5 ms·

This seems like outright fraud - how can they charge a cleaning fee and then perform no cleaning?

burnt-resistor 1y ago
Or apartment managers charge a "cleaning fee" when it was already proven clean.
octo888 1y ago
Just like how car rental companies can charge damage fees and not repair it (thus charging it multiple times for multiple customers!)
- deanc 1y ago
  Time for the EU to legislate on this. Car rental companies should be required to provide a detailed report to the customer on the damage allowing the customer to challenge any potential cost estimation (with reason) that the rental car company provides. Then the rental companies should be required to prove to the customer the damage was fixed and provide the invoice.
  - octo888 1y ago
    Careful what you wish for. What you may get in one hand they'll take in another. They're pulling other crap like cleaning fees for a grain or two of sand too. Should the EU our saviour protect us against that? Plenty alternatives to renting a car in Europe. Hit them where it hertz. Take a punt on smaller companies that are competing with eg total all inclusive insurance. Yup they're a bit more expensive sometimes but can result in an better overall experience (there are lots of scammy local companies too)
    - deanc 1y ago
      This could all be covered under legislation. If the EU can finally get airlines to agree on hand luggage standardisation I’m fairly sure they could agree that any additional cleaning or repairs must come with receipts. This makes it a lot easier for CC disputes at that point.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
    - lxgr 1y ago
      Yes, laws should generally protect consumers against predatory business practices, even if it affects the businesses' bottom line. I'd rather be charged a bit more upfront than to see mystery charges showing up on my card after I check out or return a car in the same condition I received it. Allowing this type of stuff to go unpunished also just hurts honest businesses and distorts the market, since in travel search aggregators, the primary sorting criterion is price.
      - octo888 1y ago
        They'll just find another to screw you but if you like to believe in the coordinated game of cat and mouse actually does any fundamental and long term good, you do you
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
yonatan8070 1y ago
Exactly my thinking. If I get this smoking charge but haven't smoked, I should be able to go to my credit card provider and tell them to get me my 500$ back
tialaramex 1y ago
Leases often work this way. In theory it's illegal in the UK (for a home, businesses are assumed to be big boys who can negotiate on equal footing) but it's still pretty common to be charged when you move out. Specifically UK law says "reasonable wear and tear" is just an expected cost of people living in a house you let to them - so e.g. they're going to wear out carpet after some years, but a cigar burn is not OK, the walls won't look pristine but there shouldn't be graffiti, that sort of thing. They should vacuum floors but it's not reasonable to expect dust to magically vanish from every nook. In practice in many cases you move out leaving the place very habitable, you get told they "had" to clean up your mess, and it's a suspiciously round number like £80 and they have plenty more "necessary" charges like this. In theory in the UK they're required to provide receipts showing their actual expense, but in practice they're looking at this as free revenue and most of their clients can't fight back. I was buying, freeing me from the obvious revenge if I say "Fuck you" but there were a lot of other things to do for the move and having fought them down from the original outrageous fees they wanted I gave up although I did get as far as reporting them to their regulator and threatening legal action. In hindsight I'm quite sure I could have got to $0 and possibly also got the most senior woman who was straight up lying and clearly had done all this many times removed from the register of people fit to let out properties, but I didn't and I feel bad about that.
- jplrssn 1y ago
  They absolutely prey on people not being having the time/resources to fight back. A friend in the UK had his deposit withheld as "mail charges" by his landlord upon moving out. Turned out the fine print in his lease said that he wasn't allowed to receive mail at the house he was legally renting.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - hdgvhicv 1y ago
    I have no idea what “mail” is, but I’d love to see the result of the outcome when they issues a challenge at the deposit protection company.
IncreasePosts 1y ago
Do you know they don't do cleaning? They might bring an ozone machine into the room or something Maybe it should be called an accelerated asset deprecation fee.

Or apartment managers charge a "cleaning fee" when it was already proven clean.

Just like how car rental companies can charge damage fees and not repair it (thus charging it multiple times for multiple customers!)

deanc 1y ago
Time for the EU to legislate on this. Car rental companies should be required to provide a detailed report to the customer on the damage allowing the customer to challenge any potential cost estimation (with reason) that the rental car company provides. Then the rental companies should be required to prove to the customer the damage was fixed and provide the invoice.
- octo888 1y ago
  Careful what you wish for. What you may get in one hand they'll take in another. They're pulling other crap like cleaning fees for a grain or two of sand too. Should the EU our saviour protect us against that? Plenty alternatives to renting a car in Europe. Hit them where it hertz. Take a punt on smaller companies that are competing with eg total all inclusive insurance. Yup they're a bit more expensive sometimes but can result in an better overall experience (there are lots of scammy local companies too)
  - deanc 1y ago
    This could all be covered under legislation. If the EU can finally get airlines to agree on hand luggage standardisation I’m fairly sure they could agree that any additional cleaning or repairs must come with receipts. This makes it a lot easier for CC disputes at that point.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
  - lxgr 1y ago
    Yes, laws should generally protect consumers against predatory business practices, even if it affects the businesses' bottom line. I'd rather be charged a bit more upfront than to see mystery charges showing up on my card after I check out or return a car in the same condition I received it. Allowing this type of stuff to go unpunished also just hurts honest businesses and distorts the market, since in travel search aggregators, the primary sorting criterion is price.
    - octo888 1y ago
      They'll just find another to screw you but if you like to believe in the coordinated game of cat and mouse actually does any fundamental and long term good, you do you
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]

yonatan8070 1y ago

Exactly my thinking. If I get this smoking charge but haven't smoked, I should be able to go to my credit card provider and tell them to get me my 500$ back

tialaramex 1y ago

Leases often work this way. In theory it's illegal in the UK (for a home, businesses are assumed to be big boys who can negotiate on equal footing) but it's still pretty common to be charged when you move out. Specifically UK law says "reasonable wear and tear" is just an expected cost of people living in a house you let to them - so e.g. they're going to wear out carpet after some years, but a cigar burn is not OK, the walls won't look pristine but there shouldn't be graffiti, that sort of thing. They should vacuum floors but it's not reasonable to expect dust to magically vanish from every nook. In practice in many cases you move out leaving the place very habitable, you get told they "had" to clean up your mess, and it's a suspiciously round number like £80 and they have plenty more "necessary" charges like this. In theory in the UK they're required to provide receipts showing their actual expense, but in practice they're looking at this as free revenue and most of their clients can't fight back. I was buying, freeing me from the obvious revenge if I say "Fuck you" but there were a lot of other things to do for the move and having fought them down from the original outrageous fees they wanted I gave up although I did get as far as reporting them to their regulator and threatening legal action. In hindsight I'm quite sure I could have got to $0 and possibly also got the most senior woman who was straight up lying and clearly had done all this many times removed from the register of people fit to let out properties, but I didn't and I feel bad about that.

jplrssn 1y ago
They absolutely prey on people not being having the time/resources to fight back. A friend in the UK had his deposit withheld as "mail charges" by his landlord upon moving out. Turned out the fine print in his lease said that he wasn't allowed to receive mail at the house he was legally renting.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- hdgvhicv 1y ago
  I have no idea what “mail” is, but I’d love to see the result of the outcome when they issues a challenge at the deposit protection company.

IncreasePosts 1y ago

Do you know they don't do cleaning? They might bring an ozone machine into the room or something Maybe it should be called an accelerated asset deprecation fee.