Consumer complaint received 2025-08-27 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Summit A*R, Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
Original incident occurred on XX/XX/year>, in which the front left tire of a rental car blew out from the sidewall of the tire. The car was parked on the street at the time, with the subject tire facing the street ( not contacting curb ) and having not been impacted. The car was carrying only the driver with no other passenger, and was not carrying any luggage or cargo, indicating that the car was not overloaded or over weight capacity. The tire spontaneously blew from the inside outward, indicating a tire material failure and not a puncture or other impact event that would have destroyed the tire from an external stimulus. Additionally, the vehicle was an electric vehicle, which is typically heavier than internal combustion engine vehicles of the same class and body style. All evidence indicates the tire was internally defective or the wrong specification tire was installed on the vehicle, which is the responsibility of XXXX as the owner of the vehicle. 

After the incident, XXXX towed the vehicle away and replaced it with an identical vehicle that same day with no additional complaint or claim. Nearly one full year later, I received a damage claim statement in which XXXX is charging me for the incident. I contacted the XXXX claims management department to dispute the claim per the instructions on the claim. I provided the evidence outlined above and attached to demonstrate that the damage likely occurred as a result of internal defect, and not as a result of customer misuse, accident, or neglect. As the car is XXXX 's asset and no action on my part resulted in this incident, nor could I have taken any action to prevent the incident from occurring, I asserted that I was not responsible to pay for the damage. 

Furthermore, I emphasized that the damage claim was artificially inflated. XXXX is attempting to charge me {$500.00} for a single tire, when a quality tire can be purchased for ~ {$200.00}, as well as a {$310.00} storage fee, while claiming that loss of use was only for one day. The values are also round numbers and do not seem to be actual costs paid by XXXX. 

XXXX ignored and did not respond to any statement about the inflated value of the damage claim, and simply responded that since the car was in my possession at the time, I was solely responsible for all damage. They ignored any statement I made pertaining to the likely internal defect of the car and the lack of any surrounding damage or other evidence to demonstrate that the damage was a result of my use. They also ignored my request for supporting documentation for the damage claim, including receipts, cost estimates, and internal investigative reports of the damage, and did not provide any of these or similar. 

As I continued to contest the claim, they simply reissued the claim statement, and furnished me a final notice in which this alleged debt would be reported to credit agencies, my debt sold to collection agencies, and my name blacklisted from XXXX for any future rentals. 

After further attempts to reconcile internally to no avail, I was informed that my alleged debt was sold to Summit A * R who is attempting to contact me to collect.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation