Wicked campers are unroadworthy

[Falc'man]

Saw one of these bombs yesterday afternoon with hazards on, rolling slowly down King George's Rd, with "Hire Me" painted in one of the corners of the rear window.

[TUF_302]

These things are very dangerous, i followed one home last week after a fishing trip and the left hand rear wheel was so far out of alignment it made the van wobble!

Need to get those bad ones of the roads asap

[Yaw]

Wicked Campers are one of the dodgiest companies around. You cannot hire one without having insurance as part of the contract. When a wicked camper has an accident, they charge thier customer the excess and fix the van as cheaply as possible. but when it comes to paying the liability of the not at fault party, they will refuse to pay unless you can provide a copy of the rental agreement and a recipt for the excess that they charged thier client.
So that means the not at fault party needs to get it from the driver, which is often an overseas backpaker with no fixed address and usually left the country by the time it gets to a recovery scenario, because wicked campers will not disclose this information, so much so that even if a court order is sought to force them to disclose this info, they will fight it legally stating it does not need to be disclosed to a non party applicant.

Pray your never have an accident with one of these vans.
I cringe every time I do a rego search on an at fault party in an accident and see it is owned by wicked campers. The insurance company I work for is owed hundreds of thousand dollars from these cowboys!
Think of it like your insurer refusing to pay the other person or persons invloved in an accident you caused.

[Jastel]

I liked the slogans.. gave me a laugh

Yaw
In the end you get paid out but dont you?
They mess you around and stall you and hope you go away but they cant dodge liability forever. Unless they go into receivership which is probably what will happen here

I have never been involved with a Wicked accident but Hertz, Avis etc all try the same tricks saying "You (meaning me) have to sue the driver"

Thats not the way the law is in Qld
The owner is liable for the cars damage

I give them a letter of demand, 30 days to pay, then a ticket to the small claims tribunal with costs added on to the original letter
They have all paid eventually before court

Why hasn't your company bankrupted them if they are owed that much money?? I would have.

[Windsor220]

Me and a mate used one of these last year over in Melbourne. We prebooked it and when we got there, there was 1 van out the front with "I am woman here me roar" and a picture of catwoman on it. I said to my mate there is no way in hell im driving that around. Luckily ours was out back and had a better design.

Good cheap transport I thought. Ours wasnt that bad and was a good way to see the sights. Took it all the way to mt Buller and Great Ocean road.

[MNM96]

Originally Posted by Mr Hardware

This is true, but i'm pretty sure the average filthy stoner backpacker who hires one doesn't really expect that they are. You've got to look at appropriateness of the product for the target market. Fits perfectly.

And the deaths that the report aludes to involved a brand new 100 Series Land Cruiser. The fault in that case lies with the fact that a Fraser Island specific safety demonstration regarding the hazzards involving creek crossings along the beachs being hard to see, and navigate, while at speed limits along the beach was given by an English speaking rental car company employee to a Japaneese speaking renter. It has little to do with this witch hunt.

Not to say it wasn't due.

Furter though, a worn wiper blade or cracked headlight will render a car unroadworthy, yet it still remains perfectly safe.

[Mr Hardware]

Exactly MNM96, exactly.

[OLDFORDNUT]

Originally Posted by B mobile

The Goverment can now pick up the vans for a song, get them RWC and put speed cameras in them. I bet they think that would be totally Wicked.

hahahahaha,post of the year

[Aufairghia]

anyone care to take a guess at how much the wicked owners and pocketed in the last 5 years since 2005??? i would say initially the majority would have been roadworthy, but after one trip with a few backpackers in it.......

[jd dad]

some of these vans must be ok, saw some inplaces designated 4WD only and couldnt believe they could make it in and out in 1 piece. One of the park owners we heard about was so disgusted with some of their slogans he had started painting over any that came into his park. This was prior to them being told to tone them down. They are in every state and you will come across them anywhere so keep an eye out. If wicked are going to replace all those vans they must have some serious coin tucked away. Would hope the RWC crew check out the replacements are better than those gone before

[dave351cid]

we see heaps of the "wicked"crap boxs go through town here on there way up the qld coast. there is 2 of them camped up the street now.

its hard to believe that most off them ever make it to their destination ( but then you see plenty of them busted on the side of the road) and the stuff written on them is , welll.... just weird. some of them are funny but some of the stuff would make you mother blush.

