The logic behind this clause is based on how the economics of the car rental industry work, particularly for extremely low-cost rentals.
When a rental company charges less than EUR 15 per day, the rental itself often generates very little or no profit.
For example:
- Rental period: 7 days
- Daily rate: EUR 4.99
- Total rental revenue: EUR 34.93
Out of that amount, the rental company still has to pay for:
- Vehicle depreciation
- Financing or leasing costs
- Maintenance
- Cleaning
- Staff
- Airport concession fees
- Insurance
- Taxes
- Administration
It is obvious that a business cannot sustainably operate on EUR 5 per day from the rental fee alone.
Instead, these companies generally rely on other revenue streams, primarily:
- Selling expensive insurance products at the rental counter.
- Charging for additional services.
- Recovering income through damage claims where appropriate.
Why does this increase the risk?
When a customer declines the rental company’s insurance and relies on an independent excess reimbursement policy, the rental company loses one of its largest sources of profit.
Some low-cost operators therefore have a stronger commercial incentive to identify chargeable damage when the vehicle is returned.
This does not mean that every low-cost rental company behaves improperly. Many are perfectly fair.
However, statistically, disputes over:
- previously existing scratches,
- alloy wheel scuffs,
- bumper marks,
- small windshield chips,
occur far more frequently with very low-cost rentals than with mainstream rental companies.
A practical example
Imagine two customers rent identical cars.
Customer A
- Pays EUR 35/day.
- Declines all additional insurance.
Customer B
- Pays EUR 7.99/day.
- Also declines all additional insurance.
If both vehicles return without obvious new damage, Customer A’s rental has already generated sufficient revenue.
Customer B’s rental has generated only about EUR 55 for an entire week.
The financial incentive to recover additional revenue is therefore significantly higher.
That recovery usually comes from one of two places:
- Selling expensive insurance products at pickup.
- Charging for damage that was not recorded at pickup, especially where the customer cannot prove the vehicle’s original condition.
Why do we require pickup photographs?
Good photographs eliminate most disputes.
If a customer later receives a charge for:
- a scratched wheel,
- bumper scuff,
- door dent,
dated pickup photos showing that exact area often allow us to demonstrate that:
- the damage already existed, or
- the claimed damage is inconsistent with the rental company’s allegation.
Without those photographs, the claim often becomes one person’s word against another.
When is the claim fee not intended to penalize customers?
The fee is not designed to penalize genuine claims.
For example:
Example 1 – Genuine accident
The customer reverses into a post and damages the rear bumper.
There is no dispute about liability.
This is a straightforward accidental damage claim.
Our focus is simply reimbursing the customer’s excess.
Example 2 – Customer unaware of damage
The rental company later claims there is a scratch on the wheel.
The customer has clear, dated pickup photos showing that exact wheel didn’t have the scratch.
Again, this is a genuine claim supported by evidence.
In situations such as these, where the customer either genuinely caused covered accidental damage or can clearly demonstrate that he examined the vehicle and took clear photos, we do not impose the Low Fare Rental claim fee.
The clause is primarily intended for situations where the absence of proper evidence significantly increases the complexity, uncertainty, and cost of investigating claims arising from very low-cost rentals.
