Fix these car hire rip-offs

HIRING a car is like navigating the Wild West – and you don’t even need to go abroad to get caught out.

Earlier this month we rented a car for a couple of days in Inverness through Hertz.

When we tried to return it, the woman at the desk claimed she had found a tiny chip in the paintwork that was not listed on her damage report.

‘That will be £280 plus a £35 admin charge. Please sign here,’ she said.

Imagine our (lack of) surprise when we later pulled up the photographs from when we’d picked up the car and found that very same paint chip – a chip that did not look like it was even close to £280 worth of damage.

This is the second time in six months that a car rental company has tried to pull a fast one on me.

In April I was stung for €131(£117) by Thrifty after being signed up for personal accident insurance and premium emergency roadside service. The extra costs were buried in the small print so it wasn’t until we returned home and the money was taken off my credit card that we realised.

Eventually we got our money back, but many tourists don’t.

Part of the problem is that car hire companies are so desperate to top comparison sites that they slash their advertised per day cost to the bone. They then need to make this money back elsewhere.

In Spain, for example, you can find cars on offer for as little as €3 a day. But look closer, and you may find you have to pay for a compulsory insurance policy costing up to €18 a day.

Then there are all the other expensive extras such as adding another driver. All holidaymakers want is a fair price and to be able to enjoy their trip without the niggling feeling they will be hit with a big bill the minute they return to the airport.

So at the risk of repeating my column from July: feeling like you’ve been ripped off shouldn’t be the default experience when hiring a car.

When are the regulators going to crack down on these sharks once and for all?

Disloyalty pays

THIS paper has repeatedly warned about how insurers routinely overcharge loyal customers. But stories such as the one below from Money Mail reader Kim Lewis never fail to rile me.

He says: ‘I know you have covered this subject many times, but could I offer this as an example to encourage everyone to shop around when they get their renewal invitation?

‘I have had my building and contents insurance with Prudential for many years, and through inertia have allowed the policy to ‘auto renew’ each year.

‘This year, I baulked at the renewal figure – more than £560 – so got quotes from two other providers.

‘Both offered the same cover for less than £190 – a third of the price!’

Mr Lewis continues: ‘When I rang the Prudential to query the cost they had quoted, the chap offered to drop it to £330. So why was the automatic renewal figure roughly £230 more?

‘So people who are too time-poor to look properly at their paperwork, or to phone other providers, are fleeced?

‘This smacks of sharp practice.’

BA’s fax faff

WHEN a colleague asked me last week where in the office he might find a fax machine, I was first surprised, then intrigued.

I was under the impression that the advent of email meant no one really needed to use them any more.

It turned out that, on his way home from a family holiday in Italy, his British Airways flight had been delayed and, as a result, he and his brother had to pay for a taxi home from the airport.

When he asked British Airways to reimburse him the £16.07 taxi fare, he was told to fax over a letter from his brother giving permission for him to handle the complaint.

What a faff! Surely a simple email from the brother would have sufficed – especially given that British Airways was willing to accept a copy of the taxi receipt via email?

It’s almost as if it’s in its interest for you to give up . . .