GM Car Owners With OnStar Now Can Be Their Own Rental Agencies

The Los Angeles Times reports that the world of micro-rentals just got a whole lot more crowded, with the introduction of a nationwide partnership between GM and ride-sharing company RelayRides. RelayRides has been arranging short-term car sharing in just a few cities for several years; car owners can sign up to make their own cars available for short-term rentals to others, so their expensive investment (especially in cities where parking is like a second apartment's rent) isn't sitting idle. Now, the two companies are rolling out that system in a much larger market: the rest of the U.S. Owners of GM cars new enough to be equipped with OnStar monitoring systems will be able to sign up to take part with the OnStar system providing the ability to unlock and track those cars remotely, which might make the bargain more attractive to many owners who'd like to earn money from their cars (and reduce the total number of cars needed in a given area), but reluctant to hand the keys to a stranger. (Cars without the system can still be enrolled, but will require a key hand-off.)

Comments

Still Evil

[MightyYar]

Even though this seems like a good thing, there is a corporation involved so I'm sure there is evil involved.

Gentlemen of Slashdot, affix your tinfoil hats and let's start dissecting this!

Re:Still Evil

[vlm]

Even though this seems like a good thing, there is a corporation involved so I'm sure there is evil involved.

Gentlemen of Slashdot, affix your tinfoil hats and let's start dissecting this!

1) Find car you'd like to steal or strip.
2) Social engineer the car to be a part of this "rental agreement".
3) "rent" car using the usual fake ID stuff (or just tell them you're an illegal and they're not allowed to discriminate against you).
4) Drive to steel walled warehouse or just strip the parts you want, after all they have fake ID.
5) Profit!

I am virtually certain GM is not prepared for the security implications of this.

Another interesting topic is I rent the Home Depot truck when I'm transporting garden manure etc. I wonder how they handle borderline situations where its not illegal or wrong, but...

The last topic I've never been able to understand is there used to be intense publicity about civil forfeiture, where you'll lose your car non-judicially just because a cop wants it. Now this could happen to anyone walking down the street, but how do these rental deals handle having the cops steal a car from a renter?

Re:Still Evil

[Kokuyo]

"2) Social engineer the car to be a part of this "rental agreement"."

Uh-huh, because if you want to strip a car, you're not just going to smash the window and hotwire the car with the little box you bought off of e-bay in under 5 minutes. Riiiight.

Re:Still Evil

[MickyTheIdiot]

welcome to Straw Man City.

Re:Still Evil

[19thNervousBreakdown]

3) "rent" car using the usual fake ID stuff (or just tell them you're an illegal and they're not allowed to discriminate against you).

Just because you're a stupid bigot doesn't mean the rest of us are.

Re:Still Evil

[Thiez]

Seems like a lot of trouble. Wouldn't it be much easier to steal the car the old-fashioned way? Presumably your method would result in the organisation having a picture of you (from your fake id), and the monitoring system would reveal the car mysteriously disappearing when entering your steel walled warehouse. So basically the police now know your face and your hideout.
Even if that does not lead to your capture, they can put your picture in a database and the next time you attempt to steal a car you'll get flagged and arrested.

Re:Still Evil

[Anonymous Coward]

you mean like sell ads?

Re:Still Evil

[ColdWetDog]

"2) Social engineer the car to be a part of this "rental agreement"."

Uh-huh, because if you want to strip a car, you're not just going to smash the window and hotwire the car with the little box you bought off of e-bay in under 5 minutes. Riiiight.

Of course not. That little box you bought on eBay likely came from some sweatshop in China and, for all you know, contains lead (a product known to the State of California to cause Cancer).

A little social engineering is pure, American made goodness (or maybe Nigerian, but hell, we're all free marketeers here, right?).

Why do you hate America?

Re:Still Evil

[danomac]

What I was wondering is in the case of legitimate rental use, I don't think regular car insurance will suffice. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the car owners finds that out the hard way.

All you need to do is rent the car to a guy nicknamed Crash that can't afford to acquire/insure a car for his/her own use...

Re:Still Evil

[slew]

1) Find car you'd like to steal or strip.

Okay you found a generic GM car. Now why is this "GM" car special that you want to steal it?

2) Social engineer the car to be a part of this "rental agreement".

Why bother?, if you want this particular GM car, just steal it. At a minimum, you probably need the get around having vehicle account verification information to social engineer adding the to the rental system, So if you think you do this, just social engineer Onstar unlock the car instead of adding them to this rental company agreement. That's probably easier to do, since if you want to sign-up, they'll probably will have to send you snail-mail forms you need to fill out and send back to authorize it, where as if you just want them to unlock the car, they probably can just do it right away...

3) "rent" car using the usual fake ID stuff

At this point, I don't think there is much difference between this rental and a typical car rental...

As usual, people making it harder than it needs to be.

Also, social engineering stuff like this isn't as easy as people think it is. In the old days all the call centers were staffed with nice, trusting midwestern USA employees that you can sweet-talk. Nowdays, you are calling into a boiler room where people barely know how to do what they are trained to do (including speaking english) and punt to a supervisor anytime strange comes up since they are rated on how fast they can hand off or terminate the call and are constantly being watched by keystroke loggers, so they generally not interested in being engineered by you, they are more interested in upselling you some additional product.

Re:Still Evil

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Correction: I am not a stupid bigot. I probably shouldn't have spoken for the rest of Slashdot.

Re:Still Evil

[vlm]

"2) Social engineer the car to be a part of this "rental agreement"."

Uh-huh, because if you want to strip a car, you're not just going to smash the window and hotwire the car with the little box you bought off of e-bay in under 5 minutes. Riiiight.

Seems like a lot of risk to take on in public which you can avoid with just a little paper and social engineering.

This is sounding like why social engineer yourself past the front desk guard when you can just crash a car thru a ground floor window?

Now you could have fun by setting up your enemy as a new renter so as to trash their car.

Re:Still Evil

[vlm]

At this point, I don't think there is much difference between this rental and a typical car rental...

However, I could trash the car of the supvr who fired me with this scheme, as opposed to generic Enterprise renta-car model.

Also I've heard in Vegas you can rent a Ferrari, but around here I've only seen the worlds most boring 4-door commuter cars, with the exception of a couple heavy duty trucks (but that's bordering on ripping off uhaul, not enterprise rentacar). Privately owned cars seem much more interesting.

Re:Still Evil

[Bob the Super Hamste]

Yes in Vegas you can rent a Ferrari as well as a host of other sports cars. When I was out there with my wife a few years ago I rented a Lotus Elise for a day. Of the fancy cars it was the cheapest and only like $10 more than a Ford Mustang but I like little roadsters so it was worth it for a day of driving around seeing some of the other stuff in the area. As much fun as getting something like a Lamborghini of Ferrari would be I still wanted the Elise.

Re:Still Evil

[hsmith]

Strange, because in the 1900's governments killed 100's of millions of their own citizens, through intentional famine, war, and genocide.

Not sure the last time GM killed 40,000,000 people like Mao in the Great Leap Forward.

But yeah, fuck evil corporations!

Re:Still Evil

[mjr167]

Or rip the onstar system out as soon as you get in the car and it's turned on...

Re:Still Evil

[morari]

Unfortunately, the statement is more true than not. I've volunteered within a few different social service and public assistant roles over the years. When looking for assistance on things like housing/heating/food, the government forms all state very boldly that a lack of citizenship or legal residency will not necessarily disqualify you. I'm not a bigot, but as a taxpayer it disturbs me to see welfare programs abused to the extent they are... let alone by illegal immigrants.

Re:Still Evil

[Anonymous Coward]

......some innocuous blather from vlm....
3) "rent" car using the usual fake ID stuff (or just tell them you're an illegal and they're not allowed to discriminate against you).

Why was this shit not modded flamebait?

You're a turd fondler, vlm.

Re:Still Evil

[jpapon]

2) Social engineer the car to be a part of this "rental agreement".

If you can do that, you can probably just find a way to use the on-star system directly to unlock/start the car. If you are able to submit a valid rental agreement, why wouldn't you be able to get a "I lost my keys" request through?

Re:Still Evil

[jonhainer]

1) Find car you'd like to steal or strip.

2) Social engineer the car to be a part of this "rental agreement".

3) "rent" car using the usual fake ID stuff (or just tell them you're an illegal and they're not allowed to discriminate against you).

4) Drive to steel walled warehouse or just strip the parts you want, after all they have fake ID.

5) Profit!

I am virtually certain GM is not prepared for the security implications of this.

It seems that you don't have a very good idea of how the program works.

First of all, you can't provide fake ID, because to participate as a renter you must present a driver's license to RelayRides. They check with your state's DMV to determine if the license is up to date and if you have a relatively clean driving record before they agree to insure you. Only then will you be able to go on-line and rent someone else's car. It would be very difficult to "fake" this.

GM is simply making OnStar anti-theft protection standard on all of their cars. One feature of this is that the owner can use a smart phone app to unlock the car. So, you must have a valid smartphone account for this to work, again identifying you as the culprit.

If the car is stolen, OnStar's GPS tracking features will be a huge help in locating the car.

I'm not saying that there's no way to spoof the app and make it look like someone else stole the car. I'm just saying, it would take a much more sophisticated approach than you mention.

Re:Still Evil

[19thNervousBreakdown]

While your post may be informative, the implied leap in logic--that because lack of citizenship or legal residency is not an automatic disqualifier, you as a private citizen will be forced to hand over your car keys to someone who is going to steal it--is awful big, and could really only be considered logical by ... a bigot.

Or maybe you weren't saying that at all. Maybe you just wanted to chime in that you find the idea of your tax money going to illegal immigrants disturbing, even though it has no real relation to what's being discussed. Which is totally normal, right?

Re:Still Evil

[MightyYar]

Well, it was meant to be satire... my zero mod tells me I was completely unsuccessful. I thought the bit about the tin foil hats would show that I was being sarcastic, but alas...

