Concerning damage report


As I reported here yesterday I just received my damage report for a pickup on the 4th July. I just had a closer look at the attached POC & POD with all the images the driver took and noticed that the photos are not the same ones he took when he picked up the car.

The photos are in fact from a location that I don’t recognise and the date is from the following morning at 7am. The signature under my name is also definitely not mine and it seems the driver re-took all the photos the following morning after pickup and then signed the report himself in my name.

I find this quite concerning to be honest. Why did the driver re-take all the photos he spent 20 minutes on in front of my house and made me sign the previous day?


You need to flag this to Onto. @Adam_at_Onto
That should never happen.
Trust there was no new damage that is now being claimed as your doing.

However I can think of a reason. The app the logistics company uses may have crashed, lost all the data on the guys phone because it hadn’t uploaded/synced, so the guy had to redo everything at a later date/time.


There is damage in the report that doesn’t seem to be on the photos I took beforehand, but I believe it was minor enough that I wasn’t charged for it.


I’ll be honest, over the last week or so, I’ve not been enjoying a lot of things I’ve read on this forum, but this does not sit right with me at all.

Whether or not there was an issue with the photo’s they originally took; this person has absolutely no legal right to sign your name on anything without your permission. Period. This is fraud. Minor? Maybe. But fraud.

If there was an issue, they should have spoken directly to you.

If what you are saying there is the god’s honest truth, I would be absolutely fuming if I was you. And I would be fuming if I was Onto doing Business with people that will sign a damage report on behalf of a customer under any circumstance.



That is a fair point. I hope onto can shed some light on this.

I looked a bit further into the photos and I think I found the location where they were taken. The report shows GBA Automotive Technical Centre in Grimsby as consignee and comparing the background in the photos to Google Street View it looks like they were taken at a McDonalds a couple of minutes away from GBA. That also explains why the departure time from my address in the report is 7:13am on the 5th July and arrival at GBA is 3 minutes later at 7:16am.

1 Like

Don’t tell me you never knew how fast it can go! ? :man_shrugging::clown_face:

This is concerning.

Trust that the customer and, more especially Onto, always have the right to produce evidence in event that a report contains some sort of inaccuracy (whatever the reason)? And regularly have some sort of monitoring/oversight in place to spot systemic issues too? @Adam_at_Onto


Thanks for flagging @BenB , I’ll pass it onto @Ben_at_Onto to take a look at it on Monday and come back to you directly. The way the process works is on delivery or pick up the driver will always take a full set of pictures (car condition, charging cards, bodywork, wheels, %car charged etc), the drivers are not qualified to asses or comment damage. The cars then goes to our turn around 3rd party for full check and further pictures which are used as the basis to recharge any damage. That could account for the different times but @BenR_at_Onto will be in a better position to explain.


Hey Adam, thank you for raising this to me!

@BenB I shall send you a message directly to get this sorted asap :grin:


Hey @BenB ,

Thank you for taking my call!

Just to confirm, this has now been rectified and I have removed the bill from your account - If there are any issues at all please do let me know :grin:

This was certainly a weird one for a Monday morning, I’ll get the team to chase our vendor and I have wiped the bill from all our systems to ensure the process works.

Have a great week!


Hi @BenR_at_Onto,

Thank you again for the quick resolution to this! Great customer service as always!


(We love the smell of a happy customer in the morning…

[/Apocalypse Onto Now])



Well after all I have said in praise of Onto…today they have the audacity to send me a £180 bill for an alleged damage to a wheel. @Adam_at_Onto I will thoroughly contest this…the car was picked up in immaculate condition as demonstrated by the copious amounts of photos I posted after I paid to have tvar valeted…I would have seen and photographed even the slightest damage…believe there was none.
As mentioned in the previous post the guy picking it up did all his 38 checks and commented how everything was fine and how he wished other people returned their cars in such good condition.
I am truly and utterly p#ssed off by this, which unfortunately seems indicative increasingly common behaviour for Onto
@Adam_at_Onto …please inform whoever needs to be informed that they have 5 working days to provide me with the necessary timestamped photographic evidence of £180 worth of damage…and this will need to be compared to my own photographs. If Onto does not provide satisfactory evidence of both damage and supporting documentation as to the cost of £180, I promise you I will not only make a complaint to whatever body you operate a complaint procedure under…but I will lodge a complaint with the Financial Conduct Authority under their current Treating Customers Fairly regulations

I am seriously not happy!!!

1 Like

£180 seems a bit much for an alloy repair?

It was only a few months ago people were singing praises for the reasonably £40ish refurb costs.

Yes £180 for an alloy wheel refurb is a lot. Most are £50-100 a corner depending where you go. Definitely not £180

@Shm66 Let me check with the team tomorrow. Agree that £180 for an alloy doesn’t seem right. I’ll drop you a DM.

Thank you. If I was actually aware and just pulling a fast one then would hold my hands up…if I had been aware of being so close to whst I presume to be a kerb to have caused this them I would hold my hands up…but I am not…and to me this is a p#ss take…sorry!..but it is

Picture 3
pictures from Gefco not to clear but very clear on PDF file

@Jimmi1 will get this followed up tomorrow but taking down the copy of the gefco report as it has information I’d rather not have on a public forum.

Ok thanks and sorry did not realise

no worries. The team are reviewing now and will reach out to you today.