as for the " average filthy stoner backpacker who hires one ".... a lot of them that come this way have very tidy young girls driving them who look like they would be just out of school.
they proberly book the van via a travell agent in their home country on the other side of the world , get to the depot to pick up van and even if they do have the mechanical knowlege to pick up if the car is roadworthy ( which most australian drivers would not) , they have already paid their money , are given a choice of a dodgy van or hitch hikeing . not much of an option and a young kid in a foreign country is hardly going to put up a big argument.

a lot of those old vans are x trady vans ( still read the signage under the paint on them) . the mitsi express is a deaf trap when its new, i wouldn`t want to be driving a wornout old pos that has a million km on the clock and no maintenance.

[pottery beige]

Got to admire the sense of adventure some of these tourist's have.. Some absolute POS we wouldn't risk taking up the shop's.. Off they head into our unforgiving outback.. Scary really.....

[flappist]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

Got to admire the sense of adventure some of these tourist's have.. Some absolute POS we wouldn't risk taking up the shop's.. Off they head into our unforgiving outback.. Scary really.....

Not all that difficult to understand. They are young and like all young people are immortal, bulletproof and omniscient.
The are mostly from Germany and UK and have no idea how big Australia is or what is actually here.
Things like day trips to ayers rock or Perth are often asked for to fill in a spare day between Fraser Island and Airlie.

There have been some rather nasty remarks about backpackers in this thread which are really uncalled for and ignorant.

Those members in here who have actually travelled overseas are all aware that the the real world is not very much like what you see on TV or are told by travel agents.

Many of the backpackers are university students and young professionals (engineers, doctors, accountants etc) who are taking a break to have a bit of fun and see some of the world while they are young.

Their use of drugs and alcohol is no worse than Australians, some do others don't. Their over representation in accidents on Fraser is DIRECTLY because of bloody minded bureaucratic stupidity. They come from places where they have never even seen sand and usually drive on the other side of the road and are allowed to launch off into the scrub by themselves BUT IT IS ILLEGAL to have guide or trained driver in the vehicle because that would be a "Guided Tour" and when the current party in Government first came to power in 1990 they banned any new tours.

There is a lot more to the incedent refered to with the Japanese driver recently than the general public or media know but again those who travel may possibly question how a FIT could even find Fraser Island let alone get there unless they spoke and read english.

The "wicked campers" are a bit of a scam but were popular as they had rude words all over them which appeals to extroverts (translation most young people who are away from their family for the first time) and as they are usually prepaid before arrival the renters are between a rock and a hard place as they are in a foreign country with know local knowlege of their legal or even geographic position.

It is good that they are shut down but other will take their places as Australia is the centre of the universe for extending the life of old crap cars far beyond their use by dates as the old ones are much better, faster, safer and cooler than new ones.

Just read through this forum for examples.

[Yaw]

Originally Posted by Jastel

I liked the slogans.. gave me a laugh

Yaw
In the end you get paid out but dont you?
They mess you around and stall you and hope you go away but they cant dodge liability forever. Unless they go into receivership which is probably what will happen here

I have never been involved with a Wicked accident but Hertz, Avis etc all try the same tricks saying "You (meaning me) have to sue the driver"

Thats not the way the law is in Qld
The owner is liable for the cars damage

I give them a letter of demand, 30 days to pay, then a ticket to the small claims tribunal with costs added on to the original letter
They have all paid eventually before court

Why hasn't your company bankrupted them if they are owed that much money?? I would have.

In QLD it is the driver that is liable, not the owner.
Abel Rentals use the same tactics and thier owner has just been banned from having anything to do with a rental company for 2 years. I can see the same thing happening for wicked too.
No we don't get paid in the end, usually because the driver is long gone with no contact details.You cannot hold he owner liable unless you can show "agency" for instance a truck driver using the truck for work purposes.

In the case of a rental, you cannot hold the rental company liable as there is no agency. they are renting the vehicle from a company for thier own purposes. The only way you can hold them responsible is if you can prove that the insurance coverage was there and the renter paid the excess. Which to do you need the rental contract and a copy of the Excess recipt which Wicked campers refuse to give out and they then will oppose any order sought by the court to force them to give that. So you need to get copies of this from the driver which by the time it gets to a recovery they are usually long gone from the country and usually the police reoprts will only give a name and no fixed address.

