The Justice Department filed a lawsuit Thursday, accusing Uber Technologies Inc. of discriminating against passengers with disabilities, including riders with service animals and stowable wheelchairs, prosecutors announced.
The suit alleges Uber violated Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act by refusing service, imposing improper surcharges and failing to make reasonable policy changes for riders with disabilities, a press release Friday noted.
The department seeks $125 million for individuals who filed complaints and a court order requiring Uber to comply with the ADA, according to prosecutors.
“Rideshare companies like Uber are prohibited from denying riders with disabilities the same access to transportation that riders without disabilities enjoy,” said U.S. Attorney Craig H. Missakian of the Northern District of California.
The lawsuit also demands Uber train its staff and drivers on ADA requirements and pay a civil penalty to address public harm, the office of the U.S. Attorney said.
Once after visiting the pediatrician we discovered a note on my Mom’s car. Someone had backed into it and left a note of apology along with their contact info.
Rediculous.
Can an extra large power wheelchair fit into the back of a Prius with 3 passengers?
Is a driver still liable for fines while picking up a hail for a disabled passenger located in a designated no stopping or bus loading area?
How will training staff resolve the problem if their employees are mainly white collar workers who sit at desk jobs in their Mission Bay offices?
Does surge pricing for the disabled count as an improper surcharge?
Lots to digest and think about with this lawsuit.
Idealistic blunder heads. Too stupid to face reality and subscribe to the absurd ideologies way out of date, tested and show not to work. Everyone wants less pollution but EVs won’t necessarily solve it. Researchers told our company in the late 1990s that even hybrids still will generate extra heat and not a solution. People mostly bought EVs because they were “chic and trendy” and they wanted to be perceived as that. Rather silly.
Oops. That was more for the other story though it’s in the response to the problem of fitting a wheelchair into the back of a Prius.
Something doesn’t ring right about this. Perhaps a more detailed description of the refusals, or improper surcharges would help make this more understandable. Failing to make reasonable policy changes is absurd, as who has the final determination as to what is “reasonable” when it comes to policy? Seeking $125,000,000 for how many complainants?
Is this the taxi cab lobby striking back?
It’s probably about time I look up what
Uber actually is, keep hearing about it.
I would never take Uber. It’s internet hitchhiking. You’re getting into the private vehicle of someone you don’t know. You’re riding at your own risk, male or female. And some of the drivers can’t pass a screening elsewhere. Convicted felons, etc. And the way Uber is written (according to a friend of mine who’s a lawyer) you’re not in good hands if anything happens. Complying with ADA should be a given.
Complete nonsense.
Anything for a pay day.