Complaint Review: Enterprise Rent-A-Car

I went with my daughter to Enterprise after she had an accident and her car was in for repairs. They asked if we wanted the insurance coverage while we had the rental. They explained that this way if she were in an accident it would go through their insurance instead of our regular auto insurance. Since she had just had an accident I told her to take the coverage, I was paying the bill and I pay for her insurance while she is in college. They told us the coverage was 17.99 per day, asked her to initial that she wanted the insurance and sign the rental agreement.

Unfortunately, 3 days before returning the vehicle, and after renting for 42 days, she scraped against a parked car's bumper while parking her rental. We called Enterprise and the woman I spoke with stated that since we had purchased the insurance we should leave info for the owner of the other vehicle to contact Enterprise with the agreement number and my daughter's name. I left a note on the vehicle since they did not return to their vehicle and told them to contact me if they had any questions. The owner called me and I told him to contact Enterprise.

Now Enterprise calls and states that the insurance coverage doesn't cover any other vehicle other than the rental and I need to have my insurance company cover the damage to this man's vehicle. They claim that we declined the coverage for liability when we didn't decline anything, they offered insurance coverage for a price of 17.99 per day and we accepted. I saw an article on the internet regarding New York consumers, does this apply to Pennsylvania as well? See below

Enterprise Rent-A-Car to Refund Millions
| ConsumerAffairs.com
 
July 21, 2003 

 Enterprise Rent-A-Car will pay $2 million in restitution to tens of thousands of consumers who purchased unnecessary liability insurance.
Enterprise consented to a court order resolving three years of litigation in a lawsuit bought by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer. During the case, the courts confirmed Spitzer's contention that Enterprise has an obligation to provide minimum liability coverage to its renters and to defend them when they are sued by third parties.
"This litigation resulted in a significant change in the practices of this rental car company that benefits consumers," Spitzer said. "The court order compensates consumers who were deceived into purchasing liability insurance through Enterprise even after the states highest court held that rental car companies are required by law to provide coverage for their renters."

 I feel we were deceived into thinking we had full coverage until they actually had to pay out on the insurance coverage and that if they offer insurance it should cover any damage during an accident not just their vehicle. The car was unoccupied so there are no physical injuries just property.