A reader’s complaint about a post-rental damage charge in Germany raises a broader issue: when rental car companies have financial incentives to find damage, the return process starts to feel like a shakedown.
Are European Car Rental Companies Incentivized To Find Damage?
A reader recently wrote to me after being charged about $500 for alleged windshield damage on a rental car returned in Frankfurt, Germany. He was not amused:
These German car rentals are all criminals. Got charged for $500 for windshield stuff after I dropped off car and a few hours later. There was absolutely nothing on the windshield and it’s a total scam. I’m sick of this crap with Europe.
That is obviously one side of the story, and I am not going to call an entire industry criminal based on one complaint. Windshield chips happen. Scratches happen. Renters sometimes miss things, and rental companies are entitled to recover legitimate damage.
But the complaint touches on something I have heard far too often in Europe, and particularly in Germany: a returned rental car is scrutinized with a level of zeal that feels less like ordinary asset protection and more like a revenue exercise.
The reader also sent this:
Rental car agents at major agencies like Sixt in Germany are widely reported to receive commissions or bonuses for finding new vehicle damages. This aggressive incentive structure often results in agents heavily scrutinizing returning vehicles, occasionally flagging pre-existing wear-and-tear or minor imperfections as new damage.
I cannot independently verify that statement as a current company policy at Sixt or any other major rental car company. There are Reddit threads and former-employee claims alleging that damage discovery has been incentivized in some rental operations, but those are not the same as audited internal compensation documents. Still, the volume of complaints about post-return damage claims is hard to ignore, and it is not limited to one brand or one country.
The Incentive Problem Is The Real Issue
Even if there is no direct “commission” for finding damage, the structure can still create bad incentives.
If a station is judged on recovery of damage costs, if employees are rewarded for identifying unreported damage, or if a company treats post-return claims as a profit center rather than merely reimbursement, then customers are going to feel hunted. That is especially true when the alleged damage is discovered after the customer has left the airport, returned home, and lost the practical ability to inspect the vehicle alongside the agent.
This is where European rentals can be maddening.
You pick up a car with a dozen tiny marks already listed on the contract. Then, after return, you receive a demand for a small scratch, wheel scuff, windshield chip, or bumper mark that you swear was already there or was too minor to notice.
Could the rental company be right? Of course.
Could the customer be right? Also yes. And I don’t give Sixt, here, the benefit of the doubt after they (separately) tried to charge me for a full tank of gas when I returned the car full.
That ambiguity is exactly why the incentive structure matters. A company should not place customers in a position where every return feels like a forensic exercise hunting for minor scratches and dents.
> Read More: Why You Should ALWAYS Photograph Your Rental Car Before Pick-Up And Drop-Off
AI Scanners May Make This Worse
The situation is becoming even more complicated as rental car companies adopt automated damage detection.
Hertz has faced criticism in the United States for AI-powered vehicle scanners that detected tiny marks and generated bills for customers, including charges for small scuffs. Sixt has also used vehicle scanning technology, with reports of customers disputing charges where photos or timestamps raised questions. These systems are marketed as tools for transparency and consistency, but instead they appear to be faulty and driven by revenue goals, not accountability.
If a scanner identifies every tiny imperfection and the default response is to bill the customer, renters may face even more claims for damage that would previously have been treated as ordinary wear and tear. That may be great for recoveries. It is not great for trust.
How To Protect Yourself
The practical advice is simple, if annoying.
Take a full 360-degree video of the car at pickup and return. Photograph the windshield, wheels, tires, bumpers, mirrors, roof, and lower panels. Do this even if you feel ridiculous. Make sure the rental location, timestamp, and license plate are visible. If you return after hours, be even more meticulous. I do this every time, even when though I have credit card protection for such damages.
Do not rely on the agent’s quick walkaround. Do not assume small marks are too minor to matter. Do not assume a clean return means the matter is closed unless you receive written confirmation.
If you are hit with a claim, ask for the pre-rental condition report, return inspection report, timestamped photos, repair invoice or estimate, and proof that the damage was not already present. If the rental was cross-border within Europe and the company participates, the European Car Rental Conciliation Service may also be an avenue for unresolved complaints.
