# Deactivated



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated. 

I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"

"He retrieves. He does things for me," She hissed. "Besides, your not allowed to ask that."

"That's actually the only question I am allowed to ask you," I informed her.

"I don't like your attitude. I'm not comfortable in this car. Just cancel the ride and keep the five dollars," she said, and got out of my car. 

I cancelled the ride per "Passenger requested cancellation".

Now I am deactivated from the platform for good.

Be careful out there, guys. People are rotten. I'm excited to get back to a normal life, however. I wish I could sue this passenger. Impersonating a service animal is against Arizona state law.


----------



## WNYuber (Oct 5, 2019)

Although I haven't been driving Uber for very long, every night I secretly pray that I get deactivated.

#itsjustnotworthit


----------



## O-Side Uber (Jul 26, 2017)

I got deactivated from Uber over a year ago for basically the same situation! Mine was a pool ride!!! ? I’ve been driving for Lyft ever since . It’s disgusting that a horrible person like that can take someone’s job away. Sorry this happened to you!


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> ?"I don't like your attitude. I'm not comfortable in this car. Just cancel the ride and keep the five dollars," she said, and got out of my car.
> ?I cancelled the ride per "Passenger requested cancellation".
> ?Now I am deactivated from the platform for good.


You illustrated perfectly how to Escalate a sensitive
Situation & achieve Deactivation ✔

It's almost like you're an Uber shill reminding
entry level transportation providers of Federal Law


just drive the damn car ✔


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Cold Fusion said:


> You illustrated perfectly how to Escalate a sensitive
> Situation & achieve Deactivation ✔
> 
> It almost like you're an Uber shill reminding
> ...


If I am forced to put up with a disrespectful passenger with a fake service dog, I will fall on my sword.

I asked the only legal question I was allowed to ask and canceled the ride per the passenger's request. False claims of service animals and disrespectful passengers are not covered by the ADA.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I asked the only legal question I was allowed to ask


curious what answer could she have given that you would have accepted and completed the ride?



BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I asked the only legal question I was allowed to ask


curious what answer could she have given that you would have accepted and completed the ride?


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> curious what answer could she have given that you would have accepted and completed the ride?
> 
> 
> curious what answer could she have given that you would have accepted and completed the ride?


I was asking the only question allowed and the ride was already accepted. The car was in drive and she said to cancel the ride. It wasn't a question of accepting the ride. I was simply curious, as it was obvious to me that it was not a service animal.

If a passenger asks for the ride to be canceled, I am not liable for anything.

To deny me the two questions allowed by law is forcing me to accept fraud. Period. To put the blame on me for a passenger's request to cancel a ride is a legal liability for Uber and the passenger, as I was simply complying with the passenger's request. Classic case of catch 22.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

I wasn't sure if you started the ride yet, wasn't clear. I think with service dogs and/or a pax who claims it is a service dog one more tread carefully. Look at what happen? I'm a dog person, so I guess it wouldn't bother me. That pax might, but then again I don't think I would have triggered he wrath......


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

SHalester said:


> curious what answer could she have given that you would have accepted and completed the ride?
> 
> 
> curious what answer could she have given that you would have accepted and completed the ride?


None. The dog was on the seat. SAs stay on the floor or in carriers on their handler's chests.


----------



## G.S.M. (Oct 28, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I was asking the only question allowed and the ride was already accepted. The car was in drive and she said to cancel the ride. It wasn't a question of accepting the ride. I was simply curious, as it was obvious to me that it was not a service animal.
> 
> If a passenger asks for the ride to be canceled, I am not liable for anything.
> 
> To deny me the two questions allowed by law is forcing me to accept fraud. Period. To put the blame on me for a passenger's request to cancel a ride is a legal liability for Uber and the passenger, as I was simply complying with the passenger's request. Classic case of catch 22.


You should have driven to the destination without her then ended the ride there

That makes her look like the liar and scammer.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> I wasn't sure if you started the ride yet, wasn't clear. I think with service dogs and/or a pax who claims it is a service dog one more tread carefully. Look at what happen? I'm a dog person, so I guess it wouldn't bother me. That pax might, but then again I don't think I would have triggered he wrath......


I don't believe in enabling passengers to falsely claim they are handicapped. She obviously did not know ADA law, as she said I wasn't allowed to ask her the question I asked. This obviously pissed her off, which caused her to cancel the ride. The dog was sitting on my seats and service animals are trained to sit on the floor.

I'm a dog guy too. I have accepted 100% of my dog rides. What is upsetting to me is that passengers are alarmingly inconsiderate, demanding and entitled with our vehicles. Being accommodating to passengers and feeling powerless as a driver are two different things. Regardless of whether you have a service animal or not, especially if you are falsely claiming to have a service animal, this does not allow you to act disrespectfully to a driver. We shouldn't be forced to accept a disrespectful passenger under any conditions. Period.

I am better off anyways. Uber is continually taking more from the drivers and driving drunks around was giving me a very negative perception of present day humanity. It was meant to be a source of income while I took a break. And so it was. I'm washing my hands of this with a sigh of relief.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Just saying one needs to tread lightly and I would have. No expert on the law, but I know enough not ask. If dog was well behaved it would be ok for 'me'. I have tolerance as know no matter what the time the pax and pet are in my car is very limited. 
It is too bad Uber nuked you and maybe too bad you didn't fly to GLH to explain in person. Sounds like you are pretty ok being off the platform even tho it wasn't your preferred method to leave......


----------



## gooddolphins (Apr 5, 2018)

I Ubered a pax one time and they had a dog that just sat in their owners arms. The dog was so quiet I kept forgetting it was there. I don’t like the ability of pax being able to say they have a service animal and you’re just supposed to shut up and accept it. This has no logic at all. If you tried to get in a bar and told the bouncer you were 21 you would have to prove this.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

gooddolphins said:


> I Ubered a pax one time and they had a dog that just sat in their owners arms. The dog was so quiet I kept forgetting it was there. I don't like the ability of pax being able to say they have a service animal and you're just supposed to shut up and accept it. This has no logic at all. If you tried to get in a bar and told the bouncer you were 21 you would have to prove this.


The ADA needs some desperate revisions.


----------



## everydayimubering (Aug 5, 2017)

If you prefer not to have dogs in your vehicle, you should've asked her *before *she got into your car and canceled if she couldn't prove that it was a service animal - *before* letting her in and starting the trip.
Once you started the trip and then asked her stupid questions about the type of services her dog performed - you were actually being disrespectful of the rider to the point that she couldn't bear to continue with the ride. She was clearly offended and took revenge by hitting back where it hurts most.
If you had a camcorder you could let Uber view it to decide if you were in the wrong - but you didn't. One can only feel sorry this happened to you but it is no one else's fault. Think positive maybe it was a blessing in disguise.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> Just saying one needs to tread lightly and I would have. No expert on the law, but I know enough not ask. If dog was well behaved it would be ok for 'me'. I have tolerance as know no matter what the time the pax and pet are in my car is very limited.
> It is too bad Uber nuked you and maybe too bad you didn't fly to GLH to explain in person. Sounds like you are pretty ok being off the platform even tho it wasn't your preferred method to leave......


I'd say at this point I am more interested in a lawyer who smells blood in the water in this situation. I have heard that they settle quickly in these situations with lost wages and paying unemployment, as they are presently losing many cases of misclassifying drivers as independent contractors. I would only pursue the case if it is accepted on a contingency, as I'm just not interested in paying out of pocket in the matter.

I think I was more patient in the past. After repeated exposure to disrespectful passengers, I've simply stood my ground on more matters. If I could go back in time and change the scenario, would I? No. I handled myself professionally and followed all parameters of the law. Uber is at fault in this situation for enabling problematic passengers.

What's most interesting was that I immediately contacted Uber about the ride after she got out of the car. It might have been my forthright contact with Uber that got me deactivated, which is even worse. Uber has zero legal ground in this matter and would lose a lawsuit pretty easily.


----------



## G.S.M. (Oct 28, 2019)

If you never want to get your BS ride cancelled as a rider......just send a text after the driver accepts the ride "Just letting you know I have a service animal with me"


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

everydayimubering said:


> If you prefer not to have dogs in your vehicle, you should've asked her *before *she got into your car and canceled if she couldn't prove that it was a service animal - *before* letting her in and starting the trip.
> Once you started the trip and then asked her stupid questions about the type of services her dog performed - you were actually being disrespectful of the rider to the point that she couldn't bear to continue with the ride. She was clearly offended and took revenge by hitting back where it hurts most.
> If you had a camcorder you could let Uber view it to decide if you were in the wrong - but you didn't. One can only feel sorry this happened to you but it is no one else's fault. Think positive maybe it was a blessing in disguise.


Uber isn't interested in dashcam evidence. When I let her in and the dog sat on the seat, that was proof enough for me. To be honest, I don't care. 25% of passengers were spoiled, demanding, animals with worse behavior than the supposed service dog in question.

I imagine a third party platform will come around soon enough. Maybe I will reconsider then. Lyft's rates don't seem worth it. C'est la vie. I'll go make $60k a year at 40 hours a week without depreciating my vehicle. I enjoy being active more anyways. Sitting in a car all day is not very healthy.



G.S.M. said:


> If you never want to get your BS ride cancelled as a rider......just send a text after the driver accepts the ride "Just letting you know I have a service animal with me"


If you cancel that ride, you are deactivated.

Most of my animal passengers let me know before I arrive. I always say yes and thank them for asking. It's about common decency and respect.


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> If I am forced to put up with a disrespectful passenger with a fake service dog, I will fall on my sword.
> 
> I asked the only legal question I was allowed to ask and canceled the ride per the passenger's request. False claims of service animals and disrespectful passengers are not covered by the ADA.


Ah, but they are covered by Uber, as you've just discovered.

When someone says it's a service animal, the *only* response is "ok", and take the dammed dog. We debate this repeatedly on this forum, but there it is in a nutshell.


----------



## Illini (Mar 14, 2019)

The problem is that once the pax complains to Uber, Uber cannot ask the passenger to prove that it was a service animal.
All they can do is to ask the same question you asked. The pax then gives Uber an "appropriate" answer, then BAM - you're gone.


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

This story reminds me of that guy who went to see Old Faithful and was disappointed when it went off.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Illini said:


> The problem is that once the pax complains to Uber, Uber cannot ask the passenger to prove that it was a service animal.
> All they can do is to ask the same question you asked. The pax then gives Uber an "appropriate" answer, then BAM - you're gone.


But I did exactly what their policy says to do and I was STILL deactivated. That's the bullshit part.



NorCalPhil said:


> This story reminds me of that guy who went to see Old Faithful and was disappointed when it went off.


Name one part of their policy that I did incorrectly.

The passenger told me to cancel the ride. I accepted the ride. I am not at fault.


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

everydayimubering said:


> If you prefer not to have dogs in your vehicle, you should've asked her *before *she got into your car and canceled if she couldn't prove that it was a service animal - *before* letting her in and starting the trip.
> Once you started the trip and then asked her stupid questions about the type of services her dog performed - you were actually being disrespectful of the rider to the point that she couldn't bear to continue with the ride. She was clearly offended and took revenge by hitting back where it hurts most.
> If you had a camcorder you could let Uber view it to decide if you were in the wrong - but you didn't. One can only feel sorry this happened to you but it is no one else's fault. Think positive maybe it was a blessing in disguise.


Nope nope nope - no proof required or available per the ADA, service animals are not registered or certified. Service animal laws are intended to make life easier for those with disabilities, and to protect their medical privacy. That some abuse it sucks, but changing the laws penalizes the very people they were created to help.


----------



## Illini (Mar 14, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> But I did exactly what their policy says to do and I was STILL deactivated. That's the bullshit part.


