Can a car rental company double my rate because I’m not American?

There’s something funny going on with car rental prices, and Hal Gordon wants answers.

Here’s what happened to him: A few weeks ago, he checked rental rates through the Avis website for a friend, who was flying to New York from Israel.

“The website said there were no vehicles available for the dates chosen,” he says. “I checked for other countries
in the Middle East — same result. However, for UK or Venezuela — no problem. Vehicles were available.”

Gordon visited a few other sites, including Hertz.

“They doubled the price for foreign nationals,” he says. “What’s going on here?”

Good question. To find out, I first checked the Avis site, running a query for a rental from JFK in early March. I identified myself as a resident of Israel in the first search, and the site offered me a rate of $59 a day. Not bad for a set of wheels in the Big Apple.

Then I tried the same query as an American. The rate? Almost $20 per day higher — $78.

Hmm. Jacking up the rate by $20 because I’m American? Refusing to rent a car to someone from the Middle East? Sounds ridiculous.

What’s going on here?

“Car rental pricing is market-driven and very dynamic,” says Alice Pereira, a spokeswoman for Avis. “Many factors determine price, including level of demand, cost of service, currency exchange rates, and the competitive environment. Travel companies may offer promotional rates to take advantage of growing markets or other fluctuations in demand, or simply to respond to competitive pricing.”

In other words, car rental companies have the right to change their price based on who you are. And they frequently do.

So what determines the rate you pay? A driver’s nationality, the currency exchange rate and the inclusion or exclusion of the costs of damage and liability coverages that, in some countries, are required charges for foreign travelers, according to Avis.

Hertz agreed, calling these dynamic rates a “standard travel industry practice.”

“The competitive influences in each source market typically pattern the resulting non-resident rates and promotions to be among the lowest available in the destination markets,” says Paula Rivera, a Hertz spokeswoman. “However, there is no guarantee that this will always be the case and there may be instances whereby local promotions are offered to residents at lower rate levels.”

Gordon doesn’t buy it. He calls these practices “discriminatory” — which they certainly are.

In some business settings, changing a price based on who you are, or refusing to sell you a product, would be discriminatory, if not illegal.

But “dynamic” pricing is creeping into our lives beyond the travel industry. Remember your last trip to the grocery store? Maybe they offered a special price based on your “club” membership in the grocery store’s loyalty program, or a two-for-one offer — members only.

It’s every revenue manager’s fantasy to be able to charge a price that’s based on who you are, and what you’re willing to pay, and believe me, that day is coming.

I’m not surprised at any of these answers, although I’m a little taken aback that any company would refused to rent a car to anyone based on their nationality. I tried to duplicate that result on the site, but couldn’t.

None of the car rental companies I spoke with would answer the allegation that they stopped certain travelers from renting their cars, although that isn’t necessarily illegal. Just try to rent a car if you’re under 25 or have a questionable DMV record. Your rental company might tell you it’s “out” of cars, too, or turn you down flat.

The real question is: Should that kind of discrimination — er, I mean, dynamic pricing — be allowed here in the United States, a country that takes great pride in its egalitarian values?

Should we draw the line somewhere — and if so, where?

  • TonyA_says

    Philippa, it seems like it is the WEBSITEs that are doing that fuzzy marketing stuff (like what emanon described). If I use my GDS and select EuropCar, I don’t get these rates that vary by Nationality.

  • mikegun

    But in this AVIS case, aren’t they giving different rates to residents of Israel and the US, regardless of their national origin?

  • Philippa_FRA

    Being philosophical… The difference between LA and the Bay Area is geographic. LA drivers get in more accidents than BA drivers, therefore BA drivers get cheaper insurance. If this form of geographic discrimination – CityA vs CityB – is OK, then why not also StateA vs StateB – or CountryA vs CountryB? If US residents have more accidents than residents of Israel or Brazil or Tonga, or they in some other way are “more expensive” customers… why would it not be OK to charge them more à la LA drivers?

    I have no idea if this is the case; it’s the principle I’m curious about.

  • scapel

    Got that one right. Car rental agencies should possibly be able to change the insurance rate however. Foreigners don’t have as much experience driving in the US and may be more susceptable to an accident. They may be at a higher risk for accidents, but not necessarily. Interesting what other have to say.

  • scapel

    Got that one right. Car rental agencies should possibly be able to change the insurance rate however. Foreigners don’t have as much experience driving in the US and may be more susceptable to an accident. They may be at a higher risk for accidents, but not necessarily. Interesting what other have to say.

