Car hire has been deemed a socially responsible, environmentally friendly, and cost-effective way to travel. But one sad recent incident has raised many questions about the systems rental companies use while handling EVs. The global car hire firm Hertz billed a client $277.39 for gasoline after renting a Tesla, a car that does not have gasoline.
This incident points to some emerging issues as conventional leasing firms transform to meet the current demand for EV solutions. The situation also has some concerns with regard to billing and how such mistakes are made.
Hertz Charges Customer $277 for Gas in Electric Tesla Rental
Hertz back in May this year charged a customer by the name of Joshua Lee $277.39 after he had returned a rented Tesla Model 3. This has attracted much attention because of the kind of charge and Hertz’s initial decision not to reverse it.
Lee was a loyal Hertz customer with a President’s Circle status. He bought the “Skip the Pump and Save Time” plan. This feature enables renters to return cars with empty fuel tanks and the firm should not charge him any amount for refueling whether the car was gasoline or electricity-operated.
After driving to the location and parking the car, Lee saw the battery charge was at 96% the same as when he took the Tesla. By this policy, Hertz’s policy on electric vehicles allows the customers to return the EVs at any state of charge without paying extra charges. If at any point Lee had needed to recharge the vehicle, the maximum fee would only cost $35, much less than the charge he received.
When Lee contacted the Hertz to dispute the charge, he received an email stating:
“I am unable to provide an adjustment or refund since the service was provided and the contract is closed. Your signed rental agreement will also be our basis that you are fully aware of the fuel option that was added to the contract.”
The response was perplexing, as it acknowledged that Lee was charged for refueling an electric vehicle, something that is not applicable in this case since Tesla does not require gasoline.
It grew worse when word got around online regarding Lee and the way Hertz was dealing with the electric vehicles’ rentals. After this negative publicity, Hertz acknowledged the issue and agreed to offer a refund for Lee’s charge. They said that there was a reported issue of a ‘systems error’ that saw some clients charged the wrong amount for the hire of the EVs.
Lee’s case is not unique, while other clients also received unjustified charges From Hertz for refueling electric cars. For example:
One user was billed $340.97 for the “Skip the Pump” fee after returning a Tesla with a low range feeling that they’d only be charged $25 for recharging.
Another renter says they have been charged $690.32 which includes a massive fuel charge even after they had paid their rental upfront.
Such scenarios have therefore called for debate on some of the things that Hertz has been doing in handling its electric car business and thereby also made customers think twice before considering the company for their services in the future.
Conclusion
Although Hertz has helped Lee fix the problem by offering a refund, their peculiar billing processes for electric cars and unseemly customer treatment should raise some eyebrows. Thus, Lee said he would not rent from the Hertz company again, which can be explained by the general dissatisfaction with how electric cars are rented by large firms.