Agree, but the pax could say that YOU cancelled the ride because she had a dog that happens to be a service animal.
I'm sure that she did not tell them that she asked you to cancel the ride.


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> But I did exactly what their policy says to do and I was STILL deactivated. That's the bullshit part.
> 
> 
> Name one part of their policy that I did incorrectly.


You believed the policy and ignored all previous knowledge of rideshare and service animals. Third rail of rideshare my friend, and you grabbed it with both hands.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Name one part of their policy that I did incorrectly


Have you considered visiting a GLH center?


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> Have you considered visiting a GLH center?


They mentioned that GLH cannot help in this matter.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> They mentioned that GLH cannot help in this matter


who they? the outsourced phone support from India? Hum


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

NorCalPhil said:


> You believed the policy and ignored all previous knowledge of rideshare and service animals. Third rail of rideshare my friend, and you grabbed it with both hands.


Then I am truly better off.



SHalester said:


> who they? the outsourced phone support from India? Hum


The service animal investigative team.


----------



## disp350 (Jul 16, 2016)

Cold Fusion said:


> You illustrated perfectly how to Escalate a sensitive
> Situation & achieve Deactivation ✔
> 
> It almost like you're an Uber shill reminding
> ...


Those that look for trouble most certainly will find it. If they were gonna question her about the status of the dog, you will always lose. Instead of confronting, they should of just driven away when they saw the dog. ANY dispute over a service animal, whether you think it is or not, drivers ALWAYS lose. Read through the Forums and see how many never ever won they type of dispute.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Illini said:


> Agree, but the pax could say that YOU cancelled the ride because she had a dog that happens to be a service animal.
> I'm sure that she did not tell them that she asked you to cancel the ride.


That's my sentiment. Which is why I am telling everyone to be careful. The bad karma coming for this woman is going to be somewhere close to cancer or an actual disability that cripples her.


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Then I am truly better off.


100% agree.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

disp350 said:


> Those that look for trouble most certainly will find it. If they were gonna question her about the status of the dog, you will always lose. Instead of confronting, they should of just driven away when they saw the dog. ANY dispute over a service animal, whether you think it is or not, drivers ALWAYS lose. Read through the Forums and see how many never ever won they type of dispute.


It's going to be lovely sitting in my house watching a movie or going on a hike during late nights and high demand times. I'm escaping with only 60,000k miles on my vehicle. Lucky me.


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> But I did exactly what their policy says to do and I was STILL deactivated. That's the bullshit part.
> 
> 
> Name one part of their policy that I did incorrectly.
> ...


You are at fault because from what you said you gave her a hard time the minute she said "service animal". Yes, we are allowed two questions. Seriously though, what's the point of asking them? Your story is a text book example of how they don't matter, and they serve only to antagonize. Again it sucks that she lied but you fell right into it.


----------



## R3drang3r (Feb 16, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> "He retrieves. He does things for me," She hissed. "Besides, your not allowed to ask that."
> 
> ...


 The dog is already in your vehicle with the passenger. You have already started the ride. You make the statement, "I'm a dog guy too. I have accepted 100% of my dog rides."
So what am I missing? Why the hassle if you have accepted 100% of all dog rides in the past.


----------



## Illini (Mar 14, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> That's my sentiment. Which is why I am telling everyone to be careful. The bad karma coming for this woman is going to be somewhere close to cancer or an actual disability that cripples her.


It may be too late now, but the easy solution is to take all service animals, no questions asked.
If the animal makes a mess, take pics, and send it into Uber to claim a cleaning fee.
I happen to love dogs, so I'll take them all.
I've only had one dog that was claimed to be a service dog, and by just looking at the dog, and it's owner, there was zero doubt in my mind that he was telling the truth. The other dogs I've taken were announced as just pets, or emotional support dogs (which we CAN deny rides to).


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

R3drang3r said:


> The dog is already in your vehicle with the passenger. You have already started the ride. You make the statement, "I'm a dog guy too. I have accepted 100% of my dog rides."
> So what am I missing? Why the hassle if you have accepted 100% of all dog rides in the past.


I simply asked the only legal question we are allowed to ask and she turned into a bitter harpy. She asked to cancel the ride. That was that.

I have ZERO legal liability here. We don't deserve to be harassed for asking the only legal question granted to us.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> The service animal investigative team.


waz dat?


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

CTK said:


> You are at fault because from what you said you gave her a hard time the minute she said "service animal". Yes, we are allowed two questions. Seriously though, what's the point of asking them? Your story is a text book example of how they don't matter, and they serve only to antagonize. Again it sucks that she lied but you fell right into it.


Asking the only legal question granted to us is not giving her a hard time. The fact that she thought I wasn't allowed to ask that question is proof that she is a liar.



SHalester said:


> waz dat?


They have a special division just for this service animal bullshit.


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I simply asked the only legal question we are allowed to ask and she turned into a bitter harpy. She asked to cancel the ride. That was that.
> 
> I have ZERO legal liability here. We don't deserve to be harassed for asking the only legal question granted to us.


No one is talking about legal liability. You do indeed have total Uber liability though.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> asking the only legal question granted to us.


but, why ask when it was kinda too late?


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Illini said:


> It may be too late now, but the easy solution is to take all service animals, no questions asked.
> If the animal makes a mess, take pics, and send it into Uber to claim a cleaning fee.
> I happen to love dogs, so I'll take them all.
> I've only had one dog that was claimed to be a service dog, and by just looking at the dog, and it's owner, there was zero doubt in my mind that he was telling the truth. The other dogs I've taken were announced as just pets, or emotional support dogs (which we CAN deny rides to).


For other drivers, sure. But me, I feel I'm better off. Uber's legal fiction of a setup rather irked me anyways. Their platform is only going to get worse from here.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> The ADA needs some desperate revisions.


......wrote the recently deactivated Uber driver ?


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> They have a special division just for this service animal bullshit.


so Uber over the phone? Must be more to that I suspect......do tell.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> but, why ask when it was kinda too late?


Because I knew she way lying and wanted to force her to lie some more and I wanted to ask the only legal question I was allowed to ask.

Moral of the story? You have no rights as a driver from Uber when it comes to service animals. ZERO.



SHalester said:


> so Uber over the phone? Must be more to that I suspect......do tell.


They call and record your conversation.


----------



## R3drang3r (Feb 16, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I simply asked the only legal question we are allowed to ask and she turned into a bitter harpy. She asked to cancel the ride. That was that.
> 
> I have ZERO legal liability here. We don't deserve to be harassed for asking the only legal question granted to us.


You stated you are a true dog lover and have accepted 100% of all dogs in the past. 
But you made a point of telling her it's polite to let somebody know that you have a dog. That doesn't sound like somebody who willingly accepts dogs. That sounds more like somebody who's a little bit annoyed that he now has a dog sitting on the seat of his car.
I think there's a lot more to the story than you're letting on.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

The reality is, that if you put up any stink at all about any animal, you'll get deactivated. A lot of people on the forum seem to be hyper focused about asking if a dog is a service animal or whatnot. Sure, it isn't illegal to refuse to transport a non-service animal. It may not officially even be against corporate policy for Uber/Lyft. BUT you'll be deactivated sooner or later. The reality is that Uber/Lyft side with the pax and when you upset a person with a dog, their dog becomes a service dog that you denied, and you have no recourse, because Uber/Lyft do not investigate and always take the pax word over yours and even if you have audio/video they probably won't watch it and probably won't even tell you which rider accused you because of "privacy".

I always allow all pets without question, and I've never drank in my life. However, I'm just about certain I will be deactivated sooner or later upon accusation by a pax that I denied their animal or was driving intoxicated. All it takes is to upset one pax that knows how to deactivate a driver via false accusation.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Because I knew she way lying and wanted to force her to lie some more and I wanted to ask the only legal question I was allowed to ask.
> 
> Moral of the story? You have no rights as a driver from Uber when it comes to service animals. ZERO.
> 
> ...


Trust your newly learned lessons will
assist your upcoming Lawn Mowing gig.

let's hear it boys, @BogusServiceAnimal is D O N E


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Cold Fusion said:


> ......wrote the recently deactivated Uber driver ?


I have to have a license to drive. Requiring a license for a service animal and asked to provide that license to businesses is the ONLY logical thing to do here. The idea of inconveniencing people by requiring them to have certification for their animals is ridiculous.

You are forced to have other certifications just to have a normal pet, increasing the certifications for a supposed service animal only makes sense.

States are passing laws making it illegal to falsely claim to have a service animal because these people are ruining people's lives with this nonsense.

The ADA has enabled a lot of people to sue companies non stop and for zero reasons. There's a blind man suing Dominos because he can't use their app. He is 100% able to call them on the phone, but he wants to use their app and wants to take them for millions of dollars because of it. It's insanity.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Because I knew she way lying and wanted to force her to lie some more


"pick and chose your battles" applies here. Sensitive topic and torqued pax. I'm with others who said that question should have been asked with doors locked and window down.....a bit... Once she said 'service pet' that would be the end of it; get in, let's go. Water under the bridge and uber did what it needed to do to avoid an even bigger battle by said torqed pax. 
Sounds tho, that you quite ok with the end result. Nuff said? -o:


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Cold Fusion said:


> Trust your newly learned lessons will
> assist your upcoming Lawn Mowing gig.
> 
> let's hear it boys, @BogusServiceAnimal is D O N E


Except that I have a PhD. :thumbup:



Trafficat said:


> The reality is, that if you put up any stink at all about any animal, you'll get deactivated. A lot of people on the forum seem to be hyper focused about asking if a dog is a service animal or whatnot. Sure, it isn't illegal to refuse to transport a non-service animal. It may not officially even be against corporate policy for Uber/Lyft. BUT you'll be deactivated sooner or later. The reality is that Uber/Lyft side with the pax and when you upset a person with a dog, their dog becomes a service dog that you denied, and you have no recourse, because Uber/Lyft do not investigate and always take the pax word over yours and even if you have audio/video they probably won't watch it and probably won't even tell you which rider accused you because of "privacy".
> 
> I always allow all pets without question, and I've never drank in my life. However, I'm just about certain I will be deactivated sooner or later upon accusation by a pax that I denied their animal or was driving intoxicated. All it takes is to upset one pax that knows how to deactivate a driver via false accusation.


Again, I am strangely relieved. Uber has a way of skewing one's perspective on humanity. I already feel more relaxed than I have in a year.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> already feel more relaxed than I have in a year.


and yet you remain here......venting.....hum. Hope you are outside at a park or something posting......


----------



## disp350 (Jul 16, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I have to have a license to drive. Requiring a license for a service animal and asked to provide that license to businesses is the ONLY logical thing to do here. The idea of inconveniencing people by requiring them to have certification for their animals is ridiculous.
> 
> You are forced to have other certifications just to have a normal pet, increasing the certifications for a supposed service animal only makes sense.
> 
> ...


You're 100% correct on all the points you make. That being said, Uber & Lyft have only one response to any pax that complains about treatment/questioning of any animal that accompanys them - Deactivation of Driver. Even if laws are passed, won't change anything. They make the pax happy, can the driver and no more threat of lawsuit. Either way, we get screwed, Uber & pax don't care and there is not a thing we can do about it. Good luck.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> and yet you remain here......venting.....hum. Hope you are outside at a park or something posting......


?

Sharing my experience isn't venting. Just warning all of the other drivers.

Also just throwing it out there to see if any drivers have had success in suing both Uber and passenger in this matter. This is supposed to be a community, after all--if but a community of grumpy misfits that can't find employment anywhere else.


