at fault here?
Law and Ethics
The man rents a van 3 times throughout a week. The first time he used it, the air-conditioning really was not working. When he returned he told them. Picks it up a few days later, it works fine, then uses it one more time, and it is still fine.
When he went to drop it off and have it inspected, the worker turned the key in the ignition to see if gas tank was filled up. The van was not actually started up, so the man says to the worker, see that, the air-conditoning is not working (as just air was blowing out since the vehicle was not actually running).
He then DEMANDED a refund for driving around with it the whole time "broken".
Who is at fault here? The man for tricking the worker, or the worker for being dumb enough not to realize the vehicle was not even turned on?
Law and Ethics
2007-06-29 03:06:13 · 8 answers · asked by Reserved 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The man for tricking the worker. This seems fairly cut and dry.
2007-06-29 03:09:39 · answer #1 · answered by PJ 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You need to delve deeper into the problem and get more facts. While the man's conduct is unethical, the employee/employer may NOT be at fault. Get the service contract and read it carefully. It is doubtful that the man gets a refund at all. While the employee should be more careful, most rental cars are "as is". In fact, most major companies use a special form and make the individual inspect the car before each use, signing the form that the car is in good, working condition.
2007-06-29 10:11:54 · answer #2 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Ethics, not so much Law.
The guy is a cheat. He will get his "settlement" by God or Karma or how ever you wish to put it.
In the end, if you are a dishonest person, you feel pretty much everyone else is as well. "The Lion believes everyone is a killer," is a quote I remember, but don´t remember from where.
But at the end of the day, this person will have saved a couple of days of rent...at the cost and deliverance of his soul. Not in a heaven or hell sort of "he will be DAMNED" sort of sense. Just too himself.
He is screwing himself far more than the company...because he knows. He now knows he can not even trust himself.
So the company lost a couple bucks.
The man lost far more.
Best Regards.
2007-06-29 13:36:07 · answer #3 · answered by EJ Lonergan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The man is at fault for his unethical behavior. But the workers should have more training on the vehicles and in customer service.
2007-06-29 10:18:29 · answer #4 · answered by chetter 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The man for lying and getting a refund. He essentially stole from the car rental company.
2007-06-29 10:13:25 · answer #5 · answered by Lori B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Mc Donalds
Cheetos
etc.
The worker should realize.
Today courts give megamillion settlement rulings for "Dumb" reasons.I suppose the state the incident happened in would have to be checked.
2007-06-29 14:38:15 · answer #6 · answered by robert p 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think your question answers itself, "Man rips off..." since when does it become OK to steal? This man knowingly receives a discount through deceit. That is fraud and by definition theft. shame on him!
2007-07-01 23:59:37 · answer #7 · answered by Wooluf 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"THE WHOLE SITUATION WAS A MESS"!:O Obviously neither man's parents "RAISED GENTLEMEN"!:(
beankittyky(=^v^=)
2007-06-29 18:16:09 · answer #8 · answered by beankittyky(=^v^=) 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