And yes, this is why many travelers simply buy zero-excess coverage in Europe. It may feel like surrender, but sometimes peace of mind has value.
CONCLUSION
I am not prepared to say that German rental car companies are “all criminals.” That is too broad and too unfair.
But I do think many European car rental returns have become unnecessarily adversarial, and the possibility that employees or stations may be rewarded for identifying damage only fuels that speculation. Even absent a literal commission, the incentives are not aligned with customer trust.
Rental companies deserve payment for real damage. Customers deserve clear, fair, and timely evidence before being charged hundreds of dollars for a mystery windshield mark discovered after they have left.
Until that balance improves, my advice is simple: photograph everything, video everything, and assume that the smallest mark can become a bill.
image: Sixt
I have been a loyal Avis renter and Avis First member forever and I agree that Avis (especially at FRA) is a bunch of crooks. I experienced this first hand when the small scratch to my rental was not pre-recorded on the rental agreement and I assumed it wouldn’t be an issue for such a small mark that I took the car and then of course got charged for it. I have complained multiple time that the pick-up area at FRA is extremely dark and it’s almost impossible to see any damage and then at the return area you are under a million bright lights and the attendant goes over the car with a magnifying glass.
My solution now….I pull the car out of the spot it is parked in and pull it to a well lit area of the pick-up area and make a iPhone recording of the car. Marks are photographed too and this way I have proof that I did not create the damage. I personally have had issues with Avis but I have noticed a similar pattern at Hertz. One of the problems seems to be that the people checking the cars back in are working for a separate company and I wonder if there is an incentive to find issues. I speak fluent German so I have argued with the agents before and shown before pictures to show I picked the car up with issues but if someone doesn’t speak German I have heard them argue with people who tried to fight an issue.
I have been a loyal Avis renter and Avis First member forever and I agree that Avis (especially at FRA) is a bunch of crooks. I experienced this first hand when the small scratch to my rental was not pre-recorded on the rental agreement and I assumed it wouldn’t be an issue for such a small mark that I took the car and then of course got charged for it. I have complained multiple time that the pick-up area at FRA is extremely dark and it’s almost impossible to see any damage and then at the return area you are under a million bright lights and the attendant goes over the car with a magnifying glass.
My solution now….I pull the car out of the spot it is parked in and pull it to a well lit area of the pick-up area and make a iPhone recording of the car. Marks are photographed too and this way I have proof that I did not create the damage. I personally have had issues with Avis but I have noticed a similar pattern at Hertz. One of the problems seems to be that the people checking the cars back in are working for a separate company and I wonder if there is an incentive to find issues. I speak fluent German so I have argued with them over damage I have supposedly created and have shown pics to document otherwise. For those that don’t speak German, fighting the claim at drop off might be difficult.
I have an easy solution to car rental companies and their excess charges which works 100% of the time IME. Freeze the card you paid with to stop them taking any more money from it. It certainly works on any SEPA card I hold. I’ve never either had a problem with Sixt but I’ve stopped renting with Avis because it occurred in one form or another on every occasion with them.
How does this work? They normally pre-authorise an amount on your card (€300 for my most recent European rental), is there a way of preventing them from accessing it?
On a SEPA card, the authorisation is time limited if not processed and so usually by the time you return the card, any authorisation has expired.
It’s not limited to Germany, I had a similar experience with Sixt in Mulhouse, France. Returned our vehicle there and were in a hurry to catch a train to Bern. Agent couldn’t have been nicer, indicated that all was well. A few hours later, I get an email accusing me of damaging a fender (scratches). That’ll be (something around) 1200 euros, please. BS, that car wasn’t damaged in the least. However, when I reached out to them they said not to worry because that full coverage I paid for with the rental will cover it all.
Seems incredibly shady and dishonest to me. I did not damage the vehicle in our travels and was most annoyed at the accusation. Furthermore, it seems like they were targeting the insurance coverage for a potentially lucrative claim. We have a rental coming up at Keflavik in a couple of weeks and I truly hope that Sixt plays it straight this time.
Unless I have to return the car out of hours (something which I always try to avoid), I won’t leave the rental office without a signature that the contract’s been closed. Better have an extra hour to kill in the lounge than risk the heartache of a possible dispute.
