UHaul and Explorers

[Fire488]

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.

I understand that, i just wanted to see it in writing.

 

[Fire488]

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.

I guess that is very true...sad, but true.

 

[colintrax]

Dude. We spend our money elsewhere.... Uhaul isn't a monopoly. BTW pretty sure I test the "built ford tough" moto more than anyone else on this forum. I'm one of the few people who've jumped a bone stock 2nd gen (several time) hit speed bumps at close to triple digit speeds, a tree at 30, a ditch at 60, pretended I have a desert truck, and drive it like a I would a uhaul truck. Only damage has been some rashed up rims, and a bent frame (damn ditch) the explorers (well until 2001 if you ask me) are pretty tough, but that has nothing to do with how well it tows. A brand new tundra can out tow my explorer, even though I'd be scarred to jump a curb in that ugo POS.

Towing isn't exactly "tough" and it's not discrimination until a motor vehicle is legally a person. Then yes, this would be the same as not getting to sit at the front of the bus, sort of. So go ahead and rent someone's trailer and let them make money for renting to Explorers. Uhaul is only hurting themselves as it is.

 

[Fire488]

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.

LOL. I happen to agree with that, but it is not an infringement of my civil rights as they are still servicing me.

 

[briwayjones]

Look at it another way. For a lot of us here this has been going on for the better part of a decade. And there has been a lot of complaining and so forth to UHaul. And we have learned about UHaul and what kind of company they are along the way. I think a lot of the people here are of the mindset to boycott UHaul and not use them anyway. And a major reason for that is that their equipment is horribly maintained to the point of not being safe. Pretty much all of it. Trailers, trucks ect. The real unsafe concern with towing a UHaul trailer with an Explorer is not with the Explorer, but with the UHaul trailer itself.

 

[Fire488]

Dude. We spend our money elsewhere.... Uhaul isn't a monopoly. BTW pretty sure I test the "built ford tough" moto more than anyone else on this forum. I'm one of the few people who've jumped a bone stock 2nd gen (several time) hit speed bumps at close to triple digit speeds, a tree at 30, a ditch at 60, pretended I have a desert truck, and drive it like a I would a uhaul truck. Only damage has been some rashed up rims, and a bent frame (damn ditch) the explorers (well until 2001 if you ask me) are pretty tough, but that has nothing to do with how well it tows. A brand new tundra can out tow my explorer, even though I'd be scarred to jump a curb in that ugo POS.

Towing isn't exactly "tough" and it's not discrimination until a motor vehicle is legally a person. Then yes, this would be the same as not getting to sit at the front of the bus, sort of. So go ahead and rent someone's trailer and let them make money for renting to Explorers. Uhaul is only hurting themselves as it is.

The problem was that they were not renting to me, a person, because i own a Ford Explorer.
I will now rent elsewhere and my V8 Explorer tows very nicely. I tow a 24 foot boat with it and it is effortless.

 

[briwayjones]

LOL. I happen to agree with that, but it is not an infringement of my civil rights as they are still servicing me.

I don't like people touching my vehicles, even for something as simple as filling it with gas. So to me it's like someone is raping my car.

 

[briwayjones]

It's infringing on your right to not have someone else service YOUR vehicle if you don't want them to.

 

[Fire488]

Look at it another way. For a lot of us here this has been going on for the better part of a decade. And there has been a lot of complaining and so forth to UHaul. And we have learned about UHaul and what kind of company they are along the way. I think a lot of the people here are of the mindset to boycott UHaul and not use them anyway. And a major reason for that is that their equipment is horribly maintained to the point of not being safe. Pretty much all of it. Trailers, trucks ect. The real unsafe concern with towing a UHaul trailer with an Explorer is not with the Explorer, but with the UHaul trailer itself.

Fair enough and agreed. This is new to me, that is all.

 

[Fire488]

I don't like people touching my vehicles, even for something as simple as filling it with gas. So to me it's like someone is raping my car.

Well, just so you know i always fill my own vehicle. i just grab the nozzle before the attendant does. I don't feel as strongly about this argument though, especially in the winter months.

 

[Fire488]

It's infringing on your right to not have someone else service YOUR vehicle if you don't want them to.

Maybe another post might be the way to go for you. This way the educated people on this board will at least know what they are responding to.

 

[FIND]

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...

I didn't call you an enemy. Yes other users are outraged, use the search button. No, it is not discrimination to refuse to service owners of a certain automobile, any competent attorney can tell you that. That would be like saying it is discrimination because iPhone Apps don't work on your Android phone. The store does not have any legal obligation to give you the reasons, and they may not have all the information. You do not have a right to rent and pull a trailer, they are offering a service, and they are not discriminating based upon skin color, beliefs or anything else. They are simply refusing service to a specific vehicle, something you could have found out before even making the decision to purchase the vehicle. It is nothing like not giving you a seat on the bus, you weren't born a Ford Explorer owner, you made a conscious decision to own one.

Honestly though, I was surprised myself to discover this. I've rented trailers before for my explorer from the U-haul dealer here in town, but he always rented me the trailers he owns privately, so I hadn't realized this policy was in force.

But seriously. I don't think you are an enemy or anything, I just think your comments are making light of real victims of discrimination, and I don't like that.

 

[FIND]

I understand that, i just wanted to see it in writing.