  • Philippa_FRA

    But “normal people” don’t have GDS’es – they’d go to the site, pick their country of residence, and pay these fuzzy prices.

  • TonyA_says

    IMO risk-based pricing is fine. That’s why drivers below 25 yrs old pay a higher insurance rate. Your car insurance rates in the USA depends on where you are. Make sense since some areas are more dangerous than others.

    But car rental rates (before insurance) really should be the same. I can understand giving a discount for a PROMOTION for a limited time because they are trying to boost sales from a particular country if it is marketed there. But to market INSIDE the USA for ISRAELIS and give them a lower rate. That seems very odd to me. And so, I feel discriminated against just because I’m an American.

  • TonyA_says

    Cubans and Iranians pay less than Americans, too?
    I’m using a USA website for Avis, so I presume they are marketing to people INSIDE the USA. That said, why should an Iranian inside the USA pay less than me an American inside the USA?

  • Michael__K

    The comments about New York remind me that Hertz, Dollar and Thrifty used to have special surcharges (as high as $55/day) for all NYC-metro area rentals by drivers with Brooklyn, Queens, or Bronx addresses.

    The charges were theoretically introduced because of NY State’s vicarious-liability laws, but that explanation made no sense because Manhattan, Staten Island, and non-NYC residents were usually exempt for some reason.  

    I had not heard that those surcharges were ever eliminated, but I just checked and they appear to be gone from the terms & conditions language now (there was apparently a threat of local legislation in 2010 which may have done the trick).

    http://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/03/nyregion/hertz-imposing-stiff-surcharges-on-new-yorkers.html

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/car_rental_companies_gouging_outer_9hjf1bvgHVmIDtNHCeJ39H

  • TonyA_says

    That’s because GDS a long time ago was required to be NON-DISCRIMINATORY by US law. That was relaxed quite a bit after deregulation but in general is is non-discriminatory. The web has no such rule.

    So if one can game the web, then they should. The web is a free-for-all venue.

  • TonyA_says

     that’s why Hertz has a disclosure – RATES NOW ALSO VALID FOR NY RESIDENT

  • TonyA_says

    On the contrary:
    Rental Agent: Hmm, I see you are from Israel. Lucky you, I’ll charge you less than the American. Are you sure you don’t have dual Citizenship? If so, I have to charge you the American rate.

  • TonyA_says

    True but in most cases those cheaper rates need to be purchased overseas (e.g. VUSA). In AVIS case, the purchase can/may be done inside the USA and the foreigner will pay less than the American. So they are enticing foreigners who already are INSIDE America.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_SYR4YYOAPY4X3UUYLPCADARF3Q emanon256

    Now that is insane!!!  And funny!
     
    I agree, they really should re-direct, it would look much better and wouldn’t be very difficult.  It really does look discriminatory to anyone trying.  Am I remembering wrong, or did they used to ask for the issuing state and country of the driver’s license?  I think that would be a little better of a way to determine the rate.
     
    Needless to say, I guess they are trying to attract some Iranian and Cuban tourism!

  • TonyA_says

    Emanon, I’ve got to tell you this AVIS thing is so UN-AMERICAN to me. The more I dig, the more bizarre they get.

    Hmm, do you think the US issues VISAs to Iranians? Maybe their gov’t wont even allow them out to come here.

    So from now on if anyone wants a cheaper rate in Avis, just tell them you’re from Cuba (you know that little place in Miami). LOL.

  • TonyA_says

     Raven, new term – Dynamic Discrimination (DD).

  • bodega3

    Tony, if has in the past, but not sure about 2012 pricing, that rail passes purchased here for US citizens are cheaper than getting them in Europe.  Not point to point tickets, but the passes.  Tourists ofter get pricing that locals can get.

  • bodega3

    Tony, if has in the past, but not sure about 2012 pricing, that rail passes purchased here for US citizens are cheaper than getting them in Europe.  Not point to point tickets, but the passes.  Tourists ofter get pricing that locals can get.

  • TonyA_says

    Oh the EURail passes. My bad.
    Rick Steve’s blog
    http://www.ricksteves.com/graffiti/helpline/index.cfm?topic=49734

  • TonyA_says

    Oh the EURail passes. My bad.
    Rick Steve’s blog
    http://www.ricksteves.com/graffiti/helpline/index.cfm?topic=49734

  • Michael__K

    I believe Hertz dropped the surcharges a few years ago, but Dollar & Thrifty still had them as recently as 2011.