This is a scam and I believe the goal is to sell more overpriced insurance in the end by scaring customers with these type reports.
Also SIXT is the lowest of the low. Never considered them but I have read stories about their hard sell on insurance and won’t accept that you have Credit Card coverage.
I have been renting cars in Europe for the last 20 years and after being scammed a few times I gave up and the only way to do it is to get full insurance coverage. No matter what they will find something to scam you and ruin your trip so I already included in the budget for my trip the cost of full insurance. Once in Italy I received a 3 page report of all existing damages in the car that I was renting. It was an almost new BMW and I could see the damages were mostly fabricated. For ex, the wheels were all scratched so how can someone count every little scratch on a wheel? (Yes, there was listed like 23 scratches). So you can’t get that level of detail by filming the car. I drove it for a week and absolutely never got even close to a curb to scratch the wheels but when I returned the car the agent walked around and told me I had a new scratch on one of the wheels which was absolutely BS. I gave him a look and told him to deal with my full coverage insurance. He immediately said “oh so you don’t have to worry about it”. Pure scam!!! Never, ever rent a car in Europe without full insurance coverage.
I think that part of the issue with Sixt is that they tend to be the most expensive/premium mainstream car hire firm in Europe and they can be a bit obsessive about the quality of their cars.
My last rental was with Budget/Avis, the car was 8 years old, the damage sheet was pretty well populated, and I found an additional scratch when picking it up which was immediately signed off by the employee. The car was still more than adequate for what I needed, but, with the exception of one rental in Greece as the country was about to go bankrupt, I don’t think that Sixt have ever given me anything remotely comparable- their cars tend to be pristine.
This happened to me in Italy with Nollegiare. The guy went around with a strong light and found a scratch about 1cm. It’s scam because unless I’m taking 100 close up high resolution photos with a camera it’s impossible to detect. It was really small and not particularly deep. I bet they charge everyone for the same tiny scratch.
FRA is indeed the largest rental return scam in Europe. Hertz tried to ding me for a $750 for a wheel scratch until I sent the 2 date and timestamped photos I took of each wheel. And it’s not just Hertz and Avis at FRA either. I’ve had similar issues with National recently, including them taking over a week and a half to provide an invoice when they claimed that couldn’t provide one one check-in and then trying to charge me for a full tank of gas when I returned it full. Only after filing a “Corporate Complaint Escalation” after four previous unresolved calls, was able to get them to email me the invoice.
+1 for ALL rental companies in FRA are scamming customers.
Damages to the windshield are not the renter’s responsibility
https://hofauer.com/steinschlag-am-mietfahrzeug-wer-haftet
Obviously, the rental car company will try. While I agree it can be exhausting sometimes, but with primary courage through a credit card there is zero monetary risk (check your cc conditions)
This is fascinating info. Why I love reading comments. Thanks, Marc…very useful. Translating that page into Claude it is clearly not allowed by German law.
I just don’t bother to check, pay a little for a a zero excess insurance and that takes care of the hassle. Charge whatever they want.
My understanding is that this is a Sixt issue. Did the reader disclose where he rented? That’s the important detail.
I’ve had tons or rentals with National in Germany both at airports and city locations, and the return process is similar to the States.
Sixt.
I always buy the zero excess and full damage protection packages, pay the extra expenses associated with them, and then purposefully damage the vehicle to ensure I get my money’s worth. Rental car companies are the lowest of the low and deserve to take some losses and forced accountability on occasion.
Filling the car up with water instead of gasoline works wonders and saves on refueling costs. Draining out all the oil and replacing it with water or windshield washer fluid is a fun trick as well. Good luck detecting either of these with your fancy pants AI surveillance system, Hertz!!
The zero excess thing can easily cost more than the hire itself!
Matt, they really do try this scam. Sixt in a European tried to use a California-based collections agency to go after a totally bogus, completely unenforceable claim. If they aren’t attempting to actually charge via credit card or insurance, just gotta ignore that nonsense, and never use them again. Clearly, a few folks do take the bait and pay-up, so they keep trying the scam. It’s so sad and pathetic. Shame on them.