----------



## O-Side Uber (Jul 26, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I was asking the only question allowed and the ride was already accepted. The car was in drive and she said to cancel the ride. It wasn't a question of accepting the ride. I was simply curious, as it was obvious to me that it was not a service animal.
> 
> If a passenger asks for the ride to be canceled, I am not liable for anything.
> 
> To deny me the two questions allowed by law is forcing me to accept fraud. Period. To put the blame on me for a passenger's request to cancel a ride is a legal liability for Uber and the passenger, as I was simply complying with the passenger's request. Classic case of catch 22.


Same happened with me. Pax didn't mention service dog until AFTER I questioned her about bringing a dog.. she then flipped out and told me to cancel because I was "fired anyway".

I went to the GLH a year later just to see if anything had changed. She had informed Uber of all of her invisible disabilities , ptsd, anxiety. I'll never be reactivated . The way the laws are set up , bullcrappers like her will continue to get away with this behavior .


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

disp350 said:


> You're 100% correct on all the points you make. That being said, Uber & Lyft have only one response to any pax that complains about treatment/questioning of any animal that accompanys them - Deactivation of Driver. Even if laws are passed, won't change anything. They make the pax happy, can the driver and no more threat of lawsuit. Either way, we get screwed, Uber & pax don't care and there is not a thing we can do about it. Good luck.


This will change if Uber and Lyft are more afraid of drivers suing them than the false claims.

That was the hope of this post in the first place. I'm interested in how we can fix this as a community of independent contractors that aslo have rights. The narrative of Uber and Lyft that we don't have rights as drivers deserves to be challenged in a court of law.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> can't find employment anywhere else


ouch. some of us retired. A suit? Claiming? A jury would be very hard to convince, imho of your side of the story.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> ouch. some of us retired. A suit? Claiming? A jury would be very hard to convince, imho of your side of the story.


Wrongful termination. Lost wages. Defamation.

The woman was lying about it being a service animal and also lying about not admitting that she ASKED me to cancel the ride. A court would require her to pony up with proof that the animal was an ADA service animal, which it was not.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Except that I have a PhD. :thumbup:


Yard Keeper: Mr. Animal, that the lawn still looks a little uneven over in the corner.
BogusServiceAnimal: It's DOCTOR animal to you!!!


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Trafficat said:


> Yard Keeper: Mr. Animal, that the lawn still looks a little uneven over in the corner.
> BogusServiceAnimal: It's DOCTOR animal to you!!!


I can literally find a new job at $50k a year next week. My thought of Uber was to use it as a break from traditional employment until it started to feel like a job. It started to feel like a job probably a few months ago. I'm honestly not too upset about the kick in the other direction. I would like to know what kind of legal action I could pursue against the billion dollar company mistreating drivers, however.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Except that I have a PhD.


PhD: Papa Has Dough ✔

Fat lot of good it's done 4 U
Include it on your CV for the Lawn Mowing gig ??


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Wrongful termination. Lost wages. Defamation.


we aren't employees. well, at least, I'm not yet. Who knows what AB5 will bring. Haven't bothered with your profile to see what state.
We aren't paid wages. Maybe breach of contract? Defamation? Was anything public?
Think you might need Uber's take on this first as to the decision to terminate your 'contract' with the platform. 
I only think of the poor puppy dog..... :cryin:


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> we aren't employees. well, at least, I'm not yet. Who knows what AB5 will bring. Haven't bothered with your profile to see what state.
> We aren't paid wages. Maybe breach of contract? Defamation? Was anything public?
> Think you might need Uber's take on this first as to the decision to terminate your 'contract' with the platform.
> I only think of the poor puppy dog..... :cryin:


Arizona. I'm in the 9th, which gives me a lot of options.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I can literally find a new job at $50k a year next week.


Dude, u couldn't hold on to a Low Skill Low Wage gig
U got *Dunning*-*Kruger syndrome ?*


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> which gives me a lot of options.


good luck with that. And enjoy your $50-60K job.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Cold Fusion said:


> Dude, u couldn't hold on to a Low Skill Low Wage gig
> U got *Dunning*-*Kruger syndrome ?*


You seem like a sad human. I've run into your type at the airport queue. I'm glad that Uber has given you some sense of purpose with your life.



SHalester said:


> good luck with that. And enjoy your $50-60K job.


I will. With nights off, full benefits, and my likelihood of dying in a fatal traffic accident dramatically decreasing.


----------



## Spider-Man (Jul 7, 2017)

i just dont understand why people keep making the same mistake on getting deactivated.

Service Dog or not, they could be telling the truth Or they will Lie. the Outcome is the SAME! if you dont take the Dog youll get deactivated.
It doesnt happen everyday, like 6x in 4 years for me. Just take the animal, trade 1*S and move on.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Spider-Man said:


> i just dont understand why people keep making the same mistake on getting deactivated.
> 
> Service Dog or not, they could be telling the truth Or they will Lie. the Outcome is the SAME! if you dont take the Dog youll get deactivated.
> It doesnt happen everyday, like 6x in 4 years for me. Just take the animal, trade 1*S and move on.


I took the animal. What am I supposed to do when the passenger asks me to cancel the ride? The point is that it is a catch 22 and drivers shouldn't ask one question. Take the dog regardless is Uber's invisible policy.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

$50K seems too low for a PHd. I wish you luck in getting a job. I hope it is as easy as you predict.

I worry that employers for lower paying jobs will be turned off by your PHd, assuming you will quickly leave them for something better. That will leave you with jobs that demand a PhD in your field, where you will be competing against people who did not take a hiatus from their profession to do 4000+ trips for Uber.


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I have to have a license to drive. Requiring a license for a service animal and asked to provide that license to businesses is the ONLY logical thing to do here. The idea of inconveniencing people by requiring them to have certification for their animals is ridiculous.
> 
> You are forced to have other certifications just to have a normal pet, increasing the certifications for a supposed service animal only makes sense.
> 
> ...


Spoken like an individual who has never had a disabled loved one.

If I had to choose between inconveniencing someone whose entire life is inconvenient because of a physical disability and inconveniencing an Uber driver, I would stop first and give thanks that my body is strong and healthy, then after that I'd not even have to think about my choice.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

CTK said:


> Spoken like an individual who has never had a disabled loved one.
> 
> If I had to choose between inconveniencing someone whose entire life is inconvenient because of a physical disability and inconveniencing an Uber driver, I would stop first and give thanks that my body is strong and healthy, then after that I'd not even have to think about my choice.


What a joke of a human you are. Falsely impersonating a service dog is ILLEGAL.


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Wrongful termination. Lost wages. Defamation.
> 
> The woman was lying about it being a service animal and also lying about not admitting that she ASKED me to cancel the ride. A court would require her to pony up with proof that the animal was an ADA service animal, which it was not.


No, they wouldn't. There is no proof.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Trafficat said:


> $50K seems too low for a PHd. I wish you luck in getting a job. I hope it is as easy as you predict.
> 
> I worry that employers for lower paying jobs will be turned off by your PHd, assuming you will quickly leave them for something better. That will leave you with jobs that demand a PhD in your field, where you will be competing against people who did not take a hiatus from their profession to do 4000+ trips for Uber.


The idea is that I can get a job anytime I want or hunt for one that is better paying down the road.

I have had no problem with my qualifications being in other fields. I have worked in many industries and my resumé is pretty diverse, my needs are pretty modest. I got an education for the sake of an education, not necessarily for career choices.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I would like to know what kind of legal action I could pursue against the billion dollar company mistreating drivers, however.


None. You don't have a leg to stand on. ADA is federal law. Uber isn't going to risk a class action over the ADA brought on by petulant drivers.


----------



## Uber's Guber (Oct 22, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I wish I could sue this passenger. Impersonating a service animal is against Arizona state law.


The passenger was impersonating a service animal? opsies: 
Did you ask what service she performed? :redface:


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Uber isn't interested in dashcam evidence. When I let her in and the dog sat on the seat, that was proof enough for me. To be honest, I don't care. 25% of passengers were spoiled, demanding, animals with worse behavior than the supposed service dog in question.
> 
> I imagine a third party platform will come around soon enough. Maybe I will reconsider then. Lyft's rates don't seem worth it. C'est la vie. I'll go make $60k a year at 40 hours a week without depreciating my vehicle. I enjoy being active more anyways. Sitting in a car all day is not very healthy.
> 
> ...


Sitting on the seat is not proof. You are allowed to train your own service animal. Not everyone will adhere to the on the floor or in a carrier "rules."

If the dog was behaving and you started the trip, just drive. Nothing good comes of telling someone they're not polite, which is what you did. You wouldn't expect anyone serving you to do that, so why do it as a driver.

I don't put up with crap from pax, but you started this, not her. She just did a great job of finishing it.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

CTK said:


> No, they wouldn't. There is no proof.


Yes they would. It's called discovery. It's virtually the only way to get them to show that it is an actual service dog. I would sue them for defamation and fraud and they would have to put up or shut up.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

R3drang3r said:


> You stated you are a true dog lover and have accepted 100% of all dogs in the past.
> But you made a point of telling her it's polite to let somebody know that you have a dog. That doesn't sound like somebody who willingly accepts dogs. That sounds more like somebody who's a little bit annoyed that he now has a dog sitting on the seat of his car.
> I think there's a lot more to the story than you're letting on.


Agreed.


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> What a joke of a human you are. Falsely impersonating a service dog is ILLEGAL.


Where's your proof it was false?

I'm a "joke of a human being" because I advocate cutting the disabled much slack (and accept that there are some a-holes that falsely exploit that), yet you're a fired Uber driver who's here trying to convince the world how right you are and how wrongly you were treated?

Uber 101: rider says "service animal", drivers gives the ride. Without lecturing, without questioning, without attitude. Again, your case is text book and for all your proclamations of not caring you're here defending your argument hard.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> None. You don't have a leg to stand on. ADA is federal law. Uber isn't going to risk a class action over the ADA brought on by petulant drivers.


https://patch.com/arizona/phoenix/what-service-animal-new-arizona-law-clarifies-question
Arizona state law disagrees with you.


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


The problem is that there are medical service dogs. They have no particular appearance and the answer to the question is protected by HIPAA patient privacy laws. Picking up at a PetSmart is high probability of an animal. So sorry you got deactivated.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> You seem like a sad human. I've run into your type


I've seen & smelled Your Type 
He also ⬇ has a PhD ?
Couldn't hold on to a gig
Yet thought he could secure 
Gainful employment


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Sitting on the seat is not proof. You are allowed to train your own service animal. Not everyone will adhere to the on the floor or in a carrier "rules."
> 
> If the dog was behaving and you started the trip, just drive. Nothing good comes of telling someone they're not polite, which is what you did. You wouldn't expect anyone serving you to do that, so why do it as a driver.
> 
> I don't put up with crap from pax, but you started this, not her. She just did a great job of finishing it.


It was proof enough for me. Her ignorance of the law on the questions we are allowed to ask is further proof.

Again, she asked the ride to be canceled. All of this is hysteria from crazy people. People with true service animals simply do not behave this way. Her karma will catch up with her. She was a rotten and sad person already. If that's a disability, perhaps you should apply for disability too.

The ADA will be rewritten. It's just a matter of time.


----------



## Spider-Man (Jul 7, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I took the animal. What am I supposed to do when the passenger asks me to cancel the ride? The point is that it is a catch 22 and drivers shouldn't ask one question. Take the dog regardless is Uber's invisible policy.


Believe me man im on your side. Its Just outright criminal what pax can do. But in your story she already had a b!tch attitude. before you ever showed up she had you in her Gun Sights. just wanting a Reason to set off. i hope you get a next time. And if it happens again you gotta act Normal like the dog is not even there. I know it sucks But its the only way


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Yes they would. It's called discovery. It's virtually the only way to get them to show that it is an actual service dog. I would sue them for defamation and fraud and they would have to put up or shut up.