    There were multiple lawsuits going back to 1992 seeking to ban these types of surcharges.  I’m curious on what grounds the city and consumers ultimately prevailed?   

    I see lots of historical media reports online that describe the problem, but I’m not finding any that report on the apparent resolution.

  • Michael__K

    I believe Hertz dropped the surcharges a few years ago, but Dollar & Thrifty still had them as recently as 2011.

    There were multiple lawsuits going back to 1992 seeking to ban these types of surcharges.  I’m curious on what grounds the city and consumers ultimately prevailed?   

    I see lots of historical media reports online that describe the problem, but I’m not finding any that report on the apparent resolution.

  • TonyA_says

    I don’t hear about this anymore in the Queens Area where my office is (between LGA and JFK). I suppose so many folks have their own cars in Queens where parking is easier than Manhattan. Since people from Manhattan are special and don’t get taxed (with this) then maybe nobody complains anymore. Besides it’s been a long time since NYC cared much about people in the poorer boroughs. (Sarcasm as usual.)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_SYR4YYOAPY4X3UUYLPCADARF3Q emanon256

    I was wondering the exact same thing. Can North Korean and Iranian citizens even get US Visas?  I’ll have to try Cuba next time and see if they still give me the discount when I show up.

  • TonyA_says

     @Michael__K:disqus One of the things that drove me to live in Connecticut is that in America, you are determined by your Zip Code. I hate the commute but there are tradeoffs. Mike I suppose you are from this (NYC metro) area so you understand me.

  • TonyA_says

    Hope you don’t have to look like one. LOL

  • Michael__K

    You don’t hear about it anymore because Hertz apparently ended the practice in 2006 and Dollar-Thrifty must have recently joined them (at some point after January 2011 which is when the most recent complaint I found online was posted).

    I’m curious what happened: did the companies voluntarily decide to stop defending the surcharges?  Was there a court ruling or a settlement?

    http://www.nysenate.gov/press-release/bp-stringer-senator-squadron-assemblymember-kavanagh-issue-holiday-warning-expose-hidd

  • TonyA_says

    The problem with this thing is that it get’s added when you show up and show your driver’s license. So you just can’t tell from your reservation if there will be a surprise.

    Dollar add 4 taxes for JFK, today.
    MANDATORY CHARGES:
    12.50 PCT APT CONC RECOV FEE PER RENTAL 
    11.00 PCT RENTAL TAX PER RENTAL 
    8.88 PCT STATE TAX PER RENTAL
    2.25 TRANS FACILITY CHG PER RENTAL

    That’s already a total of 34.63% tax before the CDW BS.

    Can anyone afford more?

  • Michael__K

    True that it wouldn’t show up in the quote (even if you reserved with a Brooklyn / Bronx / Queens address) but the following used to be buried in the fine print under “Additional Fees” in Dollar’s General Terms & Conditions:

    =====
    Higher rental rates for New York City (Brooklyn, Bronx, and Queens) residents renting in New York, Newark, NJ, and Philadelphia may apply as follows:

    For Brooklyn residents, the rates will be $77 higher per day.
    For Bronx residents, the rates will be $65 higher per day.
    For Queens residents, the rates will be $7 higher per 
    day.

  • TonyA_says

    I wouldn’t be surprised that they dropped this discriminatory fees when “richer” folks started moving to Park Slope/Prospect Park, Cobble and Boerum Hills areas. Brooklyn (and the Bronx) is not was it used to be. Rental car companies cannot afford to alienate the new folks who now live in Brooklyn. They have to be treated like Manhattanites.

  • Joe Farrell

     Now thats a completely different idea! ;-0

  • Joe Farrell

    I think you are incorrect.  New yorkers are NOT a national origin.  They can give a discount on a cruise – it becomes illegal if they give someone outside the US a discount or refuse. 

    Guys – lots of stuff is illegal that no one ever files a claim about. . . 

  • itravelalot

    My point was that at restaurants they sometimes offer a discount to those on a fixed income. Your point that a restaurant is there to benefit the entire eating community is correct. 

