Hertz ordered to pay €10k to blind person after €150 valet charge to clean up guide dog hair
Gordon Deegan
Hertz Rent a Car has been ordered to pay €10,000 compensation to a blind person after it imposed a €150 valet ‘damage’ charge due to a car being made excessively dirty with dog hair from the woman’s guide dog, Django.
At the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC), Adjudicator Gaye Cunningham has ordered Ryan's Investments Unlimited Company trading as Hertz Rent A Car to pay the €10,000 compensation for the effects of the discrimination suffered by Kim Murphy under the Equal Status Act.
As part of her order, Ms Cunningham has ordered the Irish arm of Hertz Rent a Car to offer an apology to blind person, Ms Murphy, for the prohibited conduct that occurred and update its policies for its rental car service, making provision for persons with disabilities, including blind persons who require the carriage of a guide dog in the vehicle.
Ms Murphy contended she was treated less favourably on the grounds of disability by Hertz Rent a Car (Hertz) when it imposed the €150 valet charge relating to her guide dog.
Ms Cunningham found that Hertz discriminated against Ms Murphy with the imposition of the €150 rectification charge, an apparently neutral provision, which she found put Ms Murphy at a particular disadvantage compared with other persons.
Ms Cunningham further found that Hertz discriminated against Ms Murphy by failing to provide her with reasonable accommodation to accommodate her needs and that such provision would give rise to only a nominal cost.
On April 3rd 2024, Ms Murphy’s husband, Anthony Murphy, rented a car for himself and his wife from the Dublin branch of Hertz for five days.
In her evidence, Ms Murphy said her guide dog Django was a cross Labrador/Retriever who had been with her for eight years.
Django was trained by the Irish Guide Dogs, and when travelling in a car, Django would sit in the passenger footwell as he did on the occasion of the rental.
Ms Murphy said that it was a wet day when her husband was returning the car, and the man receiving it did say to him that there was ‘superficial soiling’ on the inside of the car.
However, Ms Murphy did not accept that the valet charge of €150 was reasonable, and she queried it in April 2024.
Ms Murphy stated that €150 is a significant amount as she has only a pension in respect of her disability.
Mr Murphy sought a refund from the Dublin Airport branch of Hertz, and in response Hertz told him that in this case “the vehicle was required to be sent for extensive cleaning and subsequently was removed from the fleet whilst this was performed”.
The email read: "Please be assured that we understand your wife's needs for the dog to be in the vehicle and had the vehicle been returned to us in a satisfactory condition, no additional charge would have been levied... In this instance, however, we believe that the condition that the vehicle was returned to us justifies the charge applied."
In response to Ms Murphy’s complaint under the Equal Status Act, Hertz stated “that upon inspection of the vehicle it was noted that the car was excessively dirty with dog hair, the floor mats were wet and there was a strong dog odour from the vehicle”.
Hertz stated that it was only at the end of the conversation that Hertz was told there was a guide/service dog in the vehicle during the rental.
Hertz stated that “it was not charged simply because the claimant had a guide dog in the vehicle, but due to the condition the car was returned in which would not be rented again until professionally cleaned”.
In evidence at a WRC hearing at the Tower Hotel, Waterford, Mr B for Hertz accepted the car back from Mr Murphy and stated that his job was to check for damage or problems.
He said in this case, the inside of the car was soiled and there was an odour from the dog having been in the car.
Hertz stated that the rectification fee is applied universally to any customer where the condition of the vehicle warrants it and is not a bar to accessibility.