[flappist]

Some years ago I had a Hertz rental BA wagon that was run into by a very clever person while it was parked in a Motel car park in Aspley.

I got the name and rego of the "offender" from the motel owner as he did a runner back to Alice Springs and when I contacted him about it he told me to get stuffed.

I had to pay the $1500 excess to Hertz.

About 6 months later I was contacted by Brisbane Police to make a statement about the event and then a few weeks later got a refund cheque from Hertz in the mail.
The clever person had been found guilty of "leaving the scene of an accident", fined a few hundred dollars, banned from driving in QLD for 12 months and ordered to pay my excess as well as all of Hertz's costs which was several thousand dollars.

[galaxy xr8]

Originally Posted by flappist

Some years ago I had a Hertz rental BA wagon that was run into by a very clever person while it was parked in a Motel car park in Aspley.

I got the name and rego of the "offender" from the motel owner as he did a runner back to Alice Springs and when I contacted him about it he told me to get stuffed.

I had to pay the $1500 excess to Hertz.

About 6 months later I was contacted by Brisbane Police to make a statement about the event and then a few weeks later got a refund cheque from Hertz in the mail.
The clever person had been found guilty of "leaving the scene of an accident", fined a few hundred dollars, banned from driving in QLD for 12 months and ordered to pay my excess as well as all of Hertz's costs which was several thousand dollars.

Arhhh sweet justice, the sound of music to my ear's,

[Jastel]

Originally Posted by Yaw

In QLD it is the driver that is liable, not the owner.
Abel Rentals use the same tactics and thier owner has just been banned from having anything to do with a rental company for 2 years. I can see the same thing happening for wicked too.
No we don't get paid in the end, usually because the driver is long gone with no contact details.You cannot hold he owner liable unless you can show "agency" for instance a truck driver using the truck for work purposes.

In the case of a rental, you cannot hold the rental company liable as there is no agency. they are renting the vehicle from a company for thier own purposes. The only way you can hold them responsible is if you can prove that the insurance coverage was there and the renter paid the excess. Which to do you need the rental contract and a copy of the Excess recipt which Wicked campers refuse to give out and they then will oppose any order sought by the court to force them to give that. So you need to get copies of this from the driver which by the time it gets to a recovery they are usually long gone from the country and usually the police reoprts will only give a name and no fixed address.

Not doubting you but would like some more info from the inside

Maybe I have just been lucky 5 times???
I have been paid by the rental company (or their insurers) for damage to my taxi caused by their rental cars, it always takes a while but they have all settled before court. My sister being a lawyer might help too......minimal legal fees might change their mind.

What is your definition of a taxi driver then, do I have "agency" with him as the owner? To use your words he is renting the taxi from me for his own purposes. I have no control over what he does, where he goes etc
What is the difference between this and wicked?
If I charge them a daily insurance charge (like a rental car) then I am off the hook like Wicked??? I doubt it. History shows I (or my insurance) have paid out dozens of times for their crashes. Drivers have NEVER paid out

I cant see why a rental car is different to any other car?
If this is the case any driver pranging a car would just walk away leaving the car owner with a wrecked car and the innocent victim the same. No car would ever get fixed. The driver would just claim bankruptcy and do it again

Queensland Transport must require records from car rental companies as they do from taxi owners, surely the details are in there somewhere. If there are no records then the car was not rented and therefore could NOT have hit you. They are definitely breaking the law somewhere in there. Maybe get a taxation lawyer onto them?

What is the good of a court order if they just ignore it? I know they eventually close them down but these ****'s just pop up somewhere else with a new company. Jail the owner for contempt of court or something...

If what you say is true I'd better go buy a lotto ticket

[mrbaxr6t]

this saddens me another shonky jerk milking money from the community at large, one day the jerk that runs wicked will get everything he deserves - wait till some wealthy powerful overseas individuals' child gets injured in a shonky wicked campervan... Watch the lawsuits fly then

[rodderz]

There was a heap of them going up the Bruce Hwy between Rocky and Mackay last week, they all look like they've been tagged by the local hoodies

The guy did an interview with the local rag and mentioned that most of them were fixed.

The yard I saw them at in Footscray late last year had about 20 in the yard, most were on blocks. Must have fixed the fleet bloody quick.

