Refuelling receipt - BNE airport. Scam or ripoff?
Jan 10, 2014, 4:57 am
#31
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sunshine Coast, QLD Australia
Programs: AA P, QFPM, EYG, HH D, PC PA
Posts: 205
Have been ask for receipt on all rental returns to Hertz BNE for last 6 months. On one occasion another driver first said he didn't have a receipt and then, after being told the charges, suddenly 'found' the receipt. The agent noted the station location used for re-fueling was not 'as close as possible' to the airport and refused the receipt. So rest assured they are checking receipt details for both where the car is being filled up and how many litres are added compared to the kilometres driven.
Long story short, re-fuel close to the airport and keep your receipt and you won't have any issues.
Long story short, re-fuel close to the airport and keep your receipt and you won't have any issues.
Jan 10, 2014, 9:46 am
#32
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 27,222
Yes, and my own documentation (or "audit") would show the fuel gauge at the same level before and after the rental. I mean if Hertz wants to somehow guarantee/prove that the car was actually topped off before they rented it to me, then they can try and do that, but I'm not sure how much I (or a third party) would want to necessarily rely on their internal records.
Jan 11, 2014, 3:22 pm
#33
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,835
So you're required to take Hertz's word that the tank is full on renting (as evidenced by the gauge) but they don't accept it as evidence on return. That seems equitable....!
This is precisely the kind of unfair practice that consumer protection legislation is designed to eradicate IMO. The "you signed the contract" justifications are pretty weak.
This is precisely the kind of unfair practice that consumer protection legislation is designed to eradicate IMO. The "you signed the contract" justifications are pretty weak.
Jan 11, 2014, 3:42 pm
#34
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,552
[QUOTE=Kgmm77;22134655]So you're required to take Hertz's word that the tank is full on renting (as evidenced by the gauge) but they don't accept it as evidence on return. That seems equitable....!
No, you take Hertz's word based if you don't think that they are attempting to breach their side of the contract or , if concerned, go into a petrol station close to location and see whether the car will take more than 2L fuel
Hertz goes by the amount needed to refuel ( or mileage ) ; you are quite capable of doing the same
I do not think that there can be anything weak about a contract that requires that the renter provides evidence of refuelling when having travelled a distance such that the fuel guage may well not be able to be used to determine whether the car has been refuelled
No, you take Hertz's word based if you don't think that they are attempting to breach their side of the contract or , if concerned, go into a petrol station close to location and see whether the car will take more than 2L fuel
Hertz goes by the amount needed to refuel ( or mileage ) ; you are quite capable of doing the same
I do not think that there can be anything weak about a contract that requires that the renter provides evidence of refuelling when having travelled a distance such that the fuel guage may well not be able to be used to determine whether the car has been refuelled
Jan 11, 2014, 11:36 pm
#35
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,835
[QUOTE=Dave Noble;22134756]
I don't see where "breach of contract" is relevant when my post clearly stated that the inequitable contractual requirement imposed by Hertz is unfair? 
The fact remains that Hertz are requiring renters to provide additional proof over and above the fuel gauge to demonstrate the tank is full, but will not provide proof from their side that it was full on renting.
This is inequitable. Period.
Whilst you could take the car immediately to a petrol station after renting:
1) this would be a ridiculous imposition; and
2) more importantly, this would prove nothing as you don't actually know how much fuel is supposed to be in the tank. Is it "full" to the extent an autofill stops, or is it "fill it until the fuel is trickling down the side of the car"? Or somewhere in between? Who knows?
So you're required to take Hertz's word that the tank is full on renting (as evidenced by the gauge) but they don't accept it as evidence on return. That seems equitable....!
No, you take Hertz's word based if you don't think that they are attempting to breach their side of the contract or , if concerned, go into a petrol station close to location and see whether the car will take more than 2L fuel
Hertz goes by the amount needed to refuel ( or mileage ) ; you are quite capable of doing the same
I do not think that there can be anything weak about a contract that requires that the renter provides evidence of refuelling when having travelled a distance such that the fuel guage may well not be able to be used to determine whether the car has been refuelled
No, you take Hertz's word based if you don't think that they are attempting to breach their side of the contract or , if concerned, go into a petrol station close to location and see whether the car will take more than 2L fuel
Hertz goes by the amount needed to refuel ( or mileage ) ; you are quite capable of doing the same
I do not think that there can be anything weak about a contract that requires that the renter provides evidence of refuelling when having travelled a distance such that the fuel guage may well not be able to be used to determine whether the car has been refuelled
The fact remains that Hertz are requiring renters to provide additional proof over and above the fuel gauge to demonstrate the tank is full, but will not provide proof from their side that it was full on renting.
This is inequitable. Period.
Whilst you could take the car immediately to a petrol station after renting:
1) this would be a ridiculous imposition; and
2) more importantly, this would prove nothing as you don't actually know how much fuel is supposed to be in the tank. Is it "full" to the extent an autofill stops, or is it "fill it until the fuel is trickling down the side of the car"? Or somewhere in between? Who knows?
Jan 11, 2014, 11:44 pm
#36
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 35
Jan 11, 2014, 11:47 pm
#37
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 35
Whilst you could take the car immediately to a petrol station after renting:
1) this would be a ridiculous imposition; and
2) more importantly, this would prove nothing as you don't actually know how much fuel is supposed to be in the tank. Is it "full" to the extent an autofill stops, or is it "fill it until the fuel is trickling down the side of the car"? Or somewhere in between? Who knows?
