2 ms·

You think this is a standard industry practice? You think there are police stations across the country ignoring calls from local rental agencies reporting a st

You think this is a standard industry practice? You think there are police stations across the country ignoring calls from local rental agencies reporting a stolen car?

kragen 5y ago
I'm guessing that reporting car thefts to the police is a standard industry practice, I know that any such discrimination process carried out by humans has some nonzero probability of both type I and type II errors, and I'm amazed that the number of thefts they report is so low. The very low number of theft reports suggests to me that, despite the apparently ridiculously slipshod procedure described in the article, Hertz's process may actually be heavily biased in the direction of type II errors. I'm not sure what you mean about ignoring calls. Why would I have any particular belief about police stations ignoring calls? Police stations ignoring calls isn't mentioned in the article or my comments. Is there a logical entailment from something I said that isn't obvious to me?
- eesmith 5y ago
  In my original comment I linked to and quoted a source providing more information, including: > Court records show that police at the Indianapolis and Louisville airports did just that. After multiple reports of stolen vehicles that ended up being located on Hertz’s lots, those agencies reportedly said they wouldn’t take new reports from the company. Should I infer you didn't fully read that comment? Alternatively, the linked-to article in "the company does not withdraw the theft report, a Hertz spokesperson told The Philadelphia Inquirer." links to https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/hertz-530-million-lawsuit-customers-arrested-bankruptcy-court.html https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/hertz-530-million-lawsuit-c... > In 2015, the regional airport in Louisville, Ky., put a limit on the number of theft accusations it would accept from Hertz, according to documents supplied by Malofiy. In 2016, Indianapolis Airport police also began to turn down Hertz complaints. Hertz said those issues were addressed. There are more details of the plaintiff's claims in the link in "The number is part of the evidence in an ongoing lawsuit in which more than 100 customers are suing Hertz for $529.7 million" to https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/hertz-530-million-lawsuit-customers-arrested-bankruptcy-court.html https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/hertz-530-million-lawsuit-c... > According to their filings, for years Hertz has falsely reported that its cars were stolen as part of its regular business practice, "ensnaring its customers in accusations of car theft, throwing them in jail on felony charges, prosecuting them, burdening them with criminal records that impact their livelihoods, and separating them from their family and loved ones." > Why would Hertz claim that its cars were stolen when legitimate renters were driving them? Believe it or not, the filing claims this is a cost-cutting measure. In some cases, the company simply misplaces a car or a rental contract and doesn't know where the car is. Rather than upgrade its malfunctioning inventory systems or conduct its own investigation when cars are unaccounted for, Hertz simply reports these cars as stolen, the filing claims. The plaintiffs say the company is "effectively using the police, criminal justice system, and taxpayers to subsidize inventory control for a private corporation." The unfortunate renters who happen to be driving those cars are collateral damage. Your argument appears to be that Hertz follows standard industry practice, and even if the plaintiff's claim is true overall no worse on average than any of a number of other activities, so nothing anyone should worry about. Is that an accurate summary?
