HERTZ in a lot of trouble

[Jarlaxle]

I can say that 7 people in the Pittsburgh region have already been “terminated” over this.

They need to go to prison. 30 years or more-no plea deals, no bargains, consecutive sentences. Make EXAMPLES out of them.

 

[wlk]

Who is responsible for the miscarriage of justice? It has to start some where. Choice? there is always a choice. Who will compensate the falsely arrested ?

Hertz, the officer with a signed warrant by a judge is not responsible for doing their job

 

[Audiman]

I know firsthand of one auto company that temporarily stopped fleet sales in the US because of lack of available product. Would rather not name, but I work for it.

Give me a car with 100,000 miles on for all I care, just make sure it’s clean, I don’t want to be paying to sit in someone else’s filth. That I will not do.

You would think if they cannot get cars they would maintain the fleet they have to a higher standard than normal to ensure they can keep the business going. Failure to maintain what makes the money will result in failure of the company.

 

[BlueDwarf]

At the end of all this iam sure a big settlement will be paid by hertz,the attorneys will take there 99% cut,while each victim gets there $5 check in the mail 2 years later.Just from word of mouth all rental car companies have a automated system that reports the car stolen after 30 days regardless of if you paid for a extended rental time or not.Apparently if you rent the car under the rental companies "business car rental program", your rental car is not thrown into this automated system.I've never tested this theory but a dba or llc takes about a month to get for what its worth.

Also just another story about hertz reporting a stolen car

He told Insider a manager at the Thrifty depot laughed over the phone when he first called in a panic over the incident. Wright was later given an upgrade and $200 off his bill.

Officers at the scene told Wright "this happens all the time with Hertz," before he was allowed to go when the manager arrived.

A man is suing Hertz because his rental car was stopped by armed police after being wrongly reported as stolen

 

[nthach]

Hertz now is nothing like the company I knew for the first 20 years. Costs are way up. Service is way down. The cars are tired, with high mileage and worn tires. They used to treat Gold Five Star and Presidential (elite levels within Gold) quite well. Not so much any more.

I rarely need to rent a car - if I did it was Hertz, mostly via insurance but I would seek them out since AAA members get a small break from them. The local Hertz screwed around with me, I had to take an Uber and train to the one I did business with most recently. I got handed a RAV4 with worn carpet - no floor mats. 23K, I saw a OE Toyota oil filter on it - so I dunno if HLE is taking their cars to the dealer or Jiffy Lube for oil changes.

I might give Enterprise a shot next time I need to rent a car for personal(non insurance) needs.

 

[nthach]

I know firsthand of one auto company that temporarily stopped fleet sales in the US because of lack of available product. Would rather not name, but I work for it.

Personally, Ford and GM should have kept the Focus/Fusion and Cruze/Malibu/Impala in production for the rental car companies, even if it has to be imported from China or Korea(GM) or Mexico/Spain(Focus/Fusion).

I’d make the Prius a rental/Uber-only car just to sell to Hertz(who Uber also has an agreement with for leasing)/Avis-Budget Group/Enterprise Holdings/Lyft(for their Express Drive program) and end consumer sales for it if I ran Toyota USA.

 

[billt460]

I would often wait three- five hours for a car, and like you since I had status, I would end up getting a car after a very often multi hour wait. Those without status sometimes never got a car, even those with prepaid reservations.

Perhaps they were tired of people jumping over velvet ropes and chairs at airports, to make it to their cars that were being prepared for them so fast?

 

[Oillover]

No, this all on Hertz. I reserved a large car and have mid tier status with them and they give me a 2019 Sentra? They can also clean the car and put decent tires on it. I returned the car and went to National, got a 2021 Altima with 19k. Not the greatest rental I've ever had but at least it was acceptable.

I agree, Hertz vehicles are usually some of the worst to choose from. But their prices are also some of the lowest, if not the lowest.

I've since resorted to paying a little extra and going with Enterprise.
The vehicles are usually cleaner and better maintained (though some still with higher mileage due to lack of supply).

 

[nthach]

I agree, Hertz vehicles are usually some of the worst to choose from. But their prices are also some of the lowest, if not the lowest.

I've since resorted to paying a little extra and going with Enterprise.
The vehicles are usually cleaner and better maintained (though some still with higher mileage due to lack of supply).