Re:Still Evil

[Anonymous Coward]

The RelayRides program provides a 1 million dollar combined property damage/bodily injury coverage, and comprehensive and collision coverage for the rented vehicle with no deductible. So your own insurance will never get involved except if you need to update that you have a new vehicle after "Crash" totals your car.

Re:Still Evil

[morari]

No, my reply was in reference to the grandparent's statement, just as yours' seemed to be.

[...] tell them you're an illegal and they're not allowed to discriminate against you.

I wouldn't hand over the keys to my car to any stranger, let alone the majority of my friends and family. Race or legal status would have very little addition bearing on the situation, if any.

Re:Still Evil

[19thNervousBreakdown]

So which is it? Am I fool for handing my car keys over to someone who tells me they're in this country illegally and that I'm not allowed to discriminate against them, or is that claim actually plausible, as your original post more than implied?

Re:Still Evil

[Anonymous Coward]

However, I could trash the car of the supvr who fired me with this scheme, as opposed to generic Enterprise renta-car model.

So you supvr has a Ferrari with OnStar?

Re:Still Evil

[gman003]

Why do you hate America?

Do you *really* want the full list, or should I just point you to the last half century of American history?

Re:Still Evil

[R3d M3rcury]

Also I've heard in Vegas you can rent a Ferrari, but around here I've only seen the worlds most boring 4-door commuter cars, with the exception of a couple heavy duty trucks [...]

I sometimes do this--not the Ferraris or Lamborghinis, mind you, but somewhat more modestly priced cars (Audis, BMWs, etc.). Check around for "exotic" rentals. You may not be able to find Ferraris, but you can probably rent more than just you standard econobox.

One interesting thing about these agencies is that they do not provide insurance on these cars. You are responsible for any damage to the vehicle. Now you may think your insurance will cover any car you drive, but there is a maximum value on your policy. I spoke with the owner of the shop about this--it's basically too expensive for them to have insurance on these cars for any driver. So they don't even offer it. And he does call the insurance companies to verify that the insurance will cover the car. He said it's always funny because he'll call some insurance company and say that someone wants to rent a car and here's the policy number and do they have coverage? The insurance company just says, "Yeah, yeah, it's covered." He'll reply, "So I can rent him the $150,000 Audi R8 and you'll cover the replacement cost?" Brief pause. "Let me check the policy..."

Also, these cars are being rented based on their looks. If you're spending the money to rent a high-end car, you want it to be pristine. So any scratch. scrape, bump, or blemish will be your responsibility.

I would assume that if you're doing a car-sharing type of arrangement, the insurance will be an important consideration. Before I let some maniac behind the wheel of my Corvette or Cadillac, I'd want to make sure that his insurance will be buying me a new one if he totals it.

Re:Still Evil

[slew]

I would assume that if you're doing a car-sharing type of arrangement, the insurance will be an important consideration. Before I let some maniac behind the wheel of my Corvette or Cadillac, I'd want to make sure that his insurance will be buying me a new one if he totals it.

Most p2p car sharing services today have a umbrella insurance policy that superceed personal policies during the rental period (which is paid for out of the rental take). This used to be a murky areay of the law (some insurance policies were void if you rent out your car for money), but for many locales, recent changes in the law that require both that 1) insurance companies to accept personal vehicle sharing program insurance covereage w/o voiding their personal coverage, and 2) the personal vehicle sharing program indemnify the owner against civil suits for loss or injury during the rental period.

You wouldn't be relying on "his" isurance to cover, but the company's insurance.

Re:Still Evil

[morari]

Again, my statement was not in direct relation to the rental of vehicles. Rather it cherry-picked the aforementioned quote to offer a broader sense of what is or isn't just.

That said, I do indeed think you would be a fool to hand your keys over to anyone that you didn't not personally know and trust. Barring that, you would certainly be a fool for providing access to your property (via rental) to someone whom is in this country illegally. They almost assuredly have falsified documentation and would leave you with little legal recourse were something to happen to your vehicle.

Re:Still Evil

[danomac]

And what happens when both companies deny responsibility?

I've dealt with insurance companies before, I doubt it's worth the risk.

Re:Still Evil

[chrismcb]

LONG list of things to do to steal car...
I am pretty sure there are much easier ways to steal a car... Like say hot wiring it and driving it away.

Re:Still Evil

[AK Marc]

Half century? Try a full one. The US screwed up in WWI by entering on the side of the English. If the US had refrained completely from entering, or entered on the side of the Germans, it's likely that WWII would never have happened. The US also started screwing with internal politics in gross and "illegal" means starting with the White Revolution in the USSR, helping cause nearly a century of animosity and trouble in eastern Europe. Then, with the failure of the US to endorse and push the League of Nations, helped cause WWII. And, in the build-up to WWII, the US stood by and didn't intervene, in effect encouraging the slaughter of millions of innocents.

And after WWII, in the era you are talking about, they finally get to the bad stuff.

In my estimation, the US caused the USSR to be adversarial, as well as caused WWII and failed to get involved to save anyone, and only as an exercise in retribution.

Re:Still Evil

[gman003]

Joining WW1 on the side of Germany would have been retarded. Britain had naval dominance, so it would be a military failure. Britain also was (and is) a massive trading partner for the US, so it would have screwed up our economy as well.

And, while you may be right in saying if the US hadn't entered the war, WW2 wouldn't have happened, you could also make the case that if there had been an actual conquest of Germany (rather than surrender), WW2 would not have happened. And without the US, that conquest would have been impossible.

Interfering with other countries was also par for the course at the time. Remember China? Of course not - you seem to rewrite history, forgetting that it was the US that originally pushed for the League of Nations (before backing out due to political infighting), and that *all* the "Great Powers" neglected to actually enforce League decisions. Even had the US joined, it would not have succeeded.

Re:Still Evil

[Swave An deBwoner]

But what if that "Crash" guy kills and maims a family in his efforts to maintain his nom de guerre? While $1 million sounds like a lot at first, with several horribly destroyed lives to care for, it may turn out to be just a drop in the bucket.

Re:Still Evil

[AK Marc]

Interfering with other countries was also par for the course at the time. Remember China? Of course not - you seem to rewrite history, forgetting that it was the US that originally pushed for the League of Nations (before backing out due to political infighting), and that *all* the "Great Powers" neglected to actually enforce League decisions. Even had the US joined, it would not have succeeded.

I didn't re-write anything. The League of Nations failed, in no small part, due to the US backing out. I said nothing to contradict that. But yes, I didn't pay that much attention to the US interfering with China around 1920. I stopped my comments about the start of WWII (well, the US start, anyway), so our interference with China during/after the war would not be an omission, just out of scope.

There's nothing I said that was re-writing, and I didn't forget China.

Re:Still Evil

[Luyseyal]

Also, these cars are being rented based on their looks. If you're spending the money to rent a high-end car, you want it to be pristine. So any scratch. scrape, bump, or blemish will be your responsibility.

This is true of regular cars as well. Worse, insurers have no-contest agreements with rental agencies so that they pay whatever the rental company charges them and then they jack up your rate at renewal -- even if you were not at fault. This happened to my wife, once. She rented a car with some existing luggage scrapes. The rental company charged us for them because she hadn't noted them on the condition report (she didn't notice them).

At this point, I always take photos and video of the car before I drive off in it. It's stupid, but better than getting dinged on your insurance for something you didn't do.

-l

First

[Anonymous Coward]

First!

Important reminder

[Anonymous Coward]

This is NOT covered by your car insurance, so when an accident happens, you will be sued and end up broke. For example, the person driving your car runs over a rich old woman crossing the street? That's gonna cost YOU!

Re:Important reminder

[vortechs]

Erm...no, it's covered by RelayRide's car insurance.

Re:Important reminder

[Anonymous Coward]

RelayRides will take a 40% cut and provide a $1-million insurance policy for the owner and $300,000 for the renter.

Re:Important reminder

[Sqr(twg)]

Really? Because on their web page, they say the provide a $1 million liability insurance.

Re:Important reminder

[DeathToBill]

You don't sue cars, you sue people. That old woman crossing the street can sue the driver of the car, not you. It is him who has been negligent by running her over, not you. Otherwise it'd be sort of like lending your brother your gun and then being liable for any damage he did with it.

And you can also sue the driver of the car for negligence in damaging your car.

How much you'll get out of him is another question, of course. You might like to check that he is insured before you rent your car to him.

Re:Important reminder

[squizzar]

You're right, driving is the driver's responsibility and that's who should be insured. One question though: If the car is not maintained in a roadworthy way, or has a dangerous fault known to the owner but not something the person renting the car would be able to detect then I would have thought the owner would be liable. I don't mean things that a reasonable inspection of the car would uncover (Like the BOLTSS bikers get told to do: Brakes, Oil, Lights, Tyres, Steering, Suspension), but things that are known to the owner and potentially dangerous to a renter. I presume most rental agencies keep up with maintenance partly for this reason, to not do so would surely be seen as negligent. So if you're renting out your own car it doesn't seem unreasonable that you would be held responsible for ensuring it was safe to drive.

Re:Important reminder

[Anonymous Coward]

RelayRide say:

One of the ways we protect you is by providing a $1 million insurance policy that protects you against lawsuits for injuries and property damage while your car is being rented through the RelayRides service.

The cost of, for example, lifetime care for a paraplegic is greatly in excess of $1 million. If RelayRide thinks you might be liable to such lawsuits and aren't offering enough to cover them, this doesn't look like a good deal.

Re:Important reminder

[flonker]

In Florida, the burden of proof is on you to prove that you were not driving your car if you get a red light ticket.

The owner of the motor vehicle involved in the violation is responsible and liable for paying the uniform traffic citation [...] when the driver failed to stop at a traffic signal, unless the owner can establish that [...] The motor vehicle was, at the time of the violation, in the care, custody, or control of another person;
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String&URL=0300-0399/0316/Sections/0316.0083.html

(It's been challenged under the due process clause of the Constitution; I'm not sure of the details. )

Also, parking laws in New York are similar.

