surety bonds and reimbursements for non-existent damages, new sting of the Guarantor to the low-cost Gold Car – Business Insider Italy

Another 3.5 million euros. And the third fine that theAuthority for competition and the market (Agcm) has imposed in less than four years to the low-cost car rental company Gold Car. The Italian-Spanish company was in fact sanctioned on Monday 18 November for "unfair commercial practices" in the management of the deposits required to rent vehicles – the monstre blocks on credit cards up to 2 thousand euros – and for the alleged damages – with related withdrawals from the current account – for dents and for existing customers. A sanction that follows the one already decided November 30, 2016, when, for the same reasons, the fine was of 1.7 million and that of the 31 January 2018, arrived because "non-compliance" with the 2016 provision. Another 680 thousand euros. Now the new blow.

For the Agcm, in fact, Gold Car it would not have interrupted the vicious circle to which customers who had not already signed an insurance policy were subjected.

For the Authority, the incorrect practice was divided into several phases: the first it was a sort of terrifying forcing: if you buy the extension of the insurance, you don't block your credit card for amounts varying between 1,100 and 2,000 euros. As evidenced by the complaints contained in the file. A customer for example reports that "upon delivery of the car they had tried in every way to get me to take out insurance for the amount over 180 euros (…) I refused to sign the insurance that tripled the cost of the rental despite the insistence and even psychological levers". Another tells how once at the desk to pick up the car, he would have been informed that "if I wanted to withdraw the Panda reserved for me, I would have had only two possibilities or commit my credit card for 25/30 days for 1,250 euros (…), or pay 62.95 euros, "to manage my rental with confidence'. Since I could not block this amount on my credit card for a month, I was forced to "twist my neck" (Sic) to accept their imposition, on the grounds that they had in hand, my reservation already paid".

Read more: "In the jungle of rental cars: slalom between insurances that do not insure, hidden clauses and credit cards taken hostage"

To those who still refused the policy – and this was for the Agcm second phase – a "damage card" of the car was signed even before viewing the car and “often incomplete". In practice, the customer found himself certifying the status (including damages) even before seeing the vehicle. Except then being able to communicate to the staff any dents or scratches. But even here, for the Guarantor, there are problems, because often the Gold Car staff was not present or considered those damages to be "slight".

However – and we are at third stage of the vicious circle – upon return of the car, of the check in, those "minor" damages became after a "usually very accurate" check, huge damage. At that point, "the charge of damages (often" micro ") pre-existing and / or allegedly not caused by the customer and already previously reported and considered irrelevant by Goldcar personnel", writes the Authority.

Also on this the AGCM, after the seizure of documents made in some Gold Car offices (Fiumicino, Pisa, Catania) has been reflected in customer reports.

"Emblematic" says the "complaint acquired at Ciampino and consisting of a dated e-mail 30 September 2018 in which the customer, once at check-in to return the car after hours, would have filmed the entire operation "Highlighting no anomalies or further damage to those exposed and documented at the time of the withdrawal". Nevertheless, by e-mail dated 28 September 2018, Goldcar informed the customer that as a result of the control of the car a "long scratch on the carcass of the left mirror which was not registered when the car was picked up" would have been "detected. Consequently, "not having stipulated coverage", to the customer 60 euros were charged".

Finally, the AGCM also verified that it was Gold Car's corporate policy – as it had already been discovered in the previous survey – to foresee at the beginning of the year (ie ex ante) “precise commercial objectives in relation to the sale of ancillary products (including the "insurance" coverage), this for the purpose to compensate for the reduced margins related to an offer at competitive prices of the rental service (being a low-cost operator)". To testify, a report seized in the Pisa office which presented "the results of each territorial agency with specific reference to the sale of ancillary services (called"ancillaries")", Compared to the forecasts at the beginning of the year.

Not only that, the Guarantor has also discovered how "the remuneration of Goldcar employees at the desk is partly "variable", that is related to the sales made at the desk ".

At the charges, Gold Car Italia, controlled by Gold Car Spain, in turn controlled by Europcar Mobility Group ("Europcar Group"), defended itself by recalling:

• That following the acquisition of Goldcar by Europcar (in December 2017), the company would have been subjected to a complex activity of "alignment" with the group's best practices Europcar;
• That the 49 reports reported in the acts represent "an absolutely marginal share (much lower than 1%, n..d.r.) of the total rentals carried out in Italy, in the same period "(June 2018 – May 2019). Moreover, the reports would reach the Authority in a strongly conditioned context of the media echo of the decisions relating to the main proceeding and to that of non-compliance ”;
• that "the professional's commitment to achieving full customer satisfaction would be rewarded from the increase in rentals made in 2018 compared to the previous year, or from the contextual decrease in the number of complaints received by Goldcar ”;
• that "the reports would lack adequate evidence, since it is "likely to be ascribed to experiences considered to be subjectively negative, but which demonstrate nothing with regard to the alleged reiteration of the conduct";
• that by October 8, 2019 Goldcar intends to "simplify and clarify the applicable contractual provisions", providing for "the reduction of the amount of the security deposit at 950 euros for all rentals to be made in Italy".

Arguments rejected by the Guarantor, who recalled: how the acquisition by Europcar dates back two years ago "without this having resulted in obvious and obvious changes in the commercial policy followed from Goldcar ”; like the fact that "Goldcar pursues sales objectives of ancillary / insurance products is not, in itself, an element of impropriety", but that it becomes when "the security deposit set by Goldcar is still high (and variable from 1,200 to 2,000 euros) "; that “the Company did not follow up on the commitment he had made within the IP270 procedure (that of 2018, ed) to reduce the amount of the security deposit from € 1,100 to € 950"; that the last report was received "on September 23, 2019".

Finally, the Agcm emphasized that it is precisely "the economic conditions of the company, which in 2018 recorded an increase in the number of rentals compared to the previous year (an increase of around 50,000 more rentals), as well as an increase in turnover of About 2.6% compared to 2017 ", to justify a higher penalty. Three and a half million euros, in fact.