Originally Posted by
GUWonder
That Hertz indemnity claim may be materially meaningless to renters without liability insurance when the amount of claimed damages/injury from the other parties to an accident is at or below the state minimum amounts mandated by law and applicable to rental car owners. Also, there is a reason why the supplemental liability insurance sold as an optional product by Hertz too is not labeled merely as “liability insurance” in most states in the US. State insurance commissioners’ offices and those who’ve worked as lawyers for or against Hertz know that not everything claimed in corporate terms and conditions is enforceable in all jurisdictions of relevance.
From the Hertz website:
"If renting in Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, South Carolina, Virginia, or West Virginia:
Upon signing the Rental Agreement, Hertz provides primary liability protection. However, such protection is generally no more than the minimum limits required by individual state law. See Financial Responsibility Limits by State."
Presumably, state law in those seven states requires rental-car companies to provide primary liability coverage -- with no right of indemnification -- to persons renting in those states. Do you have any reason to believe that Hertz would not be indemnified for rentals commencing in other states?