matthandy

I've not posted on the Budget forum before, but I'm reasonably regular on the BA board and the trip reports forum. I'm hoping that the knowledgable people on this board will be able to advise me on a little situation that I ended up in with Budget in Australia.

I rented a car in Perth, parked it next to the cabin that I'd rented at a holiday park and then went off with friends for some wine tasting. The car was parked in a parking space which was back from the road. When I got back I was approached by someone who told me that he'd hit the car when parking his caravan. The front was damaged, light scratched and the bonnet was dented. He spoke to his insurer and started claim procedures.

I spoke to Budget to inform them of the incident and they basically told me that I was fully liable and that I would have to pay the excess on the rental agreement ($2500) and then I would have to try to claim the costs back from his insurer. They were not interested in pursuing any recovery themselves, despite the fact that the guy admitted liability and his insurer were willing to cover the cost of the repairs. Budget refused to speak with his insurance company directly, which put me square in the middle between Budget and the company. I was surprised, given that it is not my car, I do not own it. I had expected Budget to pursue the claim for repairs from the insurer, like any owner of any car that had been damaged by a third party.

I was charged for the repairs, plus 'loss of use' fees and an admin fee. They even had the nerve to charge an admin fee on top of the admin fee (a percentage rate on top of the entire account). I argued this and was told, very rudely, that they would take me to court and I would lose. They were threatening on the phone and very aggressive. They made a bulk charge on my credit card, leaving me to then try to claim everything back from the third party's insurer.

The insurer was actually very helpful, but given Budget's refusal to speak to them directly, communication was difficult. The insurer refused to pay the admin fee and loss of use, saying that Budget had not provided suitable evidence. The loss of use was based on predictions and presumptions, average utilisation etc, rather than evidence of bookings that had to be refused because the car was being repaired.

The insurer said that they would normally deal with Budget directly and had never heard of a renter being treated in this manner. I consistently pleaded with Budget to talk with the insurer directly, but they flat out refused each time, saying that it was all my issue to deal with.

Eventually, with help from the insurer, the admin fee and loss of use fees were dropped by Budget. The repairs were paid for by the insurer, so I am not out of pocket. It seems as though Budget were using the threat of court action and ambigious terms in the rental agreement to scare me into paying questionable charges.

The insurer has urged me to speak to the ombudsman here and make a formal complaint, based on the fact that Budget were laying charges on me for which they had no evidence.

Based on other's experience, is this what one could expect to occur in this situation?