Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A.I. Is Making Sure You Pay for That Ding on Your Rental Car

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 72 posts

Re: A.I. Is Making Sure You Pay for That Ding on Your Rental Car

#61

Post by fnordian »

const_cast wrote: post #56
c0nducktr wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, they'll probably make signing up for binding arbitration part of the rental agreement, conveniently having the arbitration decided by someone who sides with the company 99% of the time. It's all good though. They're certainly not scamming you.

Lately it feels like the most reputable and large companies are even running scams. The US feels filled to the brim with incredibly convoluted scams. We're innovating new ways to scam people out of their money every other day. Man, just sell a product or service and be normal.

People voted for that. Somehow they hate regulation and love to give companies all that freedom to scam them.

Re: A.I. Is Making Sure You Pay for That Ding on Your Rental Car

#62

Post by khuey »

kirubakaran wrote: post #34
khuey wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You come out ahead very quickly getting a credit card that will cover the rental car (e.g. a Chase Sapphire Preferred) and paying the annual fee instead of buying insurance through the rental car company.

There are tons of cards with no annual fees that offer collision damage waiver too.

I've never seen a no-annual-fee card that covers loss of use though. No-annual-fee card damage waivers are also typically secondary to your personal insurance (meaning you have to make a claim and your rates could go up), while the CSP's insurance is primary so your personal insurance is not involved at all.

Re: A.I. Is Making Sure You Pay for That Ding on Your Rental Car

#63

Post by tcoff91 »

const_cast wrote: post #57
tcoff91 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your mistake was renting with Hertz. This is the same company that literally got their customers arrested for grand theft auto due to negligently reporting cars stolen that had in fact not been stolen.

All rental car companies devolve into poorly-run scams. My pet theory is they're actually renting the cars at a loss to stay competitive, and then they need to con the money back to stay afloat.

Yeah but only Hertz mistakenly put many their customers in Jail. That’s a whole other level of incompetence.

Re: A.I. Is Making Sure You Pay for That Ding on Your Rental Car

#64

Post by dragonwriter »

remram wrote: post #31

How does that hold up? If I return the car, the attendant inspects it, and I go home... then later I receive a bill about a scratch that the attendant didn't point out and that I cannot possibly inspect on the car... why would I possibly pay up? How could anyone litigate if I disagree and the car has been rented again? It would make a lot more sense to scan the car immediately when I return it, point out the damage,…

> How could anyone litigate if I disagree and the car has been rented again?

The scans are evidence. Whether the are sufficient evidence to overcome whatever counterevidence you can provide (the civil standard of proof for liability being a preponderance of the evidence, not the beyond a reasonable doubt standard for criminal liability) is a matter that would be decided at trial (or, more likely, arbitration.)

Re: A.I. Is Making Sure You Pay for That Ding on Your Rental Car

#67

Post by avidiax »

anonym29 wrote: post #45
c0nducktr wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, they'll probably make signing up for binding arbitration part of the rental agreement, conveniently having the arbitration decided by someone who sides with the company 99% of the time. It's all good though. They're certainly not scamming you.

What's weird is not that companies would want to try to be greedy, but how society has socially normalized not even reading important, binding legal contracts with real consequences, and just signing them without much, if any, serious consideration of the ramifications of what we're agreeing to.

If you buy a latte at a coffee chain and you use their app to pay, you've probably agreed to a hundred page agreement that they reserve the right to change at any time, and which subjects you to binding arbitration, perhaps even if you decide to hand the barista a $10 note.

Disney recently tried to use the terms and conditions of a Disney+ subscription to get out of a claim arising from their theme parks.

Automation has made it so easy to bury society in legally binding click-through contracts. It's very unclear what innovation or business model the general public would be deprived of if we severely limited click-through agreements, or even wet signature contracts below certain thresholds.

Re: A.I. Is Making Sure You Pay for That Ding on Your Rental Car

#68

Post by fluidcruft »

const_cast wrote: post #56
c0nducktr wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, they'll probably make signing up for binding arbitration part of the rental agreement, conveniently having the arbitration decided by someone who sides with the company 99% of the time. It's all good though. They're certainly not scamming you.

Lately it feels like the most reputable and large companies are even running scams. The US feels filled to the brim with incredibly convoluted scams. We're innovating new ways to scam people out of their money every other day. Man, just sell a product or service and be normal.

It's pretty funny to contrast these practices against things IRBs can require. IRBs require informed consent and often require the entire "contract" be read aloud verbatim (no summarization) to people. This incentivizes making things as short and easy to comprehend has possible. Furthermore the IRB will decide whether the agreement is compressible to the intended audience.

Whereas in tech the opposite is true. The goal is to get people to agree to something they do not understand. This incentivizes long confusing walls of text and convoluted language so that people just click without reading.

Ultimately the difference is that when push comes to shove tech has not been required to prove people even read (much less understand) what they are signing.

Re: A.I. Is Making Sure You Pay for That Ding on Your Rental Car

#69

Post by potato3732842 »

atq2119 wrote: post #52
anonym29 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's weird is not that companies would want to try to be greedy, but how society has socially normalized not even reading important, binding legal contracts with real consequences, and just signing them without much, if any, serious consideration of the ramifications of what we're agreeing to.

What's actually weird is how society normalized binding contracts that are far too long to be reasonably read by the people they are supposed to be binding to. A well functioning legal system would throw out everything in those contracts on that basis alone.

Because it doesn't actually matter. A single click EULA won't hold up in court if they've actually done wrong. And even without a single click EULA you still weren't gonna win a coin toss lawsuit against a megacorp. So for most people it's a wash.

Re: A.I. Is Making Sure You Pay for That Ding on Your Rental Car

#70

Post by anonym29 »

avidiax wrote: post #67
anonym29 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's weird is not that companies would want to try to be greedy, but how society has socially normalized not even reading important, binding legal contracts with real consequences, and just signing them without much, if any, serious consideration of the ramifications of what we're agreeing to.

If you buy a latte at a coffee chain and you use their app to pay, you've probably agreed to a hundred page agreement that they reserve the right to change at any time, and which subjects you to binding arbitration, perhaps even if you decide to hand the barista a $10 note. Disney recently tried to use the terms and conditions of a Disney+ subscription to get out of a claim arising from their theme parks. Automation…

I don't have Apple's app store or the Google Play Store on my phone. When it comes to Dr's offices and the like asking me to download an app, I just tell them I don't have a smartphone and don't want one.
Post reply on HN