U-Haul International review: Failure to return rental vehicle agreement and affidavit

U-HAUL NOTICE OF COMPLAINT

U-Haul International legal department Address Formal Dispute the affidavit filed by Steven Cauley Fraudulant Equipment Recovery Claim CFS INCIDENT # 202501031527 filed on 07/15/2025 u-Haul of Sunnyslope , 9300 N Cave Creek Rd Phoenix, Az 85020 602-675-1256

I am writing to formally dispute the affidavit filed by Steven Cauley regarding a Notarized Document Claiming “ I Steven Cauley Certify the above described vehicle was taken without my knowledge or permission from U-Haul of Sunnyslope Between the Dates of July 5th to the Present”. This statement is perjured and constitutes a false report to law enforcement under ARS 13-2907.01.
Steven knew the following information prior to filing the fraudulent report to Phoenix Police on Auto Theft Detail Report on July 15th:
1) Steven knew that I did not need his knowledge or permission to rent the truck when Chris Hays of U-Haul of Sunnyslope signed a contract on the Company Portal Rental System, on July 5th.
2) Steven knew that Cheryl B of U-Haul extended the Contract over the phone for $83 but followed Corporate Police where the extended days could be payed when the truck was returned.
3) Steven knew that Corporate Policy the extension fees could be payed when the truck was returned.
4) Steven knew over a phone conversation on July 9th that I told him ” I have no intension of stealing the truck from U-Haul”. I’m having problems with HOM INC
5) Steven knew by all the evidence U-Haul provided him with that the truck was not taken from U-Haul without knowledge or permission on the company portal rental system and the U-Haul Communication Phone Call List the day he signed the Affidavit under penalty of perjury on July 15th when he stated July 5th to the present, we didn’t need his knowledge or permission in the first place due to Chis Hays renting me the vehicle for 4 days on July 5th.
6) Steven Checked the box confirming the rental contract specifically stated that “U-Haul will report the vehicle “as stolen” after 72 hours past due date and time and the penalty is a class 5 felony. In the sworn affidavit the rental agreement contains a warning regarding a felony penalty but omits the mandatory language required by the “Phoenix Police Department stating the vehicle would be reported as stolen after 72 hours past due date/time”. On July 15th Steven Cauley a representative for U-Haul executed a sworn PPD Failure to return vehicle Affidavit. In the sworn affidavit the representative initialized the section affirming they had verified the contract contained the specific warning that the vehicle would be “reported stolen after 72hours”. This affirmation was a material misrepresentation, as the language does not match the requirements sworn to in the affidavit. The PPD Auto Theft Reporting Packet explicitly states; “If [the contract] does not contain this warning we are unable to list the vehicle as stolen”. The defendant was aware of financial penalty, but was not aware that my conduct had crossed a line into a criminal theft of a stolen vehicle. Therefor they did not “ knowingly” commit the crime as defined in Statute ARS 13-1806 because the warning the renter the vehicle will be reported stolen after 72 hours is not in the language of the contract or appended to the end of ARS 13-1806. This a second fraudulent claim.
By filing this Affidavit, Steven Cauley has committed the offense of False reporting to law enforcement (ARS 13-2907.01) and Perjury (ARS 13-2702).
Sierra Pines Management failed to file HOM INC rental package July 7th for the inspectors to inspect the apartment on July 9th having to ask management to file the rental packet on the 9th for the July 11th inspection, however HOM INC failed to do the inspection on July 11th forcing me to have to wait until Monday July 14th, On July 14th I went to Sierra Pines at 2pm to sign the contract then return the vehicle to U-Haul, but management told me it was too late to move in come back tomorrow the July 15th, that’s when I lost my wallet having to go home to look for it, when I returned to Sierra Pines the office was closed having to wait 1 more day, but Steven filed the stolen truck report without writing that there was a rental agreement and Cheryl B extended the contract, because the police don’t file a stolen truck report if the truck was rented with an extension and that I was following late return policy and could pay the days when truck Is returned back to U-Haul, but I was arrested the night of the July 15th now facing 2.5 years because of a fraudulent police report. U-Haul was notified of the above over the phone.
I demand the following Cease and Desist:
1) Stop all recovery attempts or legal actions based on this false document. Notify the prosecutor O’Rourke that U-Haul rescinds prosecution of charges.
2) Records: Provide a copy of the signed affidavit for my legal records.
3) Correction: Correct your internal records to show this was a claim by your agent/representative
Steven Cauleys fraudulent report form stating “I Steven Cauley as described vehicle above was taking without my knowledge or permission from U-Haul of Sunnyslope between the time from July 5th to present when a contract, extension and policy for proof the vehicle was not stolen.
I will pay the restitution immediately in the amount of $1290 for my late rental fees and a molding that needed to be replaced, amongst other fees U-Haul is requesting. I already tried to pay the restitution, but the legal proceedings are delaying payment. I will come to your place of business to pay the restitution whenever you request on North Central Ave, Phoenix Arizona. I wish that Steven Cauley be Corrected on his writings, I really don’t wish to file these charges against him and don’t want him fired just corrected, maybe training.

Failure to address this fraudulent filing will result in further legal action and a formal complaint to the Secretary of State regarding the notarization. Imagine the repercussions across the states for U-Haul, every case would be brought back for judicial review, including lawsuits for employing a fictitious character filing fraudulent police reports having to do time of imprisonment over a material misrepresentation.

Sincerely,

Terry Lee Obrien / [protected] / [protected]@gmail.com