U-Haul

[lnmagic]

Hi folks. I've read a few posts here and there over the years since I owned an Explorer. I really love mine, even though it doesn't get the gas mileage it used to. If I ever get a new (faster or more efficient) car, I plan on keeping my X for the U in SUV.

The reason I've finally decided to join is because I'm fed up with U-Haul. You all know why. I'll share my correspondence with the company - hopefully, if we can demonstrate that the company could gain money by allowing us to do business with them again (and that their stance no longer makes sense), they might lift their ban. My email follows:

Today, I attempted yet again to rent a trailer from U-Haul, because your company is synonymous with trailers. Yet again, I was refused from spending my money at your stores because I drive a Ford Explorer. I understand why U-Haul initially disallowed this vehicle - I wouldn't like lawsuits either (it's hard for me to forget the old Firestone mess).

Still, your company has a strange stance on vehicles. You allow Mercury Mountaineers. You allow Mazda Navajos. You allow Lincoln Aviators. You allow Rangers. You don't allow newer model Explorers that were never involved in the incidents. Plus, ever since people have become more aware of their tire pressure (and subsequently used non-Firestone branded tires), abnormal tire blowouts have become a thing of the past.

So why does your company still refuse to rent to Explorer owners? It's counterproductive. Some of us want to give U-Haul our money, yet U-Haul still seems to be nursing an old wound. Explorers were the very top selling SUV at their peak, which means that there will be a substantial base of this truck based vehicle for years to come.

Please change your policy regarding Explorer owners.

 

[Sams01XplrSprt]

welcome

 

[BrooklynBay]

Welcome to this forum! Did U-Haul respond to your email? If so, lets hear what they have to say.

 

[1Aauto]

That's weird...anyway Welcome to the site.

 

[corderpounder99]

when i used to work for uhaul its because explorers dont have a rear stabalizer lol thats the answer i got lol they wouldnt rent to me either and i worked there lol. and mine is far from stock lol.

 

[briwayjones]

when i used to work for uhaul its because explorers dont have a rear stabalizer lol thats the answer i got lol they wouldnt rent to me either and i worked there lol. and mine is far from stock lol.

Don't have a rear stabalizer? As in don't have a rear anti sway-bar? Uh, but they do.

 

[my pos mounty]

when i used to work for uhaul its because explorers dont have a rear stabalizer lol thats the answer i got lol they wouldnt rent to me either and i worked there lol. and mine is far from stock lol.

If you used to work for U-haul, and they stated that as the reason, they were telling you mis-information.
This policy dates back to the Firestone tire recall days. U-haul thought that it would not be in their best interest to rent equipment to be attached to trucks that were known to rollover. (The reasons behind the Firestone recall) Also keep in mind what was going on within the U-haul corporation at the same time as this recall. Lots and lots of lawsuits were flying fast and furious at the corporate level (from within the founders family. ie: sons infighting for control).
Its a dumb coporate policy that does not take into account all the factors that resulted in rolling them over, blownout tire be damned.

 

[corderpounder99]

i figure that my sup didnt know what they were talking about i didnt dig any further i have a durango that i tow with anyhow. lol not much you can do about company policy though i guess they reserve the right not to rent to whomever they dont want to. they also will not rent to a soft top vehicle either.

 

[lnmagic]

@my pos mounty - You're right. I remembered the reason they don't rent to Explorers, but I've hoped that they would eventually let go of that somehow.

As for the email, they gave me the standard talk that was basically copied and pasted from their site:
1: We're sorry, but this is not a safety issue.
2: We don't like paying for lawsuits (I'll agree with them there, some people were being greedy).
3: We offer alternatives.
4: Do not share this email.

Now my point is that the wrecks and lawsuits are no longer occurring, so maybe a compromise can be reached that would be mutually beneficial: signed liability waivers. It may be that it would take a great deal of people to contact U-Haul in order for them to change their policy. I'll email them my suggestion and see what happens.

Thank you for your quick response. I have been aware of the reasons behind U-Haul's decision regarding Explorers since it was announced. I happen to agree that the plaintiffs were being excessively greedy and accusatory. I also believe that U-Haul was in no way responsible for the rollovers - after all, it was the Firestones that failed.