A little education on your part would show you that 1) there is no service dog "proof", and 2) you don't have a leg to stand on.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> https://patch.com/arizona/phoenix/what-service-animal-new-arizona-law-clarifies-question
> Arizona state law disagrees with you.


Federal law trumps state law every time.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Cold Fusion said:


> I've seen & smelled Your Type
> He also ⬇ has a PhD ?
> Couldn't hold on to a gig
> Yet thought he could secure
> Gainful employment


Enjoy your sad life of Uber driving and trolling on the internet.


----------



## TCar (Aug 4, 2019)

Keep your eye out for guy in the bushes taking picture of unaccompanied children. I think he is in Texas.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Enjoy your sad life of Uber driving and trolling on the internet.


.......wrote the deactivated dog hater ????


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> It was proof enough for me. Her ignorance of the law on the questions we are allowed to ask is further proof.
> 
> Again, she asked the ride to be canceled. All of this is hysteria from crazy people. People with true service animals simply do not behave this way. Her karma will catch up with her. She was a rotten and sad person already. If that's a disability, perhaps you should apply for disability too.
> 
> The ADA will be rewritten. It's just a matter of time.


It will for sure be too late for you though.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> Federal law trumps state law every time.


Wow. You really don't understand the law, do you? The state law was passed to PROTECT people with real disabilities from these pests abusing the ADA. The only thing that would clear her in a defamation suit is to prove that her animal is a service animal. Requiring proof in a place of business is different than protecting yourself in a law suit. In order to press charges for falsely claiming an animal is a service animal, proof would have to be revealed in discovery. Federal law would not protect her in the matter.

You can't impersonate a service animal with no fear of recourse from the law. This is why new laws are being written to deal with these vermin.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

TCar said:


> Keep your eye out for guy in the bushes taking picture of unaccompanied children. I think he is in Texas.


@Galveston ??


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> https://patch.com/arizona/phoenix/what-service-animal-new-arizona-law-clarifies-question
> Arizona state law disagrees with you.


Arizona law can disagree, but it can't override federal law. That article admits they're changing nothing. You still can only ask the same questions, and as it points out, the law has no teeth as federal agents aren't going to waste time on this.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Arizona law can disagree, but it can't override federal law.


It can create a scenario where proof of the animal being a service animal can be pursued in court. How else would they enforce the law?


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Arizona law can disagree, but it can't override federal law.


Nor does that article give anything new on how to make the determination.


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

TemptingFate said:


> I can see why you were deactivated. Well-deserved.


My thoughts EXACTLY


----------



## DriversAreMean (Jul 14, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> If I am forced to put up with a disrespectful passenger with a fake service dog, I will fall on my sword.
> 
> I asked the only legal question I was allowed to ask and canceled the ride per the passenger's request. False claims of service animals and disrespectful passengers are not covered by the ADA.


I like how now your name is BogusServiceAnimal ??????


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> It can create a scenario where proof of the animal being a service animal can be pursued in court. How else would they enforce the law?


That's the point. The law has no teeth.



CTK said:


> My thoughts EXACTLY


Actually, I'm beginning to think he's just a pretty good troll.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

CTK said:


> Nor does that article give anything new on how to make the determination.


Imagine how an airline would handle it, and that is the legal power on drivers' side as well. The laws themselves would require proof in court. End of story. Impersonators get fined and sued.


----------



## IR12 (Nov 11, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


Did you know Pax get paid $75.00 for reporting ADA "violation"?


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

IR12 said:


> Did you know Pax get paid $75.00 for reporting ADA "violation"?


I thought it was $25. But isn't that insane? Rewarding poor behavior from liars.

Alright, I've said my piece. I'm out. Very excited to clear my mind of Uber clutter from here forward and feel bad for drivers that put with this gig for longer than 18 months. I really think it has a quick way of turning typically happy people into bitter people pretty quickly.

Be well all, and fight for your rights as independent contractors. The present setup isn't fair to any of you.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Actually, I'm beginning to think he's just a pretty good troll.


An @OldBay sockpuppet.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I thought it was $25. But isn't that insane? Rewarding poor behavior from liars.
> 
> Alright, I've said my piece. I'm out. Very excited to clear my mind of Uber clutter from here forward and feel bad for drivers that put with this gig for longer than 18 months. I really think it has a quick way of turning typically happy people into bitter people pretty quickly.
> 
> Be well all, and fight for your rights as independent contractors. The present setup isn't fair to any of you.


These guys kicked in the extra $50 ✔?


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> An @OldBay sockpuppet.


You are very bothered by me.

Be a man and let it go.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> one lying byotch





OldBay said:


> You are very bothered by me.
> 
> Be a man and let it go.


It was obvious from the get-go.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

OldBay said:


> You are very bothered by me.
> 
> Be a man and let it go.


He's a man who hides behind a woman's image in his profile photo. That should tell you everything you need to know about him.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Alright, I've said my piece. I'm out.


Bye!


----------



## RideshareUSA (Feb 7, 2019)

G.S.M. said:


> You should have driven to the destination without her then ended the ride there
> 
> That makes her look like the liar and scammer.


Ummm...no.
Her rider app would clearly prove she did not take the trip!


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Enjoy your sad life of Uber driving and trolling on the internet


somebody is the troll here.......


----------



## zanboor (Jan 21, 2018)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


I've had a few occasions that the rider texted me and asking me if they are allowed to ride with their pets (cats\dogs) sure! Make sure they have a blanket! Followed by good tips.

But this is Down-under we talking a about :redface:


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


Uber is Filled with Lying Byotches.

Only a matter of time.


----------



## williamyun7 (Jul 8, 2019)

One strike out does not seem to be fair.


----------



## dnlbaboof (Nov 13, 2015)

this is one big troll, bc the rider demanded the cancellation she is at fault..no ada violation


----------



## Wolfgang Faust (Aug 2, 2018)

TemptingFate said:


> Federal law trumps state law every time.


Yeah.
Like immigration and deporting illegal aliens, right?


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

There are two questions service providers/retail establishments are allowed to ask:
_(1) is the dog a service animal required because of a disability, and (2) what work or task has the dog been trained to perform._

That said, even if passenger does NOT have any animal, the way Uber has it rigged, if passenger evokes the phrase, _Service Animal, _it's and automatic Deactivation with zero recourse for driver to appeal the claim.

OP did nothing wrong, other than drive for Uber.

Every driver is susceptible to exact same outcome. Zero rhyme or reason on Uber's part; purely covering they azzes.

https://www.ada.gov/service_animals...ask two questions,dog been trained to perform.



dnlbaboof said:


> this is one big troll, bc the rider demanded the cancellation she is at fault..no ada violation


That the passenger requested/demanded the Cancellation is pure 'hearsay.' Driver's word against passenger's. [ I believe OP, but passengers lie ] At minimum, let passenger Cancel, NEVER Cancel if there is mention of a Service Animal - no matter what options Uber provides on the Cancel screen.



BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I don't believe in enabling passengers to falsely claim they are handicapped. She obviously did not know ADA law, as she said I wasn't allowed to ask her the question I asked. This obviously pissed her off, which caused her to cancel the ride. The dog was sitting on my seats and service animals are trained to sit on the floor.
> 
> I'm a dog guy too. I have accepted 100% of my dog rides. What is upsetting to me is that passengers are alarmingly inconsiderate, demanding and entitled with our vehicles. Being accommodating to passengers and feeling powerless as a driver are two different things. Regardless of whether you have a service animal or not, especially if you are falsely claiming to have a service animal, this does not allow you to act disrespectfully to a driver. We shouldn't be forced to accept a disrespectful passenger under any conditions. Period.
> 
> I am better off anyways. Uber is continually taking more from the drivers and driving drunks around was giving me a very negative perception of present day humanity. It was meant to be a source of income while I took a break. And so it was. I'm washing my hands of this with a sigh of relief.


Good on you! You did nothing wrong, and Took One for the Team, on this. Best of luck out there, and don't look back...



CTK said:


> You are at fault because from what you said you gave her a hard time the minute she said "service animal". Yes, we are allowed two questions. Seriously though, what's the point of asking them? Your story is a text book example of how they don't matter, and they serve only to antagonize. Again it sucks that she lied but you fell right into it.


The second question is there to weed out the fakes (emotional support animals, and/or flat out liars). That said, it don't matter, like the case of OP, all passenger need mention on their complaint is the phrase, _Service Animal _and that results in an irreversible Deactivation. Even if there was no animal. About the only hope a driver *might *have would be to have entire exchange on video. Get a dash cam or turn on your phone's video camera.


----------



## WindyCityAnt (Feb 24, 2019)

3000 rides in Chicagoland. Only 2 had dogs. Both times pax made me aware before pick up. 

Both were small dogs 15lbs or less even, going to doggie hotels for the weekend. Both times pax tipped me well. Pax and doggies were very respectful while in the car ride. But I am a huge dog lover. 

Best friend has 4 wiener dogs and a little tea cup lol. Now that’s called a shit show. But it’s cool. I’m down. We drove them from LAX basically to Vegas they slept the whole way. Lazy asses. LOL. 

I would take these trips ALL DAY everyday. Very profitable. Pax were great and drove them back to there home with the trick in the app.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

G.S.M. said:


> You should have driven to the destination without her then ended the ride there
> 
> That makes her look like the liar and scammer.


They track gps on both phones.



BogusServiceAnimal said:


> But I did exactly what their policy says to do and I was STILL deactivated. That's the bullshit part.
> 
> 
> Name one part of their policy that I did incorrectly.
> ...


Then sue the pax for fraud, slander, and defamation of character and damages arising therefrom, in SMALL CLAIMS COURT. It's faster, less expensive, less formal and less stickier about procedure, and doesn't require an attorney. Check and see if your state has any laws about faking a service animal and press charges/issue the ticket, and become a witness for the state.

Afterwards you can take the judges' findings from both to Uber and get back on the platform, if you so wish. If not, at least you will have cleared your name for the future (there's stirrings of RS companies starting to have to share information), and, so long as the would-have-been-pax isn't "judgement-proof", a recompense for at least part of your loss.

And the satisfaction of revenge, of course. There is that, too.



Illini said:


> It may be too late now, but the easy solution is to take all service animals, no questions asked.
> If the animal makes a mess, take pics, and send it into Uber to claim a cleaning fee.
> I happen to love dogs, so I'll take them all.
> I've only had one dog that was claimed to be a service dog, and by just looking at the dog, and it's owner, there was zero doubt in my mind that he was telling the truth. The other dogs I've taken were announced as just pets, or emotional support dogs (which we CAN deny rides to).


And what happens when the dog chews off your face?

I love dogs too. It's the owners that are a problem, and many don't know how to properly socialize, train/restrain little Cujo Fluff-Bottom.


----------



## Illini (Mar 14, 2019)

SuzeCB said:


> And what happens when the dog chews off your face?
> 
> I love dogs too. It's the owners that are a problem, and many don't know how to properly socialize, train/restrain little Cujo Fluff-Bottom.


I'm more worried about other pax that may shoot me in the face.


----------



## Immoralized (Nov 7, 2017)

OP trolling he wasn't ever a driver to begin with.
OP has a PHD in trolling. Dr Troll.


----------



## Clarity (Sep 20, 2018)

disp350 said:


> Those that look for trouble most certainly will find it. If they were gonna question her about the status of the dog, you will always lose. Instead of confronting, they should of just driven away when they saw the dog. ANY dispute over a service animal, whether you think it is or not, drivers ALWAYS lose. Read through the Forums and see how many never ever won they type of dispute.