[Yaw]

Originally Posted by Jastel

Not doubting you but would like some more info from the inside

Maybe I have just been lucky 5 times???
I have been paid by the rental company (or their insurers) for damage to my taxi caused by their rental cars, it always takes a while but they have all settled before court. My sister being a lawyer might help too......minimal legal fees might change their mind.

What is your definition of a taxi driver then, do I have "agency" with him as the owner? To use your words he is renting the taxi from me for his own purposes. I have no control over what he does, where he goes etc
What is the difference between this and wicked?
If I charge them a daily insurance charge (like a rental car) then I am off the hook like Wicked??? I doubt it. History shows I (or my insurance) have paid out dozens of times for their crashes. Drivers have NEVER paid out

I cant see why a rental car is different to any other car?
If this is the case any driver pranging a car would just walk away leaving the car owner with a wrecked car and the innocent victim the same. No car would ever get fixed. The driver would just claim bankruptcy and do it again

Queensland Transport must require records from car rental companies as they do from taxi owners, surely the details are in there somewhere. If there are no records then the car was not rented and therefore could NOT have hit you. They are definitely breaking the law somewhere in there. Maybe get a taxation lawyer onto them?

What is the good of a court order if they just ignore it? I know they eventually close them down but these ****'s just pop up somewhere else with a new company. Jail the owner for contempt of court or something...

If what you say is true I'd better go buy a lotto ticket

I'll try one point at a time.
Agency can sometimes be attached to a taxi driver. Depends on the contract or conditions of employment the driver has.

If the driver works for you, means you have employed that driver and would be an arrangement or way of working out the pay/commission/wage.

When I worked years ago at a servo that had about 30 Taxi's based there they used the "pay in" method. Where a shift would be anywhere up to 12 hours, the employer was the taxi management company that ran from the servo, whereby it would be like 50% of the takings plus a nominal insurance fee per shift....that would be employment therefore showing agency.

However there was other places at the time which would "lease" a taxi to a driver on a weekly basis. Whereby it was a fixed fee, and that whatever the driver made during that week was theirs and they would also have to organise their own insurance. In that case there is no agency to the taxi owner unless the leasee employed drivers during this time, then those drivers would have agency to the leasee...Confused yet?

As a rental company, a driver does not work for the rental company, there is no agency. You cannot possibly make the argument that the rental company required the driver to do something for them. The renter is free to use the vehicle how they see fit.

Another way agency can be involved does not necessarily require employment. An example of this could be asking a friend or neighbour to take your car down the road to pick up the kids from school......The agency there is that the owner has asked the driver to do this for them, not the driver asking to borrow the car to go do something for themselves.

As for ignoring court orders...I never said they do that...what I said was they will oppose it.
Ok let me try and explain this step by step.

The rental company has a rental agreement (contract) that contract is signed by 2 parties, the rental company and the renter.

It will be on this contract which will show the terms and conditions and options the renter has taken, for example the terms of the insurance.

Now in order to prove that the rental company did in fact charge the renter for insurance and that it would cover a third party you need a copy of this contract. You also require a receipt to show any excess that was due was paid which would show the renter has fulfilled their part of the contract.

Now the trick here is that the rental company will not release this contract to a "non party" to the contract.

Now in this case when a court order is sought by a non party to the contract they will have their solicitor oppose that they should release it sighting privacy and disclosure of it to anyone other than the signatory is unnecessary.

So in order to get a copy of the rental agreement and excess receipt the other option is to try and get a copy from the renter, which in the case of wicked campers is usually backpackers with no fixed address and long since left the country by the time you track them down or the recovery process is ready to happen. Usually they report the accident to Rental Company and the rental company
charges them their excess and say they will look after everything and not to worry about it.

Fortunately most rental companies are not unscrupulous like this. Wicked Campers and Able rentals are 2 big examples

[SilentDave]

i have noticed a lot less of the Econovan's and the like but have seen a few Tarago's heading around Perth so maybe they have upgraded the dodgy ones.

On rental companies i have rented a car trailer that was repossed by the local lad's in blue because the plates didn't match the trailer and the company had reported the plates stolen from a different yard 5 years earlier.