However, I believe that the risk associated with the lawsuits has waned. Perhaps a different strategy could be pursued, that would protect U-Haul from harm in the future yet still allow the company to generate revenue from rentals to Explorer owners. Rather than refuse service, why not use a liability waiver?

 

[97xlt4.0]

Boy it would be nice to rent a U-Haul trailer!!! I worked there as well, not long after that policy took effect....I think they could do away with it now, though!!

 

[illjim69]

No joke! I need to rent a trailer for an upcoming move and my wife told me that they won't rent to Explorers. Then I logged in and saw this thread. Wow, what a brainless policy. I bet they are renting to Toyotas though.............

 

[2SEVEN]

Just out of curiousity, is it ALL Explorers? Even those that were made after the Firestone issue?

 

[Hevyg]

WTF?? I have never heard this!? anybody ever see a jacked up Ram or 1500 pulling a boat or tin shack down the freeway?? An Explorer is less safe? thats nuts.

 

[jonlax]

Ok here is the low down on the firestone and explorer problem.

Ford tried to make up for the lack of a good suspension by running a lower tire pressure than what the firestone tire was ment for. Further more on top of people being idiots and not knowing the proper towing procedures it tarnished the explorer name with alot of companys such as firestone and ford lost out thus the switch to a crappy goodyear RT/S. When the RT/S was getting alot of wear complaints Ford went with the michelin contract. In plain words Ford hurt themselfs!

While U-haul should reverse its policies or even have a waiver avalable they will not. The whole mess that lead to Explorers crashing/rolling over has left a sour taste in the companys mouth. Its not worth the risk and if people want the product that much they will just offer it with one of the rental trucks they own. With that being said do you not have alternatives? I have a ryder place that i rented a trailer from and used it for about 2 days when moving this past december. They had no problems what so ever and all they ask it you have a class 3 hitch or greater.

 

[Hevyg]

Thats interesting. As Ive said before, its impossible to legislate intelligence.
You are correct. I actually have my own trailer; It just surprises me that a company would single out a rig such as the explorer and allow the sister rig, the Mountaineer, to rent. The mind boggles.

 

[jonlax]

Thats interesting. As Ive said before, its impossible to legislate intelligence.
You are correct. I actually have my own trailer; It just surprises me that a company would single out a rig such as the explorer and allow the sister rig, the Mountaineer, to rent. The mind boggles.

They single out the explorer since it was the one rolling over. From what i recall not many mountaineers rolled if any. My guess is mountaineer owners were the smarter bunch.

When i talked to a manager a few years back he said it was because of all of the lawsuits coming from explorer owners. They tired to blame everyone and in the end they found ford at fault. He clearly said its not because of design flaw but consumers not being trained properly and ford for not having the correct tire pressure suggested for the factory tires. I don't blame U-haul since i would not want to get sucked into any mess like that one was.

 

[Dan Whitaker]

Have you ever looked close at a U-Haul trailer? They are doing you a favor not renting one of those accident's/catastrophes about ready to happen.

 

[my pos mounty]

Thats interesting. As Ive said before, its impossible to legislate intelligence.
You are correct. I actually have my own trailer; It just surprises me that a company would single out a rig such as the explorer and allow the sister rig, the Mountaineer, to rent. The mind boggles.

The same policy (ie:no rent) applies to the Mountaineer as well, or I should say that it does in New Hampshire and in Massachusetts. I tried the rental places near me (50 mile radius) when I needed to rent a trailer. NONE would do it, until I used an alternate vehicle to pick it up. The Ryder nearest to me rents commercial trucks only.

 

[my pos mounty]

Have you ever looked close at a U-Haul trailer? They are doing you a favor not renting one of those accident's/catastrophes about ready to happen.

Actually, the trailer I eventually lied to get was a brand new trailer that they put temporary plates on just as I pulled off their lot. I was as surprised as anyone.

 

[jonlax]

Have you ever looked close at a U-Haul trailer? They are doing you a favor not renting one of those accident's/catastrophes about ready to happen.

Along with the rest of the products they have!

When my mother moved she rented a GMC Topkick. I have been driving big trucks and have a CDL so she wanted me to use it. Anyway 340,000 miles and the steering was soooo loose i felt as if i was going to go off the road. Very poorly maintained truck like 99% of the equipment they rent. The 1% thats good is the brand new trucks they rent and tell you they are booked for.