AVIS Car Rental Complaint

On 6 March 2019, I picked up a rental car at AVIS Menlo Park with the details Toyota ETIOS and registration number CA903571. I fully inspected the car as per the normal practice in the presence of an AVIS official and all damages or defaults / defects on the car were identified. The AVIS official did not identify any other damages or faults to the car and I took over the car and drove it off. When I arrived at home, I tried to lock the car and realised that the locks were not working. I asked my nephew to check if I am pressing the correct buttons to lock the car and after a while, we realised that there was a fault in the locking system of the car.

I phoned the AVIS office on the same day and reported the fault to them and indicated that I will bring the car in for inspection after dropping my daughter at school on the morning of 7 March 2019. Upon presenting the car to the AVIS official, it became apparent that there was a fault in the locking system of the car which the AVIS official had not picked up the day before during inspection of the car, when they handed it over to me. I found that very unprofessional that AVIS did not know the condition of a car that they were handing over to me, that this car had a fault locking system. The AVIS official acknowledged the fault and apologised and arranged that I will be given a replacement car.

The replacement car was a SUZUKI SWIFT registration number HS41CJGP, given to me on 7 March 2019. The car was fully inspected as per the normal procedure and all damages on the car identified. The windscreen was also inspected by looking at it just generally without lifting the wipers and the windscreen appeared to not have any visible damages.

I returned the SUZUKI SWIFT car on 14 March 2019. The car was inspected upon arrival and there was no damage identified on the body of the car. The AVIS official who assisted me with the inspection then moved to the windscreen and the car was not inspected the same way when it was given to me on 7 March 2019. The inspector went straight to a tiny spot (size of a pin head) on windscreen hidden next to the wipers of the car, he lifted the wipers and and pointed out a tiny chip (pin-head size), that I could not even see. It almost looked like the AVIS official knew that the chip was there. I got suspicious that the official could possibly have known that the there was this tiny chip when the car was handed over to me and I immediately disputed that I caused the chip and I requested an investigation of the chip as per notes on the AVIS "Damage and Incident Report" form. I had a work colleague of mine by the name of Rhoda Du Plessis who was with me on the day when I returned the car and witnessed the inspection and was also shocked that the windscreen wipers were picked up to identify a tiny chip. She is willing to come forward as a witness to this matter.

AVIS took a few days to investigate what I was disputing and came back to me and said I caused the tiny pin-head sized chip on the windscreen. They further informed me that they had replaced the windscreen of the car two (2) weeks later as per invoice dated 28 March 2019 and I was liable to pay R4590.64 towards the replacement of the windscreen. The amount owing has now accumulated interest and in July 2019, I was informed by the debt collectors (CreditWorx) appointed by AVIS in May 2019, that I am now owing R5831.62 for the replacement of the windscreen.

I would like to put it on record that since 9 May 2019 until 28 July 2019, I have been called and harassed every day by CreditWorx Debt collectors about the windscreen issue. The first call was from a gentleman called Brandall. I sent him an e-mail on the same day he phoned me (9 May 2019) to advise him that I had escalated the matter to the MIOSA Ombudsman. I thought this would stop the calls from the Debt Collector while my matter was being attended to, but I was called every day and this emotionally traumatised me. I found their actions unprofessional especially after explaining that an Ombudsman was looking into my matter / complaint.

The complaint to the MIOSA Ombudsman was lodged on 26 April 2019. On 19 August 2019, I received an e-mail from the MIOSA Ombudsman via a letter attached and dated 7 May 2019, that they do not have jurisdiction over my complaint.

RELIEF / ASSISTANCE SOUGHT:

1. I am requesting HelloPeter to assist me on the matter where I am disputing the damage of windscreen on the SUZUKI SWIFT car registration number HS41CJGP as I did not cause the damage. 2. HelloPeter to further assist me to investigate the matter with AVIS and remove the liability of a damaged windscreen from me, because I did not cause it. The inspectors of AVIS who inspected both cars issued to me on 6 and 7 March 2019, did not do a proper and thorough inspection job in that they could not pick up a faulty locking system on the car issued on 6 March 2019 and I suspect that did a shoddy inspection job on the car issued on 7 March 2019. 3. I believe this is malicious, false and baseless allegation against me for the windscreen as I believe this is the modus operandi to cheat unsuspecting consumers and get them to pay for things and damages they did not do as part of a money-making scheme on their part. 4. HelloPeter to assist me to also direct me to the correct Ombudsman to handle this matter so that I can lay my complaint formerly with them. 5. I find it suspicious that AVIS would go and replace a windscreen with a tiny chip the size of a pin-head within 2 weeks of having unfairly accused me of causing the damage to the windscreen. The size of the damage (which was not caused by me), did not warrant an immediate replacement of the windscreen at a cost of R4590.64. Why couldn't they have gone to PG Glass to get that tiny chip fixed at a fraction of the cost. I believe their actions is a money making business and scheme aimed at consumers that cannot defend themselves. 6. I request HelloPeter to stop AVIS and CreditWorx from blaming me for the cost of the repairs of a windscreen I did not damage and totally removing this financially liability from me. 7. To stop AVIS and CreditWorx from listing me under ITC or other Credit Bureau's because I am not liable for this damage and cost of replacement of a windscreen. 8. AVIS has already demonstrated that their inspection system is not accurate and up-to-standard as I was first issued with a faulty car that had the entire central locking system not working after their inspectors could not pick up this fault and remove the car from the pool of “active” rental cars. This car was the TOYOTA ETIOS registration number CA903571 issued to me on 6 March 2019.

9. I almost feel like AVIS has victimised me for picking up the fault on the first car that they issued to me with an entire locking system not working. I believe I am paying for that through this accusation that I caused the chip to the windscreen of the second car issued to me.