I will keep that in mind. I usually don't have a problem if pax has one dog regardless if service animal but if let's say they have like 3+ huge dogs I would rather pass them and keep driving and not ask.


----------



## Ssgcraig (Jul 8, 2015)

I let one dog into my vehicle and it was the last. Let the dog climb all over the place and it made a mess. People need to be reminded of respect and have some self awareness.

Your animal needs to adhere to the rules of my car. On the floor or on your lap. 

Uber needs to have a category for service animal, and vet the request before the pax can request a ride. In other words, make the pax claim the animal is indeed a legal service animal and sign a document. Effing entitlement in this country is beyond reproach.


----------



## touberornottouber (Aug 12, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


You CAN sue the passenger. If you are 100% sure it wasn't a service animal see a lawyer and have them go after LYft for the passenger information. If it is a legit service animal she should have proof, if not, then you will likely get damages.


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Imagine how an airline would handle it, and that is the legal power on drivers' side as well. The laws themselves would require proof in court. End of story. Impersonators get fined and sued.


Whoa. Airlines need to manage airborne tubes of metal with hundreds of human beings simultaneously suspended and propelled at 34k feet and 540mph. There is no comparison.


----------



## OG ant (Oct 11, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


Deactivation is just that encouragement you needed to move on to better things.


----------



## dauction (Sep 26, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> If I am forced to put up with a disrespectful passenger with a fake service dog, I will fall on my sword.
> 
> I asked the only legal question I was allowed to ask and canceled the ride per the passenger's request. False claims of service animals and disrespectful passengers are not covered by the ADA.


Because you are allowed to ask does not mean you should .. there are things that simply are not worth the hassle of getting into an argument over (as you just found out).

Best thing to do with pets , is simply be prepared, carry a towel in the trunk for them to lie on , scratch their ears and take them where they are going

good luck ..if you still want to drive , suck up your pride , repent your sin to uber and drive on y child :biggrin:


----------



## South Shore Driver (Jan 17, 2017)

Sorry to hear this happened. Whenever an uncomfortable situation like this happens, as long as it is not too bad, I just take the ride, smile sweetly, and then 1 star the passenger. On both Uber and Lyft, this makes sure I never get the passenger again. That's my only concern - protecting myself. You put up with 10 minutes of discomfort, you don't tell the enemy what you're thinking. It's not your job to educate them, they can read the documentation on their own.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I simply asked the only legal question we are allowed to ask and she turned into a bitter harpy. She asked to cancel the ride. That was that.
> 
> I have ZERO legal liability here. We don't deserve to be harassed for asking the only legal question granted to us.


Is this on your dash cam?


----------



## DriveNM (Apr 13, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


 Another Brick in the Wall of reasons for giving every non tipping passenger one star.


----------



## Carblar (Sep 1, 2016)

I don't see the problem with taking dogs, service or otherwise. Unless they shit or piss they are no messier than a human in the car (usually less). And if they do shit or piss you collect a hefty cleaning fee just like you would if a human puked.
But those who choose not to like taking dogs are entitled to their view but they risk situations like this.


----------



## NoPooPool (Aug 18, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> But I did exactly what their policy says to do and I was STILL deactivated. That's the bullshit part.
> 
> 
> Name one part of their policy that I did incorrectly.
> ...


Should have made the pax cancel.



BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Except that I have a PhD. :thumbup:
> 
> 
> Again, I am strangely relieved. Uber has a way of skewing one's perspective on humanity. I already feel more relaxed than I have in a year.





SHalester said:


> and yet you remain here......venting.....hum. Hope you are outside at a park or something posting......


I am with you in agreement @BogusServiceAnimal, but I still cannot stop thinking about you having drove for one year, and the 60,000 miles on your car! Damn son, that is equivalent to four years of depreciation for mileage in one year!

That kinda makes me think of the old saying that was put to me by coworkers over 40 some years ago, when I stupidly was plunging into marriage at the young age of 20.

It applies to most of us driving rideshare, and especially to your outcome @BogusServiceAnimal. 
The saying was "the [email protected]@@@@@ you get, is not worth the [email protected]@@@@@ you will get. It rang true 9 years in, when I ended up having to divorce from the crazy B(woman). ??‍♂??


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

OP is a troll; just look at


NoPooPool said:


> but I still cannot stop thinking about you having drove for one year, and the 60,000 miles on your car! Damn son, that is equivalent to four years of depreciation for mileage in one year!


you have me confused with somebody else! Driving since August and while my car just cracked 60k, that was from normal non-commercial use. btw, depreciation doesn't increase or decrease based on usage, fyi.


----------



## Fat Man (May 17, 2019)

Here is my take on the situation. If it WAS a service animal they should have a vest on identifying it as such. I don't care if its a dog, cat flamingo... it needs to have ID saying it. If it doesn't have a vest on you should be able to ask the question by law. If asked if it was a service dog and no vest take a picture to prove it I guess. Goober should ask her to prove it PRIOR to deactivation. Law says you have to provide documentation if asked. Airlines ask it EVERY TIME! Why wouldn't goober ask before deactivating a driver for asking a reasonable question. I will tell you. It shows you how LITTLE goober respects the ones that MAKE ALL THE MONEY for them!


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Then I am truly better off.
> 
> 
> The service animal investigative team.


S.A.I.T ain't so!


----------



## Atavar (Aug 11, 2018)

A true service animal is a pleasure to have in my car. Better behaved than people.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Kevin Kargel said:


> A true service animal is a pleasure to have in my car. Better behaved than people.


Any animal is honestly a pleasure. But every animal owner should ask and all service animal owners should inform their drivers so that we can be prepared when we pick them up.

The disrespect and entitlement of the rideshare "community" are nightmares quickly disappearing in my rear view mirror. The peace of mind is fantastic, y'all. For real.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

Fat Man said:


> Here is my take on the situation. If it WAS a service animal they should have a vest on identifying it as such. I don't care if its a dog, cat flamingo... it needs to have ID saying it. If it doesn't have a vest on you should be able to ask the question by law. If asked if it was a service dog and no vest take a picture to prove it I guess. Goober should ask her to prove it PRIOR to deactivation. Law says you have to provide documentation if asked. Airlines ask it EVERY TIME! Why wouldn't goober ask before deactivating a driver for asking a reasonable question. I will tell you. It shows you how LITTLE goober respects the ones that MAKE ALL THE MONEY for them!


you do not have to provide evidence of a dog being a service animal. You are mistaken.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> ... I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup.


I never heard of that.

Why should they let you know before the pickup? So you can cancel?

Though I do think it sucks that the driver has to take an animal even if they are allergic or it's against their religion. It seems to me like the rideshare company would lose that one in a court battle.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Any animal is honestly a pleasure. But every animal owner should ask and all service animal owners should inform their drivers so that we can be prepared when we pick them up.
> 
> The disrespect and entitlement of the rideshare "community" are nightmares quickly disappearing in my rear view mirror. The peace of mind is fantastic, y'all. For real.


we also have a good share of entitled drivers it appears


----------



## peteyvavs (Nov 18, 2015)

BigRedDriver said:


> we also have a good share of entitled drivers it appears


You are absolutely correct, we're all entitled to a jar of lube from U/L.


----------



## Fat Man (May 17, 2019)

BigRedDriver said:


> you do not have to provide evidence of a dog being a service animal. You are mistaken.


You ABSOLUTLY have to provide proof to a airline! I would know personally. I would THINK goober would at least ask before deactivating


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

Fat Man said:


> You ABSOLUTLY have to provide proof to a airline! I would know personally. I would THINK goober would at least ask before deactivating


Wrong. No proof required for service animals. That would violate the ADA.

"Under the existing service animal regulations, it is generally not permissible to insist on written credentials or documentation for an animal as a condition for treating it as a service animal, except for an ESA or PSA. DOT requires airlines to accept animals as service animals based on the "credible verbal assurances" of the passengers.[9] Airlines may also not charge for the transport of service animals"
https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...8-10815/traveling-by-air-with-service-animals


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Fat Man said:


> at least ask before deactivating


i'm thinking OP is a troll or there is much more to this story than posted.......


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

Fat Man said:


> You ABSOLUTLY have to provide proof to a airline! I would know personally. I would THINK goober would at least ask before deactivating


are you an airline?

didn't think so.


----------



## Bobbyk5487 (Jan 28, 2019)

I have learned to shut up and drive


----------



## NoPooPool (Aug 18, 2017)

SHalester said:


> OP is a troll; just look at
> 
> you have me confused with somebody else! Driving since August and while my car just cracked 60k, that was from normal non-commercial use. btw, depreciation doesn't increase or decrease based on usage, fyi.


Thanks for the fyi, but no, I don't have you confused with someone else. The comment was to the OP, @BogusServiceAnimal. UP melded the comments together, and the first place I could post a reply was after your comment, @SHalester. There were other quotes in blue background, and comments after. First place I could actually post reply was place in the thread after your post, fyi.

Anytime you see a post such as how my post read,@BogusServiceAnimal, the @ denotes who the post is directed to, fyi.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

oic?


----------



## Fat Man (May 17, 2019)

BigRedDriver said:


> are you an airline?
> 
> didn't think so.


Are you a ass hole? I think so


----------



## williamyun7 (Jul 8, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> Wrong. No proof required for service animals. That would violate the ADA.
> 
> "Under the existing service animal regulations, it is generally not permissible to insist on written credentials or documentation for an animal as a condition for treating it as a service animal, except for an ESA or PSA. DOT requires airlines to accept animals as service animals based on the "credible verbal assurances" of the passengers.[9] Airlines may also not charge for the transport of service animals"
> https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...8-10815/traveling-by-air-with-service-animals


1. So every time a pax gets in and we are not sure to take, we need to look up a regulation beforehand?

2. Just because a driver violate once, Uber should deactive the driver immediately?. No, so cruel. This thread's guy had worked for Uber maintaining good rates, and just because of that, he got deactivated? That's completely wrong.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

williamyun7 said:


> 1. So every time a pax gets in and we are not sure to take, we need to look up a regulation beforehand?
> 
> 2. Just because a driver violate once, Uber should deactive the driver immediately?. No, so cruel. This thread's guy had worked for Uber maintaining good rates, and just because of that, he got deactivated? That's completely wrong.


OP is just a sad misogynist troll trying to stir people up. The story is fake.

But yes, if you work with the public you should know the law. The ADA is the law governing access to public services for people with disabilities. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for violating it.


----------



## NoPooPool (Aug 18, 2017)

SHalester said:


> OP is a troll; just look at
> 
> you have me confused with somebody else! Driving since August and while my car just cracked 60k, that was from normal non-commercial use. btw, depreciation doesn't increase or decrease based on usage, fyi.


You are totally incorrect on "depreciation doesn't increase or decrease based on usage" @SHalester. Excess mileage decreases the value of a car, compared to a low mileage car of the same model year, with the same trim level and options package.

E.G., you and I both purchased a 2019 Toyota Camry brand new on the same day, and the cars are identical twins. You put 40,000 miles on your car by Halloween of 2020. I put 15,000 miles on my car by the same date in 2020. My appraised wholesale value would be approximately $4,000 higher than yours, due to the excess mileage on your Camry. The excessive higher mileage accelerates depreciation, and your ACV(actual cash value) would be considerably less than my car.


----------



## gomo (May 29, 2019)

I have the same experience. I maintain a customer rating of 4.94. I was deactivated. I don't know who is helping me. I don't know English, driving is basically my only job.


----------



## vkandaharv (Mar 30, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


I think you plausibly could sue them for defamation. Uber has the business records you need to track down the customer. Perhaps theyre discoverable.


----------



## Omega 3 (Apr 4, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


I love dogs so when they ask I say "get em in here".


