Introduction

In a surprising turn of events, a man from British Columbia has been awarded $319 by the province’s Civil Resolution Tribunal after a tumultuous experience with Hertz Canada Limited, where his online reservation failed to secure him a rental vehicle.

The Case Details

The details of the case unfolded on October 8, with tribunal member Peter Mennie presiding over the matter. The center of the conflict revolved around Lorne Larry Whaley, who had made a reservation for a car online on June 14, 2023, intending to pick it up the following day. However, upon arrival, Whaley learned that Hertz had no vehicle available for him, leading to a domino effect of additional transportation challenges.

Additional Costs Incurred

To compound the issue, Whaley incurred unexpected expenses for taxi rides to alternate car rental companies, as well as the additional cost of securing a rental from a third company. He stated that the incident not only caused financial strain but also considerable stress, particularly since he and his companions were traveling to visit a sick relative.

Hertz’s Defense

Hertz defended its position by asserting that making a reservation did not create a binding contract to provide a vehicle. They claimed that reservations were subject to availability and insisted they attempted to notify Whaley of the lack of available cars, although they were unable to reach him.

Tribunal's Decision

However, Mennie strongly disagreed with Hertz’s interpretation of their reservation policy. He highlighted that the absence of evidence from Hertz to support their claim was critical. “A reservation implies that Hertz set aside a car for Mr. Whaley,” Mennie argued, emphasizing the company's responsibility to provide clear evidence of their policies.

Outcome of the Ruling

As a result of Hertz's failure to provide a vehicle despite a confirmed reservation, the tribunal ruled in favor of Whaley, ordering Hertz to reimburse him for the taxi fares and the increased rental costs, amounting to $119.

Consideration of Mental Distress

In a noteworthy aspect of the ruling, Mennie also considered Whaley’s claim for damages related to mental distress. While typically, such claims are not granted in breach of contract scenarios, Mennie recognized that the nature of this contract aimed to alleviate stress and contribute to 'peace of mind' for travelers. He acknowledged the emotional strain caused by the situation, particularly with Whaley traveling with seniors to visit a sick family member. Consequently, the tribunal awarded Whaley an additional $200 for the mental distress suffered due to Hertz’s failure to fulfill its obligation.

Conclusion

This ruling highlights a critical lesson for consumers: a reservation can hold more weight than merely a promise, and companies like Hertz need to take reservations seriously. While this incident may have created significant distress for Whaley, it also raises awareness about consumer rights and the importance of corporate responsibility in the rental car industry.