State: Pennsylvania
Our business is being Challenged by a rental client. The rental equipment, quote and simple terms are made upfront prior to placement of equipment.
Simple terms: Deposit upfront, Equipment specs are in accordance with their needs, Dates are established and the maintaining is covered under the rental cost. The delivery/pickup fee is also line itemed. Operational charges are outlined.
The scenario: The date of the rental and set delivery time frame had been established. The morning of, our Truck had a mechanical problem (cold weather- cold crank didnt start). We contacted the customer immediately to explain the delay and affirmed we would still keep them first on the list for delivery, once we acquired a replacement truck. It placed us one hour behind schedule. Our driver contacted them as soon as he was within ten minutes of their facility function. They appreciated our communications and updates. Our business carries a two hour window in terms of delivery and we did re-iterate that weather permitting played a factor in that time frame.
A week into this rental client called to have ONE of the pieces picked up as they were finished utilizing it. They had two pieces delivered originally.We agreed to re-imburse them the difference since it was set for two week rental. They waited til the last day of the rental term to challenge us with further discounts and re-imbusements. The equipment performed as needed. They wanted re-imbursed for the fact we were delayed in getting the equipment there at the original delivery time . They were given a pro rata refund based on the terms of rental , yet now they are stating that that one hour caused over 40,000$ in loss profits.
We cannot assume what they are stating is true as they were a non profit working a convention booth and the event didnt commence til well into the afternoon. So they are accusing us of "non fullfillment of contractual agreement" and monetary damage for loss in potentail monies from the event. (Fund raiser monies?) . Our oral agreement with them on the morning of the delivery was " we shall still keep you as first delivery this morning once we acquisition a new truck", On the written terms it does state weather and road conditons take precedence . No where do we have written or oral of the 100% guarantee to have it placed at a certain time. ( example : '9:14 Am it will be in place" type verbage)
Our business contends that we made every reasonable effort once our truck delay happened to inform customer and work realistically to get them their items (equipment) . They seemed respectfull of our dilema and simply asked that they still be first on the delivery list . Which they were.
So Ultimately do they have a case to take us to court ? Some level of reasonable effort to both compensate them and make sure the equipment remained operational was met. The one piece of equipment was of a higher quality (model) then the specs quoted, so there again we gave them more bang for their buck . We honored our price and rental service provision. It comes down to the time factor and them insisting they have a monetary loss(which I would think they have to prove in court if it goes that far). In these scenarios is it best just to refund them entirely or should we allow them to take us to court and let the judge decide?
Our business is being Challenged by a rental client. The rental equipment, quote and simple terms are made upfront prior to placement of equipment.
Simple terms: Deposit upfront, Equipment specs are in accordance with their needs, Dates are established and the maintaining is covered under the rental cost. The delivery/pickup fee is also line itemed. Operational charges are outlined.
The scenario: The date of the rental and set delivery time frame had been established. The morning of, our Truck had a mechanical problem (cold weather- cold crank didnt start). We contacted the customer immediately to explain the delay and affirmed we would still keep them first on the list for delivery, once we acquired a replacement truck. It placed us one hour behind schedule. Our driver contacted them as soon as he was within ten minutes of their facility function. They appreciated our communications and updates. Our business carries a two hour window in terms of delivery and we did re-iterate that weather permitting played a factor in that time frame.
A week into this rental client called to have ONE of the pieces picked up as they were finished utilizing it. They had two pieces delivered originally.We agreed to re-imburse them the difference since it was set for two week rental. They waited til the last day of the rental term to challenge us with further discounts and re-imbusements. The equipment performed as needed. They wanted re-imbursed for the fact we were delayed in getting the equipment there at the original delivery time . They were given a pro rata refund based on the terms of rental , yet now they are stating that that one hour caused over 40,000$ in loss profits.
We cannot assume what they are stating is true as they were a non profit working a convention booth and the event didnt commence til well into the afternoon. So they are accusing us of "non fullfillment of contractual agreement" and monetary damage for loss in potentail monies from the event. (Fund raiser monies?) . Our oral agreement with them on the morning of the delivery was " we shall still keep you as first delivery this morning once we acquisition a new truck", On the written terms it does state weather and road conditons take precedence . No where do we have written or oral of the 100% guarantee to have it placed at a certain time. ( example : '9:14 Am it will be in place" type verbage)
Our business contends that we made every reasonable effort once our truck delay happened to inform customer and work realistically to get them their items (equipment) . They seemed respectfull of our dilema and simply asked that they still be first on the delivery list . Which they were.
So Ultimately do they have a case to take us to court ? Some level of reasonable effort to both compensate them and make sure the equipment remained operational was met. The one piece of equipment was of a higher quality (model) then the specs quoted, so there again we gave them more bang for their buck . We honored our price and rental service provision. It comes down to the time factor and them insisting they have a monetary loss(which I would think they have to prove in court if it goes that far). In these scenarios is it best just to refund them entirely or should we allow them to take us to court and let the judge decide?