[greenfoam]

Wicked vans are a national icon, really :!. Just as many people take pictures of the paint jobs on them than they do of the landscape. What ever happened to roughing it a bit, you don't need a brand new 100% rwc car to drive around and see stuff

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by greenfoam

Wicked vans are a national icon, really :!. Just as many people take pictures of the paint jobs on them than they do of the landscape. What ever happened to roughing it a bit, you don't need a brand new 100% rwc car to drive around and see stuff

Because if your paying for something then it should be Roadworthy... Ever heard of Negligence.. This company stinks of it and seems to think it can get away with running a dodgy fleet by putting discusting remarks all over them.. As far as im concerned they should be shut down and all their second hand shitboxes should be burnt...

Taxis have to be roadworthy and inspected by the transport department every 3 months... why should these things be any different?? We all carry on when we get in a taxi and its falling appart dont we, but its alright to let poor little tourists drive around in time bombs.. Talk about double standards.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by Mr Hardware

Just remember guys, QLD has some pretty stupid RWC rules, just because something is classified unroadworthy doesn't mean it's a deathtrap.
Empty Washer bottle? FAIL
Crack in a tail-light? FAIL
A drop of oil on the swaybar? FAIL
No pattern printed on the top of the manual shifter? FAIL
A parker bulb out? FAIL
A single spot of rust in a panel? FAIL

Does that make the van a death-trap? No. Does it make it 'unroadworthy'? Yes.

Out of 86 vehicles, only 4 passed the safety cert. However, if you read on, only 5 were pulled from the road. Therefore, only 5 out of the 86 were really 'Un-Road-Worthy' in the true sense of the word. In the case of these 5, then yes, they shouldn't be hired.

I think if it was a simple as replacing a park light bulb they wouldnt have deregistered them.... I thought they only sampled 9 outta that lot and only 4 outta the 9 passed. lool.

[BOSHOG]

im with you bfiipursuit, these POS are allowed on the roads and guys like us get pinned for having a nice enhaust, coilovers or cai............ make no sense to me

[micky4433]

take the POS off our roads and burn them. even send a couple up to the national motor museum in SA, outside in the weatewr of course with signage saying australia's worst hire vans!!

[MR.BA.GT.332]

has anyone noticed they are also starting to use mitsubishi delica vans in their fleet? maybe they gunna scrap the older tradie vans and buy a ship load of the imported delicas if the rest are being put out to pasture.

My sister and a friend are going to hire a wicked van in Europe around march, i seriously hope the condition of the vans there are better than ones ive read about here...

I will admit ive gotten a chuckle from the graffix on the vans tho... altho some i would think would be borderline to the constablery

[greenfoam]

Originally Posted by bfiipursuit

Because if your paying for something then it should be Roadworthy... Ever heard of Negligence.. This company stinks of it and seems to think it can get away with running a dodgy fleet by putting discusting remarks all over them.. As far as im concerned they should be shut down and all their second hand shitboxes should be burnt...

Taxis have to be roadworthy and inspected by the transport department every 3 months... why should these things be any different?? We all carry on when we get in a taxi and its falling appart dont we, but its alright to let poor little tourists drive around in time bombs.. Talk about double standards.

I don't care much about laws or taxis or negligence, that's all a load of over the top americaniZed crazy talk. But I do know about backpacking having fun and tourists love to do things on the cheap it just makes everything that much better when its a bit of a struggle. If they aren't renting a Wicked van then they will be in a 40 year old bogged up kombi or a 99% stuffed XF. Apart from more style in the Kombi, seems like no difference to me in those compared to a wicked van. The traditional way to do it was to drive your kombi all around, then sell it for a couple grand to the next guy, he would drive it all around then sell it on again, no one ever lost money on it so the renting of the van was free. Alot of them were south australian cars so they never needed a rwc. I'm sure someone decided at some stage to offer a service that sloted right into this market but included making some money and there you have the wicked vans.

I've never seen anything other than some cool murals painted on them, whats so bad about the ones you have seen?. Maybe all the stuffed ones don't make it this far out in the sticks. In the end 99% of these are making it around the country safely time and time again, they can't be that bad. I've seen alot more broken EA's that wicked vans on the side of the road, infact I've never seen a broken wicked van

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by greenfoam

I don't care much about laws or taxis or negligence, that's all a load of over the top americaniZed crazy talk. But I do know about backpacking having fun and tourists love to do things on the cheap it just makes everything that much better when its a bit of a struggle. If they aren't renting a Wicked van then they will be in a 40 year old bogged up kombi or a 99% stuffed XF. Apart from more style in the Kombi, seems like no difference to me in those compared to a wicked van. The traditional way to do it was to drive your kombi all around, then sell it for a couple grand to the next guy, he would drive it all around then sell it on again, no one ever lost money on it so the renting of the van was free. Alot of them were south australian cars so they never needed a rwc. I'm sure someone decided at some stage to offer a service that sloted right into this market but included making some money and there you have the wicked vans.

