The complaint has been investigated and
resolved to the customer's satisfactionResolved Enterprise Holdings/Alamo — Fraudulent car rental damage claim
resolved to the customer's satisfaction
The resolution I want is a genuine "Loss Damage Report" with photos and employee/body shop witness statements, not a generic unattributed damage claim of "Passenger Front Door: Dent-dent right front door" with "Incident Details: advised to create claim to pass door". I need to be able to submit a proper claim to my insurance companies. Proper resolution would also involve letting my body guy examine the car to document the purported "damage" (I contend there was not any damage, and certainly not any damage that occurred while the vehicle was in my possession), then getting car repaired and back on the road ASAP to limit the continuing and additionally bogus "loss of use" claim that will allegedly be accruing.
Enterprise uses these complaint forums to pretend they are helping the customer. For instance, at another site my complaint is marked "resolution pending" even though Enterprise is doing nothing at all to resolve my complaint. Alamo (an Enterprise company) has verbally claimed I put a "ripple" in the passenger door of a rental car (for which, if I "did it", I have insurance -- but they refuse to provide the information necessary to pursue a claim). They refuse to allow my body guy access to the vehicle to verify the "damage", refuse to provide any photos or proof of damage, refuse to put me in touch with anyone who can resolve the problem. I have multiple responses from [email protected] -- none of which actually respond to anything and some of which ask me for information that is actually in the prior email and email subject line. I have spoken to Tucson Alamo manager Mark Damon (the location where they didn't give me the "Rental Agreement Jacket" with all the contract terms in it -- and Enterprise continues to withold it). He finally contacted me a week after the rental. He says he can't assist and can't put me in touch with anyone who can. Their "Social Media" team has assured me I should follow the "advice" the Tucson manager gave me, based on reviewing his comments in my data file. (But, he did not give me any "advice" nor provide any steps toward resolution at all except for assigning a claim #). I have sent faxes to Tucson Alamo - both managers Pamela Swango and Mark Damon, Clayton J. Thornton, regional manager in Ontario where I returned the vehicle (and the branch making the bogus claim) and to their "Damage Recovery Unit" -- with no response from any of them except for the Tucson manager (who didn't know about my fax, didn't have any useful information for me, didn't explain what prompted his call, and didn't follow through on sending me the information he implied he would be sending). He did tell me the vehicle is on "litigation hold" -- meaning, I assume, that Alamo is building a large "loss of use" claim for what is, at best, extremely minor damage (or, as I contend, no damage at all). Any reasonable business would work with me to file my insurance claim and get the car back on the road ASAP. Enterprise, however, wants to send a "message" that customers need to buy their overpriced damage waiver, which I did not. So, their vehicle return system and their phalanx of customer service representatives are all there expressly to prevent the customer from resolving the damage claim in a reasonable and expeditious fashion. Moreover, it is my opinion that I was switched to the specific vehicle from the one I reserved for the explicit purpose of having a "ripple" in the door with no scratches, dings or other marks, so that receiving it in a dimly lit parking garage, I would have no opportunity to notice the "ripple". Which, BTW, I could not see even when it was purportedly pointed out to me. At worst, there might be a prior poorly done door repair job. My claim # is [protected]. My RA# is [protected]. My RES # is [protected]. My Allianz claim # is [protected]. I don't know if I can include a link, but I have detailed everything at my own blog: http://daltrey.org/b2evo1/blog7.php. There are no photos -- and Tucson Manager Damon assures me that neither Tucson nor Ontario took any photos of the damage (although Ontario told me at return that they would have to "check with Tucson" for photos of the vehicle before making their claim; and an online customer service rep. told me Tucson "has cameras" and will have documented the vehicle condition upon my receipt of it. Via another site, Enterprise "Social Monitoring" person Carol H. has told me to "follow the advice" of Mr. Damon -- but he didn't give me any advice, in fact he said that he could not assist and he could not put me in touch with anyone who can assist. I was told by phone customer service that I would be receiving a call from the "regional team", which has never contacted me; later telling me that the "regional team" takes care of matters "in the order in which they are received", which implies they have far more complaints than they have staff to deal with the complaints. On the other hand, Mr. Damon said the regional team cannot tell me anything different from what he has told me, and that resolution must come from the damage recovery unit -- for which he has no contact information (and the damage recovery unit has not responded to my faxes). Other online complaints suggest that the damage recovery unit routinely waits a month or more and then sends out unexpected and undocumented "damage" claims, thereafter sending the claim out to a collection agency to harass any customer who actually expects some proof that the damage occurred. All presumably based on the terms of a contract they have refused to provide me, with a company that is almost certainly not the same one running the damage recovery unit (as far as I can tell, the Tucson and Ontario branches are not the same legal entity).
But, it's not even possible to track down what legal entity or entities I am dealing with and the employees apparently don't know either -- although "Enterprise Holdings" is allegedly a $25 billion a year company and the largest rental "company", through its Alamo, National and Enterprise subsidiaries. I will walk if I have to rather than do business with this company ever again. This system suggests uploading documents -- I have fax receipts for all of my documents, but as far as I can tell no one at Enterprise ever actually reads them (Damon did not know I had faxed his branch). If Enterprise wants to provide me with some other fax number or secure document drop location, I will gladly provide them with additional copies -- though asking for redundant information appears to be one of their delay/harassment tactics, despite being able to look up my transaction based on my last name.
The complaint has been investigated and resolved to the customer's satisfaction.