Hertz 2009 Annual Report Download - page 167

HERTZ GLOBAL HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
the District Court of Wyandotte County, Kansas. The case was subsequently transferred to the
District Court of Johnson County, Kansas. The Fun Services matter purports to be a class action
on behalf of all persons in Kansas and throughout the United States who on or after four years
prior to the filing of the action were sent facsimile messages of advertising materials relating to
the availability of property, goods or services by HERC and who did not provide express
permission for sending such faxes. The plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of compensatory
damages, attorney’s fees and costs. In August 2009, the court issued an order that stayed all
activity in this litigation pending a decision by the Kansas Supreme Court in Critchfield Physical
Therapy, Inc. v. Taranto Group, Inc., another Telephone Consumer Protection Act case. The
Kansas Supreme Court heard oral argument in the Critchfield case in January of 2010 and we
believe that the stay in the Fun Services litigation will remain in effect until approximately
mid-2010.
4. California Tourism Assessments
We are currently a defendant in a proceeding that purports to be a class action brought by
Michael Shames and Gary Gramkow against The Hertz Corporation, Dollar Thrifty Automotive
Group, Inc., Avis Budget Group, Inc., Vanguard Car Rental USA, Inc., Enterprise Rent-A-Car
Company, Fox Rent A Car, Inc., Coast Leasing Corp., The California Travel and Tourism
Commission, and Caroline Beteta. Originally filed in November of 2007, the action is pending in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, and plaintiffs claim to
represent a class of individuals or entities that purchased rental car services from a defendant
at airports located in California after January 1, 2007. The complaint alleges that the defendants
agreed to charge consumers a 2.5% tourism assessment and not to compete with respect to
this assessment, while misrepresenting that this assessment is owed by consumers, rather
than the rental car defendants, to the California Travel and Tourism Commission, or the
‘‘CTTC’’. The complaint also alleges that defendants agreed to pass through to consumers a
fee known as the Airport Concession Fee, which fee had previously been required to be
included in the rental car defendants’ individual base rates, without reducing their base rates.
Based on these allegations, the complaint seeks treble damages, disgorgement, injunctive
relief, interest, attorneys’ fees and costs. The court has dismissed all claims against the CTTC,
and plaintiffs dropped their claims against Caroline Beteta. The court also dismissed all claims
against the rental car defendants except for the federal antitrust claim. The plaintiffs’ have
appealed the dismissal of their claims against the CTTC to the United States Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit. The remaining claim against us, the federal antitrust claim, is in the
discovery stage.
We are currently a defendant in a consolidated action captioned ‘‘In re Tourism Assessment
Fee Litigation’’ pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California.
Originally filed as two separate actions in December of 2007, the consolidated action purports
to be a class action brought on behalf of all persons and entities that have paid an assessment
since the inception of the Passenger Car Rental Industry Tourism Assessment Program in
California on January 1, 2007. The other defendants include various of our competitors,
including Avis Budget Group, Inc., Vanguard Car Rental USA, Inc., Dollar Thrifty Automotive
Group, Inc., Advantage Rent-A-Car, Inc., Avalon Global Group, Enterprise Rent-A-Car
Company, Fox Rent A Car, Inc., Beverly Hills Rent-A-Car, Inc., Rent4Less, Inc., Autorent Car
Rental, Inc., Pacific Rent-A-Car, Inc., ABC Rent-A-Car, Inc., as well as The California Travel and
Tourism Commission, and Dale E. Bonner. The complaint sought injunctive and declaratory
relief, that all assessments collected and to be collected be held in trust, unspecified monetary
147