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

Fat Man said:


> Are you a ass hole? I think so


No, I'm not entitled either.

you?



williamyun7 said:


> 1. So every time a pax gets in and we are not sure to take, we need to look up a regulation beforehand?
> 
> 2. Just because a driver violate once, Uber should deactive the driver immediately?. No, so cruel. This thread's guy had worked for Uber maintaining good rates, and just because of that, he got deactivated? That's completely wrong.


1. You are sent many emails on the subject, don't ignore them.

2. It appears so.


----------



## Greenfox (Sep 12, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


Wow.... **** that IS rotten!

... I'm so sorry.  that sucks massive schlongitis.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

This is a shame; there are several tutorials here on how to handle pax with service animals. TL DR - if you're not going to roll over and automatically comply with the pet handler's every wish then you must have video evidence of the encounter. You're playing against a rigged deck with Uberlyft as the bent croupier and you have no chance if you do not - as you found out, you're done.



BogusServiceAnimal said:


> To put the blame on me for a passenger's request to cancel a ride is a legal liability for Uber and the passenger, as I was simply complying with the passenger's request. Classic case of catch 22.


No, this is not catch 22. Catch 22 refers to mutually dependent conditions, such as "(1) I can't drive for Uber today because I have no money for gas and (2) in order to get money for gas I have to drive for Uber". What you describe is simply Uber automatically believing the passenger's account of events in the absence of any proof.



BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I was asking the only question allowed and the ride was already accepted.


Such mistakes are made by many - the erroneous belief that Uberlyft is a level playing field.



G.S.M. said:


> You should have driven to the destination without her then ended the ride there
> 
> That makes her look like the liar and scammer.


Brilliant! And then Uber checks the pax' GPS records and sees that she did not go anywhere, and probably ordered another ride from the same spot immediately afterwards.



BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Uber isn't interested in dashcam evidence.


You don't know that because you didn't try. In fact, as above, having video proof of the pet owner admitting that the dog is not a service animal is the only way to not get canned. This forum poster @elelegido refuses fake service animals and video records the fraudsters so they can't have him deactivated when they report him:

https://uberpeople.net/threads/video-of-service-animal-fraud-attempt-by-lyft-pax.177339/


----------



## Ping.Me.More (Oct 27, 2018)

Pax: "Cancel the ride"
You: "I'm not allowed to cancel the ride, because you have a service animal.
"*You* will therefore have to be the one to cancel this ride".
(Proceed to destination).

RESOLVED!


----------



## Diamondraider (Mar 13, 2017)

CTK said:


> Nope nope nope - no proof required or available per the ADA, service animals are not registered or certified. Service animal laws are intended to make life easier for those with disabilities, and to protect their medical privacy. That some abuse it sucks, but changing the laws penalizes the very people they were created to help.


Abusers are the same people that will hang their senile grandmother's HC placard off the mirror so they can run into the liquor store and cvs.


----------



## Fat Man (May 17, 2019)

BigRedDriver said:


> No, I'm not entitled either.
> 
> you?
> 
> ...


I am probably the least entitled you will EVER meet. However, I believe I am not the only one that thinks your a ass hole. Just saying.


----------



## O-Side Uber (Jul 26, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> They track gps on both phones.
> 
> 
> Then sue the pax for fraud, slander, and defamation of character and damages arising therefrom, in SMALL CLAIMS COURT. It's faster, less expensive, less formal and less stickier about procedure, and doesn't require an attorney. Check and see if your state has any laws about faking a service animal and press charges/issue the ticket, and become a witness for the state.
> ...


Sadly it would take several drivers getting their faces chewed off to change any ADA type laws. I had to let a young woman with a pit bull into my car a few months back because she declared it a service animal. It clawed and damaged my seat and spent the ride sniffing my neck. If it had bitten me I would have FOR SURE sued her. HOWEVER.....

I do not recommend suing a pax for the fake service animal crap. In my case, the woman that ultimately got me kicked off Uber had divulged to the reps that she had PTSD , anxiety and whatever other invisible disabilities one can conjure up.

I would've lost in court if I had persued her and that would of opened the doors for her to sue me. I'm lucky I only lost access to the Uber app.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

Fat Man said:


> I am probably the least entitled you will EVER meet. However, I believe I am not the only one that thinks your a ass hole. Just saying.


Don't actually care what someone who doesn't understand the rights of the disabled thinks about me. Get it?

and if you dispute their rights, then yes, you are indeed entitled.

just sayin.


----------



## Fat Man (May 17, 2019)

Wow you really are clever with your come back. Go piss up a rope.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

O-Side Uber said:


> Sadly it would take several drivers getting their faces chewed off to change any ADA type laws. I had to let a young woman with a pit bull into my car a few months back because she declared it a service animal. It clawed and damaged my seat and spent the ride sniffing my neck. If it had bitten me I would have FOR SURE sued her. HOWEVER.....
> 
> I do not recommend suing a pax for the fake service animal crap. In my case, the woman that ultimately got me kicked off Uber had divulged to the reps that she had PTSD , anxiety and whatever other invisible disabilities one can conjure up.
> 
> I would've lost in court if I had persued her and that would of opened the doors for her to sue me. I'm lucky I only lost access to the Uber app.


Not if it wasn't a real service dog. A judge isn't bound by observation and the two questions. A judge can make her demonstrate the dog's tasks, not just declare what they are.

And I wasn't saying the law needs to be changed. If you actually KNOW the law, you can use it


----------



## Diamondraider (Mar 13, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I took the animal. What am I supposed to do when the passenger asks me to cancel the ride? The point is that it is a catch 22 and drivers shouldn't ask one question. Take the dog regardless is Uber's invisible policy.


Never cancel on request. Call support while while waiting for pax cancel.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

NoPooPool said:


> "depreciation doesn't increase or decrease based on usage"


nope. You are thinking of value which is only determined if you sell or trade-in the car. Your zip code has more effect on value then anything else. Plus IRS only has a set amount of depreciation methods to chose from if you are a true business and car title is held as a company asset. Mileage isn't one of them.


----------



## Diamondraider (Mar 13, 2017)

TemptingFate said:


> Federal law trumps state law every time.


Not true. In the housing crisis, MA voted not to honor the tax forgiveness for people losing their homes.
The state taxed folks on the losses from foreclosure/short sales by listing the amount as "realized capital gains"

Just one example.
.......
Ma has banned all vaping despite vaping being legal nationally.
....
Ma is looking at making menthol cigarettes illegal in the state.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Diamondraider said:


> Not true. In the housing crisis, MA voted not to honor the tax forgiveness for people losing their homes.
> The state taxed folks on the losses from foreclosure/short sales by listing the amount as "realized capital gains"
> 
> Just one example.
> ...


States almost always have the right to be more strict than the feds, so long as it doesn't violate the constitution, or the federal law doesn't specifically say they can't.

ADA says states can be more lenient (I believe CA gives more rights to ESAs than other states or feds do), but can't, for example, restrict breeds, etc.

Your examples are specious.


----------



## Lovelife (May 16, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


I picked up pax with "service dog" and none service dog. I don't question it nor care unless the dog make mess in my car. One lady with non service dog even informed me that she had a dog. I don't really see the issue unless the dog goes to bathroom in your vehicle.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

Fat Man said:


> Wow you really are clever with your come back. Go piss up a rope.


who you taking to?


----------



## IR12 (Nov 11, 2017)

NoPooPool said:


> Should have made the pax cancel.
> 
> 
> I am with you in agreement @BogusServiceAnimal, but I still cannot stop thinking about you having drove for one year, and the 60,000 miles on your car! Damn son, that is equivalent to four years of depreciation for mileage in one year!
> ...


Early 2016 - Back when Lyft's rental program did not charge for a rental if you did 70 rides/week I used that car for 3.5 mos.
When I got the car it had 17 miles.
When I returned it, there were almost 54,000 miles so it's pretty easy to run up the mileage.


----------



## rkozy (Apr 5, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Be careful out there, guys. People are rotten. I'm excited to get back to a normal life, however. I wish I could sue this passenger. Impersonating a service animal is against Arizona state law.


I don't care what kind of animal my passenger has in their hands when I pull up. It could be a goddamn Iguana or cockatiel, and I'd still let them in my car. Why? Because, if you're mental enough to need an Iguana as a comfort animal, you're mental enough to screw with an Uber driver who is just trying to make a few extra bucks to keep their bills paid.

So, I let these freaks in my car, no questions asked, 100% of the time.

But, if their animal leaves a turd or shreds my seats...you're goddamn right photos will be taken, and Uber will be charging them extra for the damage.


----------



## O-Side Uber (Jul 26, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> Not if it wasn't a real service dog. A judge isn't bound by observation and the two questions. A judge can make her demonstrate the dog's tasks, not just declare what they are.
> 
> And I wasn't saying the law needs to be changed. If you actually KNOW the law, you can use it


I went into the green light hub a few months back to see if they would reinstate me, it had been a year since deactivation. While I was there the rep mentioned that this woman's alleged disabilities were documented by Uber. So she must have volunteered that info to them just to screw me even harder.

At the time I thought like you and didn't think it would go very far, but her one phone call to Uber and I was done. The way these laws work, we will not win. If that dog can retrieve her weed and bring it to her , it's a service dog.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

BigRedDriver said:


> Don't actually care what someone who doesn't understand the rights of the disabled thinks about me. Get it?
> 
> and if you dispute their rights, then yes, you are indeed entitled.
> 
> just sayin.


The rights of the disabled came around 1990 and it is 100% hot garbage. It's not my fault that nature has been unkind to these people. If someone came up to my car with an electric wheelchair, it's not my responsibility to accommodate them. I am not trained nor equipped to. The law is 100% flawed.

Regardless, pretending that your dog is a service dog makes you the scum of the earth.



The Gift of Fish said:


> This is a shame; there are several tutorials here on how to handle pax with service animals. TL DR - if you're not going to roll over and automatically comply with the pet handler's every wish then you must have video evidence of the encounter. You're playing against a rigged deck with Uberlyft as the bent croupier and you have no chance if you do not - as you found out, you're done.
> 
> No, this is not catch 22. Catch 22 refers to mutually dependent conditions, such as "(1) I can't drive for Uber today because I have no money for gas and (2) in order to get money for gas I have to drive for Uber". What you describe is simply Uber automatically believing the passenger's account of events in the absence of any proof.
> 
> ...


If I ask the passenger if it is a service animal, I'm ****ed. If I don't ask the passenger if it is a service animal, I'm ****ed. If I have dash cam video, I'm ****ed. If I don't have dash cam video, I'm ****ed.

Uber basically has put drivers in a position where we can't ask questions and all of the passengers hold us over the fire. This applies to more than just service animals. Which is why they aren't worth driving for and need to be pursued legally for allowing these horrible working conditions to fester and flourish. Uber created this mess. Passengers exploit it.


----------



## kc ub'ing! (May 27, 2016)

9 pages! It’s so simple. If you enjoy driving rideshare, take every dog. If you refuse, you will be deactivated. 

No it isn’t a service dog. Take it anyway.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

kc ub'ing! said:


> 9 pages! It's so simple. If you enjoy driving rideshare, take every dog. If you refuse, you will be deactivated.
> 
> No it isn't a service dog. Take it anyway.


This is the whole point. **** any company that treats you this way.

I don't like ridesharing because you have ZERO rights as a driver. Want a reasonable base rate? No say in the matter. Want fair HR regarding problematic passengers? No say in the matter. Want surges to be reflected accurately? No say in the matter. Want the majority of a ride's market value to go to the driver? No say in the matter? Want to see fares up front? No say in the matter. Want to stay on a certain side of town? No say in the matter. Want only short rides? No say in the matter.

See a pattern?


