Hello everyone. We are unable to proceed. On the 19th of last month, we uploaded a video titled Socar's Act of Betraying Customers with Wordplay. The main content of the video was about the long-term rental products offered by Socar. In the long-term rental industry, unlike regular automobiles, they do not follow the standard insurance terms for cars but instead create their own terms based on the standard terms for rental cars. 

The problem is that this standard for rental cars contains many issues. For example, in the terms for rental cars, there is a clause stating that they cannot provide compensation for damage to the vehicle. One of the prohibitions listed is the act of using it in violation of laws and public order. It is not well understood what exactly is prohibited and how much they intend to restrict. Ultimately, these terms...

The terms and conditions lead to the emergence of companies that exploit them, and a representative case of this is the one we mentioned earlier, which is Socar. They list prohibited activities such as drunk driving and hit-and-run, but when a customer falls asleep at the wheel or makes a mistake due to being unfamiliar with the route, they refuse to cover the damages, claiming that the customer's actions are included in the exceptions. They then demand hundreds of thousands of won from the customer, threatening legal action if the customer protests. They say, We will sue you, and I honestly wish they would go ahead with it. They also claim that this is a common practice in the industry, implying that other companies operate the same way. So today, we will investigate whether all companies are indeed like this. First, we will look into short-term car-sharing products and long-term rental products.

Since both need to be managed, we should take a look at long-term rental products first. I keep mentioning that while selling long-term rental products, some companies claim to provide the best coverage through certain insurance policies. However, when an accident occurs involving your own vehicle, they suddenly include all major faults under a single clause. In other words, they say that all major faults are included under this one clause, but only reveal this later. If you violate the no-cut-in rule just once and an accident happens, companies like SoCar do not provide any assistance for long-term rental vehicles. So, how do other companies handle this? Some of the most popular long-term rental services come from Shinhan Card, Hyundai Capital for short-term rentals, KB Capital for long-term rentals, and Lotte Capital for long-term rentals.

How do companies handle this? All five companies I just mentioned, excluding drunk driving, inquiries, and hit-and-run incidents, fall under the category of serious negligence. However, if you have subscribed to a personal vehicle insurance product, they say they will cover the personal vehicle liability. One interesting fact here is that if you look at the contract of Lotte Rental Car, you will find a phrase that seems quite familiar. It is very similar to the prohibition clause of Socar, leading one to suspect that they might have copied it. There are very similar terms, including prohibitions on unlicensed driving, drunk driving, and hit-and-run incidents. However, something seems off. They have added terms such as including but not limited to and stated that all of these incidents are included. But what about Lotte? I mentioned earlier that Lotte Rental Car does not include all incidents.

Let's listen to the contents discussed with the compensation team staff. If you drive while under the influence and do not comply, there are actions that will result in you not receiving benefits, which are specified as prohibited actions. In cases of reckless driving, such as accidents caused by speeding or other infractions, there is an insight into the vehicle's condition. Here, it states that prohibited actions are legally forbidden within the facility. After that, it mentions actions like driving under the influence, evading arrest, and hit-and-run incidents. 

Is it possible that all of these actions fall under the prohibited category? No, not all of them are included. That's correct. In the case of Lotte Rent-a-Car, similar to Socar, while they have some similarities, actions like driving without a license, driving under the influence, and hit-and-run incidents do not all fall under the same category.

In fact, I think this is a very common interpretation of the terms and conditions. In a situation like this, they claim that all 11 major faults are included under the term etc. and charge the customer tens of millions of won. They threaten to sue me, and when it comes to hit-and-run or drunk driving, if etc. is attached, it is only reasonable to interpret that the actions corresponding to the mentioned offenses, like drunk driving, would apply. However, they just arbitrarily group everything under 12 major faults. What kind of special circumstance is SoCar talking about? It’s not the shoulders that are special; it’s that you are refusing to process all 11 major faults for personal vehicles. You even add etc. to it. As for long-term rentals, that’s one thing, but now we need to talk about sharing. I really appreciate the ongoing education on this. Reporter Kim Ah-ram kindly created a logo for this as well.

On the Socar car-sharing Q&A page, there are questions related to the insurance coverage for the short-term rental products offered by Socar. Among these, when looking at the questions regarding the self-vehicle damage insurance, the response states that we only need to pay the deductible for the self-vehicle damage coverage. However, if an accident occurs and is not reported immediately, or if there is driving under the influence, or if a driver other than the person who made the reservation is driving, there are additional conditions attached. 

So, I took a look at the car-sharing terms and conditions from Socar, and I found that all the prohibited clauses are included without exception. This is collectively referred to on the KLA page as well. Here, even a single violation, such as running a red light or improper merging, can result in losing the self-vehicle damage coverage due to the accident. However, this information can be difficult to understand.

It's stated as such. Honestly, if you only look at this Q&A, who would imagine that if someone violates the rule against cutting in line, they won't be able to process their own car insurance? Other companies are the same, right? Are you saying this without proper market research? And even if other companies are the same, as you say, KB, Lotte, Shinhan, BMW, and Hyundai all say that their long-term rental products won’t allow for personal car insurance processing. Even if that’s the case, just because other companies do the same doesn’t mean it’s acceptable, right? As I mentioned in the video on the 19th, running a red light or speeding over 20 km/h is certainly wrong. It is, of course, wrong. It shouldn’t be done. However, such incidents can occur due to mistakes or unforeseen circumstances. For instance, one might cut in line because they urgently need to relieve themselves. And such things happen.

Isn't insurance meant to guarantee protection against losses, and isn't signing up for a liability policy a part of that? To the representatives of Socar, if there's anyone here who has never exceeded the speed limit by more than 20 km/h or cut into another lane, please step forward. Now, let’s move on. Can anyone honestly claim that they have lived their entire life without violating any overtaking rules, lane-changing prohibitions, or exceeding the speed limit by 20 km/h? I mean, how ridiculous is it that the title of the article suggests someone drove at 110 km/h on a 40 km/h curve? Calling someone a victim in this manner is absurd. The most frightening yet effective concealment starts by cleverly mixing truth and lies. Were you looking in the mirror? According to the claims, South Korea could easily be called the home of Mad Max and Fast & Furious. Before writing the article, shouldn't we take a good look at our own footage?

보고 쓰시고, 쏘카가 무슨 말을 해도 제대로 검증하고 취재를 해서 기사를 내세요. 기자니까요. 그래서 오늘의 변론, 제발 장기렌트나 카셰어링 계약 전에 잘 알아보자. 약관도 중간에 잘 읽어보자. 쳐 맞기 싫으면, be cool.

다른 업체도 다 똑같다면서 고소하겠다는 쏘카의 주장, 사실일까? (feat. 롯데,KB,현대,BMW,신한 장기렌터카)

다른 업체도 다 똑같다면서 고소하겠다는 쏘카의 주장, 사실일까? (feat. 롯데,KB,현대,BMW,신한 장기렌터카)