It is 8 dozen millionty bazillion places on the internet, including this forum in a dozen or more threads, and on wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-Haul#Ford_Explorer_Ban

U-Haul does not rent trailers intended to be attached to a Ford Explorer.[5] According to U-Haul: "U-Haul has chosen not to rent behind this tow vehicle based on our history of excessive costs in defending lawsuits involving Ford Explorer towing combinations. This policy does not involve safety issues. This is an unusual circumstance for U-Haul." This applies to all production years and models (for example, this ban includes the Ford Explorer Sport Trac) of the Explorer, regardless of tire brand that is attached. This comes from many accidents involving Bridgestone or Firestone tires. This ban does not apply to related vehicles such as the Mercury Mountaineer, Lincoln Aviator, or Mazda Navajo despite that are all mechanically identical to the Ford Explorer

 

[OffTrac]

Wasn't trying to be an enemy. Just didn't figure it'd do any good to tell you what I assumed your lawyer would have. I figured you were definitely going to go further with it no matter what some jackass (me) on a forum told you so I was going to let you hear from an "expert" instead. Turned out your expert is an idiot so I felt that was the appropriate time to break the bad news. Glad you got an acceptable response from UHaul. Now you can get on like the rest of is who have been done a favor by UHaul and use better companies.

 

[Varsity]

I don't like people touching my vehicles, even for something as simple as filling it with gas. So to me it's like someone is raping my car.

I feel the same way, so it's a good thing I don't live in NJ.

As for the OP, I'm glad it got sorted out, even though the results were less than desirable. One of my pet peeves on this forum is people who ask or say something and never follow through, like those who say "I'm gonna call...." or "I wanna do this to my truck..." and they disappear. So props to you for actually doing something about it and keeping us informed, even though it was kinda hopeless to start. I agree with just about every thing said in this thread so I won't go any longer. Good luck with all your other future endeavors.

 

[Fire488]

I didn't call you an enemy. Yes other users are outraged, use the search button. No, it is not discrimination to refuse to service owners of a certain automobile, any competent attorney can tell you that. That would be like saying it is discrimination because iPhone Apps don't work on your Android phone. The store does not have any legal obligation to give you the reasons, and they may not have all the information. You do not have a right to rent and pull a trailer, they are offering a service, and they are not discriminating based upon skin color, beliefs or anything else. They are simply refusing service to a specific vehicle, something you could have found out before even making the decision to purchase the vehicle. It is nothing like not giving you a seat on the bus, you weren't born a Ford Explorer owner, you made a conscious decision to own one.

Honestly though, I was surprised myself to discover this. I've rented trailers before for my explorer from the U-haul dealer here in town, but he always rented me the trailers he owns privately, so I hadn't realized this policy was in force.

But seriously. I don't think you are an enemy or anything, I just think your comments are making light of real victims of discrimination, and I don't like that.

Discrimination has many faces and can be defined in many ways. Lately it's definition has broadened and gone viral in the courts throughout the United States. The courts will decide what is discrimination and what is not.
Your analogy using cell phones is invalid because some software is just not compatible with either phone so there in lies the justification for a vendor not selling to one or the other.
The vendor absolutely does have legal obligations to tell many why they will not rent a trailer to me. I showed the spec sheet and capability of my vehicle proving it can do exactly what every other manufacturer can do. They have the right to refuse services to a specific vehicle if they produce cause or reason. I know my rights and I am very knowledgeable in this field considering the line of work I am in.

I can argue that I absolutely was too a born Ford owner as my Father purchased a 1964 (1/2) Mustang the year I was born and it was given to me at the age of 17. I have always owned a Ford. By the way you brought up the bus thing not me. I just said that both are forms of discrimination. Are some worse than others? Sure, but, both are very wrong.
I am not sure what your last statement is implying. I take all forms of discrimination very seriously.

 

[Fire488]

It is 8 dozen millionty bazillion places on the internet, including this forum in a dozen or more threads, and on wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-Haul#Ford_Explorer_Ban

I respect everything that you have said so far except to insult my intelligence with a WIKI and then ask my to get a valid and accurate description from it. WIKI's can be edited by anyone and are NEVER to be taken at face value. they are a reference only.

 

[Fire488]

Wasn't trying to be an enemy. Just didn't figure it'd do any good to tell you what I assumed your lawyer would have. I figured you were definitely going to go further with it no matter what some jackass (me) on a forum told you so I was going to let you hear from an "expert" instead. Turned out your expert is an idiot so I felt that was the appropriate time to break the bad news. Glad you got an acceptable response from UHaul. Now you can get on like the rest of is who have been done a favor by UHaul and use better companies.

My "expert" or lawyer i assume you meant, is a friend of mine and did what i asked of him. He looked into it received documentation for me to review and decided that Uhaul has legal cause not to rent to Explorer owners. He did what i asked of him and if there was no cause or reason then we had a case. He is not an idiot though, he is just a blood sucking lawyer. LOL

 

[Fire488]

I feel the same way, so it's a good thing I don't live in NJ.

As for the OP, I'm glad it got sorted out, even though the results were less than desirable. One of my pet peeves on this forum is people who ask or say something and never follow through, like those who say "I'm gonna call...." or "I wanna do this to my truck..." and they disappear. So props to you for actually doing something about it and keeping us informed, even though it was kinda hopeless to start. I agree with just about every thing said in this thread so I won't go any longer. Good luck with all your other future endeavors.

I hear that so much too. One thing about me is that I always follow through. I am not always happy with the results, but I follow through with accurate answers that I never make in haste or out of emotion.
Turns out that i was wrong about the Uhaul thing, but it still does not make it right.
I will not use Uhaul anymore at all for any reason.

 

[Jstcruz]

Im glad to see another guy giving them a hard time. I think of it as they are stupid enough to lose that much money every year over a tire issue from years ago. I just dont rent U-haul, even if I have the option to use my father in-laws 4 cyl Nissan Frontier that pulled a sedan from LA to FL with a bed full of tools. (with U-hauls car dolly)