Re:Important reminder

[Sarten-X]

...unless the owner can establish that [...] The motor vehicle was, at the time of the violation, in the care, custody, or control of another person...

Like having rental details available from RelayRide that says the renter was operating the car?

Re:Important reminder

[karnal]

I was in a collision scenario around 10 years ago where the driver was definitely not the owner. Someone hit me at a red light; all 3 passengers got out of the car QUICK and bolted from the scene. The passengers all got rounded up in front of the local police department (why, oh why would you run towards the police lol) but they could not easily determine the driver of the vehicle. Neither could I, as I only had an instant to relax before the hit - I saw them coming in the rear view and my immediate concern was for the service manager who was in the passenger seat on a test drive to help solve an intermittent misfire. The car that hit me turned out to be an over due rental - and none of the occupants were the renter of the car; it was one of the passenger's sister who rented the car. Eventually the insurance company covering the rental (turned out to be a dealership across from the location I was getting my car looked at) paid for the damages to the car.

In any case, I would be very leery to rent out my car unless I had additional insurance protection to cover this scenario - and I would have to think that between the extra hike in insurance costs plus GM's cut of this process, it would probably not turn out to be a whole lot of money unless I was renting a few cars at a time.

Re:Important reminder

[NJRoadfan]

While RelayRides is providing its own supplemental policy, I wouldn't be surprised if the primary car insurance provider decides to drop customers. Personal Auto Policies are strict in what use they are intended to insure. If they find out that you are renting out your car, they can cancel your policy, even if you have RelayRide's insurance. Some insurers don't want ANY possible exposure to liability for people using their cars in this matter.

Re:Important reminder

[PhotoJim]

Owners of vehicles are, in most jurisdictions, jointly and severally liable for the injuries caused by the negligent operation of their vehicles.

It might be that GM assumes liability for you, but since they provide $1 million of coverage, that implies to me that dollar $1,000,001 comes out of your pocket, not theirs.

Re:Important reminder

[PhotoJim]

Why didn't the police just fingerprint the steering wheel? Running from an accident is a crime.

Re:Important reminder

[Amouth]

Actually you sue the driver first - then when they are dry you go after the registered owner of the vehicle. I know it sounds stupid but as long as the tags are in your name you are responsible for it.

Re:Important reminder

[flonker]

Like having rental details available from RelayRide that says the renter was operating the car?

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. My point was that you can and would get a ticket in the mail, and you would have to prove that someone else was driving. The need to prove that would be a punishment in and of itself. Also, you would be rolling the dice to see if they believe you.

And my other point is that in New York, parking tickets are given to the car, not to the driver. So, the owner would be responsible.

While I'm sure that rental companies have all sorts of loopholes and outs, doing this as a private person could get expensive in terms of time and/or money.

Re:Important reminder

[Muad'Dave]

That would involve "Actual Police Work (tm)". Can't have that. Why didn't the police fingerprint the stuff that I know the intruder touched when I had a break-in some years ago? Too much trouble.

Re:Important reminder

[cdecoro]

You don't sue cars, you sue people. That old woman crossing the street can sue the driver of the car, not you. It is him who has been negligent by running her over, not you. Otherwise it'd be sort of like lending your brother your gun and then being liable for any damage he did with it.

And you can also sue the driver of the car for negligence in damaging your car.

It is true that you sue the driver of the car; however, in some states (e.g. New York) the owner of the car is "vicariously liable" for the negligence of any driver of that car who was driving with the owner's permission. This means that, so long as they can show that the driver was negligent, they do not need to show anything about the owner.

This is the same manner in which, for example, if you're run over by a negligent, red-light-running Pizza Hut delivery guy, Pizza Hut is automatically liable,
no matter how careful they were in screening or training the guy (and if they were negligent there, that is ANOTHER basis for their liability, known as "negligent entrustment").

Now, the driver is liable to the owner for any judgment that the owner had to pay out ("indemnification"). And yes, the driver is separately liable to you for his own negligence in damaging your property. But as you pointed out, good luck getting anything from him.

The one saving grace is that, in many states, a valid insurance agreement, to indemnify the owner, allows (or even requires) the insurance company to immediately step in to deal with defending the lawsuit. So at least the owner won't personally have to find a lawyer and go to court. But good luck trying to find affordable insurance premiums after that.

Re:Important reminder

[nitehawk214]

Why didn't the police just fingerprint the steering wheel? Running from an accident is a crime.

Or why not arrest all three of them. Isn't running from an accident a crime even if you were not the driver?

Though the most obvious answer is the police just didn't give a shit, which is usually the case for minor crimes for people that don't matter. Do the same thing to a politician's car and they will have the entire force crawling the streets for you.

Re:Important reminder

[dontmakemethink]

Insurance companies insure cars, not drivers. If you lend your car to someone else, and they run over an old lady, you can be sued just as rightly as the driver. You are responsible for your vehicle unless it is stolen. How RelayRides insurance fits into that I don't know, but definitely some fine print worth reading.

Re:Important reminder

[AK Marc]

You neglect to even indicate (let alone support) the notion that the owner of the car would be responsible for any misuse. $1,000,000 should be sufficient for any reasonable action (and most unreasonable ones).

Re:Important reminder

[AK Marc]

Assaulting someone with a motor vehicle and running is only a minor violent crime. But, if they were committing a non-violent victimless crime (like smoking a joint), then they'd have the book thrown at them, then tased, then kicked a few times.

Re:Important reminder

[jaymemaurice]

Most rental companies I know don't keep the cars long enough to do any maintenance they pay for - they bring them into the dealer while still under free maintenance and expect the dealers to be responsible for doing any warrenty work.

Re:Important reminder

[jaymemaurice]

Most rental companies charge a 10% to 30% service charge on fines, tolls and tickets. I would be surprised if RelayRide does not have you covered there. Same with cars returned with no gas or in need of cleaning.

Re:Important reminder

[Anonymous Coward]

An example. Suppose the brakes fail and the car causes more than a million dollars worth of damage (e.g. by severely crippling someone). As of the owner of the car you are responsible for the maintenance and you are first in line for liability. It's then up to you to attempt to shift that liability on to somebody else, the manufacturer or a mechanic, say. But you were a week late with the annual service so the court decides the liability is yours. And you're bankrupt.

This certainly wouldn't be the wackiest decision made by an American court.

Re:Important reminder

[AK Marc]

Then, if you've missed the annual service, take it out of the rental pool for a week until you get it done. I would agree with the courts on that one, if you negligently neglect the maintenance on your equipment, and that equipment kills someone, then you are at fault. But the first court case against a car-sharer-for-hire was where another driver was driving on the wrong side of the road and hit her car head-on while rented, and she was sued for millions (because she had insurance, and you sue the money, not the guilty). The reasonable outcome of that case would be to disbar the lawyer for the plaintiff and find for the defense, but instead, the insurance companies are battling it out with a sleazy ambulance chaser lawyer paid on commission. That's the much more likely scenario, rather than deliberate negligence, as you suggest.

Re:Important reminder

[Anonymous Coward]

Who gets their services done exactly one year apart? If you get a service every July, say, then some years the gap will be a little less than a year and some years a little more. When it's a little more, are you negligent? How many people who share their cars will give this a moment's thought?

Not that it matters. You think it's negligent, I don't. We agree that the courts might find it negligent and that's what does matter. I also agree that sleazy lawyers are a problem.

Anyway, the bottom line is that I'm not getting into the commercial rental business without the protection of a limited liability corporation. No RelayRide for me.

Re:Important reminder

[DeathToBill]

That depends on your jurisdiction - my insurance policy covers me if I'm driving someone else's car with their permission.

Sweet

[TorrentFox]

Great news for people who want the shit beat out of their cars by random strangers.

Re:Sweet

[metalgamer84]

My first thought as well.

Piece of advice to people that cant afford their car so they need to rent it out: Find a cheaper car you can afford or switch to a different mode of transportation. If you are even considering renting your car out for extra cash, your car costs too much.

Re:Sweet

[jeffmeden]

Great news for people who want the shit beat out of their cars by random strangers.

Modern cars are so depressingly hard to abuse that this is almost a non-issue. The old gags, like neutral dropping the transmission to do a burnout in an automatic, are a thing of the past thanks to hyper-aware engine computers that know when not to let the operator do things that might hurt the engine. We are almost at a point where a service like OnStar could even put the car into "no speeding mode" and prevent the operator from violating the speed limit at any given moment. About the only thing that can really "hurt" the car is what will leave a scar, i.e. hopping a curb and bending a rim, or just outright crashing the thing. These incidents would be easy to spot, report, and claim insurance for.

Re:Sweet

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Seriously. I just had a rental with 5,000 miles on it. The thing looked, felt, drove, and smelled like it'd been used to drive angry pigs to and from a slaughterhouse by a lead-footed 9-day-old corpse with IBS. If there's one thing people don't give a fuck about, it's taking care of a rental.

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

How about puking all over the front seat? Claim insurance and clean all you want, that smell will remain.

Re:Sweet

[alen]

that's why i have leather seats in my CR-V. both my kids puked in there and i didn't get to wash the car for weeks until after the fact and the smell came out

Re:Sweet

[cdrudge]

It's no that they can't afford their cars. Monthly parking can easily run more then a monthly car payment for a luxury vehicle. Even if you got a $500 beater, you'd still be paying $400-800 a month to park it.

Re:Sweet

[karnal]

Someone I once knew always said "Nothing parties like a rental!"

Re:Sweet

[cpu6502]

Then move to the suburbs where parking is free (in your own driveway, or in apartment parking lots).

Re:Sweet

[h4rr4r]

Then take public transit. Name one city where renting a space for a car costs more than $300/month and they don't have excellent public transit options.

Re:Sweet

[cpu6502]

The car I rented was pretty beat-up. Only 5000 miles with a scratch on the passenger door, and scratches around the driver door handle. People just don't give a shit about taking care of other people's property. (Which is probably why everyone's so deep debt... constantly replacing the stuff they didn't take care of.)

My first car lasted 360,000 miles and my second car looks like it will live to see 250,000 (it's japanese Mitsubishi so they don't have as much longevity). No scratches at all. Loan out my car to another person? Ha! Fat chance.

Re:Sweet

[NatasRevol]

Free!*

*$1200 monthly mortgage or rental agreement required

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

Great news for people who want the shit beat out of their cars by random strangers.

Do you know what the fastest car in the world is?

A rental car

Re:Sweet

[YrWrstNtmr]

Free!*
*$1200 monthly mortgage or rental agreement required

And rent in the city is free? You have to live somewhere.

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

So it didn't get between or under the seats or console, then? Lucky. Unless you have leather floors too.

Re:Sweet

[ColdWetDog]

Modern cars are so depressingly hard to abuse that this is almost a non-issue.

I take it you're not around teenagers on a regular basis. No?

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

Great news for people who want the shit beat out of their cars by random strangers.

Modern cars are so depressingly hard to abuse that this is almost a non-issue. The old gags, like neutral dropping the transmission to do a burnout in an automatic, are a thing of the past thanks to hyper-aware engine computers that know when not to let the operator do things that might hurt the engine. We are almost at a point where a service like OnStar could even put the car into "no speeding mode" and prevent the operator from violating the speed limit at any given moment. About the only thing that can really "hurt" the car is what will leave a scar, i.e. hopping a curb and bending a rim, or just outright crashing the thing. These incidents would be easy to spot, report, and claim insurance for.

Your insurance probably doesn't cover you if your car is being used as a rental.

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

Boxes are available. They're even multi-story now.

Re:Sweet

[arkane1234]

Not on purpose.

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure. Living within your means and saving up for the future all sound good. Consumers spend and the only way to accumulate wealth is through saving. Entrepreneurs also save but savings is to invest not to just accumulate money. That's the biggest difference in their attitude toward money.

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

I rented a car to Timothy and it came back smelling like farts. Took a whole week of airing it out before I could drive it again.

Re:Sweet

[turkeyfeathers]

How do you know it wasn't the pigs that had IBS? The corpse was probably the one with the bad cologne that lingered on the headrest for weeks...

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

All the rental car's I've had in the past 8 years have governors that top out at about 105mph - this includes Mustangs (even the special Hertz black/gold edition) and Challengers. So if the fastest car in the world can only do 105, then you are correct.

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

Then move to the suburbs where parking is free (in your own driveway, or in apartment parking lots).

The 'burbs is where the boring people live.

Re:Sweet

[Bob the Super Hamste]

You can still check to see that the curbs exist (this will probably knock it out of alignment, if not repeat until it does), stand on the brakes and gas at the same time and cook the converter, ride the brakes until you boil the fluid, floor it immediately after the engine catches when starting, turn off the traction control and whip some shitties (go in reverse if in a front wheel drive vehicle), leave the emergency brake on.

Re:Sweet

[davester666]

Don't forget that your car insurance doesn't cover renting your car out. I would find it surprising if adding rental coverage will be particularly affordable, at least compared with how much you'll earn from renting it out.

Re:Sweet

[russotto]

Then take public transit. Name one city where renting a space for a car costs more than $300/month and they don't have excellent public transit options.

New York.

(Nope, no excellent public transit options. Halfway decent public transit options in most of Manhattan and a few parts of the other boroughs. Rather poor public transit (as in slow-ass buses) everywhere else.)

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

As long as they leave me alone, I don't care how boring they are.

Re:Sweet

[h4rr4r]

The parts of New York that would have $300/month parking are generally the parts that have good public transit.

You think people are paying $300/month to park on long island?

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

You remind me of that anti-smoking guy from that one South Park.

"Hey, you shouldn't smoke."

"I smoke to relax."

"You should just go to your vacation home in France to relax."

"I don't have a vacation home in France."

"Your vacation home in Switzerland then, geeze!"

(not exact quote, but the rough gist of it from memory)

Re:Sweet

[jeffmeden]

1: Rim Damage (obvious)
2: Engine wont rev AT ALL when the brake is applied
3: You will come to a complete stop way before that happens, see #2
4: Traction control kicks in immediately even if you manage to get the transmission to go into gear above idle RPM
5: Traction control wont turn off
6: Brakes override throttle, see #2 again

You really have no idea how much joy they have managed to suck out of modern cars. But "rental rage" should be a lot better than it was in days gone by.

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

As I always say:

"Don't be gentle, it's only a rental".

Re:Sweet

[drinkypoo]

Name one city where renting a space for a car costs more than $300/month and they don't have excellent public transit options.

San Francisco. I lived in Bernal Heights and worked at the foot of Potrero Hill. I could drive to the neighborhood I worked in and park in 15-20 minutes, the variance being largely determined by the difficulty of finding parking. I had to spend at least 1h15m (pretty much always longer) taking a bus, the muni, and a bus to get to work on public transport. To do it on foot probably would have taken 30 minutes but I was still pretty damned fat then so I wasn't into it, though I probably should have been.

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFA - the company that provides the inter-mediation (And takes a 40% cut if rental fees) provides $1,000,000
coverage to owner and $300,000 coverage to renter.

Re:Sweet

[HornWumpus]

You just got used to the smell. Ask someone who will tell you the truth.

Re:Sweet

[jaymemaurice]

What do you drive?? Does your car have SMG/Dual Clutch/CVT
1, if you hit a curb or speed bump head on, you may get damage/wear you will not see right away
2, many cars, especially american crap, this is not true
3, again, this is not true on most cars
4, not sure you guys are talking about the same thing
5, the reason you have a traction control off switch is for slippery conditions, you may have a liability issue on your hands here
6, also not true in any of the cars I have been in

Re:Sweet

[Bob the Super Hamste]

1. I wasn't talking about hitting a curb head on but clipping one at speed and laterally loading the suspension which will knock it out of alignment. My wife does this a fair amount when turning as she doesn't pay attention and then wonders why her car never goes in a straight line.
2. In every vehicle I have ever driven with an automatic it is possible to get on the brakes and the gas at the same time. You will load up the torque converter up to the stall point. With enough practice in a rear wheel drive vehicle you can do a nice burnout this way. Bonus points if you also realize that this will give you a really nice launch off the line if you drag race. This is really hard on the transmission fluid and if you do it enough you will start to burn it as you overheat it
3. Here I am not talking about standing on the brake pedal but riding it so you are always applying braking force to the wheels, you are still on the gas pedal, but more so than you would need to be otherwise. I had a vehicle where one of the front calipers got stuck which is basically the same thing, it was still possible to accelerate but it did it really slow, and eventually I burned up the rotor, pads, and boiled the brake fluid, but managed to get it home.
4. Not in park which is usually the gear that you start in. When you start a vehicle it doesn't have oil pressure immediately and when you floor it the engine will rev up quite quick without oil pressure. This will wear the engine out really fast, or just blow up the motor eventually (ask my step mom who usually ends up with 3 engines being put into a car with less than 100,000 miles).
5. Never seen a vehicle where the traction control couldn't be turned off with a push of a button. This is usually do the the fact where there are edge cases where it just goes stupid like on a sheet of ice when starting. Here it just goes stupid and will throttle down the engine and apply the brakes until the car ceases to go forward since you will end up spinning one tire if you have an open diff.
6. The emergency brake is not very strong and is usually just a mechanical linkage to a small set of drum brakes located in the rear rotors. The emergency brake is usually only strong enough to keep the car from rolling on a mild incline. Even if it actually controlled the actual brakes using the hydraulic system it still wouldn't be that much force and could be overcome by pressing down on the gas pedal more.

Granted some of these all assume having either an automatic or cvt transmission and not a manual, but standard manuals you can really beat on by riding the clutch or by learning how to shift without the clutch. There is also the grind the gears option but that seems to simple but is a side affect of learning how to shift without using the clutch.

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

Scratches and other cosmetic bearings have no impact on the mechanical state of the car. The engine, wheel bearings, belts, etc were probably all doing just fine.

Re:Sweet

[Luyseyal]

We bought a precertified Toyota Sienna with about 29k miles from a dealership. They said the previous owner was a rental company. While driving it home (Dallas to Austin), it crapped out. Turns out the engine was sludged out because the oil had never been changed. Fortunately, since it was precertified, Toyota picked up the tab for the brand new engine.

However, lesson learned. Just because you think someone might take care of it doesn't mean they actually did.

-l

Lets call this step 1

[Anonymous Coward]

Next step, car companies "selling" you a car for cheap, where you're required to rent it out every so often on-demand and the car company/dealership keeps the profit from the rental. That way, you get a shit, beat-up, smoked-in, sexed-in, whatever-renters-do-in'd car for a cheaper price.

Open questions...

[azalin]

There are a few questions that would need to be cleared before I would even consider such an idea. Burden of proof on damages, specialized insurance (I'm pretty sure your normal car insurance won't cover it), wear, cleaning, smokers, tickets...
The point is rental companies see their cars as an investment that is supposed to bring in some profit before being phased out. Private owners consider their own cars as "my precious" and renters as "who cares, it's not my car" and hope the rental company doesn't note the new scratches.

Re:Open questions...

[Neil Boekend]

From the Relay rides website:

Insurance is included with every rental

Re:Open questions...

[Anonymous Coward]

And then there's the question. "Where'd that asshole renter leave my car?"

Re:Open questions...

[jcaplan]

Right where the GPS says he left it. Yep, RelayRides rentals are GPS equipped. This way renters and owners can find the car easily. I used it recently when my car was in the shop. Relay Rides gave me a link to the GPS coodinates of the car. Click to Google Maps and there's the car. I returned close to its home and I was all done.

Re:Open questions...

[nschubach]

Sure, but who's to say they don't drive it from Chicago to Vegas and leave it there. Who pays for your airline ticket to pick up your car?

Re:Open questions...

[nitehawk214]

From the Relay rides website:

Insurance is included with every rental

Who does it insure? Liability insurance for the carrier/vehicle owner, or actual coverage of damage to the vehicle itself?

Re:Open questions...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's all well and good. You have the GPS. But that asshole renter left it ACROSS TOWN and obviously I don't have my car to go pick it up....

Re:Open questions...

[jcaplan]

From the RelayRides web site: "If you return the car more than 30 minutes after the scheduled return time then you will be charged $25 for every 1/2 hour past the expected return time." Since you're required to return the car to its home or within 1/4 mile (400 meters) of its home if the car doesn't have a dedicated spot, I'm guessing that leaving the car across town will incur fines, half of which go to the owner.

If you think rent a car places are bad about dents

[Joe_Dragon]

If you think rent a car places are bad about dents just wait for this.

Better take a video of the car before pick up so you don't pay for old dents.

wear and ill treatment

[Anonymous Coward]

So when my car is rented by someone who slips the clutch like a driver's ed student and puts five years worth of wear on the clutch plates in two days, I'm supposed to be happy about this because hey, Onstar?

No thanks.

Re:wear and ill treatment

[jeffmeden]

So when my car is rented by someone who slips the clutch like a driver's ed student and puts five years worth of wear on the clutch plates in two days, I'm supposed to be happy about this because hey, Onstar?

No thanks.

You don't have an automatic, unlike 94% of cars sold? That's easy, this program is not for you. I bet they wont even enroll a standard transmission car, it's not worth the hassle of requiring another check box on the web form.

Re:wear and ill treatment

[JDG1980]

You don't have an automatic, unlike 94% of cars sold? That's easy, this program is not for you.

Agreed, the grandparent used a bad example, but there are lots of ways that careless/malicious renters could abuse a car with an automatic. They can still drag race, do donuts in a parking lot, and so on.

Will people using this Onstar rental service be allowed to restrict rentals to experienced drivers with good records? Can you specify no one with less than 4 years of driving experience or with more than 1 at-fault accident in the last two years?

Re:wear and ill treatment

[Anonymous Coward]

standard transmission

If 94% sold are automatic, and most cars to not offer a manual option, shouldn't the automatic be considered the "standard"?

Re:wear and ill treatment

[mlts]

I can see using RelayRides for a ratty subcompact car whose only purpose is to be a backup vehicle, or for something to drive downtown that it doesn't matter if it gets hit by car doors, vandalized, broken into, or set on fire. At least the vehicle can perhaps pay for itself.

It would not have much value when selling though. I'm sure Carfax or other places will note the vehicle has been used as a rental, and this will disastrously impact the thing's resale value.

Re:wear and ill treatment

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't have an automatic, unlike 94% of cars sold?

In many countries the vast majority of cars sold are manual transmissions.

Re:wear and ill treatment

[jcaplan]

RelayRides does offer manual transmission cars, too. They're not too common, but clearly indicated.

Re:wear and ill treatment

[arkane1234]

Sure you can. That's considered a good record.

Re:wear and ill treatment

[jeffmeden]

You don't have an automatic, unlike 94% of cars sold? That's easy, this program is not for you.

Agreed, the grandparent used a bad example, but there are lots of ways that careless/malicious renters could abuse a car with an automatic. They can still drag race, do donuts in a parking lot, and so on.

Try "Drag racing" or "doing donuts" with a new car that has all of the "safety features" enabled and see how that goes. The car wont let you break the tires loose at all, plus it will force a shift well below redline, and (in my imagined future) it won't let you speed either (in the present, the car can still tell on you for speeding). So, those two pastimes basically never leave the operational envelope of the car (and are totally boring). The most you could do is attempt high-speed maneuvers like drifting in turns, but that really only compromises the tires and unless you are really good at tricking the stability control system, it won't even do that very much.

Re:wear and ill treatment

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't have an automatic, unlike 94% of cars sold?

What are you talking about? In much of the world, automatics are considered to be vehicles for people who have physical handicaps, and an automatic transmission will significantly harm the resale value of an automobile. Even most rental cars use manual transmissions. It's quite common for 75% of all cars sold in many countries to be manuals.

American dumbed-down culture has not yet taken over the entire world. 80% of cars sold in Europe are manuals, and in some places it's even more.

http://express-press-release.net/29/Nearly%2080%20percent%20of%20passenger%20cars%20are%20sold%20with%20manual%20transmission%20in%20Europe.php

Re:wear and ill treatment

[jcaplan]

First, this is not an OnStar rental service. This is RelayRides adding a feature, allowing people with OnStar equipped vehicles to easily participate in their service without having to have the special module from RelayRides installed. The module provides the GPS, network connection and locking/unlocking capability which is all stuff that the OnStar system is capable of. RelayRides restricts its service to renters with at least two years of driving experience and a clean driving record. I don't know what they consider clean and I don't think this is configurable. You also have the option of being able to look at a renter's history and feedback on the site before choosing whether to rent to them.

Re:wear and ill treatment

[Anonymous Coward]

There is often an easily accessible button to turn off traction control (electronic stability control, etc).

Re:wear and ill treatment

[jeffmeden]

Being electronic, the operation is easily overridden in software (for example, by the owners request whenever the car is in "rental" mode.)

Re:wear and ill treatment

[jaymemaurice]

Or go off-road.

Mostly, the only reason I rent a car is to drive something fun and different. Even with my driving experience and good driving record, I still do donuts with my car and bend my 4x4 jumping sand dunes and ruts.

Re:wear and ill treatment

[jaymemaurice]

Ever turn off the traction control in a rental?

I saw a guy launching a boat with a uhaul truck - complete back end of the truck submerged (including rear diff) and it started to slip in... luckily someone had a strap. I am sure there was no VISIBLE damage done to the truck but would be surprised if the diff didn't get water inside it and fail shortly after.

Drive around and round in an empty round about as fast as possible?
Drive it on the ocean beach during low tide?
Do +80km/h on a long rough gravel road?
Leave it running with the A/C on in the corner of a hot parking garage?
Drive on a humid day with A/C on max and windows open?
Leave the windows/sunroof open in the rain fog, or early morning dew?
Tow it incorrectly (causing early wheel bearing failure or transmission wear)?
Take it off-road and smak the oil pan/diff off a few rocks?
Take it into the sand dunes?
Drive through a corn field and make a mais maze?
Jump it on hilly back country roads?
Use sunroof as exit to sit up on roof (who notices roof dents)?
Make whoopie in it?
Do all of the above on the same day.

Re:wear and ill treatment

[jaymemaurice]

Yes, because all cars, even ones without onstar that they rent, have an override to disable the traction control.

Even then, unplugging the ABS relay easily overrides such an override.

Re:wear and ill treatment

[AvitarX]

My local car share (I use it for the hourly rental of a pick-up and sometimes a mini-van, while using my sub-compact as a daily driver) will not let people join with under 5 years experience, more than one accident in 5 years or a DUI in 10.

I don't believe the regularly re-run the license though, and looking at the site now, some of these requirements are relaxed/not mentioned.

Why just cars?

[Anonymous Coward]

My closet is full of clothing just hanging there unworn.

And my sock drawer is a virtual gold mine!

Re:Why just cars?

[Higgs Bosun]

And my sock drawer is a virtual gold mine!

I'm just glad it's not your underwear drawer.

Re:Why just cars?

[NatasRevol]

Just brown rocks there...

You wouldn't make much money

[Anonymous Coward]

The owner supplies the gas and sets the price, which is expected to average about $10 an hour

I wouldn't rent my car out if I had to pay for the gas. If your car gets 35 mpg and they drive it responsibly on the highway, you would only make $2 an hour. But realistically, they won't drive responsibly, they're going to drive it like it's rented, probably even worse because of the free gas.
The best case scenario still works out to " can I thrash your car for an hour? I'll give you $2."

better to stage a fake accident with the rented ca

[Joe_Dragon]

better to stage a fake accident with the rented car and have the deep pockets of GM / on star / RelayRide pay out.

Agreed.

[bdwoolman]

Who among us treats a rental with the same tender care we treat our own cars?

1. -- Speed bumps get more bump (just a touch).
2. -- A little more torque off the line.

I always check the tire inflation of a rental. I have gotten cars with 60 lbs of pressure. Does this make drifting easier?

Re:Agreed.

[Higgs Bosun]

Who among us treats a rental with the same tender care we treat our own cars?

Well since you were asking, me. I don't know why I'm like this, but I don't feel that just because something isn't mine I can basically vandalise it.

I think I returned the last hire car I had cleaner than how I received it, heh. Mostly because I wanted to avoid the bogus sounding "£50 valeting charge if returned dirty" penalty.

Re:Agreed.

[ColdWetDog]

Who among us treats a rental with the same tender care we treat our own cars?

1. -- Speed bumps get more bump (just a touch).
2. -- A little more torque off the line.

I always check the tire inflation of a rental. I have gotten cars with 60 lbs of pressure. Does this make drifting easier?

Mr. Thompson? Hunter S. Thompson?

You're still with us? Thank God! We thought you were dead!

Car Sharing

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't really car rental -- it's car sharing. This is very different from rental cars. With car sharing, there is more onus on the "renter" to treat the car well since the chances are -- they want to rent the car again and again. If they treat cars poorly, they'll be kicked out of the car share service.

Re:Car Sharing

[cpu6502]

Good point but that doesn't mean much. Look at the bathroom or break-room at work. We all share that space but there's always 1 or 2 people who just don't give a shit.

They dump feces or urine on the seat for you to sit on. They dump coffee on the counter or take the last cup, and don't brew a fresh batch. They steal other people's drinks or meals. They spill in the microwave or fridge and don't clean it up. The same thing would happen with the shared car as happens with shared bathrooms & breakrooms.

Re:Car Sharing

[jcaplan]

Yeah, but at work you don't know who the scoundrel is. With RelayRides, there is accountability for obvious abuse, since owners can leave reviews of renters. Owners can simply refuse to rent to bad renters. Renters driving records are also checked, prior to being accepted.

Re:Car Sharing

[cpu6502]

But after the door is already scratched, then it's too late. You can barr the offender but the damage is already done.

Re:Car Sharing

[jcaplan]

Yes and the offender is charged for the damage. Also, in business you gotta take the good with the bad. You usually get good renters, and sometimes get bad renters, but you always get paid. Hopefully you're satisfied with your returns on your investment.

From the RelayRides Terms for Renters. (Answers this question and some related ones.)

"12. Fees. You are responsible for paying all fees when they come due in connection with your use of the service. You give permission to RelayRides to charge your credit card for all amounts due including but not limited to usage fees, fines/penalties, deductibles and damages. You will be responsible for payment of usage fees from the start of your rental period until the time you return the car. You will be responsible for all of the costs relating to any citations and fines (e.g. tolls, parking tickets, towing fines) incurred during the rental period (and after if the car has not been parked in an authorized and legal parking space). You are also responsible for any insurance deductibles that are related to damage or liability incurred during the rental period. "

Re:Car Sharing

[CCarrot]

Good point but that doesn't mean much. Look at the bathroom or break-room at work. We all share that space but there's always 1 or 2 people who just don't give a shit.

Actually, they do. That's kinda the problem.

Re:Car Sharing

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to have listed a bit of a mixed bag of people doing downright shameful acts, and things that don't really seem bad at all.

We all share that space but there's always 1 or 2 people who just don't give a shit.

They dump feces or urine on the seat for you to sit on.

So they do give a shit, just not where they should. ;)

Ok, joking aside, I would seriously love to know where you work at that you manage to make $140k a year and the people have such poor hygiene. Once I got out of fast food, the only stuff I've noticed are little pee spots that are easily missed (but are frankly easily avoidable by just lifting the fracking seat...).

They dump coffee on the counter

Shameful.

or take the last cup

To be fair, how many of them actually know where extra cups are? I'll replace something if I know where it is, but if not, well, that's why there is someone at work whose job includes such duties.

and don't brew a fresh batch.

So it's better to brew a full pot that might end up going to waste?

They steal other people's drinks or meals. They spill in the microwave or fridge and don't clean it up.

Shameful.

Terrible idea...

[Anonymous Coward]

As someone who has started a new job and travels regularly, I am shocked to see how my colleagues treat rental cars. Hard breaking, rapid acceleration, reckless turns, etc... and then the interior... and it's not just my company. I've been in other rental cars (driven by other third parties at the client) and it's all the same. Sometimes they smell, sometimes people scratch them... why would you do that for $10/hr?

Even if they insure it, if they get in a wreck they'll probably repair it with non-original parts, and it'll never be the same. Yeah it was fixed, but when your buyer pulls the Carfax report, he's going to see the accident.

People do not treat rental cars well. $10/hr and you have to pay for gas, plus the income is taxable? I'd never do it, and my car is far older than the ones people are renting out.

As a newly semi-urban dweller, cool

[Yogs]

We have two cars, parking for one, and variable (relatively low) needs.

I actually looked into this, but our cars are too high mileage (they limit to 120K and we racked up miles quickly prior to our move) to rent out through their service.

But when one dies, this will probably be better vetted in practice and if it's still going this provides two more options for me depending on frequency of need.

1: More convenient and cheaper rental
2: A way to partially offset the cost of the newer car.

Either way, I like.

Problems for both sides

[JDG1980]

If I'm renting my car out under this arrangement, how can I be sure that the renters aren't abusing it in subtle or hard-to-detect ways? Burning up the brakes, doing donuts in parking lots, weird stuff with the transmission... there are lots of ways to damage a car that won't be immediately apparent. By the time it's noticed, it may be too late. And even in the case of overt damage, expect a major fight with the insurance company over just who caused it and whether your insurance or Relay Rental should pay. Dealing with insurance companies is always a nightmare, every time.

For rental recipients, this poses its own set of problems: how do you avoid being blamed for damage you didn't cause? How can you be sure that the car isn't missing basic functionality – you wouldn't be happy to get a rental in the middle of July with broken A/C.

Re:Problems for both sides

[jcaplan]

If you get a car that isn't what you expected, you can leave a bad review. Also, you can decide not to rent that car again. Owners have a strong incentive to take care of their vehicles to get new renters and to keep old renters coming back.

Insurance is covered by RelayRides and usually explicitly not covered by owners policies when renting out a car.

For non-obvious damage your choice on whether to rent your car depends on your appetite for risk. Compensation for that risk part of what you're getting from your rental fee. This might not be enough for you, especially if you have an expensive car or an emotional attachment to your vehicle.

Re:Problems for both sides

[fermion]

When I see ads for this kind of rental, it is like saying you are going to get free money. In reality, a car is somewhat delicate machine and even when used with care requires usage incurs non trivial costs. So renting your car is not like renting your house. Yes, there is risk to renting a house, but the car is certainly guaranteed to come back more used. The rental structure appears to externalize most costs to the car owner.

The second thing I see in the ad is that insurance is provided by the firm brokering the rental. It implies there is no risk to the owner, which I think is hogwash. If I loan my car to someone than that person and anyone they harm can go after my insurance. With the involvement of cash the situation becomes even more complex.

Now, I can imagine using this to fund the acquisition of an extra car. If it is mostly available to rent, and well insured, then maybe the payments can be made by the rental fees. To fund a $500 monthly payment and insurance though one would to rent enough to get about $700, which would mean that car would have to rented about half the days in a month.

Re:Problems for both sides

[drinkypoo]

If I'm renting my car out under this arrangement, how can I be sure that the renters aren't abusing it in subtle or hard-to-detect ways? Burning up the brakes, doing donuts in parking lots, weird stuff with the transmission...

All of that stuff can be detected with onstar. Burning up the brakes? You can detect whether the brakes are depressed, the vehicle speed, and the throttle position. Donuts in parking lots? If you have electric power steering the computer knows where the wheel is, and it knows the throttle position. Weird stuff with the transmission? I don't know what you're talking about, but the entire transmission state is known by the computer, as well as the throttle position and brake status.

For rental recipients, this poses its own set of problems: how do you avoid being blamed for damage you didn't cause?

If Onstar is being used intelligently, again, it won't be an issue.

How can you be sure that the car isn't missing basic functionality â" you wouldn't be happy to get a rental in the middle of July with broken A/C.

I would be surprised if onstar couldn't determine whether the A/C ought to be working, but I don't know for a fact that they can observe the high/low pressure switch(es).

Re:Problems for both sides

[jaymemaurice]

So you honestly think onstar is monitoring and logging the brake pressure, vehicle speed, throttle position and steering angle, constantly? I highly doubt it.

Re:Problems for both sides

[drinkypoo]

Onstar already has exception detection and reporting; when the air bag goes off they call you and ask if you've been in an accident and dispatch the police if you say yes or if you don't answer. Onstar is already connected to the vehicle computer, and can be used for remote diagnostics -- and by default, it is used in this way every month. Now, is there anything else automotive you don't know about that you'd like to talk about?

Re:Problems for both sides

[jaymemaurice]

Sure, what is the bandwidth on the Onstar reporting and the resolution of all the sensors for brake pressure, vehicle speed, throttle position and steering angle and any accelerometers?! What is the time resolution which they are sent. How much data would it be to determine you are driving the shit out of the car with OnStar.

The OnStar module recieving a message from the SRS module on the CAN bus when the air bags have deployed is much different then OnStar constantly probing the car "have the air bags gone off". Even with modern vehicles is that not all sensor values are sent across the CAN bus at all time - a particular vehicle module handles the the I/O for a particular subsystem and messages are sent between the modules to request or push values as required for inter subsystem integration.

When you hook the car up to diagnostics on the OBD port, NAV system, OBC or OnStar often only a limited number of sensor values can be sent across the diagnostics bus at high resolution. If you were to have a vehicle sybsystem to determine if the car is getting the shit driven out of it could tell onstar - but that subsystem would need throttle position, transmission and stability control system information in real time - which is not how cars are usually designed. Just because onstar has access to the information, it doesn't mean it's all available where you want it all the time in real-time.

Re:Problems for both sides

[drinkypoo]

How much data would it be to determine you are driving the shit out of the car with OnStar.

It would really help if you spoke English. I addressed that when I said "Onstar already has exception detection and reporting". If you want me to explain each individual word in that sentence, I will, but I really shouldn't have to.

OnStar module recieving a message from the SRS module on the CAN bus when the air bags have deployed is much different then

When?

OnStar constantly probing the car "have the air bags gone off".

The PCM can be configured with an optional OBD-II monitor which alerts Onstar of other dangerous conditions via the same mechanism. It's clear you know fuck-all about OBD-II.

When you hook the car up to diagnostics on the OBD port, NAV system, OBC or OnStar often only a limited number of sensor values can be sent across the diagnostics bus at high resolution.

That's irrelevant to the discussion, again, due to my first sentence in the GP comment, and the way OBD-II works. See, the PCM runs "monitors" based on conditions and then if the monitors fail they set a code, which if it is anything more than informational will light the MIL indicating that the vehicle is outside of the FTP limits for emissions. Several monitors are mandatory, like the emissions monitor and the comprehensive test monitor. However, manufacturers are free to implement as many optional monitors as they like. These monitors can be used for exception monitoring. There's no reason why cars meant to be equipped with OnStar cannot have monitors which will fulfill these functions. I never said they did, but I have explained how they can, which was the question asked.

If you were to have a vehicle sybsystem to determine if the car is getting the shit driven out of it could tell onstar - but that subsystem would need throttle position, transmission and stability control system information in real time

Again, no it wouldn't, and if you could read English you would know that.

Just because onstar has access to the information, it doesn't mean it's all available where you want it all the time in real-time.

Well then, it's a damned good thing it doesn't have to be.

Re:Problems for both sides

[jaymemaurice]

You don't get it - it would need threshold based optional monitors that aren't there and such that the bus is not saturated with spurious messages. The optional monitors which are there for general purpose diagnostics do not apply as they would be be spurious. Such monitors would need the onstar module or some other module to determine the conditions of abusive driving as if they are sent straight to onstar that would be still a huge amount of data. If you are suggesting onstar can/will reprogram the modules 'over the air' to add such monitors - I highly doubt that.

Re:Problems for both sides

[drinkypoo]

You don't get it - it would need threshold based optional monitors that aren't there

And you know that these monitors aren't there because?

And you think these monitors can't be added with a firmware update because?

If you are suggesting onstar can/will reprogram the modules 'over the air' to add such monitors

I'm not. Firmware upgrades are regularly made at a dealership, it requires nothing more than plugging in a properly-programmed scan tool.

Re:Problems for both sides

[drinkypoo]

I really enjoy that your response to getting smacked down like a bitch in this argument was to foe me. Thanks for making my day by crying like a little bitch!

Re:Problems for both sides

[jaymemaurice]

I'm not. Firmware upgrades are regularly made at a dealership, it requires nothing more than plugging in a properly-programmed scan tool.

... and the vehicle to be plugged into a battery charger and the dealer to be liable for making sure the vehicle can still drive away after.

Re:Problems for both sides

[jaymemaurice]

You think you are so elite when people with real lives carry on with them. In your fantastical world, you are right and OnStar in its intelligence will:
-take some liability to determine if a driver is abusing or has abused a car
-make your vehicle determine such abuse is occuring due to abuse (not preexisting mechanical malfunction not monitored)
-allow renters some way to enforce that the car is not abused or allow some form of economic recovery if it is
-ensure a complete diagnostic is done on each vehicle before and after each rental
Since you have so much faith in this, please, rent out your OnStar equipped vehicle.

Re:Problems for both sides

[drinkypoo]

Sssshhhhh, no more tears now

Re:Problems for both sides

[drinkypoo]

... and the vehicle to be plugged into a battery charger

Who told you that? They lied.

and the dealer to be liable for making sure the vehicle can still drive away after.

And the manufacturer is liable to the dealer. And firmware updates are performed all the time.

Re:Problems for both sides

[jaymemaurice]

Try looking at most mfgr technical infromation documents, like this PDF from Lexus Techstream:
Step 1, read suppliment documentation & noticess
Step 2, connect GR8 battery charger to maintain 13.5v
http://www.lambros.net/LexusTechInfo/2007LS/L-SS002-07.pdf

You'll find the same in BMW TIS and others

Re:Problems for both sides

[jaymemaurice]

I mean, in big bold letters in a big red box - sounds like something they will do remotely:

Page 13 of 21

NOTE:
Errors during the flash reprogramming process can permanently damage the vehicle
ECU. Minimize the risk by following the steps below.
- Battery voltage MUST NOT FALL BELOW 11.4 volts during reprogramming.
Confirm battery voltage is higher than 11.4 volts, but be sure voltage DOES NOT
RISE ABOVE 16.0 volts during reprogramming.
- Turn OFF all vehicle accessories (e.g. audio system, A/C, interior lights, DRL, etc.).
Do NOT add to or significantly change the vehicle’s electrical load
while reprogramming.
- Confirm the hood is open and ensure under hood temperature does NOT exceed
158F (70C).
- Confirm cable connections between the vehicle and Techstream are secure.
- Do NOT disconnect or turn off Techstream or vehicle ignition during reprogramming.
- Set parking brake.
- Complete ALL flash calibration updates provided for each ECU.
- If the battery’s state of charge or capacity are in question, test with SST. No.
00002–V8150–KIT “Digital Battery Analyzer”, and follow TSIB No. PG001–06,
“Battery Maintenance for In–Stock Vehicles & Pre–Delivery”.
To ensure stable battery voltage, a battery charger MUST be connected so:
- Voltage does NOT fall below 11.4 volts.
- Voltage does NOT exceed 16.0 volts.

Re:Sweet - Disagree

[coolmoose25]

I have purchased 2 cars through Hertz's Rent 2 Buy program. The first purchase was a very specific minivan that had a tow package installed (suspension but not a hitch). I bought it with about 40k miles on it. It was at least $2000 below KBB, and I've had it for 2 years now. It has given me NO trouble whatsoever. I just purchased a small SUV from their program and it was basically cherry. Again, $2000 below KBB and it too has been wonderful so far.

I've had a lot of people raise their eyebrow at this. They typically recount a story where they treated their rental like crap. But they've rented many cars. Most are rented at the airport by business people who drive to a hotel and an office, and back to the airport to go home. Most rentals are like that minus the horror stories you hear.

The nice thing about the Hertz program is that you rent the vehicle after finding it online near you. You can rent it for 3 days at $50/day. You get to drive it and see if the tire pressure sucks, or the car shimmies, or the tranny doesn't shift right. You bring it to a garage and have them inspect the car for damage and general road worthiness. If you decide to buy, you go to their website, click "Buy" and keep the car. They send you an fedex with all the paperwork, and even do financing through Chase or BoA. After you send them the downpayment, they send you the completed registration and plates for your state. You can even transfer your old plates if you sell your old car separately. I dumped a 100k+ mileage Honda Accord hybrid on CarMax. They paid me 4k for it, and the AC didn't work and there was significant body damage. We now have a 2011 late model SUV with 37k miles, the AC works, and the car has been like a dream in comparison. Gets the same mileage, and is from a reputable Japanese manufacturer.

For all those who are going to reply that the car will be trouble down the road, I'd ask you to tell me how you treated your last lease vehicle. That is what you're going to get on a used car lot. One driver who didn't change the oil, and didn't give a crap about the car because it was just a lease and they will trade up in 3 years anyway. Is there really any appreciable difference? Yes. The rental company had an incentive to make sure the car was in its rental fleet, and so they did the maintenance regularly. It all depends on your POV... if you want to roll the dice that you got a good lease car over a bad one, okay. Or, you can buy the rental for thousands less, with the chance that a small number of drivers abused the car, while most treated it with care lest they end up having to pay the rental company for damage. I'll take the latter.

relayrides insurance

[bloosqr]

Its worth remembering what happened to a poor boston student who rented her car for a carshare out using relay rides (and their liability insurance (same 1 million dollar liability insurance GM is using):

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/14/your-money/relayrides-accident-raises-questions-on-liabilities-of-car-sharing.html?pagewanted=all

Re:relayrides insurance

[MozeeToby]

I don't understand this. If I go to Hertz, rent a car, and plow through a playground, I'm liable. Hertz tell you so, repeatedly, when you get the car and they try to sell you insurance. Why should it be any different for an individual? I can see if there's a maintenance or other issue with the car. But if the driver it is on them and their insurance (either through the rental company or their own private insurance) to cover the damages.

Re:relayrides insurance

[gnasher719]

Its worth remembering what happened to a poor boston student who rented her car for a carshare out using relay rides (and their liability insurance (same 1 million dollar liability insurance GM is using):

An unusual case. The person renting her car killed himself and injured others. Since the person was dead, he couldn't tell anyone that there was insurance through the company organising the car rental.

That student is not going to pay the cost of the accident, because quite simply, the accident wasn't her fault, so she has no liability. At worst it may be that her own insurance will pay and her insurance will become more expensive. Where I live, that can happen if your car is hit by an uninsured driver, your insurance pays for your repairs, and they can't claim the money back from the uninsured driver. (In theory, you can sue them for the damage (higher insurance cost), in practice they don't have any money; that's why they are not insured). Or if someone steals your car and causes damage to your car and to others; your insurance will pay and the premium goes up. Again, you can sue the thief if he is caught.

Re:relayrides insurance

[Anonymous Coward]

Its worth remembering what happened to a poor boston student who rented her car for a carshare out using relay rides (and their liability insurance (same 1 million dollar liability insurance GM is using):

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/14/your-money/relayrides-accident-raises-questions-on-liabilities-of-car-sharing.html?pagewanted=all

RelayRides / GetARound / Spride were fully warned back in 2010. I know, as an insurance company owner of a US domiciled carrier. RR was a bit deceptive in their advertising, and it was clear from the beginning that they had both regulatory, legal, and business problems.

REGULATORY: Many/most states (and is state-by-state) don't allow peer-to-peer car sharing, since anytime someone collects a fee to "rent" a vehicle it is commercial use. CA had specifically enabling legislation to allow "sharing." It hasn't been challenged in a court of law, as of yet.

LEGAL #1: Almost every automobile insurance policy has specific, automatic exclusions that terminate coverage if the policyholder rents their vehicle. "Sharing" it for a fee is a commercial use. An insurance company is not interested in absorbing substantial risks for which they aren't paid. So the owner of the vehicle really needs a commercial policy, and well, that makes it a hassle and economically unprofitable (for a single vehicle).

LEGAL #2: Given legal issue #1, if someone rents their vehicle and then the renter causes an accident, there is no policy in force. The "Sharing" companies (eg RelayRides) then step in to offer limited coverage through their commercial policy they purchased and extend to their customers. This is legally questionable in and of itself; however, as soon as those limits are exhausted (read: EVERY time a fatality or multiple-injury accident occurs), the injured party will seek recourse against the vehicle renter/owner.

