Singapore car rental company and customer end up in tribunal over alleged unpaid deposit

[SINGAPORE] The amount may be relatively small, but a dispute between a car rental company and a customer has turned acrimonious enough for the client to turn to the small claims court while the firm accuses him of potential defamation.Singaporean Jayden Neo, 26, who is self-employed, said he rented a Honda Civic from Charlotte Vehicle beginning May 2024. He put down a higher than normal deposit of S$14,400 because of a relatively low rental rate of about S$1,200 a month, but the deal required pre-payment of the rental fees. In January 2026, the company asked him to pay S$3,888 for another 112 days of rental, or face an increase in the monthly rent by around S$1,700. He chose not to continue with the lease. He said that after returning the car on Feb 5, the company told him that his remaining balance of S$13,764 would be repaid in full by Mar 2. Instead, it paid him in smaller amounts totalling about S$2,700 until Mar 6. A sum of S$11,000 remains. Neo then gave the company until Mar 9 to fully repay the amount. Charlotte Vehicle did not meet the deadline.The next day, Mar 10, he lodged a complaint with the Small Claims Tribunal seeking an “unpaid balance” of S$11,000. It will be heard on Apr 2. Neo posted the details on social media channels, including Facebook and Reddit. Charlotte Vehicle has denied his claims, saying that they have caused the company to lose business. “We are currently in the process of taking legal action against Jayden Neo for false statements made against us,” a representative of Charlotte Vehicle said in response to queries from The Business Times.“We have already suffered damage to our reputation and lost business because of these false statements,” the representative added. Handshakes data indicated that Charlotte Vehicle is a relatively young private limited company, incorporated in 2023. It lists Singaporean Jerry Yau as a major shareholder and director.In a Mar 14 post on its Facebook page, Charlotte Vehicle said it was aware of the “false and misleading statements”, and was taking legal action against Neo. The post was accompanied by a photo of a cease and desist letter addressed to him, from its legal representatives Contigo Law. “Our company has never refused to refund any customer’s deposit. In some cases, refunds may take slightly longer as we need to verify any outstanding fines or accident claims in both Singapore and Malaysia, which may not be reflected immediately in the system,” it said in the post. “We have been in operation for 11 years serving thousands of customers every year. If the allegations were true, our company would not have been able to operate for this long. We will let the legal process reveal the truth.” The company previously operated under another name, the representative said.