  - kragen 5y ago
    Thanks! Yes, although I did fully read your comment when you initially posted it, I had forgotten you had said that, and I should have reread it when I was confused. Your quotes are good evidence that I was wrong and Hertz is in fact making so many type I errors that even the police are losing patience with them. Thank you! I'd like to correct your summary slightly. My argument was that Hertz probably doesn't deviate much from standard industry practice, and even if the plaintiff's claim is true overall no worse on average than any of a number of other activities, so nothing a prospective customer should worry about. Certainly it's something that police, legislators, courts, and Hertz management should worry about. Moreover, as shown by the articles you point out, my argument was wrong: the fact that police are ignoring Hertz theft reports is evidence in fact you likely would reduce your risk of a false theft report by renting from a different company, which might be worth it if it doesn't cost you more than, say, US$5 in higher rental costs.
    - eesmith 5y ago
      "Close Reading 2.0" (https://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2014/01/close-reading-20.html https://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2014/01/close-reading-20... ) is only important for authors of standardized tests and for the "look at me, I'm so clever" crowd. You page of statistics suggests you were in the second. If that's not what you want, please take this comment as a cautionary warning.
      - kragen 5y ago
        No idea what any of that means. I accumulated a page of statistics in order to try to understand what "1 in 10000" means in practice, just as I read your comments to try to understand what Hertz's policies mean in practice, which were very helpful, thank you. Then I shared that page of statistics in order to share that understanding, just as you were kind enough to share your understanding with me.
        eesmith 5y ago
        "Close Reading 2.0" refers to students who are required to take a standardized test for 'English' wherein they analyze a document without any context. Indeed, these texts often are chosen so there is no well-known context, purportedly to prevent bias in favor of students who might have studied that context. As a result, these are rather pointless tests, as they don't reflect the skills people need to understand literature. For a certain class of student, it doesn't matter - the goal is to get a high score. These people often consider themselves "clever" for doing that. In this story about Hertz, your response focused on one detail in the story, laboriously worked out, on the apparent assumption that you didn't expect people here to know about micromorts, and had to see a full table rather than follow a link to a more full description. This is the sort of thing I see in people who think they are more "clever" than others. Further, your comments appeared to only be interested in the surface-level details of the linked-to article ("isn't mentioned in the article or my comments"), rather than considering context readily available outside that frame, and earlier mentioned in my comments - thus reminding me of "Close Reading 2.0". And when I objected to your comments, you constructed a hypothetical ("I'm guessing that reporting car thefts to the police is a standard industry practice") rather than re-evaluate the certainty of your conclusion. Something common to everyone, including me, but what "clever" people do is build on their hypotheticals to come to a conclusion which is irrelevant to the issue ("Hertz's process may actually be heavily biased in the direction of type II errors"). My interpretation can be entirely wrong. If you get no feedback you'll get no chance to re-evaluate the effectiveness or appropriateness of your sharing.

