There is good reason to assume that this will result in more errors and more bogus damage charges levied on Hertz customers. Just consider the inaccuracy of the AI chat-bots that certain carriers (hello, AA) now use for first level cs responses.

One of the biggest differentiators between Hertz and Enterprise/National/Alamo is that Hertz (as well as Sixt) views minor vehicle damage as a revenue item, whereas Enterprise views it as normal wear and tear on the vehicle.

Given that a minor scratch will have no actual impact on a vehicle's value, there's a good argument that what Hertz (and Sixt) are doing is illegal. As far as proving claims, I think an AI-based system may make it very difficult if not impossible for Hertz to prevail in a legal forum due to lack of evidentiary foundation.