A long-time Hertz customer is fed up with the car rental service, claiming an AI-driven damage detection system wrongly identified a non-existent mark on the vehicle. He shared a video to back up his claim.
“After a decade with Hertz—no real issues and always returning the car in great shape—I’m finished,” said a Reddit user known as Akkasca. He didn’t clarify how much Hertz asked him to cover regarding the supposed damage.
This isn’t an isolated incident; other customers have reported being charged hefty fees for minor scratches flagged by AI scanners recently.
Akkasca recounted his experience after renting from Hertz at George Bush Intercontinental Airport. According to his story, problems began as soon as he used the company’s automatic return scanner.
“Just minutes after heading upstairs for the shuttle, I got a text saying, ‘Damage detected,'” he wrote. Feeling concerned, he exited the shuttle, bags in tow, to check the vehicle.
Upon inspection, he found no evidence of any damage at all. “The areas that should have shown damage? Completely fine. I even recorded a video on the spot to document its condition,” he noted.
When he sought help at the Hertz location, staff couldn’t assist him, just directing him to contact customer support. “What’s frustrating is that no one there could help. They just pointed to the ‘AI scanner’ and said it wasn’t their responsibility,” he said.
Akkasca initially thought he could resolve the issue through Hertz’s dispute process. “I figured, don’t worry. I’ve got a video. I’ll sort it out later. I have a flight to catch,” he mentioned. But he faced hurdles while trying to dispute the claim.
“The link they provided didn’t let me file a dispute. When I called customer support, they were of no help, claiming there was nothing they could do,” he added.
He also remarked on the counterintuitive nature of the AI system. “What’s absurd is that I caused damage in another area that the AI didn’t pick up on, despite it being clearly visible. It’s just a bad joke,” he expressed.
Akkasca questioned whether external factors influenced the AI’s accuracy, asking, “Could the AI have mistaken reflections or dirt for actual damage? But, it’s like there’s no allowance for this kind of ambiguity—just harsh automated judgments.”
In a follow-up post, he shared that he finally managed to contact Hertz’s corporate office, specifically their billing department. “The claims department informed me that the damage allegations were dismissed, and I’m not accountable for any charges,” he wrote.
Even with this resolution, he raised concerns about Hertz’s dispute process, labeling it flawed. “The conflict link just led to an endless cycle, making it impossible to file a legitimate dispute,” he said.
Hertz had stated that the damage detection system “only identifies claimable damages” and added, “Most rentals don’t involve incidents. If damage occurs, we aim to enhance the rental experience by boosting transparency and speed in the claims process.”
The company has Uveye scanners currently operational at several major airports and plans to roll out more across the country by 2025.
