After sending Dollar/Thrifty a letter alleging non PP (the auto dealer where I take my car, uses them to obtain loaners from time to time) for a hard inquiry where I was not the guarantor of payment, they basically replied with the "legitimate business need" jive. For those who don't recall, I tendered a Visa debit card to Dollar/Thrifty for a car rental. Again, however, the dealership was the guarantor of payment. Now I'm usually in the mood for a good lawsuit, but I'm wondering if this is worth the fight. I've read an opinion letter that stated, among other things, that PP included such things as credit, employment and check writing. On the other hand, there was no authorization provided by me to run a hard inquiry. Moreover, Dollar/Thrifty doesn't have a policy of running hards on ALL customers, only those who opt to pay with a debit card. Just wondering what some of y'all thought about taking on this fight.
Let me see if I fully understand the situation. You took your car in for work at the dealership. Warranty covered work? They sent you to Thrifty / Dollar to get a rental car as a loner. Were they going to pay for the rental as part of the agreement associated with the warranty work? I say if Dollar / Thrifty were being paid from the dealership, why did you even have to supply them with a debit card? If I submit a debit card for payment of something (NO MATTER WHAT IT IS) I most definitly am not giving authorization of the retailer to pull my credit report. Assuming you did not sign anything while getting the rental car that might have authorized them to pull your credit, I would follow through with a lawsuit. I doin't see how they can claim permissible purpose, you weren't requesting a job, credit, or insurance coverage from them . . . hmm did you agree to the "insurance coverage" they offer? Come to think of it, if so they might have you there. . . ChrisB
You got it, Chris. Dealership paid for the rental, although I was the one who signed the rental agreement since I was going to be the driver. But the agreement contains no provisions for credit checks and debit cards. Also, I declined the rental insurance. Thrifty is basically hiding under the "legitimate business need" umbrella. It's catch-alls like this that make me wonder if I should fight this any further.
Re: Re: Dollar/Thrifty Replies Back And therein lies the rub. The statutes don't explain. And it's so vague and ambiguous that you'd almost have to go to court just to get some kind of legal definition. I'm thinking that a court would want to see that the "need" would be something similar to credit, insurance, employment, rent, etc. What I thought was interesting was Thrifty's effort to somehow comfort me by telling me that the agent at the desk never sees my CR, rather, it's all just one electronic process. The "computer" runs an inquiry and then "tells" the agent whether or not to rent the car to a person. So what is there in the CR of a debit card holder that would not be on the CR of a credit card holder?
Re: Re: Dollar/Thrifty Replies Back If the dealership paid for the rental, I question why they needed any credit card / debit card from you anyway? FIGHT IT I say. I'd head down to the courthouse first thing tomorrow morning and file a $1,000 non PP lawsuit (don't mention any offer of settling or anything like that in the suit) and then serve them, wait 7 days for some response such as an offer to settle, then send them an offer. Be generous, offer to take half of what the courts will give you. They have NO legs to stand on with this one, it's clearly a non PP inquiry. This should be a 75% or higher likelyhood of (if it does go to court) $1000 to you. Good luck, and let us know what happens. ChrisB