Around here in CA, Enterprise does a lot business with insurance companies except for AAA, which tends to be Hertz. Also, if your car is in for service at a “luxury” car dealer that isn’t Lexus, you’re getting a cheap rental from Enterprise as a loaner. I’ve met more than one person in carpool who was disgruntled they got a Hyundai or Nissan from Enterprise while their BMW or Audi is in the shop.

I think the time when the big 3 rental companies were under control of Detroit was their golden era for fleet age and upkeep. Hertz was Ford, Avis was GM and Thrifty/Budget was Chrysler. All focused on the airports, but Hertz and Avis were focusing on the much more lucrative business market, Thrifty/Budget and Alamo was towards the leisure traveler.

Enterprise is independent - they focused on the local market, when you car was in the shop or you needed an insurance rental. They would buy cars locally.

 

[BISCUT]

We need to see the police in prison and the responsible Hertz people in prison.

What law was violated by the police?

 

[demarpaint]

I can't wait to see if their EV investment pays off or not.

 

[SC Maintenance]

What law was violated by the police?

4th amendment.

" An arrest must be based on probable cause, otherwise it is an "unreasonable seizure." "Probable cause" may be defined as a substantial and objective belief that the person to be arrested committed the alleged offense."

Hertz saying you did is neither substantial or objective.

South Carolina Bench Book for Summary Court Judges - Civil Section

www.sccourts.org

 

[BISCUT]

4th amendment.

" An arrest must be based on probable cause, otherwise it is an "unreasonable seizure." "Probable cause" may be defined as a substantial and objective belief that the person to be arrested committed the alleged offense."

Hertz saying you did is neither substantial or objective.

https://www.sccourts.org/summaryCou...,arrested committed the alleged offense.[/URL

4th amendment.

" An arrest must be based on probable cause, otherwise it is an "unreasonable seizure." "Probable cause" may be defined as a substantial and objective belief that the person to be arrested committed the alleged offense."

Hertz saying you did is neither substantial or objective.

South Carolina Bench Book for Summary Court Judges - Civil Section

www.sccourts.org

Trust me brotha, I don't need the definition of probable cause. I skimmed so if I'm wrong I will correct it. From what I understand Herzt, representative, with full authority of the "person in control" signed an affidavit declaring that XXX did XXX? That XXX is an illegal action, No? Correct so far? Based off that complaint an arrest was made? That is not a 4th amend violation.

To simplify. You and me don't agree. I punch you in the face causing a "normal" injury like a black eye. In my state, that is Assault 3rd. BUT I beat you to the police department and I sign an affidavit and provide a signed, sworn statement that says you were the aggressor and you punched me first and I have a visible injury. After your statement photos will be taken and an an open case for arrest is created. After a certain amount of attempts to contact you and police can't get you for an interview; then the officer that case is assigned to will ask a judge for an arrest warrant.

Ya, buddy that is how it works. Cops did not observe the event and are working off a complaint and eventually a judge who says lock em up. So, again, unless I read this wrong your comments do not meet any legal standard for police not doing what they are supposed to. Please, remember the cops don't make the rules they enforce em.

 

[SC Maintenance]

Trust me brotha, I don't need the definition of probable cause. I skimmed so if I'm wrong I will correct it. From what I understand Herzt, representative, with full authority of the "person in control" signed an affidavit declaring that XXX did XXX? That XXX is an illegal action, No? Correct so far? Based off that complaint an arrest was made? That is not a 4th amend violation.

To simplify. You and me don't agree. I punch you in the face causing a "normal" injury like a black eye. In my state, that is Assault 3rd. BUT I beat you to the police department and I sign an affidavit and provide a signed, sworn statement that says you were the aggressor and you punched me first and I have a visible injury. After your statement photos will be taken and an an open case for arrest is created. After a certain amount of attempts to contact you and police can't get you for an interview; then the officer that case is assigned to will ask a judge for an arrest warrant.

Ya, buddy that is how it works. Cops did not observe the event and are working off a complaint and eventually a judge who says lock em up. So, again, unless I read this wrong your comments do not meet any legal standard for police not doing what they are supposed to. Please, remember the cops don't make the rules they enforce em.

Yep, you should read the article. The vast majority of these cases were people that rented the car from Hertz long after it had been reported stolen by Hertz, and were driving the car when they were pulled over for driving a stolen car. One was even a Retired LEO, who had just rented the car 30 minutes earlier, and showed them the contract. Still arrested.

