You mean his estate had to. Not “we”. That’s the source of the confusion.
I don’t understand the outage at all. Mind you the article in the OP is misleading. I originally saw the story on Fark and the articles I read presented the fact somewhat differently. But regardless, why are businesses being bad-mouthed for going about standard operating procedures?
When people die businesses don’t just sweep their business contracts into the trash and absorb the loss. If the sons had rented the car themselves, whatever insurance didn’t cover would still have to be paid by their respective estates. There is nothing unusual there. It’s part of the really unfortunate business details you have to deal with when someone dies. Since the father is the one who rented the car, he is liable for costs incurred, because the sons were not covered by any insurance for that vehicle. Yes, that sucks, but that’s how it works.
If I drive into the middle of the desert with a rental car and the engine overheats and dies, I’m the one who has to pay for the tow truck. If I die from heatstroke on the way back, my bill still has to be paid, so the executor of my estate will have to take care of it. If my partner borrows the car and gets in a fatal accident, since she wasn’t on the rental agreement and is not covered by any insurance to drive that particular vehicle, I’ll be paying out of pocket. That also sucks, but that’s how it works.
It would be a nice PR move if the rental company waived t, but given the way the global economy has impacted New Zealand’s tourism industries, they may not be in a position to do so, and would be leery of setting a precedent.
It’s stupid business practice if there’s a reasonable chance they’ll lose just two rooms of business over this. And they very likely will.
Let me help:
-
it’s January and papers don’t have much real news.
-
NZ and Australia like to slag one another off in a friendly kind of way
Frequently, if the debt is unsecured and the deceased leaves no estate, that is exactly what happens. Many people die with no estate. Creditors eat the loss.
As has been pointed out, the contract in this case was with the parents, not the deceased.
Of course, and that has been pointed out above, but the creditors don’t just throw up their hands and say “Oh, well!” without first taking all reasonable efforts at their disposal to recoup.
Yes, pointed out by my own post even. My point is the “cruel Kiwi” stories are so off base, I can’t even muster any recreational outrage just to be sporting.
I’m afraid I disagree. No business can make it a habit of free concessions every time someone is upset. If you are a stay-at-home spouse and your earning partner dies leaving you unable to pay the mortgage, the bank will foreclose. It won’t say “Oh, sorry about your personal crisis. Let’s forget about the mortgage.” The phone company will never say “Your forgot to pay your bill because your grandma died? Oh, well forget about that silly phone bill then. Just pay the next one.” You will still have your outstanding balance waiting for you.
In the hotel’s case, they did not charge for the room except for the one a family member had called and re-confirmed and asked them to keep for them after the tragedy, and the rental company did not charge them additional days for the vehicle, only for the unusual cost of towing and key replacement, costs that were above an beyond what they would be expected to reasonably incur as a part of normal business operations.
Oh shit, sorry about the confusion. “We” were taking care of all the odds and ends on behalf of his estate pretty much all of which was communal property with our very-much-still-alive mom. So there was no trustee or anything, and most of the big stuff had been transferred to my mom’s name or paid off before he died.