  • itravelalot

    I don’t think I was 100% clear in my first statement.  What I meant to say was that as restaurants do want to attract as many people to buy food at their establishment. But they recognize the need to market themselves to different demographics. Hence, some put different prices for seniors and children, happy hours, etc. Thanks:)

  • TonyA_says

    @Michael__K:disqus  I think the NY Rental Car companies dropped this charge because of the Graves Amendment. http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/49/VI/A/301/I/30106 

    The Graves Law (49 US 30106), passed in August 2005 as part of the SAFETEA-LU highway bill, created a uniform standard against liability without fault by preempting state vicarious liability laws imposing liability on non-negligent leasing and renting companies. Since its enactment into law, the highest courts in several states, including New York, Florida, and Minnesota, have upheld its authority. Federal circuit courts and the U.S. Court of Appeals have also ruled in support of the Graves Law. On July 13,2010,  the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit invoked the federal Graves Law (49 USC 30106) in ruling that a vehicle lessor could not be held vicariously liable on the sole basis of vehicle ownership. Note below that even the NY Court of Appeals strongly affirms the authority of the Graves Amendment to preempt New York’s unlimited vicarious liability law

    On September 11, 2006, the Supreme Court in Queens County, New York denied a motion made by Nissan Infiniti, LT in Graham v. Dunkley and NILT, Inc. to dismiss a vicarious liability claim. The motion to dismiss was based on the federal statute (49 USC 30106) that prohibits states from imposing liability solely on the basis of ownership. Judge Thomas Polizzi, in denying the motion, held that the federal statute “is an unconstitutional exercise of congressional authority under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 8.” The action in Graham v. Dunkley and Nilt, Inc. is the first case in which a court has ruled against the constitutionality of the federal statute. Court Opinion – Denial of Motion to Dismiss Graham v. Dunkley and Nilt, Inc.The trial court decision in Graham v Dunkley was reversed by the Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department of the Supreme Court on February 1, 2008. In its decision, the appellate court stated that “we agree with the weight of precedent that the Graves Amendment was a constitutional exercise of Congressional power pursuant to the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.” The appellate court declared unequivocally that “actions against rental and leasing companies based solely on vicarious liability may no longer be maintained.” Appellate Court Opinion and OrderOn April 29, the state’s highest court, the New York Court of Appeals, dismissed the plaintiff’s appeal of the lower appellate court decision upholding the Graves Amendment. This action strongly affirms the authority of the Graves Amendment to preempt New York’s unlimited vicarious liability law

  • SoBeSparky

    Private companies have variable rates all the time for a variety of factors.  Go to second and third-world countries and many times you must negotiate in person for your hotel, merchandise, guide, private car hire, and many other prices.  Most times, they double the price just because you are a foreigner.  I do not complain.  Just bargain them back down to the ground floor.

    Equal opportunity pricing is absurd.  Government control of pricing is just about the worst idea I have heard in this column.  Sharp consumerism and fair advertising, yes.  Authoritarian control of private pricing, absurd.

  • Michael__K

    Interesting…. thanks!
    I guess it just took Dollar a little longer than everyone else to realize that the charges no longer had any basis (to the extent they ever had in the first place).

  • TonyA_says

    There is a reason why we want some standards – it is good for commerce. Can you imagine if taxis don’t have meters? Or you have to haggle with a bus driver to determine your bus fare? In a lot of cities, they try to enforce a single FIXED taxi fare from the airport to the center (if the city). If there is no regulation (what you call Authoritarian control), then an airline, bus, train or taxi will be able to create INDIVIDUALIZED fares. Tom, Dick and Harry even if similarly situated may get charged differently maybe because of their willingness or ability to pay DYNAMIC PRICING. This is a sure way to price gouging and zero consumer protection – things you get in a third world country.

  • SoBeSparky

    Taxis are regulated public conveyances on public streets.  It is a very limited exception to market pricing to protect the public.  It does not apply to most private negotiations.

    Indeed, the USA used to have highly regulated airline and energy industries.  During hyper-inflation of the 1970s we had price controls. All these caused shortages and inefficiencies in the market.  Study your history.

    “Dynamic” has nothing to do with it.  It is the basic freedom in the market economy to price according to variables at any given time.  To regulate those variables in most industries is to stifle the efficiencies of the market.

    There is a vast difference between racial, religious, gender and other such discrimination,which is outlawed; consumer protection to assure honest and ethical dealings, and market pricing.  Study your economics.

  • TonyA_says

    I did. I actually graduated with honors.

  • y_p_w

    North Korea is so incredibly tight with people leaving. When they did several family reunions with siblings/parents/children in South Korea, they supposedly had a loyalty test and only allow the most loyal to North Korea to be part of the reunions.