1) this would be a ridiculous imposition; and
2) more importantly, this would prove nothing as you don't actually know how much fuel is supposed to be in the tank. Is it "full" to the extent an autofill stops, or is it "fill it until the fuel is trickling down the side of the car"? Or somewhere in between? Who knows?
Jan 12, 2014, 1:23 am
#38
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: San Jose, California, USA
Programs: AS 100K, UA MM, AA MM, IC Plat Amb, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold, Hyatt Explorist
Posts: 3,146
I have two thoughts on this issue:
(1) This issue (Hertz requiring a receipt when the car is driven less than a certain number of miles) is not new. If you do a search, you'll see that it's been discussed here on FT many times. It doesn't surprise me when this catches infrequent renters unaware, but I am surprised that a frequent renter and longtime FT'er isn't aware of this Hertz scam/ripoff. (Choose your term; IMHO, they both apply.)
(2) I am bothered by the inability of the Hertz agent to precisely define how this is calculated. If it's specified in the contract, then there should be no confusion. I would get Hertz to confirm (preferably in writing) how this fee is calculated and then dispute the overcharge with my credit card issuer. It's one thing for Hertz to ripoff unsuspecting renters in this situation; it's another to charge an amount that's inconsistent with what they claim.
(1) This issue (Hertz requiring a receipt when the car is driven less than a certain number of miles) is not new. If you do a search, you'll see that it's been discussed here on FT many times. It doesn't surprise me when this catches infrequent renters unaware, but I am surprised that a frequent renter and longtime FT'er isn't aware of this Hertz scam/ripoff. (Choose your term; IMHO, they both apply.)
(2) I am bothered by the inability of the Hertz agent to precisely define how this is calculated. If it's specified in the contract, then there should be no confusion. I would get Hertz to confirm (preferably in writing) how this fee is calculated and then dispute the overcharge with my credit card issuer. It's one thing for Hertz to ripoff unsuspecting renters in this situation; it's another to charge an amount that's inconsistent with what they claim.
Jan 12, 2014, 1:55 am
#39
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,552
I don't see where "breach of contract" is relevant when my post clearly stated that the inequitable contractual requirement imposed by Hertz is unfair?
The fact remains that Hertz are requiring renters to provide additional proof over and above the fuel gauge to demonstrate the tank is full, but will not provide proof from their side that it was full on renting.
This is inequitable. Period.
The fact remains that Hertz are requiring renters to provide additional proof over and above the fuel gauge to demonstrate the tank is full, but will not provide proof from their side that it was full on renting.
This is inequitable. Period.
Drive > 125Km then return measurements are based on use of guage since it is known that a guage will no longer read full by that time
Jan 12, 2014, 2:08 am
#40
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,835
Not even vaguely inequitable. Since the guage does not move until quite a few kilometres have been driven, it is not reasonable to expect to use the guage to meaure it on return
Drive > 125Km then return measurements are based on use of guage since it is known that a guage will no longer read full by that time
Drive > 125Km then return measurements are based on use of guage since it is known that a guage will no longer read full by that time
They are imposing additional requirements on the renter that they themselves don't follow in EXACTLY the same circumstances. What they are saying is that the gauge is accurate for the renter but not for Hertz. That is inequitable.
Jan 12, 2014, 2:31 am
#41
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,552
....so if the gauge is an inaccurate method of determining whether the tank is full on return, why don't Hertz provide another means of demonstrating the tank is full on rental?
They are imposing additional requirements on the renter that they themselves don't follow in EXACTLY the same circumstances. What they are saying is that the gauge is accurate for the renter but not for Hertz. That is inequitable.
They are imposing additional requirements on the renter that they themselves don't follow in EXACTLY the same circumstances. What they are saying is that the gauge is accurate for the renter but not for Hertz. That is inequitable.
There is nothing onorous in asking for the receipt; if fuel was purchased , then a receipt will have been provided.
I can't imagine Fair Trading classing this as an unfair requirement, but feel free to raise it with them
Jan 13, 2014, 11:46 am
#42
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 27,222
Not even vaguely inequitable. Since the guage does not move until quite a few kilometres have been driven, it is not reasonable to expect to use the guage to meaure it on return
Drive > 125Km then return measurements are based on use of guage since it is known that a guage will no longer read full by that time
Drive > 125Km then return measurements are based on use of guage since it is known that a guage will no longer read full by that time
And if they're going to charge you if they have to add more than X gallons/liters after you return the car anyway, what's the point of asking for the receipt in the first place?
Jan 13, 2014, 2:11 pm
#43
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,552
This doesn't change the fact that even after you drive > 125Km, the fuel gauge is no better an indication of how full the tank is if you drive < 125Km. Why do they mandate a receipt in one instance but not the other?
And if they're going to charge you if they have to add more than X gallons/liters after you return the car anyway, what's the point of asking for the receipt in the first place?
And if they're going to charge you if they have to add more than X gallons/liters after you return the car anyway, what's the point of asking for the receipt in the first place?
It does not stop the final auditing to verify for certain that it is full when > 125Km is driven
Jan 15, 2014, 4:43 am
#45
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,552
As a gold member, they generally just check the driving licence and then hand over the keys and paperwork