HERTZ GLOBAL HOLDINGS, INCHTZ
HERTZ GLOBAL HOLDINGS, INC Commitments Disclosure
Contingencies and Off-Balance Sheet Commitments
Legal Proceedings
Public Liability and Property Damage
The Company is currently a defendant in numerous actions and has received numerous claims on which actions have not yet commenced for public liability and property damage arising from the operation of motor vehicles rented from the Company. The obligation for public liability and property damage on self-insured U.S. and international vehicles, as stated in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets, represents an estimate for both reported accident claims not yet paid and claims incurred but not yet reported. The related liabilities are recorded on an undiscounted basis and are based on rental volume and actuarial evaluations of historical accident claim experience and trends, as well as future projections of ultimate losses, expenses, premiums and administrative costs. As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, the Company's liability recorded for public liability and property damage matters is $488 million and $553 million, respectively. The Company believes that its analysis is based on the most relevant information available, combined with reasonable assumptions. The liability is subject to significant uncertainties. The adequacy of the liability is regularly monitored based on evolving accident claim history and insurance related state legislation changes. If the Company's estimates change or if actual results differ from these assumptions, the amount of the recorded liability is adjusted to reflect these results.
Loss Contingencies
From time to time the Company is a party to various legal proceedings, typically involving operational issues common to the vehicle rental business, including claims by employees and former employees and governmental
investigations. The Company has summarized below the most significant legal proceedings to which the Company was and/or is a party during 2020 or the period after December 31, 2020, but before the filing of this 2020 Annual Report.
Governmental Investigations - The Company previously identified certain activities in Brazil that raised issues under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (the "FCPA") and other federal and local laws, which the Company self-reported to appropriate government entities. The matters associated with the FCPA and other federal matters were previously resolved without further action by the applicable U.S. government entities. The Company entered into a leniency agreement in August 2020 with the Brazilian authorities for a monetary sanction against a Hertz non-Debtor subsidiary and the matters under local Brazilian laws are now closed.
In re Hertz Global Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation - In November 2013, a purported shareholder class action, Pedro Ramirez, Jr. v. Hertz Global Holdings, Inc., et al., was commenced in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey naming Old Hertz Holdings and certain of its officers as defendants and alleging violations of the federal securities laws. The complaint alleged that Old Hertz Holdings made material misrepresentations and/or omissions of material fact in certain of its public disclosures in violation of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The complaint sought an unspecified amount of monetary damages on behalf of the purported class and an award of costs and expenses, including counsel fees and expert fees. The complaint, as amended, was dismissed with prejudice on April 27, 2017 and on September 20, 2018, the Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the complaint with prejudice. On February 5, 2019, the plaintiffs filed a motion asking the federal district court to exercise its discretion and allow the plaintiffs to reinstate their claims to include additional allegations from the administrative order agreed to by the SEC and the Company in December 2018, which was supplemented by reference to the Company’s subsequently filed litigation against former executives (disclosed below). On September 30, 2019, the federal district court of New Jersey denied the plaintiffs’ motion for relief from the April 27, 2017 judgment and a related motion to allow the filing of a proposed fifth amended complaint. On October 30, 2019, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The parties fully briefed the appeal and oral argument had been scheduled for June 19, 2020. As a result of the Company's bankruptcy, the appeal was stayed as to the Company, but the plaintiffs advocated that the appeal could proceed against the individual defendants. On October 13, 2020, the Third Circuit affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ motion for relief against the individual defendants since the motion was not timely filed.
In addition to the matters described above, the Company maintains an internal compliance program through which it from time to time identifies other potential violations of laws and regulations applicable to the Company. When the Company identifies such matters, the Company conducts an internal investigation and otherwise cooperates with governmental authorities, as appropriate.
The Company has established reserves for matters where the Company believes that losses are probable and can be reasonably estimated. Other than the aggregate reserve established for claims for public liability and property damage, none of those reserves are material. For matters, including certain of those described above, where the Company has not established a reserve, the ultimate outcome or resolution cannot be predicted at this time, or the amount of ultimate loss, if any, cannot be reasonably estimated. These matters are subject to many uncertainties and the outcome of the individual litigated matters is not predictable with assurance. It is possible that certain of the actions, claims, inquiries or proceedings, including those disclosed above, could be decided unfavorably to the Company or any of its subsidiaries involved. Accordingly, it is possible that an adverse outcome from such a proceeding could exceed the amount accrued in an amount that could be material to the accompanying consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows in any particular reporting period.