    I can speak from experience of friends and coworkers that the US does issue visas to Iranians, and it’s really not that big a deal for Iranians to leave their country.  The US will probably issue visas for North Koreans, but the hard part would be getting permission to leave and the fact that the US has no official diplomatic relations with NK.

    Iran certainly isn’t as authoritarian as North Korea.  I know people who have left Iran as spouses of US citizens or permanent residents.  Some have even entered the US on immigrant visas.  Quite a few Iranians come to the US on student visas.  The US doesn’t have any formal diplomatic relations with Iran, but I believe visas can be handled by the Swiss embassy in Tehran as an intermediary.

    The policies for Iranian students studying the US were somewhat restrictive at one point.  They were only valid for a single entry within a three month period, which meant if a student returned, they would have to apply for a new visa to return to the US.  The policy has been changed such that the visa can be used for entry within a two year period and for multiple entries.

    http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2011/05/164001.htm

  • Citizentraveller

    I think we are going to see more targetted business offerings and pricing across the economy. For example, with Google now apparently tailoring advertising to each person’s online history, it wouldn’t be hard to advertise different prices to different people depending on their interests as evidenced by their usage of Google search.

    This has nothing to do with discrimination by race etc. but is really aimed at maximising revenue and profits.

    What the consumer can try to do is to obtain as much commercial intelligence as he/she can in order to at least have some basis on which to judge whether he/she is obtaining the best price and quality of service.

    We need more people like you Mr Elliott to help us!

  • andrelot

    @TonyA_says:disqus , there is a difference between transparent information and freedom to vary prices and prejudicial discrimination on basis of race, religion etc.
    I’m all for transparent information regulations (like airlines advertising fares that include all compulsory fees and taxes; cruise line not allowed to shovel “fuel surcharges”  after the cruise had been already paid, burden-of-proof of damages on car rental companies etc.

    However, merely discriminating prices among costumers is not inherently unfair. Reasons by which they regulate taxi fares, or bus fares – for instance – is that the passenger is usually underpowered, at the mercy of the service provider. That is not the case with airline tickets or car rentals where the overwhelming majority of purchases are done well before the costumer actually uses the service.

  • TonyA_says

    So you think it’s fair for Americans to pay more for car rentals at Avis JFK airport than Cubans or Iranians? You might want to rethink your position.

  • jgb123

    No they can NOT discriminate.  You want to penalize and discriminate against an entire ethnic or age group because of bad experience with some members of that race or age group.

  • http://twitter.com/travelingiraffe Crissy

    While I say no, I can understand that a rental company might charge more for an international visitor – someone who will be out of the country after the rental and hard to track down if there is an issue that comes up later. 

    But in the end  this is no different then creating a promotion, contest, raffel for only certain groups of people – it happens all the time.

  • MikeInCtown

    You are 100% WRONG. if you lose too many cars to a certain group, then you make them pay the manditory insurance charge in the rental price and you make note of it in your pricing structure. What the rental companies are doing is discrimination.

    The first poster in the thread went on about restaraunts. Totally different. in that scenario one entire group is given a DISCOUNT, not a surcharge and the group is based on age or how much they eat. In a rental car situation, this would be taken care of by requiring insurance. As someone else said, what the rental companies are doing is akin to a restaraunt requiring black people or jewish people to pay more, and offering discounts to white people. Would ANYONE in America stand for this today? So why can the rental world get away with it but calling it “dynamic”. hmmm, a new term for racism…

  • andrelot

    If the price discrimination happens solely on a nationality basis, then it shouldn’t be legal. Usually, though, that happens as a result of IP-based pricing (online retailers have made IP-based (which they associate with ZIP Code) promotions and tailored offers for years), or language barriers.

    As I said in other comment, I had more than once found lower comprehensive rates (with insurance) for American cars quoting them in European websites. But you gotta know the language, as changing for “English” reverts to the British version whose pricing is more in tandem with American ones.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UES4TUPI6NRPTG2DCB4YCX6R4U wyoming1949

    The US Civil Rights Act of 1964 expressly prohibits discrimination, on the basis of nationality, by any place of “public accomodation” provided said place has a material impact on interstate commerce.  The major rental car companies clearly meet both criteria.

  • Lindabator

    HAHA – and a good whine helps out in the AM (And Italy is a pain in the a@@ with their cars, too!)