Europcar

Brian Daugherty, M.Sc., B.Sc., B.A,

Europcar hired out a defective van to me which started smoking within half an hour. For some reason they want me to pay for whatever was wrong. (£ 15,000 - FIFTEEN THOUSAND POUNDS !!!!)

Summary : I picked the van up in Southampton but by the time I had arrived in Portsmouth, it started smoking. I called the AA who attended briefly but I was told it was in order to proceed. I then proceeded to my destination, loaded up but the van went less than 100m before packing up completely . I called the AA again and the van was taken away. The problems started when Europcar claimed that I had only called the AA once. Additionally I did hit something at roof level (just before calling the AA for the first time) which I am not denying but I need to point out that it is not fanciful to believe that this was caused by distraction caused by my smoking van

I first realised something was seriously wrong when waiting at traffic lights on Park Road in Portsmouth and I could see smoke coming from the van. This was about half an hour after picking up the van in Southampton. You would not expect such a thing to happen to a rental vehicle only half an hour after you had picked it up

Almost immediately after picking the van up, the accelerator started whirring (as a result of a radio program, when I heard someone mention that this sound can result from a broken turbocharger, I questioned whether the van was turbocharged but received no reply).

The van had stalled about 10 times on the way (but obviously not on the motorway which makes up the bulk of the distance)

It was my intention to turn off Park Road at the bottom (which you used to be able to do - I had done this in the opposite direction only recently) but I soon found out that that was no longer possible. It is hard to say (because I no longer live in Portsmouth) but presumably there were signs indicating that after crossing the traffic lights the only option was to enter Gunwharf Quays (several hundreds of metres away), but I was distracted by the smoke (which I only slowly realised was coming from my van)

Inexorably I was drawn into Gunwharf Quays, into the underground car park. There appeared to be no obvious 'escape routes' and when I hit a height restriction sign there was even more obvious because I was half underground by then (all this was happening while I was being distracted by a van that could, for all I knew, burst into flames at any moment[1]).

Although I originally made reference to distraction during the flight of an aircraft, I realise there is a more obvious example of distraction - that caused by drivers looking at their mobile phone. If such an activity can cause major problems, then sitting in a smoking vehicle can certainly produce similar distraction

 

So by this time I was half underground, with a queue of traffic behind me - it would have seemed likely to me that was still an 'escape route' moving forward (which is the only way I could go) -even if that meant just entering and exiting the car park), until I hit something. I am still not 100% certain what I hit - it was not a low roof or anything like that which would have been obvious to see coming.

It seems strange to me to be only told about height restrictions when it is too late to do anything about it.

I had no option but to go backwards, under guidance from staff, and then parked up about 50 metres away, after being sent down an unmarked 'escape route' leading to the shops. That was when I called the AA because of the smoke

The AA patrol officer just made some claims that I must have been riding the clutch and then let me go. I then left to go to Western Parade

After loading up, the van limped about 30 metres before coming to a stop and refusing to re-start. I then called the AA for a second time

After coming to the conclusion that the clutch was burnt out, this second AA man was with me for about 3 hours and arranged the consequences. He did express the belief to me verbally that it was not my fault that the company had given me a van whose clutch burnt out. The van was taken away by Boarhunt. Europcar paid for a hotel room for the night

Problems

Right from the beginning, Europcar have based their actions on the claim that the AA only attended once and acted in accordance with this belief. But this is illogical. The van was not taken away after this first AA visit at between 11 and 12 in the morning and it was not taken away from Gunwharf Quays. It was taken away about 11 hours later from Duisburg Way which is about 2 km away.

They could have consulted the company who carried the van away - Boarhunt who are almost next door (about 100 metres away from the Europcar offices). Possibly the van was also equipped with a GPS system.

The clutch had gone and this was unlikely to have resulted from the actions of any driver within half an hour. They seem to imply that I picked up the van from Southampton and then within half an hour I had not only reached Portsmouth but had loaded the back of the van completely with my worldly goods.

It is not good service to have problems within half an hour of taking possession

Personal Consequences

Extra expenditure to me was around 1 000 pounds. But after they announced on the Friday that they were not going to supply a replacement van, I travelled up to Liverpool to take care of appointments at my new flat. Unfortunately I couldn't find anywhere to stay on the Saturday so I had to spend the night in a local park, an experience I hope to never repeat (this was a night when I should have been spending my second night in my flat). This experience almost trumps the loss of money

The AA do not want to provide me with formal proof that the AA attended me twice - for some reason they say I have to contact Europcar over this matter !!!!

This emphasise the situation - they state they can only act following a request from Europcar, which Europcar have obviously not submitted - and it is not to their advantage to do so. Until then they will not investigate further

---

The British Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association run an alternative resolution service which purports to be independent but is actually run by a body representing the hire car companies

Their declaration is as follows :

We are writing to advise you that we have completed our investigation into your complaint against Europcar. Having carefully reviewed the information from both parties we are now in a position to offer our comments and observations.

We understand you dispute the charge for damage as you state you did not cause the smoking coming from the engine or cause damage to the clutch.

You comment that the AA attended and stated the clutch had burned out and that you state you are not responsible for this.

Europcar have confirmed that the vehicle telematics show it was being driven in a manner indicative of improper handling after collection. It showed instances of hard braking, hard acceleration and sharp corners. They state the AA were called out and call handler wrote down your comments regarding smoke from the engine. However, on arrival, the AA mechanic found no evidence of a mechanical defect or smoke from anywhere, rather they confirm as per the attached AA report that the vehicle had been driven into a barrier lower than the clearance of the van. This was determined to be the cause of the issues you had.

The driver bares responsibility for any damage that occurs during their rental and any impact to the roof of the vehicle invalidates the excess cover on the vehicle as it is considered negligence. We have been presented images of the area that the van was at the time of the incident and the signage is clear on the height restrictions.

As the cause of the issue was damage caused to it as per the above, we cannot request any charge is removed.

With consideration of the evidence before us our perspective is that the charges have been correctly raised by Europcar and we are unable to uphold your complaint against them. We would like to assure you that all aspects of your complaint have been fully examined and would wish to thank you for bringing the matter to our attention.

We value feedback on our alternative dispute resolution service, please click here to answer a few questions on the service you received https://online1.snapsurveys.com/bv8b9q

Kind regards,

Laura

Points that should be noted

1. It is obvious that they haven't taken much notice of what I said. They rely on the first visit by the AA and ignore the second visit altogether

2. There was definitely smoke - is it possible for the clutch to burn out without any smoke?

3. Evidence of hard braking after driving the van for a total of about 30 minutes, and travelling about 30 km between Southampton and Portsmouth, is surely impossible. Most of the way is motorway and urban roads. If it is true that there was evidence of hard braking, then that is surely confirmation that they gave me a defective van. (I had aleready mentioned the problems with the accelerator, which they have chosen to ignore)

4. Europcar are lying when they state that the AA patrol officer found no smoke, so everything else they say should be treated with suspicion as well