Other Proceedings
Litigation Against Former Executives - The Company filed litigation in federal court in New Jersey against Mark Frissora, Elyse Douglas and John Jefferey Zimmerman on March 25, 2019, and in state court in Florida against Scott Sider on March 28, 2019, all of whom were former executive officers of Old Hertz Holdings. The complaints predominantly allege breach of contract and seek repayment of incentive-based compensation received by the
defendants in connection with restatements included in the Old Hertz Holdings Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 and related accounting for prior periods. The Company is also seeking recovery for the costs of the SEC investigation that resulted in an administrative order on December 31, 2018 with respect to events generally involving the restatements included in Old Hertz Holdings Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 and other damages resulting from the necessity of the restatements. The Company is pursuing these legal proceedings in accordance with its clawback policy and contractual rights. The parties are currently involved in motion practice in the New Jersey action and discovery and depositions have commenced in the Florida action. In October 2019, the Company entered into a confidential Settlement Agreement with Elyse Douglas. In September and October 2020, the judge in the New Jersey action entered orders requiring the parties and applicable insurers to attend and participate in mediation. The attorneys in the Florida action voluntarily agreed to participate in the same mediation which was held on November 30, 2020. The mediation was unsuccessful, but settlement discussions have continued. Pursuant to the agreements governing the separation of Herc Holdings from Hertz Global that occurred on June 30, 2016, Herc Holdings is entitled to 15% of the net proceeds of any repayment or recovery.
Indemnification Obligations
In the ordinary course of business, the Company has executed contracts involving indemnification obligations customary in the relevant industry and indemnifications specific to a transaction such as the sale of a business. These indemnification obligations might include claims relating to the following: environmental matters; intellectual property rights; governmental regulations and employment-related matters; customer, supplier and other commercial contractual relationships and financial matters. Specifically, the Company has indemnified various parties for the costs associated with remediating numerous hazardous substance storage, recycling or disposal sites in many states and, in some instances, for natural resource damages. The amount of any such expenses or related natural resource damages for which the Company may be held responsible could be substantial. In addition, Hertz entered into customary indemnification agreements with Hertz Holdings and certain of the Company's stockholders and their affiliates pursuant to which Hertz Holdings and Hertz will indemnify those entities and their respective affiliates, directors, officers, partners, members, employees, agents, representatives and controlling persons, against certain liabilities arising out of performance of a consulting agreement with Hertz Holdings and each of such entities and certain other claims and liabilities, including liabilities arising out of financing arrangements or securities offerings. The Company has entered into customary indemnification agreements with each of its directors and certain of its officers. Performance under these indemnification obligations would generally be triggered by a breach of terms of the contract or by a third-party claim. In connection with the Spin-Off, the Company executed an agreement with Herc Holdings that contains mutual indemnification clauses and a customary indemnification provision with respect to liability arising out of or resulting from assumed legal matters. The Company regularly evaluates the probability of having to incur costs associated with these indemnification obligations and has accrued for expected losses that are probable and estimable.
Historical Timeline
| Fiscal Year | Filed | |
|---|---|---|
| 2020 | Feb 26, 2021 | Showing above |
| 2019 | Feb 25, 2020 | |
| 2018 | Feb 25, 2019 | |
| 2017 | Feb 27, 2018 | |
| 2016 | Mar 6, 2017 | |
About Commitments Disclosures
Commitments and contingencies disclosures catalog a company's off-balance-sheet obligations and legal exposures — purchase commitments, guarantee arrangements, pending litigation, and regulatory proceedings. These items represent potential future cash outflows that may not appear as liabilities on the balance sheet until they become probable and estimable.
Key signals: litigation reserves and disclosed loss ranges quantify management's estimate of legal exposure, but unquantified "reasonably possible" losses often represent the larger risk. Watch for changes in language around pending cases — shifts from "remote" to "reasonably possible" or increases in estimated loss ranges signal deteriorating outcomes. Unconditional purchase obligations and take-or-pay contracts create fixed cost structures that reduce operational flexibility. Guarantee arrangements for subsidiaries or joint ventures can create cascading obligations. Compare the total commitment schedule against projected free cash flow to assess whether the company can meet its obligations without additional financing.