The Hertz lawsuit landscape spans four distinct legal fights: a wave of cases over false car-theft accusations that produced a $168 million settlement in 2022, pending class actions over a large-scale 2024–2025 data breach, a $10 million securities fraud settlement tied to the company’s electric vehicle strategy, and a disability discrimination class action that reached preliminary settlement in 2026. Bankruptcy-related creditor litigation from Hertz’s 2020 Chapter 11 filing has also generated separate rulings. Together these cases have cost Hertz hundreds of millions of dollars and exposed problems in how the company managed customer records, cybersecurity, corporate disclosures, and disability access.
The False Theft Report Cases
The most damaging Hertz lawsuits accused the company of filing false police reports against its own customers. Lawsuits alleged that Hertz engaged in “routine and systemic mass reporting, without verification or investigation,” and that an internal policy requiring a local security manager to verify each theft report was routinely ignored. One complaint said the company used law enforcement as a “private repossession service” instead of fixing broken computer systems.1ClassAction.org. Class Action Alleges Hertz Files False Vehicle Theft Reports
The failures took several forms. Hertz’s systems often did not record authorized rental extensions, so vehicles still lawfully in a customer’s possession were flagged as stolen. In other cases, the company re-rented vehicles that had been reported stolen without rescinding the original police reports, exposing the next renter to arrest. Sometimes stolen vehicles were linked to the wrong customer entirely.2NPR. Hertz to Pay $168 Million to Settle Claims of False Theft Accusations
Between 2016 and 2020, Hertz and its subsidiaries Dollar and Thrifty reported roughly 3,000 cars stolen per year, with many of those reports later identified as false. Some airport police departments stopped accepting theft reports from the company altogether.3Bailey Glasser. Rental Car Wrongful Arrest
What Happened to Customers
Renters described being pulled over at gunpoint, handcuffed, jailed for weeks or months, and left with felony records that cost them jobs and licenses. A Florida nursing student extended her rental four times and had text messages from a Hertz employee confirming her return plans, yet the car was reported stolen; she spent 37 days in jail, was separated from her two children, and missed her nursing school graduation. A Mississippi customer returned his rental and paid in full, but Hertz never informed prosecutors, and he spent more than six months in jail after missing a court hearing he did not know about.2NPR. Hertz to Pay $168 Million to Settle Claims of False Theft Accusations One arrested customer, Steven Robinson, had never rented from Hertz at all.4CBS News. Hertz Claims False Arrests
The $168 Million Settlement
In December 2022, Hertz agreed to pay approximately $168 million to resolve claims from 364 individuals, covering more than 95 percent of pending false-theft claims against the company.5The New York Times. Hertz Theft Settlement Hertz said it expected to recover a “meaningful portion” of the cost from insurance carriers.6Business Insider. Hertz Agrees to Pay $168 Million to Settle Allegations Customers Falsely Accused
CEO Stephen Scherr said the company had “changed our policies to avoid the possibility of this happening again,” though Hertz did not publicly detail the specific operational or technology changes made. Hertz said “several hundred” people were affected out of 15 million annual transactions. Plaintiffs’ counsel estimated the true figure at around 8,000.7WDAM. CEO of Rental Giant Hertz Vows to Fix False Theft Reports
The Ongoing Benson Class Action
The 2022 settlement did not close the door on further litigation. On November 3, 2023, Coriana Benson filed a federal class action, Benson v. The Hertz Corporation et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-00992, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Benson alleged she rented a vehicle from a Thrifty location in Ohio in December 2019, extended the rental and paid by credit card, and returned the vehicle in February 2020. Hertz nevertheless filed a police report claiming the vehicle was stolen and that she had never paid. Nearly two years later she was pulled over, handcuffed, and detained on an outstanding warrant.8ClassAction.org. Benson v. The Hertz Corporation et al. Complaint
Benson was charged with a fifth-degree felony, entered Ohio’s Intervention in Lieu of Conviction Program, was ordered to pay $10,000 in restitution to Hertz, and served a year of probation. The class action seeks to represent all U.S. residents falsely detained, arrested, prosecuted, or jailed due to Hertz’s false theft reports, asserting negligence, defamation, abuse of process, and false arrest.8ClassAction.org. Benson v. The Hertz Corporation et al. Complaint
The 2024–2025 Data Breach Class Actions
In April 2025, Hertz disclosed that customer data had been stolen through a vulnerability in the file transfer platform of its vendor, Cleo Communications. Attackers exploited a zero-day flaw during October and December 2024. Hertz said it identified the breach on February 10, 2025, and completed its scope investigation on April 2, 2025.9ClassAction.org. Hertz Data Breach Lawsuits