I've never seen anything other than some cool murals painted on them, whats so bad about the ones you have seen?. Maybe all the stuffed ones don't make it this far out in the sticks. In the end 99% of these are making it around the country safely time and time again, they can't be that bad. I've seen alot more broken EA's that wicked vans on the side of the road, infact I've never seen a broken wicked van

You really have no idea do you... Theres a difference between someone owning their own car and it being un roadworthy and someone else supplying a car at a cost and it being unroadworthy.. Wicked Vans have a Duty of care... Its plain and simple and you have missed the point.. If I go buy an EA Falcon and its unroadworthy and I get killed in it then thats my problem as its up to me to maintain it. If I go rent a car and get killed in it because its unroadworthy then one would think the rental company has been negligent in making sure its roadworthy... And we arent talking about 1 car here..

Some of the crap they write on them is horrendous and in most cases sexually explicit... I can't go rent a bill board and legally put something sexually explicit on it can I?? No.

As for value for money they charge anywhere from $40 to $70 a day for these buckets of crap, yet i can go rent a brand new $40,000 XR6 from Hertz for $75.. Fair enough I cant sleep in it but 80% of Wicked Vans fleet would be worth 10 grand or less... its not really great value for money is it.

Who ever the guy is that owns it is obviously a smart boy, but I think his days of making money for NOHTING are just about over...

[Jastel]

Originally Posted by Yaw

I'll try one point at a time.
Agency can sometimes be attached to a taxi driver. Depends on the contract or conditions of employment the driver has.

If the driver works for you, means you have employed that driver and would be an arrangement or way of working out the pay/commission/wage.

When I worked years ago at a servo that had about 30 Taxi's based there they used the "pay in" method. Where a shift would be anywhere up to 12 hours, the employer was the taxi management company that ran from the servo, whereby it would be like 50% of the takings plus a nominal insurance fee per shift....that would be employment therefore showing agency.

However there was other places at the time which would "lease" a taxi to a driver on a weekly basis. Whereby it was a fixed fee, and that whatever the driver made during that week was theirs and they would also have to organise their own insurance. In that case there is no agency to the taxi owner unless the leasee employed drivers during this time, then those drivers would have agency to the leasee...Confused yet?

As a rental company, a driver does not work for the rental company, there is no agency. You cannot possibly make the argument that the rental company required the driver to do something for them. The renter is free to use the vehicle how they see fit.

Another way agency can be involved does not necessarily require employment. An example of this could be asking a friend or neighbour to take your car down the road to pick up the kids from school......The agency there is that the owner has asked the driver to do this for them, not the driver asking to borrow the car to go do something for themselves.

As for ignoring court orders...I never said they do that...what I said was they will oppose it.
Ok let me try and explain this step by step.

The rental company has a rental agreement (contract) that contract is signed by 2 parties, the rental company and the renter.

It will be on this contract which will show the terms and conditions and options the renter has taken, for example the terms of the insurance.

Now in order to prove that the rental company did in fact charge the renter for insurance and that it would cover a third party you need a copy of this contract. You also require a receipt to show any excess that was due was paid which would show the renter has fulfilled their part of the contract.

Now the trick here is that the rental company will not release this contract to a "non party" to the contract.

Now in this case when a court order is sought by a non party to the contract they will have their solicitor oppose that they should release it sighting privacy and disclosure of it to anyone other than the signatory is unnecessary.

So in order to get a copy of the rental agreement and excess receipt the other option is to try and get a copy from the renter, which in the case of wicked campers is usually backpackers with no fixed address and long since left the country by the time you track them down or the recovery process is ready to happen. Usually they report the accident to Rental Company and the rental company
charges them their excess and say they will look after everything and not to worry about it.

Fortunately most rental companies are not unscrupulous like this. Wicked Campers and Able rentals are 2 big examples

Thanks Yaw

I will have to look into this further I think.....