My daughter, Kate, is a nursing student at USC. On September 10, 2008 she rented a car from Enterprise while her car was being repaired. She drove the rental 79 miles according to the Enterprise records. Kate and her roommate returned the rental at around 4:00 or 4:15 on September 11, 2008. The car was checked in and an Enterprise employee drove them to Cottman (around 5 miles according to Henry Medlin, the assistant manager) to pick up Kate’s car. The girls were driven to Cottman in the car Kate rented from Enterprise. (Kate’s roommate is willing to testify to this.) The Enterprise employee left Cottman alone in the enterprise car Kate had rented.
On September 17th, 2008 we were contacted by Jeff Scott from the Loss Control Department. He insisted Kate had damaged the underneath of the car she had rented and we were to contact our insurance company or pay for the damages. We, of course, were shocked at this belated news. Mr. Scott stated an employee started the car on September 11th after Kate dropped the car off at the Enterprise office and the car overheated because of a damaged radiator. I called Henry Medlin, the assistant manager, and he had a different story. He said leaking fluid was seen under the car. Mr. Medlin was not clear when the leaking fluid was found. I did some more investigating.
I called Mr. Scott on September 18th, 2008, he told me the car was picked up by a tow truck the day Kate returned the car which would have been September 11th, 2008. I tried to explain to him an Enterprise employee drove the car the last 10 or so miles, the last 5 of which he was in the car alone. If the car had a damaged radiator, from my investigation, according to the information Mr. Scott gave me, the car could not have been driven to Cottman and back. He told me to have Kate send a written dispute. She did – it is attached.
A few days later, dated September 19th, 2008, we received a letter, an invoice from the body shop and the receipt for towing. I could not see how a car with that kind of damage could have been driven to Cottman and back to Enterprise. So it seemed to us the damage had to have been done after the girls were dropped off at Cottman. We ask Mr. Scott to investigate further.
We received a letter dated October 20th, 2008 from Mr. Scott that stated “If and when we receive all documents in regards to your claim we will fully review them and contact you. Please be advised that this may take up to 60 days.” He never contacted us to send him any information we had collected. On October 23, 2008, the day after we received this letter, we received a call from Mr. Scott. He had completed his investigation and expected payment.
When Mr. Scott contacted us on October 23rd, 2008 and we were told he had completed his investigation to its fullest extent and our dispute was reviewed fully and we had been found at fault. I asked again about the Enterprise employee driving the girls in the car Kate had rented and Mr. Scott’s answer was “…from speaking to all involved parties I have been advised that that vehicle was not used to deliver her.” He never seemed to understand there were two girls in the car!
We did call our insurance company and turned this over to them when neither Mr. Scott nor anyone in his office would return our calls.
Here are the facts Mr. Scott missed:
When Kate rented the car her rental agreement shows there were 20138 miles on the car. When she returned the car Kate’s receipt showed 79 miles had been driven. This matches the information that Mr. Medlin gave me on the phone – 20217 miles on the car when Kate returned it. When the car reached the body shop it had 20228 miles – that is 11 miles driven by a car Mr. Scott said was not drivable and had to be towed that day. This extra 11 miles driven also matches closely to the number of miles Mr. Medlin gave me on the phone, September 17th, 2008, as the distance from Enterprise to Cottman and back to Enterprise. This is the miles the Enterprise driver drove the girls (in the car Kate rented) to Cottman and then drove alone back to Enterprise.
Mr. Scott told me the car was towed on the day Kate returned it. That would have been September 11th sometime after 4:45pm; take a look at the tow receipt. The car was not towed until September 12th, at 12:50pm.
The first letter Mr. Scott sent states “When this vehicle was checked in, damage was noted to the radiator and engine.” When in fact, Kate’s roommate was sitting in the car while Mr. Medlin and Kate checked the car in and no damage was noted. Neither the trunk nor the engine was checked but, the car was drivable because then an Enterprise employee got in the car with the girls and they drove off the lot to Cottman. At this point Kate’s roommate had not gotten out of the car.
If Mr. Scott had investigated our dispute “to its fullest extent” as he stated, why didn’t he know about the 11 extra miles? Why didn’t he know someone had to have driven the car that he stated was not drivable? Also, why didn’t he know when the car was towed? Why didn’t Mr. Scott know Kate’s roommate was with her when she returned the car?
Other concerns I have…
…Kate’s receipt was falsified. Her receipt shows she returned the car on September 11th, 2008 at 2:02pm. She was in Clinical at the hospital until 3:30. After Clinical, Kate and her roommate left the hospital and, went back to their apartment. Kate and her roommate then drove the rental to Enterprise. They did not get to the Enterprise office until around 4:15pm. Mr. Medlin was trying to help Kate out by reducing her excessive rental charges, but legally he cannot change her receipt to show a different time the rental car was returned. This document has to show the correct date and time of returning a rental car, especially when there is a possibility the customer may get accused of damages to a car. This information could have an influence on the outcome of an investigation.
…Why wouldn’t Mike McCown return my calls? He is the one Mr. Medlin said found the leaking fluids under the ca r. He is also the manager of that branch.
…Why would Mr. Medlin or Mr. McCown, the Enterprise office manager, not tell Mr. Scott, the Loss Control Administrator, that an Enterprise employee drove the car Kate rented?
…Austin an employee of Enterprise and Mr. Medlin told me Mr. Scott told them they were not to talk to me. All questions should be referred to Mr. Scott. But after my last phone conservation with Mr. Scott on October 23, 2008, he would not return my calls. I left at least 3 messages for Mr. Scott’s superior, Michelle Robson, she never called me back. I have also left 3 messages for Mike McCown to call me – never heard from him. I have cell phone records to confirm this.

…We were sent a letter dated October 20th, stating an investigation may take 60 days. Then we get a phone call on October 23rd saying Mr. Scott had made his decision. (I want to know what evidence he uses to make his decision).
…A few days after my last conservation with Mr. Scott, my daughter started getting collection letters and phone calls from a collection service. We have informed them this has been turned over to our insurance company and our insurance company has told them to stop calling us. We have gotten calls from them every day this week.
I have told Mr. Scott every piece of information I have collected to help resolve this matter. I want the situation investigated in hopes another Enterprise customer will not have to go through the same thing. If my 21 year old college student daughter had to deal with this on her own, she could not have done it. I know now, our insurance company will investigate for us, but there is no way they could have known all the little pieces that proved our daughter did not do this. And would it have been worth an insurance company’s time?
I would appreciate any help and information to prevent this from affecting our daughter’s credit and to stop the harassing letters and phone calls. I keep thinking every day it is going to stop, and now I see I need to take whatever action necessary to help my daughter clear this up.