The compromised data included names, contact details, dates of birth, credit card numbers, driver’s license information, Social Security numbers, government ID numbers, passport information, and in some cases Medicare or Medicaid IDs and injury-related vehicle accident details. The breach affected customers of Hertz, Dollar, and Thrifty.10GlobeNewsWire. Hertz Data Breach Exposes Personal Information
Hertz has not disclosed a total number of affected individuals. A spokesperson said it “would be inaccurate to say millions of customers are affected,” but state-level notifications confirmed at least 96,665 people in Texas, 34,452 in Massachusetts, 4,657 in New Hampshire, and 3,409 in Maine.11The Record. Hertz Data Breach Notifications Plaintiffs identified the “Clop” ransomware group as the perpetrator and alleged it issued a ransom demand. Hertz has not said whether it paid.12News-Press. Hertz Faces Class Action Lawsuits After Data Breach
Several class actions followed the disclosure, filed in the Middle District of Florida and the Northern District of Illinois, including Zelson v. Communications US LLC, et al., Jonte v. The Hertz Corporation, et al., and Camplese v. Hertz. The complaints allege that Hertz and Cleo failed to adequately protect customer data, stored information without encryption, and delayed public disclosure for months after discovering the breach.13Top Class Actions. Hertz Data Breach Lawsuits12News-Press. Hertz Faces Class Action Lawsuits After Data Breach
Because Hertz’s rental contracts include arbitration clauses, many individual claims are being pursued through mass arbitration rather than through the class actions. No settlement has been reached in the data breach litigation. Hertz has offered affected customers two years of free identity monitoring through Kroll.14Ethenos & Troff Law. Hertz Class Action Lawsuit
The EV Securities Fraud Case
Investors sued Hertz over its electric vehicle strategy in Doller v. Hertz Global Holdings Inc. et al., Case No. 24-cv-00513, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. The class period runs from January 6, 2023, through April 24, 2024.15KTMC. Hertz Global Holdings Inc. Securities Fraud Class Action
The complaint alleged that Hertz downplayed the financial impact of vehicle depreciation, overestimated demand for its EVs, and maintained a fleet size inconsistent with profitability. When the company later announced a roughly $200 million earnings hit while trying to offload the vehicles, its stock price dropped significantly.16Law360. Hertz Inks $10M Deal to End Investor Suit Over EV Demands On May 15, 2026, Hertz agreed to a $10 million settlement, with a filing seeking preliminary approval submitted the same day.17Bloomberg Tax. Hertz Reaches $10 Million Settlement in Investors’ EV Demand Row
The Hand Controls Disability Lawsuit
In February 2024, Disability Rights Advocates filed a class action on behalf of customers with disabilities who require hand controls to drive rental vehicles. The case, Ho, et al. v. The Hertz Corporation, et al., Case No. 3:24-cv-01066-MMC, is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California before Judge Maxine M. Chesney.18DRA Legal. Ho v. The Hertz Corporation
The complaint alleges that Hertz violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by drastically reducing the vehicle models available with hand controls, effectively limiting disabled customers to a narrow and often more expensive subset of vehicles. Plaintiffs also alleged that the reservation process for hand-control vehicles was more burdensome than the standard process. The suit built on Giacopini v. Hertz Corporation, a settlement from more than twenty years earlier that had required Hertz to install temporary hand controls on all vehicle models where they could be safely operated.19DRA Legal. Ho v. Hertz Class Notice
The case does not seek monetary damages for the class. It focuses on injunctive relief, requiring Hertz to change its policies and make hand controls available across a broader range of vehicles. On May 1, 2026, the court granted preliminary approval of a proposed settlement. The specific terms remain in sealed court filings.18DRA Legal. Ho v. The Hertz Corporation
Bankruptcy-Related Creditor Suits
Hertz filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in May 2020 and emerged in June 2021 after paying pre-petition debts in full and distributing roughly $1.1 billion in cash, stock, and warrants to former stockholders.20U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. In re Hertz Corp., No. 23-1169
Noteholders sued in July 2021 seeking approximately $272 million in additional payments, including about $147 million in early redemption premiums and $125 million in post-petition interest at the contractual default rate. In a September 2024 opinion, the Third Circuit sided partly with each side, ruling that the redemption premiums were unmatured interest properly disallowed under the Bankruptcy Code, but that unimpaired creditors of a solvent debtor are entitled to post-petition interest at the contract rate rather than the minimal federal judgment rate the bankruptcy court had applied.20U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. In re Hertz Corp., No. 23-1169
In February 2025, Delaware Chancery Court Judge Eric Davis dismissed a separate suit by warrant holders. They had argued that Hertz’s post-bankruptcy activities, including $3.4 billion in stock repurchases and $2.2 billion in new debt between November 2021 and December 2023, triggered a contractual obligation to redeem their warrants. The court ruled those transactions did not constitute a “reorganization event” under the warrant agreement.21WDEZ. Hertz Wins Dismissal of Lawsuit in Delaware Over Warrants