Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

134. To ask the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation the recourse persons have under consumer protection regulations with respect to car rental companies charging different customers for the same pre-existing damage while forgoing to actually repair the vehicle (details supplied); and the number of related complaints submitted to the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission relating to such car rental issues in each of the years 2014 to 2018 and to date in 2019, in tabular form. [15666/19]

Heather Humphreys (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy will appreciate that only the courts can authoritatively interpret and determine statutory provisions. The Consumer Protection Act 2007 which gives effect to Directive 2005/29/EC on Unfair

Commercial Practices provides in section 43 that a commercial practice is misleading if, first, it involves the provision of false information, or would be likely to cause the average consumer to be deceived or misled, in relation to a range of matters, including the usage or prior history of a product, the results and material features of tests or checks carried out on a product, and the need for any part, replacement, servicing or repair in relation to a product, and, secondly, it would be likely to cause the average consumer to make a purchasing decision that he or she would not otherwise make. Section 46 of the Act further provides that a commercial practice is misleading if the trader omits or conceals material information that the average consumer would need in order to make an informed purchasing decision and the practice would be likely to cause the average consumer to make a purchasing decision that he or she would not otherwise make. 

The Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC) is the statutory independent body responsible for the enforcement of domestic and EU consumer law in the State, including the enforcement of the Consumer Protection Act 2007 in relation to commercial practices in the car rental sector.  Section 9 (5) of the Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2014 provides that the CCPC is independent in the performance of its functions.  As investigations and enforcement matters generally are part of the day-to-day operational work of the Commission, I, as Minister for Business, Enterprise and Innovation, have no direct function in the matter.

If the Deputy has specific information that a car rental company is engaging, or has engaged, in the practice referred to in his question, he should submit that information to the CCPC.

As much of the car rental by consumers occurs outside their country of residence and as the main companies engaged in car rental operate on a trans-national basis, action to tackle anti-consumer practices in the car rental sector needs also to be undertaken on an EU-wide basis. In response to an increase in complaints from consumers about car rental, in 2015 the European Commission and national consumer protection authorities in EU Member States, including the CCPC, engaged, through a common position, with the five leading car rental companies with a view to securing better compliance with EU consumer protection legislation. The five companies - Avis, Europcar, Enterprise, Hertz and Sixt - account for around two-thirds of all private car rentals in the EU. As a result of this engagement, the companies gave commitments on their commercial practices in a number of areas, including the procedures for inspection of vehicle damage and for handling of damage claims. The European Commission and the national consumer authorities agreed that they would continue to monitor the car rental sector closely. In March 2019, following further engagement with the national consumer protection authorities and the European Commission, the five main car rental companies agreed to change the way they present car rental prices in order to make them more transparent for consumers. These changes include a commitment to make clear in price offers the price and details of optional extras, in particular the insurance waivers that reduce the amount due in case of damage. This information should set out what is covered in the basic rental price regarding damage to vehicles, while any additional payments the consumer may have to make should also be clearly indicated. If additional insurance or damage waiver is purchased, what this does and does not cover should be clearly indicated before the consumer signs up for it.

The Car Rental Council of Ireland which represents the main companies involved in car rental in Ireland has established a Code of Best Practice for the sector. This includes provisions on pre-rental and post-rental inspection which require companies to provide customers with a written pre-rental inspection report and to give them an opportunity to check and agree the condition of the vehicle before signing this report. On the return of the vehicle, the Code provides that the company will inspect it in the presence of the customer and establish a written post-rental inspection report that must be noted and signed by both parties. Both parties are required to record on this inspection form any new damage found that was not recorded on the pre-inspection report. Membership of the Car Rental Council is subject to acceptance of, and compliance with, the Code of Best Practice. Section 45 of the Consumer Protection Act 2007 provides that a commercial practice is misleading if it involves a representation that the trader is bound by a code of practice and the trader fails to comply with a firm commitment in that code where the representation would be likely to cause the average consumer to make a purchasing decision that he or she would not otherwise make.

Information on the number of complaints about car rental made to the CCPC since 2014 is set out in the following table.

The Commission has advised me that in order to provide information on the number of complaints relating specifically to charges for pre-existing damage, it would have to review each complaint individually.  As such a review could not be undertaken in the time available to answer the Deputy's question, I regret that I am not in a position to provide this information.