty of certain types of gross negligence.) Though it would certainly be entertaining to hear the justifications for his "counter-claim."
DonTopaz is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 11:07 AM
  #14  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Update: I spoke to the Avis' lawyer via the contact no that is provided in the NJ court document and told them I have the LDW acceptance in the contract. She checked and told me she understood that I did have LDW after she investigated and informed me that she would call me back this afternoon. Will keep you updated on this. At this point, I am trying to understand what led to this. Mean while, I am looking into paying this case to my Lawyer and have it take over.

>> Though it would certainly be entertaining to hear the justifications for his "counter-claim. Yes, the time and money that will be spent on this , but of course i will be advised by my lawyer on this.

Outside US??
PK001 is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 11:20 AM
  #15  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Okay, good news: Just got a call from Avis' Lawyer confirming that they are dismissing my case and sending me a letter today as well as preparing to file in the court to withdraw as well. Will wait for confirmation letter. Accordingly I would deal with it, specifically making sure my name is deleted from court records. keep you posted. Thanks guys for supporting.
PK001 is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 11:32 AM
  #16  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
> Outside US??

You're either outside the U.S., or there's yet another inconsistency in your story.

Your original post is timestamped at 10:15pm Eastern U.S. time December 16, and that same post says that "today" is "17/DEC/2014." There are lots of places where it's Dec 17 when you made that post, and every single one of those places is outside the U.S.

So, you're either outside the U.S. (maybe home from 9th grade?), or you were only fooling when you said that you got the letter today, Dec 17th when it wasn't Dec 17th anywhere in the U.S. [OK, except maybe Guam.]
DonTopaz is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 11:44 AM
  #17  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ah..so you went too far on that, missing the big picture, the real problem. that should have been 16/DEC/2014, It is filed under NJ. Apparently, most of your guess and projections are simple wrong, but then 12/17 was not correct, 12/16 is , fat finger syndrome..lol...
Anyway, again thanks for spending your time on this post.
PK001 is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 12:17 PM
  #18  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 49,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This whole thing is weird. I agree with Don Topaz and Dukey.
nanabee is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 12:20 PM
  #19  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 49,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
17/DEC/2014 -- most people in the US would write DEC/17/2014 unless you are in the military. Generally non US citizens write the day first.
nanabee is offline  
Old Dec 17th, 2014, 12:43 PM
  #20  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ok guys, get over the date format, i said it should be 16 Dec. US resident who has lived in many countries who posts here does not have to be US citizen and 16/DEC/2014 is perfectly OK and a US citizen for that matter anyone should not have any problem whatsoevr to understand that, as you said non-us citizens write the day first. just because date format is different, does not mean the post does not have any merit. As for the problem, i am happy that the case is being dismissed. will keep you updated when the issue gets closed.
PK001 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -