UHaul and Explorers

[waskly]

its a private company, they can do what they wish.

 

[briwayjones]

As much as I don't like the fact that U-Haul doesn't rent to Explorers for no good reason they have the right to not to if they don't want to. And that's the way it should be.

 

[AlexSport'00]

I do however feel like they are right to do this, even though I wish they didn't do it, I've been thinking and honestly, it is a large business, and if something negatively effecting them, then it's reasonable for them to not allow it. Yeah, they probably know that the problem has been fixed, but they probably don't feel like going to the hassle of changing policy.

 

[Fire488]

Mmmmm couldn't help but get my final thoughts in on this as well. Glad to hear you're taking this seriously. I do enjoy hearing or knowing that the "little guy" will try to take on the big corporations/companies and just won't take no for an answer.

I am a little ashamed at part of the EF community here though for the quick shutdowns. All I see here is a true David vs. Goliath scenario with someone who honestly wants to try to set things straight or at least get their voice heard. BUT, in my online family's defense, tons and tons of people come on here complaining about UHaul or things not being right only to disappear in a short time or leave without any update. I am by no means saying this is the first time someone wanted to do something or swore they would accomplish something, but an attempt is an attempt. I could be in the minority here, but unsuccessful as they may have been, an attempt is at least a step in the right direction IMO. I know theres probably hundreds, but the few threads I've read always just fissle out shortly afterwards with nothing being done. This policy has been around for quite some time so I know you're not the first person to try to take them on, and I'm pretty sure you won't be the last, but I can't complain for you actually trying. I mean, how many things actually happened or got through by everyone sitting down saying "Wow that sucks" or "Too bad" and complaining to everyone about it.

Regardless of what happens, try to keep us in the loop, win or lose as some people may be very interested or can help out in other ways. This would be the first post I've read personally where someone actually tries to do something and stays motivated about it. Ignore what other people say about the subject and keep trying; at least you're TRYING to do something about it, rather than the other 99% of people. We got your back

first of all thank you for the well thought out reply. I like what you said and I always try to respond to people the same way. I hate the blanket statement replies where no thought was involved that sometimes get thrown out there in most forums.
I don't expect everyone to agree with me on making a stand with this and it may go nowhere. I know that. I have a few months to go and I will be a retired firefighter from a very busy city. I mean no disrespect to anyone here and if it would be better not to tell you all about this and post updates I'll stop it.
I just thought that being this is a Ford Explorer web site that most here would be as upset as i am with UHaul.

I am not going to sit here and advise everyone about their civil rights in this country, but trust me this is discrimination without cause. Discrimination comes in many forms and I am being discriminated against for being a Ford Explorer owner.
I started the ball rolling and I will see where it goes.

 

[Fire488]

its a private company, they can do what they wish.

They can do as they wish as long as they do not discriminate without cause.

"The Federal Civil Rights Act guarantees all people the right to "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin."

Now this act is completely subjective and is being redefined on a daily basis. In some cases the anti bullying laws are being lumped in as well. Although I am not being discriminated against for race, color, religion, or national origin, I am being discriminated for something that i own. Most of you here own Fords because you may believe they are the best and choose not to own other manufacturers, it is you "beliefs" that cannot be defined in a court of law and will usually add another chapter to the act.
All I need is for some judge to look at this or depending on how far it goes, a jury and decide if Uhaul has the right to discriminate against all Ford Explorer owners without cause or reason. I think we win this battle and so does my lawyer.

 

[Fire488]

As much as I don't like the fact that U-Haul doesn't rent to Explorers for no good reason they have the right to not to if they don't want to. And that's the way it should be.

They used to do this same tactic prior to the 70's didn't they? "Will not service blacks", "No Jews allowed", etc. It gets very ugly and i wont go further, but this is no different in the scheme of things. Discrimination is discrimination. I despise discrimination in all it's ugly forms.

 

[Fire488]

I do however feel like they are right to do this, even though I wish they didn't do it, I've been thinking and honestly, it is a large business, and if something negatively effecting them, then it's reasonable for them to not allow it. Yeah, they probably know that the problem has been fixed, but they probably don't feel like going to the hassle of changing policy.

I agree with what you say to an extent here. If there is a reason...even a bad one, then maybe they have the right.
Safety concerns, loss of revenue...whatever, just something.
I still do not have an official statement or letter of refusal of services from UHaul. They just say it is their policy. That is wrong!

Funny thing is that the ford Explorer is still one of the top selling SUV's and most Uhaul managers that I spoke with off the record wish that this thing would get settled. They are losing millions of dollars each year turning away Explorers.

 

[FIND]

They do have cause, and they have cited it several times before. Explorers have resulted in a high number of claims, and litigation costs are higher if they involve an Explorer. Same reason they don't rent to people who drive Wranglers. Just because you don't agree with their reasons, doesn't mean they don't have cause.

You won't get anywhere with it. This is not someone telling you you can't sit at the front of the bus because you are black. This is a company that made a policy not to rent to people driving Ford Explorers because of their past experiences which have caused them a significant economic burden.

 

[OffTrac]

Ok, I know I said I was bowing out, but I need to say something and figured a competent lawyer would have already told you this. I wish you the best and I do understand your frustration. I just hate to see you getting all worked up over a civil rights issue that isn't there. I'm not a lawyer but I am a constitutional scholar and a public policy analyst. Since your lawyer is inept, I'll give you some areas to look under for which precedent you would base your case on. Do some homework (or ask your lawyer to) and let us know which U.S. law forbids a company from deciding which services it provides are not compatible with certain machinery.

Is it:

Equal Pay Act of 1963
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (any of the 6 Titles)
Civil Rights Act of 1965
Fair Housing Act
Pregnancy Discrimination Act
Violence Against Women Act

They also do not rent to Jeep Wrangler owners. Is that discrimination or do they have a legitimate claim that Wranglers without hard tops are a greater liability to their company and do not meet the safety standards they require for using their equipment? I think it's the latter. They have a real business interest in not renting their equipment to a particular piece of machinery because it has been considered a liability and unsafe in their judgement.

Their judgement is all that matters. It doesn't matter if Ford says the Explorer can tow 1,000,000 lbs safely and the NHTSA agrees and you just know for a fact your Explorer can safely tow a UHaul product. It is their policy based on the safety guidelines set by their research indicating that Ford Explorers result in higher liability claims for them. You see, the precedent set in courts is on their side. There are court cases already showing that the Explorer has proven unsafe in their history of towing UHaul products. That is the reality of what the judge will look at. To rule otherwise, the judge would need to set up an independent investigation by engineers, risk managers, etc. to determine if the Explorer is truly safe to tow UHaul products. He cannot just overturn UHauls policy because you and Ford say it's capable. How likely do you think a judge is to demand that sort of investigation. Let's be honest and realistic here.

We haven't been discriminated against. We bought vehicles that are incompatible with UHaul products. These facts were available to you before you purchased an Explorer. Whereas you cannot choose your race or gender and are therefore rightly guaranteed to eat anywhere or vote in all elections, you did choose a vehicle that does not meet UHaul standards for using THEIR products.

Sorry man, and if you do continue to pursue this, I really do wish you the best. I just hate to see you getting drug along by a lawyer who has absolutely no fricken clue what he's doing. You are not championing some great cause...it's a lost cause. Not trying to be harsh or ignorant; just providing some facts that you're going to come across eventually. From me, an arbitrator or a judge, you're going to find out exactly what I just wrote. As long as you have no money in it, I don't see any harm but I just really don't see this working out the way you have it planned. Again, good luck in whatever you decide.

 

[koda2000]

it's your time. waste it anyway you like...

 

[colintrax]

They do have cause, and they have cited it several times before. Explorers have resulted in a high number of claims and litigation costs are higher if they involve an Explorer. Same reason they don't rent to people who drive Wranglers. Just because you don't agree with their reasons, doesn't mean they don't have cause.

You won't get anywhere with it. This is not someone telling you you can't sit at the front of the bus because you are black. This is a company that made a policy not to rent to people driving Ford Explorers because of their past experiences which have caused them a significant economic burden.

I was going to quote Offtrac as well. Regardless, this is exactly right ^ btw people being sue happy is what caused this crap in the first place. You think another law suit will fix it?
And no one here is happy uhaul won't rent to us. We just know it can't be fixed, and spend our money else where (or buy a trailer....)

 

[sector9]

As much as I don't like the fact that U-Haul doesn't rent to Explorers for no good reason they have the right to not to if they don't want to. And that's the way it should be.

They have a RIGHT not to. and if you look at it from the money stand point, not renting to explorer's hurts them very little, so why would want to change that.
I have dealt with this before and it is frustrating but i understand them not wanting to take the risk.

 

[FIND]

FWIW, if you actually ask U-Haul corporate, they don't say that they are not renting to Explorers because they are unsafe vehicles to tow with. They are not renting to Explorers because of the higher litigation cost from suits involving them.

 

[waskly]

They can do as they wish as long as they do not discriminate without cause.

"The Federal Civil Rights Act guarantees all people the right to "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin."

Now this act is completely subjective and is being redefined on a daily basis. In some cases the anti bullying laws are being lumped in as well. Although I am not being discriminated against for race, color, religion, or national origin, I am being discriminated for something that i own. Most of you here own Fords because you may believe they are the best and choose not to own other manufacturers, it is you "beliefs" that cannot be defined in a court of law and will usually add another chapter to the act.
All I need is for some judge to look at this or depending on how far it goes, a jury and decide if Uhaul has the right to discriminate against all Ford Explorer owners without cause or reason. I think we win this battle and so does my lawyer.

while to you, or everybody that owns an explorer it seems like it is discrimination, its not, they used to at one point. till too many people sued them and it costed too much, so they stopped.

Its the same as you going out to eat and try to pay a check with all pennies, they do not have to accept it.

 

[briwayjones]

Scott, I see you live in New Jersey. If you feel like going and trying to get something changed, get the law changed there where people can't pump their own gas. I don't even live in New Jersey and that one just gets under my skin.

 

[Fire488]

They do have cause, and they have cited it several times before. Explorers have resulted in a high number of claims, and litigation costs are higher if they involve an Explorer. Same reason they don't rent to people who drive Wranglers. Just because you don't agree with their reasons, doesn't mean they don't have cause.

You won't get anywhere with it. This is not someone telling you you can't sit at the front of the bus because you are black. This is a company that made a policy not to rent to people driving Ford Explorers because of their past experiences which have caused them a significant economic burden.

First of all, I am NOT the enemy here. I am a fellow Ford Explorer owner and thought that maybe some other owners might be as outraged as i am. I am not one to take things lying down. Just because everyone else tells me I can't do something doesn't mean it can't be done. I do not defend them for making a decision based on a problem that occurred more than 10 years ago.
Secondly, as i have stated in my OP, they NEVER gave me any reason for not renting it to me except to say it was there policy. That is just NOT a valid answer to me and i wanted to know more. That was all i was looking for. What you say about the higher incidents and costs for Explorers and wranglers is true, but let's not forget what the number one selling SUV of all time is. Of course there will; be more incidents with the most popular SUV's on the road. It would be statistically impossible for the numbers to fall any other way. If their costs are higher for Ford Explorers then i guess they have a right of refusal for sales and services. I do not argue that.
One further thing here. If a company decides not to service a Ford Explorer owner without cause or reason and then services another customer just because they drive a another brand of the same specs and capabilities then it absolutely is discrimination and falls under the exact same subject as the person on the bus.
Uhaul did not give me an official statement or letter of refusal of sale yesterday, today they did. I think it sucks, but I am satisfied.

Final note- Doesn't anyone fight for their rights these days? I don't see how anyone, especially on this board can defend their actions against us. If it were not for people standing up for what is right and having the guts to take make a stand in light of all the people telling them they will not get anywhere we would all be speaking another language.
"Built Ford Tuff" does not apply to their owners I guess...

 

[Fire488]

Ok, I know I said I was bowing out, but I need to say something and figured a competent lawyer would have already told you this. I wish you the best and I do understand your frustration. I just hate to see you getting all worked up over a civil rights issue that isn't there. I'm not a lawyer but I am a constitutional scholar and a public policy analyst. Since your lawyer is inept, I'll give you some areas to look under for which precedent you would base your case on. Do some homework (or ask your lawyer to) and let us know which U.S. law forbids a company from deciding which services it provides are not compatible with certain machinery.

Is it:

Equal Pay Act of 1963
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (any of the 6 Titles)
Civil Rights Act of 1965
Fair Housing Act
Pregnancy Discrimination Act
Violence Against Women Act

They also do not rent to Jeep Wrangler owners. Is that discrimination or do they have a legitimate claim that Wranglers without hard tops are a greater liability to their company and do not meet the safety standards they require for using their equipment? I think it's the latter. They have a real business interest in not renting their equipment to a particular piece of machinery because it has been considered a liability and unsafe in their judgement.

Their judgement is all that matters. It doesn't matter if Ford says the Explorer can tow 1,000,000 lbs safely and the NHTSA agrees and you just know for a fact your Explorer can safely tow a UHaul product. It is their policy based on the safety guidelines set by their research indicating that Ford Explorers result in higher liability claims for them. You see, the precedent set in courts is on their side. There are court cases already showing that the Explorer has proven unsafe in their history of towing UHaul products. That is the reality of what the judge will look at. To rule otherwise, the judge would need to set up an independent investigation by engineers, risk managers, etc. to determine if the Explorer is truly safe to tow UHaul products. He cannot just overturn UHauls policy because you and Ford say it's capable. How likely do you think a judge is to demand that sort of investigation. Let's be honest and realistic here.

We haven't been discriminated against. We bought vehicles that are incompatible with UHaul products. These facts were available to you before you purchased an Explorer. Whereas you cannot choose your race or gender and are therefore rightly guaranteed to eat anywhere or vote in all elections, you did choose a vehicle that does not meet UHaul standards for using THEIR products.

Sorry man, and if you do continue to pursue this, I really do wish you the best. I just hate to see you getting drug along by a lawyer who has absolutely no fricken clue what he's doing. You are not championing some great cause...it's a lost cause. Not trying to be harsh or ignorant; just providing some facts that you're going to come across eventually. From me, an arbitrator or a judge, you're going to find out exactly what I just wrote. As long as you have no money in it, I don't see any harm but I just really don't see this working out the way you have it planned. Again, good luck in whatever you decide.

I have official documents substantiating this from UHaul and their insurance company. I guess that's it.

 

[Fire488]

it's your time. waste it anyway you like...

Fighting for my rights is never a waste of my time. It is my obligation.

 

[Fire488]

I was going to quote Offtrac as well. Regardless, this is exactly right ^ btw people being sue happy is what caused this crap in the first place. You think another law suit will fix it?
And no one here is happy uhaul won't rent to us. We just know it can't be fixed, and spend our money else where (or buy a trailer....)

My lawsuit was not frivolous. I will take my business elsewhere from now on.

 

[Fire488]

They have a RIGHT not to. and if you look at it from the money stand point, not renting to explorer's hurts them very little, so why would want to change that.
I have dealt with this before and it is frustrating but i understand them not wanting to take the risk.

They happen to be losing quite alot. Millions of dollars annually. That is because the ford Explorer is the most common truck on the road today. I did not know that until today.