----------



## Fat Man (May 17, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> The rights of the disabled came around 1990 and it is 100% hot garbage. It's not my fault that nature has been unkind to these people. If someone came up to my car with an electric wheelchair, it's not my responsibility to accommodate them. I am not trained nor equipped to. The law is 100% flawed.
> 
> Regardless, pretending that your dog is a service dog makes you the scum of the earth.
> 
> ...


I am all for disabled people's rights. I myself am a combat Veteran with moderate to severe PTSD. So I get it. The thing I don't get is letting people just say it is a service animal. A service animal is a dog that helps blind people, people that can't hear, or people with illness that they help with such as severe diabetics. This emotional support BS has gone WAY to far. They help VETs with PTSD like myself but people that can't handle every day life need to get a clue and figure out that a dog is not going to make the world they have any better. Problems will still be there. Time to put big boy pants on, go to work, and leave the god damn dog at home!


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Fat Man said:


> I am all for disabled people's rights. I myself am a combat Veteran with moderate to severe PTSD. So I get it. The thing I don't get is letting people just say it is a service animal. A service animal is a dog that helps blind people, people that can't hear, or people with illness that they help with such as severe diabetics. This emotional support BS has gone WAY to far. They help VETs with PTSD like myself but people that can't handle every day life need to get a clue and figure out that a dog is not going to make the world they have any better. Problems will still be there. Time to put big boy pants on, go to work, and leave the god damn dog at home!


It's not our duty to accommodate you for PTSD. We can be sympathetic, but that's it. People abuse the PTSD card all the time, including up to the point of excusing it for violent, erratic behavior. I can see you being protected from termination for having this issue addressed, but it wouldn't excuse you to be a holy terror to all of your co-workers.

Do you see the dilemma? This enables a lot of rotten people because it is POORLY written.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

O-Side Uber said:


> I went into the green light hub a few months back to see if they would reinstate me, it had been a year since deactivation. While I was there the rep mentioned that this woman's alleged disabilities were documented by Uber. So she must have volunteered that info to them just to screw me even harder.
> 
> At the time I thought like you and didn't think it would go very far, but her one phone call to Uber and I was done. The way these laws work, we will not win. If that dog can retrieve her weed and bring it to her , it's a service dog.


That was Uber.

How was the dog behaving? Did you ask the two questions (politely!)? Did you have this recorded on your dashcam?

If yes to all of the above, and the evidence was the dog didn't qualify, then had you sued her, she would have lost, and you would have been reinstated.

I have several medical issues that render me classified as disabled. I have a Handicap Parking placard. I do NOT have a Service Animal, even though I might actually qualify for one sort or another, if I wanted to. That doesn't give me the right to claim my dog (regardless of size) is a SA. SAs are DAMNED expensive. Finding one with the right temperament is time consuming and frustrating. Finding one already trained to the point where it can pass a Public Access test, moreso, and EXPENSIVE. Training is EXPENSIVE, unless you do it yourself, and you'd better be damned good at it, as your life depends on it.

Many people who qualify actually never get a SA because of this. Those with PTSD may qualify for a SA, but instead they get an ESA -- which is NOT granted any protections under the ADA except for housing. Period. It's the FAA that Grant's them the right to fly on planes.

You never formally challenged her claim. If you had, you could have gotten lost wages, punitive damages, and reinstated, and you would have been telling us here all about your pax-paid vacation to somewhere nice-but-not-TOO-expensive.


----------



## Seamus (Jun 21, 2018)

Thread # 4,781 on the subject and people still arguing about it. Its simple and proven time and time again over the years:
1- On the approach you see an animal stop and take it.
2- On the approach you see an animal and you don't want to take it DO NOT STOP AND ENGAGE just keep going and cancel.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda don't mean anything. The ADA doesn't mean anything. Either take the animal or risk deactivation if you stop and engage. It's that simple.


----------



## VanGuy (Feb 15, 2019)

kc ub'ing! said:


> 9 pages! It's so simple. If you enjoy driving rideshare, take every dog. If you refuse, you will be deactivated.
> 
> No it isn't a service dog. Take it anyway.


Does it have to ride inside the vehicle? I like animals and plan on doing the blanket thing but for those that don't, pulling out some straps and mentioning the roof of the vehicle might change some tunes. 

I did my best Uber, the animal was totally welcome to ride with me. I don't know why the passenger changed their mind at the last second.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SuzeCB said:


> That was Uber.
> 
> How was the dog behaving? Did you ask the two questions (politely!)? Did you have this recorded on your dashcam?
> 
> ...


I did all of these things. I was polite and the woman immediately turned into a witch for me even questioning her.

To be honest, I don't care. I'll wait for a third platform to come around through all of this. At the current trajectory, both companies being publicly traded will make it impossible to make a buck on the platforms. Both will increasingly make all of you miserable while you all irrationally sit on this website hating them and defending them in the same breath.



Seamus said:


> Thread # 4,781 on the subject and people still arguing about it. Its simple and proven time and time again over the years:
> 1- On the approach you see an animal stop and take it.
> 2- On the approach you see an animal and you don't want to take it DO NOT STOP AND ENGAGE just keep going and cancel.
> 
> Shoulda, coulda, woulda don't mean anything. The ADA doesn't mean anything. Either take the animal or risk deactivation if you stop and engage. It's that simple.


There are a number of threads of people deactivated for canceling the ride as soon as they drove past. They don't even have to say it was a service animal.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

the never-ending saga continues......


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> This is the whole point. @@@@ any company that treats you this way.
> 
> I don't like ridesharing because you have ZERO rights as a driver. Want a reasonable base rate? No say in the matter. Want fair HR regarding problematic passengers? No say in the matter. Want surges to be reflected accurately? No say in the matter. Want the majority of a ride's market value to go to the driver? No say in the matter? Want to see fares up front? No say in the matter. Want to stay on a certain side of town? No say in the matter. Want only short rides? No say in the matter.
> 
> See a pattern?


Its been said before. This gig ain't for everybody.

if that makes me an a hole, I could care less


----------



## ubergrind (May 23, 2017)

When I first started I was a hard a$$ about this since I am not a pet fan... But after joining this forum and reflecting on a bit It's not worth the risk of someone falsely accusing you because you don't want to deal with a pet for a few minutes. It really won't hurt you to pick up someone's pet. The real annoyance is they are getting around the system.

I do wonder if you could take this to court with a contingency based lawyer. I am no lawyer so don't take this legally, but it you had started the trip and know the first name of the passenger, you could hypothetically use public records/ social media to track down the rider and figure out who the passenger was. Waze also gives you the address if you used that as well since Uber/Lyft are unlikely to give out that information without a legal fight that is going to be costly. If you know their address or place of business it would be possible to locate the person that falsely accused you. It may be possible to show damages from a false accusation in the form of lost wages. 

Not sure if this has ever been tested out by anyone in the community, but false accusations are a huge deal. Uber/Lyft wont help but if you can get creative you can likely track down anyone if you so choose if you have their basic place of business or residence. Talk to a lawyer, but this is something that I have been ruminating on especially if you can get the ball rolling with the address. Just an idea....


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

Seamus said:


> Thread # 4,781 on the subject and people still arguing about it. Its simple and proven time and time again over the years:
> 1- On the approach you see an animal stop and take it.
> 2- On the approach you see an animal and you don't want to take it DO NOT STOP AND ENGAGE just keep going and cancel.
> 
> ...


It's really just this ^^^^^^^^^^ simple.


----------



## Diamondraider (Mar 13, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> States almost always have the right to be more strict than the feds, so long as it doesn't violate the constitution, or the federal law doesn't specifically say they can't.
> 
> ADA says states can be more lenient (I believe CA gives more rights to ESAs than other states or feds do), but can't, for example, restrict breeds, etc.
> 
> Your examples are specious.


Specious, eh?

How about legalized cannabis? (Prohibited federally)


----------



## Misunderstood Pirate (Aug 25, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


Next time keep your mouth shut. Let this be a lesson to all of you who think you are your own boss


----------



## kc ub'ing! (May 27, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> ZERO rights as a driver


True. It's a crummy circumstance. I can't wait to get a regular job. I choose to tolerate this despicable bs until that happens.


----------



## Bolympia (Jan 8, 2015)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


I feel like there's more to this story than what you're telling us.

I find it hard to believe you were fired over a minor disagreement over a dog.


----------



## Johnny Mnemonic (Sep 24, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"


He's apparently trained to get drivers fired.










Seriously though, your best shot at getting reactivated (if you want) is to go to a GreenLight Hub and plead your case. They know a lot of people with "support animals" are full of male bovine end-product. Otherwise, wash your hands of it and fill out some job apps.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

O-Side Uber said:


> I got deactivated from Uber over a year ago for basically the same situation! Mine was a pool ride!!! ? I've been driving for Lyft ever since . It's disgusting that a horrible person like that can take someone's job away. Sorry this happened to you!


How the hell does someone order a pool ride with a service animal?

Im just saying having a service animal should automatically disqualify a pax from using Uber Pool.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Cash cam?


----------



## O-Side Uber (Jul 26, 2017)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> How the hell does someone order a pool ride with a service animal?
> 
> Im just saying having a service animal should automatically disqualify a pax from using Uber Pool.


Service animal trumps all rules and logic


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

O-Side Uber said:


> Service animal trumps all rules and logic


Uber could release guidelines to for no animals in pool rides and be in compliance with the law. They just don't give a fahck


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> If I ask the passenger if it is a service animal, I'm @@@@ed. If I don't ask the passenger if it is a service animal, I'm @@@@ed. If I have dash cam video, I'm @@@@ed. If I don't have dash cam video, I'm @@@@ed.


Incorrect; have a reread of my post.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Incorrect; have a reread of my post.


Bitter people like to wallow in self-pity and blame their failures on others. They don't take advice; they just want their neuroses to be validated.


----------



## JPaiva (Apr 21, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


I'd file a police report for fraud that requires uber to disclose the passenger information. Then sue the passenger in small claims court for the next years worth of lost income. Teach that beeyatch not to lie about her pet in the future. Perfectly within your right to ask that question. Anyone that has a problem answering it is LYING. All service animal owners I've ever encountered are proud to explain what the animal does for them. Any attitude and its fraudulent 100% of the time.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Diamondraider said:


> Specious, eh?
> 
> How about legalized cannabis? (Prohibited federally)


And the feds have the right to raid any grow site or dispensary or person in possession that they want. They just haven't.

Doesn't that make you curious as to why?


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

JPaiva said:


> I'd file a police report for fraud that requires uber to disclose the passenger information. Then sue the passenger in small claims court for the next years worth of lost income. Teach that beeyatch not to lie about her pet in the future. Perfectly within your right to ask that question. Anyone that has a problem answering it is LYING. All service animal owners I've ever encountered are proud to explain what the animal does for them. Any attitude and its fraudulent 100% of the time.


And if it really was a service dog, this would open the driver up to an ADA lawsuit.

Somethings are better left alone.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

sue the pax? for what exactly?


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

TemptingFate said:


> Bitter people like to wallow in self-pity and blame their failures on others. They don't take advice; they just want their neuroses to be validated.


Yeah, I know the type. My ex-wife is a narcissist, and if you know what they are, they are never ever ever ever ever wrong. No siree! Not me. Nu-uh. Not my fault at all. It is pointless trying to reason with this personality type; you might as well try to have a debate with your cat.

What he says about his firing being unfair is indeed correct. But he went into battle with Uber & pax totally unprepared. He got caught with his pants down and received a comprehensive spanking.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Yeah, I know the type. My ex-wife is a narcissist, and if you know what they are, they are never ever ever ever ever wrong. No siree! Not me. Nu-uh. Not my fault at all. It is pointless trying to reason with this personality type; you might as well try to have a debate with your cat.
> 
> What he says about his firing being unfair is indeed correct. But he went into battle with Uber & pax totally unprepared. He got caught with his pants down and received a comprehensive spanking.