So to use your analogy, you punch me in the face, run to the cops and make a sworn statement, and they come to arrest me, so I offer to show them video of you punching me in the face. Should they a) arrest me, or b) look at the video. Police are obligated to look at the totality of the evidence, not jump when Hertz says how high.

The majority of these were people who rented AFTER the car was reported stolen, so there was no sworn statement from Hertz against that person anywhere. So detained for stolen property. Arrested, should not have been.

The arrest could be overlooked if these people were taken to jail for driving a stolen car and then released when appropriate facts were presented, but many were actually charged, one was held for several weeks.

 

[BISCUT]

Yep, you should read the article. The vast majority of these cases were people that rented the car from Hertz long after it had been reported stolen by Hertz, and were driving the car when they were pulled over for driving a stolen car. One was even a Retired LEO, who had just rented the car 30 minutes earlier, and showed them the contract. Still arrested.

So to use your analogy, you punch me in the face, run to the cops and make a sworn statement, and they come to arrest me, so I offer to show them video of you punching me in the face. Should they a) arrest me, or b) look at the video. Police are obligated to look at the totality of the evidence, not jump when Hertz says how high.

The majority of these were people who rented AFTER the car was reported stolen, so there was no sworn statement from Hertz against that person anywhere. So detained for stolen property. Arrested, should not have been.

The arrest could be overlooked if these people were taken to jail for driving a stolen car and then released when appropriate facts were presented, but many were actually charged, one was held for several weeks, because cops get rated on statistics, so they charge anyone they can with anything they can. So I am sure many of the cops are innocent, but many are also not - IMHO of course.

I'm going to be cordial. I did read the article. And you Sir, are wrong. The police have done nothing wrong here. The issue is the rental company. The rental CO filed a criminal complaint and swore on an affidavit and therefore the process began. Blaming the police is wrong but I do understand it. Kinda crazy kids in school have all these classes...leave it there but none on basic law and how it is applied. Police are a flow thru here.

Luckily for you I have a little experience. In my jurisdiction, Enterprise was the filthy one renting to drug dealers regularly. A town away. Same issues but with confrontation and an understanding we curtailed the "stolen" issues of non-return for rentals by flat out organizing a meeting with the district manager and making clear we would not arrest based off their claims.

Understand that in NY if a plate comes back stolen the driver will be arrested and it is on them to refute same in court. That is not a dereliction on the cops. Also understand, the biggest offender of this situation is state DMV's. I've been a proponent of non-arrest for this crap but make no mistake IT IS ALL ABOUT $$$!!!

Spew all you want about injustice but the claimant isn't the police and an arrest was made based off a sworn statement.

How old are you?

 

[BISCUT]

Yep, you should read the article. The vast majority of these cases were people that rented the car from Hertz long after it had been reported stolen by Hertz, and were driving the car when they were pulled over for driving a stolen car. One was even a Retired LEO, who had just rented the car 30 minutes earlier, and showed them the contract. Still arrested.

So to use your analogy, you punch me in the face, run to the cops and make a sworn statement, and they come to arrest me, so I offer to show them video of you punching me in the face. Should they a) arrest me, or b) look at the video. Police are obligated to look at the totality of the evidence, not jump when Hertz says how high.

The majority of these were people who rented AFTER the car was reported stolen, so there was no sworn statement from Hertz against that person anywhere. So detained for stolen property. Arrested, should not have been.

The arrest could be overlooked if these people were taken to jail for driving a stolen car and then released when appropriate facts were presented, but many were actually charged, one was held for several weeks.

Now to address the analogy.

So to use your analogy, you punch me in the face, run to the cops and make a sworn statement, and they come to arrest me, so I offer to show them video of you punching me in the face. Should they a) arrest me, or b) look at the video. Police are obligated to look at the totality of the evidence, not jump when Hertz says how high.

I can answer with credibility. I retired a patrol boss. Basic crap here. If video is readily available the officer in charge would watch and make a determination. If no video exonerating you or even a ehhh, then expect to be arrested and it is up to the court to determine if you were justified or if it even happened at all.

Why the emotional tie to Hertz? Cops aren't.

Side Note: Patrol Boss has a lot to do with these issues and IMHO needs to take control. I personally caught grief because I refused to enforce any crap from Enterprise...like I said that was our local issue. This one is Hertz. Disgusting but don't think anyone has your best interest. This instance is Hertz....

 

[Astro14]

That’s enough bickering.