I assume you picked up on this via the Usenet boards (right)?

Yes.


Kind of scary that everyone in the world can access that stuff, now, and 100
years from now, but in a case like this it's cool. It will snowball on
Purco someday to the point that they will have even more problems defending
themselves.

Where did you rent your car? When?

Wisconsin.... picked up, dropped off, and paid for there (never
left the state).
Late November.

Wyoming for me. I actually drove it into Montana, and Utah along the way,
but picked it up, and returned it in Wyoming.

Besides all of this, I'm concerned that in order for me to
pursue them I would have to prove they are wrong, and that
is not an easy thing to do since I have nothing in writing
that the car was O.K.


Hmmm... it may appear that our ordeals are different, despite
being similar.

If I'm correct, you are trying to dispute/resolve whether the
damages occurred while you were in possession of the rental
vehicle.


Yes, and more...


In my case... whether the vehicle was damaged in my possession or
not is now irrelevant. The car rental company, and PurCo have
not complied with Wisconsin laws regarding rental car damage
claims. Some of which are the prompt notification of the damage,
allowing the renter 2 days to inspect the car before repairs are
made, getting two estimates from competing shops, enclosing those
estimates with any claim, etc. In my case, the car rental
company did not meet a single of those requirements, when they
are required by law to meet all of them.


Same here, I wasn't notified for four months......the repairs didn't occur
until 7-8 weeks after the alleged damages occurred (alleged by then, totally
disputed by me, I didn't do anything to that car). Do they think they have
a prayer in court?

Through some of the correspondence with PurCo, it has been stated
that my case is exempt from those Wisconsin laws, which it is
not. By falsely representing the legal status of the debt as
valid, when it is not, PurCo shot themselves in the foot by
violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.


They wouldn't respond to my inquires as to the letter of the law in Wyoming.
I've poked around a bit but where did you find the Wisconsin status that
specifically addressed timelines as to how long they have to notify, and the
right to inspect the car/two estimates before repairs? I don't know if you
had the time to read those links I gave you, but there was an issue in there
talking about the multiple estimate requirements which was one of the key
points that the judge overturned the prior courts findings.

If you read through my prior Usenet threads you probably have also seen that
Purco got into some trouble in Utah for not having a license in Idaho to
collect debt, but representing themselves as if they did. They were forced
to stop doing so, at least for a period of time last year. You may want to
check the Wisconsin to determine if they have a license to operate in
Wisconsin, and whether they are acting as a collector. Here's summary of
the Idaho case, but I have some good detail around if you need me to dig it
up.
http://www.idahobizlaw.com/summaries..._F inance.htm

From where, I don't know, but I thought your business was done in
Wisconsin as well. Unless the state you did business in has
similar laws on rental car damage claims, it appears that we're
fighting two different things.

My main problem is getting PurCo to see their wrong-doings & to
see that the debt was invalid before it was even turned over to
them. They seem somewhat shady... it's a no-brainer that the car
rental company did not comply with the state laws, thereby
forfeiting any claim the may wish to make. Yet PurCo continues
on with their efforts to collect... almost as if they are o.k.
with collecting invalid debts (which could obviously land them in
even bigger trouble than what they've been in before).

Yeah, I have talked to them about obvious discrepancies in the claim from
Alamo, yet they basically were ignoring it and continuing to push the claim.
I guess some people just give up, so they keep pushing, hoping the consumer
will pay cause it's too time consuming and/or costly. I think that's part
of the process/approach they take and the reputation they want to show to
their clients, that they will take the risk to get the debt collected.
There's some managers out there that stand to get promotions if they can
reduce bad debt , and since Purco will take the heat for them, why wouldn't
they sign up with them?

I'm hoping that eventually there will be enough claims out there that a
class action suit can somehow be initiated where people such as ourselves
can join in to put these guys out of business, or at least straighten them
out.

The best thing about all their violations is that I have actually
got PurCo & the car rental co responding to my claims at this
point, instead of me having to respond to their claims.

I'm in the process of filing complaints to the Wisconsin & Utah
Consumer Protection Depts., in addition to the one in my home
state. Also, due to PurCo's Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
violation, all is being forwarded to the Federal Trade Commission
as well.


Engaged my insurance company, and they are working
on it. Purco stopped calling me.


If you talk to your insurer again, it may sound obvious, but try
to get as much documented communication going with PurCo as
possible. As soon as they told me who they were & what they
wanted, I told them to say no more & fax/mail me what they had to
say (so I would have everything in writing). Thus far, I rec'd
somewhere around 10 faxes, and literally every single fax has
said something new to help my cause & hurt theirs.
I actually got one fax from them that contained emails between
PurCo & the car rental company... when trying to assess their
compliance with the Wisc laws, they appear to be having trouble
finding those laws & literally give up their search and say
something along the lines of, "don't know whether we are in
compliance or not... so continue collection efforts." Ignorance
may be bliss, but it doesn't exempt you from the law.

Actually sounds like you had more luck than I here, but I did request their
documentation and nothing in there proves anything. Most of the supposed
documentation was handwritten and could have been created at any time.
Their documentation does prove that Alamo waited two months to get the
damage fixed (would they really allow the car to be rented if it had $1900
in damage to it?) and that they waited four months to pursue the claim .
Also there were no photos taken, which my insurance company is requiring
since we didn't get to see the damage.

best of luck
Phil

You too, but if you don't mind, drop me a line as things progress, I'm
curious. I will also.

FYI

The rental car industry is quite inter-connected. These questionable
tactics mimic others such as those by the Republic Industries conglomerate
that is embedded in the auto industry including rentals. sent you some more
detail there if you care, in e-mail, but they own many car dealerships
across the country, AutoNation, rental companies including Alamo,
Nationwide, and others, and much more (Miami Dolphins, Florida Marlins, etc,
etc, etc, etc, etc.). I think they are in the Top 100 in the Fortune 500,
but most people have never heard of the parent company. I
Thanks for the correspondence and good luck!