You think this is a standard industry practice? You think there are police stations across the country ignoring calls from local rental agencies reporting a stolen car?

kragen 5y ago

I'm guessing that reporting car thefts to the police is a standard industry practice, I know that any such discrimination process carried out by humans has some nonzero probability of both type I and type II errors, and I'm amazed that the number of thefts they report is so low. The very low number of theft reports suggests to me that, despite the apparently ridiculously slipshod procedure described in the article, Hertz's process may actually be heavily biased in the direction of type II errors. I'm not sure what you mean about ignoring calls. Why would I have any particular belief about police stations ignoring calls? Police stations ignoring calls isn't mentioned in the article or my comments. Is there a logical entailment from something I said that isn't obvious to me?

eesmith 5y ago
In my original comment I linked to and quoted a source providing more information, including: > Court records show that police at the Indianapolis and Louisville airports did just that. After multiple reports of stolen vehicles that ended up being located on Hertz’s lots, those agencies reportedly said they wouldn’t take new reports from the company. Should I infer you didn't fully read that comment? Alternatively, the linked-to article in "the company does not withdraw the theft report, a Hertz spokesperson told The Philadelphia Inquirer." links to https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/hertz-530-million-lawsuit-customers-arrested-bankruptcy-court.html https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/hertz-530-million-lawsuit-c... > In 2015, the regional airport in Louisville, Ky., put a limit on the number of theft accusations it would accept from Hertz, according to documents supplied by Malofiy. In 2016, Indianapolis Airport police also began to turn down Hertz complaints. Hertz said those issues were addressed. There are more details of the plaintiff's claims in the link in "The number is part of the evidence in an ongoing lawsuit in which more than 100 customers are suing Hertz for $529.7 million" to https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/hertz-530-million-lawsuit-customers-arrested-bankruptcy-court.html https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/hertz-530-million-lawsuit-c... > According to their filings, for years Hertz has falsely reported that its cars were stolen as part of its regular business practice, "ensnaring its customers in accusations of car theft, throwing them in jail on felony charges, prosecuting them, burdening them with criminal records that impact their livelihoods, and separating them from their family and loved ones." > Why would Hertz claim that its cars were stolen when legitimate renters were driving them? Believe it or not, the filing claims this is a cost-cutting measure. In some cases, the company simply misplaces a car or a rental contract and doesn't know where the car is. Rather than upgrade its malfunctioning inventory systems or conduct its own investigation when cars are unaccounted for, Hertz simply reports these cars as stolen, the filing claims. The plaintiffs say the company is "effectively using the police, criminal justice system, and taxpayers to subsidize inventory control for a private corporation." The unfortunate renters who happen to be driving those cars are collateral damage. Your argument appears to be that Hertz follows standard industry practice, and even if the plaintiff's claim is true overall no worse on average than any of a number of other activities, so nothing anyone should worry about. Is that an accurate summary?
- kragen 5y ago
  Thanks! Yes, although I did fully read your comment when you initially posted it, I had forgotten you had said that, and I should have reread it when I was confused. Your quotes are good evidence that I was wrong and Hertz is in fact making so many type I errors that even the police are losing patience with them. Thank you! I'd like to correct your summary slightly. My argument was that Hertz probably doesn't deviate much from standard industry practice, and even if the plaintiff's claim is true overall no worse on average than any of a number of other activities, so nothing a prospective customer should worry about. Certainly it's something that police, legislators, courts, and Hertz management should worry about. Moreover, as shown by the articles you point out, my argument was wrong: the fact that police are ignoring Hertz theft reports is evidence in fact you likely would reduce your risk of a false theft report by renting from a different company, which might be worth it if it doesn't cost you more than, say, US$5 in higher rental costs.
  - eesmith 5y ago
    "Close Reading 2.0" (https://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2014/01/close-reading-20.html https://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2014/01/close-reading-20... ) is only important for authors of standardized tests and for the "look at me, I'm so clever" crowd. You page of statistics suggests you were in the second. If that's not what you want, please take this comment as a cautionary warning.
    - kragen 5y ago
      No idea what any of that means. I accumulated a page of statistics in order to try to understand what "1 in 10000" means in practice, just as I read your comments to try to understand what Hertz's policies mean in practice, which were very helpful, thank you. Then I shared that page of statistics in order to share that understanding, just as you were kind enough to share your understanding with me.
      - eesmith 5y ago
        "Close Reading 2.0" refers to students who are required to take a standardized test for 'English' wherein they analyze a document without any context. Indeed, these texts often are chosen so there is no well-known context, purportedly to prevent bias in favor of students who might have studied that context. As a result, these are rather pointless tests, as they don't reflect the skills people need to understand literature. For a certain class of student, it doesn't matter - the goal is to get a high score. These people often consider themselves "clever" for doing that. In this story about Hertz, your response focused on one detail in the story, laboriously worked out, on the apparent assumption that you didn't expect people here to know about micromorts, and had to see a full table rather than follow a link to a more full description. This is the sort of thing I see in people who think they are more "clever" than others. Further, your comments appeared to only be interested in the surface-level details of the linked-to article ("isn't mentioned in the article or my comments"), rather than considering context readily available outside that frame, and earlier mentioned in my comments - thus reminding me of "Close Reading 2.0". And when I objected to your comments, you constructed a hypothetical ("I'm guessing that reporting car thefts to the police is a standard industry practice") rather than re-evaluate the certainty of your conclusion. Something common to everyone, including me, but what "clever" people do is build on their hypotheticals to come to a conclusion which is irrelevant to the issue ("Hertz's process may actually be heavily biased in the direction of type II errors"). My interpretation can be entirely wrong. If you get no feedback you'll get no chance to re-evaluate the effectiveness or appropriateness of your sharing.