Coercitive selling

Coercitive selling: with the excuse that my credit card was not working I have been forced to purchase a full car cover for the cost of 190eur. My Bank never received any transaction or error. Hence the fault was 100% on car rental side that used a fraudulent behaviour.

Hello, Thank you for your reply. However, I believe you have not fully understood the substance of my complaint. I am formally contesting your coercive and improper sales practice, which it is not lawful. First, you could have offered payment via a secure payment link by email, as you did for a second booking. Second, the issue was clearly with your payment system, not with my credit card. My bank has confirmed that it did not receive any payment authorization or transaction attempt from your system. For these reasons, I would never have voluntarily signed the contract for this additional insurance. The circumstances and the way the contract was presented forced me to accepting it. I would also like to point out that I already have my own personal annual car insurance, and therefore I had no need for the insurance offered by your company. I have already opened a formal chargeback procedure with my bank so that the circumstances can be properly investigated. I am also in contact with a legal advisor of the consumer protection association regarding this matter. That said, my preference is still to resolve this matter directly with you, without further escalation, and to receive a full refund of the amount charged for the insurance. I therefore kindly ask you to reconsider my complaint and confirm the refund. Kind regards, Nicola

As follow up of previous mail: attached the alternative way of payment that you offered with a second booking (to my wife Elisa Mascolini). The situation has been the same: your system was not able to accept the deposit of 1300eur with the credit card (even if it was fully working). You were proposing to buy the full insurance but, as I well remember the bad situation happened on 09 of August we regretted and insisted. Finally has been proposed the payment with link by mail. Why it has not been proposed on 09 of August? And why in 2 different situations your behaviour has been the same (with different end users)? I strongly believe that during the booking of 09 of August has been voluntary adopted a coercitive behaviour to push me to buy and sign something not needed or requested. Even if the past events are not so good I trust you can understand the situation. Hoping that the coercitive selling has been just an occasional error and not a common practice... Il ven 28 ago 2026, 17:19 Nicola Cominetti nicola.cominetti@gmail.com ha scritto: Hello, Thank you for your reply. However, I believe you have not fully understood the substance of my complaint. I am formally contesting your coercive and improper sales practice, which it is not lawful. First, you could have offered payment via a secure payment link by email, as you did for a second booking. Second, the issue was clearly with your payment system, not with my credit card. My bank has confirmed that it did not receive any payment authorization or transaction attempt from your system. For these reasons, I would never have voluntarily signed the contract for this additional insurance. The circumstances and the way the contract was presented forced me to accepting it. I would also like to point out that I already have my own personal annual car insurance, and therefore I had no need for the insurance offered by your company. I have already opened a formal chargeback procedure with my bank so that the circumstances can be properly investigated. I am also in contact with a legal advisor of the consumer protection association regarding this matter. That said, my preference is still to resolve this matter directly with you, without further escalation, and to receive a full refund of the amount charged for the insurance. I therefore kindly ask you to reconsider my complaint and confirm the refund. Kind regards, Nicola

Dear Customer, Thank you for your follow-up message and for providing the additional information. We understand your concerns regarding the payment method used at the office. However, please note that the payment methods available for additional services or extras may vary depending on the office and the circumstances of the rental. OK Mobility has different secure payment methods available for processing extras, and any payment method offered and used at our offices is fully secure and valid. Regarding your request, after reviewing the case again, we maintain our previous decision and no refund can be applied. As previously explained, the document attached to our previous email was signed by you and confirms your agreement to purchase the additional service contracted at the office. Therefore, the signed documentation constitutes confirmation that you accepted and authorized the purchase of the extra. We understand your perception of the situation; however, based on the documentation available in your rental file, we have no grounds to consider that the extra was contracted without your consent. For this reason, after reviewing the information once again, our decision remains unchanged and no refund will be issued. Kind regards, Juan Soto - OK Mobility Atención al Cliente Juan Soto - OK Mobility No lo imprima si no es necesario. Proteja el medio ambiente. Do not print if not necessary. Protect the environment. Advertencia legal/Legal warning:Más información/More information. El 28 de agosto de 2026, 16:46:50 UTC, nicola.cominetti@gmail.com escribió: CAUTION: This email originated from OUTSIDE the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe, if in doubt, please send us the mail to Support As follow up of previous mail: attached the alternative way of payment that you offered with a second booking (to my wife Elisa Mascolini). The situation has been the same: your system was not able to accept the deposit of 1300eur with the credit card (even if it was fully working). You were proposing to buy the full insurance but, as I well remember the bad situation happened on 09 of August we regretted and insisted. Finally has been proposed the payment with link by mail. Why it has not been proposed on 09 of August? And why in 2 different situations your behaviour has been the same (with different end users)? I strongly believe that during the booking of 09 of August has been voluntary adopted a coercitive behaviour to push me to buy and sign something not needed or requested. Even if the past events are not so good I trust you can understand the situation. Hoping that the coercitive selling has been just an occasional error and not a common practice... Il ven 28 ago 2026, 17:19 Nicola Cominetti nicola.cominetti@gmail.com ha scritto: Hello, Thank you for your reply. However, I believe you have not fully understood the substance of my complaint. I am formally contesting your coercive and improper sales practice, which it is not lawful. First, you could have offered payment via a secure payment link by email, as you did for a second booking. Second, the issue was clearly with your payment system, not with my credit card. My bank has confirmed that it did not receive any payment authorization or transaction attempt from your system. For these reasons, I would never have voluntarily signed the contract for this additional insurance. The circumstances and the way the contract was presented forced me to accepting it. I would also like to point out that I already have my own personal annual car insurance, and therefore I had no need for the insurance offered by your company. I have already opened a formal chargeback procedure with my bank so that the circumstances can be properly investigated. I am also in contact with a legal advisor of the consumer protection association regarding this matter. That said, my preference is still to resolve this matter directly with you, without further escalation, and to receive a full refund of the amount charged for the insurance. I therefore kindly ask you to reconsider my complaint and confirm the refund. Kind regards, Nicola

Dear OK Mobility, I am extremely dissatisfied with your latest response. The signature should not be regarded as valid because it was obtained through coercive selling practices. The mere fact that a contract has been signed does not automatically mean that valid consent was freely given. If a customer is placed under undue pressure (as you did) and left with no reasonable alternative but to accept the proposed terms, the signature cannot be considered the result of a free and informed decision. I would never have voluntarily purchased this insurance, as I already have my own annual motor insurance coverage. I accepted it solely because of the circumstances created at the rental desk. Therefore, I strongly dispute the validity of the consent on which the insurance agreement is based and reiterate my request for a full refund. Furthermore, I have already provided clear and substantial evidence supporting my position: I already have an annual insurance policy and therefore had no need to purchase your additional insurance. No payment transaction was declined by my bank. There were no errors, restrictions, or blocks preventing the payment from being processed. During my second booking at the same office, your staff finally offered me the option to pay via a payment link. This option was not offered during the first booking and appears to have been proposed only because, by then, I was already aware of your bad practice. In light of the above, I will pursue the matter through all available channels, including a chargeback and formal dispute with my bank, as well as complaints to the relevant consumer protection bodies, including OCU and the European Consumer Centre (ECC). I therefore request, once again, a full refund of the insurance charge. TO OCU who read us in CC: Last but not least, I would like to highlight that the same coercive sales practice was applied in both of my bookings. This indicates that the issue was not an isolated incident or the result of an individual employee's mistake, but rather appears to be a recurring and systematic practice. If further complaints from other customers reveal a similar pattern of conduct, this could suggest the existence of unfair commercial practices rather than an exceptional occurrence. Such practices may attract scrutiny from consumer protection authorities and could lead to investigations, regulatory sanctions, corrective measures, and increased liability for the company. It would also strengthen the position of consumers seeking refunds or other remedies. For this reason, I believe this matter should be taken seriously and reviewed internally, as it raises concerns not only about my individual case but also about the manner in which customers are being treated more generally.Kind regards, Nicola Cominetti

Hello, I would also like to add the following information: the claim with Ok Mobility was opened immediately, at the beginning of the rental period. Please find the related email attached. At that time, I did not yet know whether I would return the car with or without any damages. I never received any response to that email. Ok Mobility only started replying after OCU became involved. PS: also discovercars.com, the intermediate platform where I bookedthe car, is waiting your reply since 11/08. Case Opened: D012855847 Reclamation OCU: I still remainconfident we will be able to find an agreement before this claim becomes a legal matter. regards,

Dear Customer, Thank you for the additional information. Please be advised that the relevant department will provide a response directly to DiscoverCars regarding the case mentioned. In the meantime, we would like to confirm that the information and position previously provided remain unchanged. Have a good one Juan Soto - OK Mobility Atención al Cliente Juan Soto - OK Mobility No lo imprima si no es necesario. Proteja el medio ambiente. Do not print if not necessary. Protect the environment. Advertencia legal/Legal warning:Más información/More information. El 4 de septiembre de 2026, 14:17:55 UTC, nicola.cominetti@gmail.com escribió: CAUTION: This email originated from OUTSIDE the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe, if in doubt, please send us the mail to Support Hello, I would also like to add the following information: the claim with Ok Mobility was opened immediately, at the beginning of the rental period. Please find the related email attached. At that time, I did not yet know whether I would return the car with or without any damages. I never received any response to that email. Ok Mobility only started replying after OCU became involved. PS: also discovercars.com, the intermediate platform where I bookedthe car, is waiting your reply since 11/08. Case Opened: D012855847 Reclamation OCU: I still remainconfident we will be able to find an agreement before this claim becomes a legal matter. regards,