Just happened to me with Alamo at Hamburg Airport. I was post-billed 129 euros for ‘Flat Tire/Breakdown Service’. I am spending too much time proving that those things did not happen. Alamo and Enterprise share customer service – both are less than helpful or concerned about any potential errors on their part. “We will follow-up in 10 business days”, that’s all they ever say. There is no accountability. They are hoping that people consider the bogus charge amounts so small, that it is not worth fighting for. One time I really want to be like Seinfeld, buy that Damage Insurance, and beat the hell out of a rental car.
European rental car companies are behaving like scam telemarketers: if 1 out of 10 people pay the charge, then the scam and the effort is justified.
Happens stateside too. Seen it thrice in HNL including once with one of my Hertz rentals a couple of years ago when on the return the receiving agent ran up toward the car with a grease pencil and circled a windshield chip before I had finished parking. $200 for that one the magic amount that was pre authorised on the card.
This is coming from someone very liberal but can we just stop the bullsh*t?
European rental car companies are notorious for bringing out mirrors to inspect cars. These are cars. They will get wear and tear damage.
They are crackheads. Stop trying to normalize or rationalize it. Drive in Ireland for one day and then tell me after returning it “yep they’re fine, inspect with a fine tooth comb”.
It’s no different than you trying to tell Europeans why they should tip 25%. We have that. They have car scanners. It is what it is.
If anything as a blogger your response should be this is bullshit in Europe but it is what it is and is why you need a card with primary coverage.
Please stop normalizing this.
Normalizing what?
I always take photos by pickup and by drop-off. O make sure that the agent checking in the vehicle sees me taking the pucs and signing off on the spot so he shouldn’t mess. I then also have my own Excess Waiver that costs approx 50GBP per year just in case. I barely need to use it.
Remember that scratches under two inches, tiny rim scuffs, or standard undercarriage scrapes that pass without notice in North America are rigorously flagged and billed in Europe.
I agree with this and will take a pic of every little ding. However, just yesterday I was picking up a rental from Enterprise in Germany and the agent said the little scratch I found was under the “2 Euro” limit, meaning it was of no issue because it was less than the diameter of a 2 Euro coin. First time I ever encountered this in Germany. I still took numerous pics of any possible damage; we’ll see what they say when I return the car.
You should address in a separate article how in some European countries (for sure Germany) they will charge your for repairs in addition to DIMINISHED VALUE of the vehicle, whatever they determine that to be. Major issue being that US credit cards with rental car coverage do not cover diminished value. I rented a car in Germany last summer and got in a minor accident for which the repair costs were about $2,500. I wasn’t worried as I had made the reservation using a credit card with rental car coverage. However, in addition to the $2,500 of repairs the rental car company also charged me an additional $600 of “diminished value” due to the car having an a history of accident/repair. At the end of the day this was a minor accident and not a big deal, but I imagine in a major accident the diminished value line item could be thousands of dollars and imo, essentially renders credit card coverage useless. It’s a glaring coverage gap in the event of a major accident that I imagine most people relying on credit card coverage are unaware of
“That is especially true when the alleged damage is discovered after the customer has left the airport, returned home, and lost the practical ability to inspect the vehicle alongside the agent.”
I have never come across this situation. Vehicle inspections are done in my presence and I either receive the all clear, or, very occasionally, notification that damages will be charged.
I totally agree with this. Recent data from CarInsuRent indicates that high-tourism European destinations experience a disproportionate surge in disputed, pre-existing car rental damage claims due to rapid vehicle turnover.
This trend, alongside reports that 58% of global damage claims are not the renter’s fault, underscores the necessity of thorough, documented vehicle inspections. For more context on these findings, read the report on https://carinsurent.com/guides/car-rental-insurance-guides/rental-car-insurance-identifying-geographic-anomalies-in-rental-car-damage-claims/
As a former (involuntarily retired) truck driver I totally agree with Matthew on how to protect yourself. Do a thorough pretrip inspection and DOCUMENT anything that could possibly considered to be “damage”. I learned an expensive lesson by not being diligent enough one time and got dinged 1,700$ for some scratches on a truck I delivered that were almost invisible and I’m sure I missed those scratches when I did my pretrip inspection when I picked up the truck. Document. Document some more. Cover yourself.