BUSINESS: Once a plaintiff attorney justifiably makes the case for damages exceeding the $1 million limits of "Sharing" company's policy (eg RelayRides), then the real fun begins as the "Sharing" company is placed into a conundrum. They either take a publicity beating and hurt their customer, or they help the customer and end up drastically increasing their operating costs. Either choice hurts their business model.
                a) In the first instance, the "Sharing" company stands firm and holds the line "we've paid the policy limits". Then the plaintiff attorney sues the underlying vehicle owner for recourse ("the defendant failed to maintain state required financial responsibility", or "the defendant was operating a commercial auto service without a license", etc.). The plaintiff attorney will win, and as soon as word gets out that the "Sharing" company pays in excess of policy limits, it becomes open season with plaintiff attorneys. The "Sharing" company has to pay more for coverage, mollify angry customers, and try to contain the p/r fallout.
                    b) In the second instance, the "Sharing" company makes an "ex-gracia" payment to the plaintiff. They can try to tie the payment to a non-disclosure, but they problem is going to keep re-appearing. Nevertheless, the cost of business goes up. And there will always be another big plaintiff case around the corner. This decision option doesn't solve the fundamental insurance legal problems, it just is a way of paying large sums of hush money to avoid negative p/r and delay the bigger decisions on the business model and operations.
--Dude in The Know

My 0.02

[DaMattster]

I'm somewhat dubious about this. Given the propensity of people to mistreat stuff they don't own, I don't know that I would be willing to rent my car out. I depend upon the reliability of my car. I've heard tell of people beating up rentals. Plus, imagine the insurance you would have to carry and I'm sure it would not be inexpensive. In fact, you would have to incorporate yourself just to shield anything personally-owned from potential loss due to a lawsuit. If your customer got injured because the brakes fail (it can happen even in a car properly maintained) and a child got injured as well as a third party, you could be positively cleaned out and living on the streets.

Re:My 0.02

[EmagGeek]

Not only would you have to incorporate, but you would have to sell the car to the corporation, which means you'd have to get an expensive corporate car loan to avoid commingling corporate and personal assets (which pierces the corporate veil). The corp itself would have several hundred dollars/year in maintenance costs (annual state filings, registered agents, etc), and then you'd have to worry about paying your accountant to do a whole other tax return for your corp (even if you do passthrough taxation with an LLC, in most cases a corp tax return must still be filed).

AND, even if you jump through all the hoops to separate your corp from your individual self, as an officer of the corp, you could still be held personally liable for negligence, for example if you fail to maintain the braking system and someone is injured as a result, and the award exceeds your insurance coverage.

Your $0.02 would be about all you had left, even if you thought you did everything right.

On-Star

[DanZee]

One thing people haven't thought about is that On-Star is able to monitor the car's operation. It could be easy to spot renters who are driving 100 miles an hour or are doing donuts in parking lots and fine them for abuse. But I see all sorts of other problems. For example, when I rent from a major company, I know the car will be cleaned and vacuumed and that the company has some kind of maintenance program. You could wind up renting a car filled with baby seats and McDonalds wrappers. And what about minor dings, scratches and so forth. You would have to take pictures of your car daily to prove who messed up your car.

Re:On-Star

[Anonymous Coward]

How about the banker who hires a patsy and a car to deliver a bribe to a government official. Your car is now impounded as evidence.

Re:Sweet - Disagree

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Sure, it's great when you can inspect it before plunking down money. I'm sure there's plenty of fine former fleet cars. But how would you feel about loaning the car out after you've already bought it?

There's also the question of who's going to rent..

[NeverWorker1]

It seems many of the car-owners have an inflated opinion of their cars' worth. Looking at the prices people in my area want to charge, they tend to be at least double what ZipCar would charge me (and ZipCar includes gas!). That kind of kills their business model in major cities.

About time

[damn_registrars]

One holiday season when I was returning to my original home for a little over a week I considered renting a car to make it easier to get around. Car rental companies utterly rape customers on costs over the holiday (the same imaginary supply and demand bit that causes gas prices to go up and down at convenient times) to the point where I would have paid 10x as much for a really lousy rental car than I did for round trip airfare.

I thought perhaps I could get around the stupidity by trying to rent a car through craigslist. I posted an ad "I want to rent your car" and after getting a reply from one idiot who thought himself funny, the ad was removed within 24 hours.

But there is definitely a market for this. People do have cars that they don't always need, and people have a demand for cars that they need for just a short bit of time. Not everyone has the disposable income to pay a rental car company for a car, either. Even the cheapest Hyundai shitbox gets expensive quickly. A one-week rental of a Hyundai is equal to about 10% of the car's MSRP on the lot.

Re:About time

[Anonymous Coward]

I posted an ad "I want to rent your car" and after getting a reply from one idiot who thought himself funny, the ad was removed within 24 hours.

Was it this guy?

I can tell my Ford how to restrict itself

[Shivetya]

while the kids drive. I can set the maximum speeds and even the volume of the radio with Ford's mykey. I would hope OnStar is as advanced if not more.

After all, if the car leaves the proscribed area it should turn itself off.

I think it's great news too

[jago25_98]

Agreed. I spend a lot of time out of the country and it's a shame having to pay for a car I rarely use, but it's essential when I am in that location.

  In the UK a cheap car can be £600($940) and the tax per year for that is ~£200($312). Fuel is £6.7/gal ($10.4) Renting a car is ~£70($110)/day and leasing is only a little cheaper.

We have all these cars on the road, some people have 3 or 4 cars each for different tasks. It's ridiculous excess.

This should be useful for people in cities like London where there isn't the space but it's workable to get public transport out of town and use a car from there. I'd love this kind of thing to catch on outside the U.S.

Re:I think it's great news too

[HornWumpus]

What the fuck is wrong with owning 3 or 4 cars?

It's not like I can drive more then one at a time. 1 4x4 truck (Sierra Nevada, Hunting etc, plus towing home new cars), 1 tail finned 1960, 1 v8 roadster (daily driver), 1 race car (Fiat 850 sport, big turbo bug motor, 12 seconds and dropping).

1158 combined cubic inches.

Here's the first thing I thought of....

[VAXcat]

http://www.ag.auburn.edu/users/parmega/articles/neon/

Re:Sweet - Disagree

[lexman098]

False dichotomy.

Option C: Pay a little more up front to buy new, take good care of it yourself, and get ridiculous mileage out of it bringing down the total cost/mile compared to a used car.

And hope you, as owner, don't get sued.

[Patricia]

Woman rents out her car via RelayRides, someone gets killed while driving her car, she may end up getting personally sued.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/14/your-money/relayrides-accident-raises-questions-on-liabilities-of-car-sharing.html?pagewanted=all

Don't worry; I'm a rofessional

[ThatsNotPudding]

"Professional *what*?"

Save Ferris

Re:Don't worry; I'm a rofessional

[ThatsNotPudding]

Don't worry; I'm a rofessional

Ruh-roh :(

IT'S A TIME WARP!

[Anonymous Coward]

"now can"?

RelayRides was advertising in SV six to eight months ago.
Get with the times, /.!

Rentals cars are like the President...

[tokencode]

Both age 3 times faster than they would normally... There is no way I would rent my car out to a random person. I know many people who rent cars and have a goal of putting more wear and tear on the car than they paid for the rental... driving with the e-brake on, driving with both the gas and brake applied at the same time, repeatedly accelerating and braking as fast as possible until you warp the rotors, setting an automatic to no use more than first or second gear for the entire rental duration (think 6,000rpms at highway speeds for 3 days straight) just to name a few.

Drug traffickers

[detritus.]

Tinfoil hat affixed.

Sounds like a drug/contraband/money traffickers dream come true. Call up GM with fake credentials, get a car, nobody sees your face on camera when you pick up your vehicle.

Re:Drug traffickers

[MightyYar]

Drug trafficking is an interesting area... can't the cops confiscate any vehicle used in drug trafficking? Can they take my "rental" car?

Oh my, never dirty...

[bdwoolman]

Who was talking about vandalism? Just rode hard and put away wet is all... And we are talking rentals here, Are we not?

"Ouch, podjo, that was a bad pothole."
"No worries. It's a rental vehicle."

A friend's car is of course returned clean and full.

Whoa! Fifty GBP for turning in a dirty car. There would be no charge in the US for returning a car with a bit of litter in it. Maybe if the interior was egregiously filthy, or if you smoked in it. Then you could get dinged. That said, I usually police the interior before I turn a car in, if only to double check for my own possessions. I'm currently in Europe. Have to remember to use that litter bag.

I would not want my car rented to "random strangers". What's up with this big sharing movement, anyway? Everything seems up for grabs. Couch surfing, car swapping, my personal data.... What's next? Wife swapping..? Oh, wait!

Re:Sweet - Disagree

[HornWumpus]

New cars are for ego driven suckers.

Re:If you think rent a car places are bad about de

[pipedwho]

Don't you already do this as a matter of course when renting a car? If you have to walk around the car to inspect it, you may as well have your phone camera actively recording what you see.

experience

[Tom]

Slightly different angle, same idea of short-term rentals: I've become a fan of a service in my home town where you can rent a car, get billed by the minute, and don't have to worry about gas or anything else, as everything is included in the rental price.

It's perfect for driving in the city, costs about half as much as a taxi would, and they have an iPhone App that tells you where around your current location the nearest available car is.

Concepts like these will change mobility, especially in cities. I don't need a car of my own, haven't needed one for years, but every now and then I have something to transport or whatever. Lots of people aren't so different.

Beauty in efficiency

[jago25_98]

I'm the sort of person who gets a bit annoyed at having to own more than 1 pair of shoes. 1 should be enough, I find the efficiency assuring. All the rest is just an irritation for me. I can see I don't really need it but I have to recognise social rules around me. So the partner says have to buy shoes for sport, work, hiking, sailing, work boots etc, I do it. To me, having to own more than one of something shows up the failure of something to deliver (the world on a stick).

When I was younger living at home we had my van, my dads van, my brothers car, my mothers car, my fathers car all on one driveway. Then relatives visit and we've caused our own traffic jam. It seemed like an inefficient waste of metal especially as not all of them were used at any one time. Likewise, when we're driving down the road there will be at least a few people going the same way. It costs me over $200 to fill my car now. If I was driving like I used to that would be $5000 of wasted cash. I'd prefer to have that cash in my pocket.

I have an engineers mindset so I like efficiency. I find that beautiful. There are other arguments to be made including that having more than what we need in general is the kind of thing that is bringing the world to it's knees, but that isn't why I like to be minimalistic, promise.