The story is a fraud. It's a sockpuppet troll account designed to stir up the readers and spread his toxic misogynistic view.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

Here is what doesn't make sense...

How does the passenger prove to Uber that they have a service animal?

*Can anyone just tell Uber they have a dog and get a driver they don't like deactivated?*

Is there a registry of service animals? Does the pax have to give this info to Uber? Or do they just send a dog pic?

Or is this whole thing an urban legend?



TemptingFate said:


> Bitter people like to wallow in self-pity and blame their failures on others. They don't take advice; they just want their neuroses to be validated.


Other people use their dash cam to create avatars out of unsuspecting passengers.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

OldBay said:


> Can anyone just tell Uber they have a dog and get a driver they don't like deactivated?


there is more to the story the OP is not telling. For sure. Trolls do that.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

OldBay said:


> Other people use their dash cam to create avatars out of unsuspecting passengers.


Why so defensive @OldBay , or should I say, @BogusServiceAnimal ?


----------



## Julescase2 (Apr 1, 2019)

SHalester said:


> curious what answer could she have given that you would have accepted and completed the ride?
> 
> 
> curious what answer could she have given that you would have accepted and completed the ride?


Curious as to why there are two identical questions here and wondering if my sight is getting even worse. -o:



CTK said:


> Ah, but they are covered by Uber, as you've just discovered.
> 
> When someone says it's a service animal, the *only* response is "ok", and take the dammed dog. We debate this repeatedly on this forum, but there it is in a nutshell.


If people actually read, absorb, and comprehend what you've written here there would most likely be no UberPeople.com to read.

I think OP's intention and opinion is understandable, yet the presentation and conveyance was not on point.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

wasn't me..........


----------



## TXUbering (May 9, 2018)

So here's my question, you sign up for Uber, you have a service animal of your own, a passenger complains about your service animal, Uber kicks you off the platform, can you sue Uber?


----------



## IMMA DRIVER (Jul 6, 2017)

It should be required that all service dogs must wear Service Dog ID tags during any form of transportation. So then an Uber driver's only question would be. "Can I see your dog's service tag?". Problem solved.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

IMMA DRIVER said:


> It should be required that all service dogs must wear Service Dog ID tags during any form of transportation. So then an Uber driver's only question would be. "Can I see your dog's service tag?". Problem solved.


ok, see, the service dog is intended to be an extension of the human. It is intended to make the disabled as "whole" as can be. By putting a sign of any kind on the dog, you tell the world that the individual is disabled, giving him an identity of someone not whole.

its a bit like saying someone with a fake eye must wear a sign saying "This guy is less than you because he has a fake eye".


----------



## Youburr (Aug 22, 2019)

Of all the dogs I've carried none have been legit beasts of servitude. The pax will state as much, apologize, and offer to cancel if they can't ride. Its never really an issue because they always sit in the pax lap (even huge dogs), so the shedding occurs on the pax and not my car. There are special doctors who can make your dog a service/support animal officially for a small fee and filling out a form, and just like getting a prop 215 rec back in the day all you need to say is that the dog helps with your anxiety/migranes.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

the service animals I've seen have the red sweater on that states what they are and usually 'don't pet me' on them......


----------



## vkandaharv (Mar 30, 2017)

Once parked for a pickup in SF. Then the door opened and a great dane hopped in and sat on the seat. No warning and huge dog spooked me. Pax didnt even ask nor claim service animal status which obviously it wasnt. Left 1 star. Later someone claimed a cat was a service animal. Obviously false because only dogs can be a service animal. Left one star and report it as lying about service animal. I generally just take the animals unless they are dirty or smelly. Sometimes I ask them to go in the cargo area.


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

Pax should be registered on the Uber app as always having a service animal. Any Questions?


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

SHalester said:


> sue the pax? for what exactly?


Slander & Defamation of Character & actual and punitive damages arising therefrom.



LADryver said:


> Pax should be registered on the Uber app as always having a service animal. Any Questions?


Illegal.


----------



## Julescase2 (Apr 1, 2019)

IMMA DRIVER said:


> It should be required that all service dogs must wear Service Dog ID tags during any form of transportation. So then an Uber driver's only question would be. "Can I see your dog's service tag?". Problem solved.


Well, beyond the fact that your suggestion is illegal, people who are _already_ disabled in some fashion and dealing with all that entails really shouldn't have to go above and beyond to prove their disability is a *thing* just so Uber drivers will accept the fact that they need to do their job and obey the law.

How about just do the ride and if you don't want dogs in your car, don't drive rideshare?

You're mi


Youburr said:


> Of all the dogs I've carried none have been legit beasts of servitude. The pax will state as much, apologize, and offer to cancel if they can't ride. Its never really an issue because they always sit in the pax lap (even huge dogs), so the shedding occurs on the pax and not my car. There are special doctors who can make your dog a service/support animal officially for a small fee and filling out a form, and just like getting a prop 215 rec back in the day all you need to say is that the dog helps with your anxiety/migranes.


I think you might be confusing service dogs and emotional support animals. You're describing the criteria for getting your pet confirmed as an emotional support animal in the above comment.

Service animals are trained in very specific ways depending on the disability of their person.



LADryver said:


> Pax should be registered on the Uber app as always having a service animal. Any Questions?


Question: Have you read the ADA or any portion of it?


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

> Question: Have you read the ADA or any portion of it?


What is your pedantic, irrelevant point?



SuzeCB said:


> Slander & Defamation of Character & actual and punitive damages arising therefrom.
> 
> 
> Illegal.


How do you believe so?


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

LADryver said:


> What is your pedantic, irrelevant point?
> 
> 
> How do you believe so?


If the animal is clearly not a service animal, the pax claiming that you refused service because of their service animal is exactly those things: slander and defamation of character. Your actual loss would be a source of income, or threatened loss of income and diminished "standing" with the company you do business with (Uber or Lyft). Punitive would be because they knew, or should have known, that their animal was not a bona fide service animal as defined by the ADA, and that their claim against you was deliberate, fraudulent, and meant to cause harm.

Cases of slander and defamation are a little different than other cases. The plaintiff says, "what that person said isn't true, and it harmed me like *this*."

Then, the only defense for the defendant is to deny ever having said it (which your subpoenaed records from Uber would disprove), or to claim and prove it was true.

They would have to prove to a judge that the dog was a genuine service animal, necessary for a disability, and trained to perform at least one specific task to aid in that disability. They would also have to prove the dog has the proper disposition/personality (which is actually quite rare, as they have to go against many behaviors normal for dogs), and acceptable behavior.

Service dogs don't act like other dogs. If you've ever seen one while it's working, you'd understand. You could put a juicy steak in front of one that hadn't eaten all day, and it wouldn't touch it until its handler said it was OK. They don't get into your car until commanded to, verbally or by hand signals, by their handlers. They don't jump on your seat, but curl up on the floor, without being told to, or else they're carried in harnesses on the handler's chest (particularly dogs that sense sugar levels for diabetics).


----------



## Youburr (Aug 22, 2019)

Emotional support dogs can legally fly on planes with pax. Think you can decline one in an Uber and not get deactivated? I mean just for being a stickler!



Julescase2 said:


> Well, beyond the fact that your suggestion is illegal, people who are _already_ disabled in some fashion and dealing with all that entails really shouldn't have to go above and beyond to prove their disability is a *thing* just so Uber drivers will accept the fact that they need to do their job and obey the law.
> 
> How about just do the ride and if you don't want dogs in your car, don't drive rideshare?
> 
> ...


----------



## vkandaharv (Mar 30, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> If the animal is clearly not a service animal, the pax claiming that you refused service because of their service animal is exactly those things: slander and defamation of character. Your actual loss would be a source of income, or threatened loss of income and diminished "standing" with the company you do business with (Uber or Lyft). Punitive would be because they knew, or should have known, that their animal was not a bona fide service animal as defined by the ADA, and that their claim against you was deliberate, fraudulent, and meant to cause harm.
> 
> Cases of slander and defamation are a little different than other cases. The plaintiff says, "what that person said isn't true, and it harmed me like *this*."
> 
> ...


You don't know what you're talking about.


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> If the animal is clearly not a service animal, the pax claiming that you refused service because of their service animal is exactly those things: slander and defamation of character. Your actual loss would be a source of income, or threatened loss of income and diminished "standing" with the company you do business with (Uber or Lyft). Punitive would be because they knew, or should have known, that their animal was not a bona fide service animal as defined by the ADA, and that their claim against you was deliberate, fraudulent, and meant to cause harm.
> 
> Cases of slander and defamation are a little different than other cases. The plaintiff says, "what that person said isn't true, and it harmed me like *this*."
> 
> ...


That has nothing to do with preparing us to make the one pickup of a pax with a service animal. It has nothing to do with staing that you come with one.


----------



## Tampa Bay Hauler (May 2, 2019)

Spend an hour vacuuming or lose your job? I'll vacuum. Somebody was on this forum complaining about someone eating jellybeans. I let passengers eat snacks if they want,pizza if they want to, bring there dog or whatever. I have never had an issue with a passenger where we exchanged words. I live in Florida and have to constantly sweep sand out of my vehicle anyway. I'll sweep the dog hair and jelly beans with it. No big deal. Fighting with the customer for the few minutes they are in my van isn't worth it to me. Deal with what clean up there is and move on to the next ride.None of this happens that often anyhow.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Youburr said:


> Emotional support dogs can legally fly on planes with pax. Think you can decline one in an Uber and not get deactivated?


Absolutely. I reject fake service dogs whenever they come up and have not been deactivated.


----------



## Diamondraider (Mar 13, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> And the feds have the right to raid any grow site or dispensary or person in possession that they want. They just haven't.
> 
> Doesn't that make you curious as to why?


No, it doesn't.



BigRedDriver said:


> ok, see, the service dog is intended to be an extension of the human. It is intended to make the disabled as "whole" as can be. By putting a sign of any kind on the dog, you tell the world that the individual is disabled, giving him an identity of someone not whole.
> 
> its a bit like saying someone with a fake eye must wear a sign saying "This guy is less than you because he has a fake eye".


Hold the phone!

so a dog tag will identify the person as disabled and you don't think the person telling the driver that the dog is a service animal will not accomplish the same thing???

SMH


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Diamondraider said:


> No, it doesn't.
> 
> 
> Hold the phone!
> ...


The ADA service animal legislation lays service providers wide open to abuse, that's for sure. However, if there were some kind of official register for service animals there would be costs involved. There would need to be dog inspectors/certifiers, admin staff, IT staff, premises and capital expenses etc. Who would pay for all of this? IMO it wouldn't be appropriate for the disabled to pay for it - this would amount to a tax on being disabled.


----------



## Diamondraider (Mar 13, 2017)

The Gift of Fish said:


> The ADA service animal legislation lays service providers wide open to abuse, that's for sure. However, if there were some kind of official register for service animals there would be costs involved. There would need to be dog inspectors/certifiers, admin staff, IT staff, premises and capital expenses etc. Who would pay for all of this? IMO it wouldn't be appropriate for the disabled to pay for it - this would amount to a tax on being disabled.


Disabled people would have this covered under Medicaid and disability insurance. Let's not be dramatic.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Diamondraider said:


> Let's not be dramatic.


Ironic, given that what was actually being sought from you was an answer in which a points-scoring attempt was not present.

Anyway, the question remains. Not all disabled people receive medicaid or disability insurance benefits.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Cold Fusion said:


> You illustrated perfectly how to Escalate a sensitive
> Situation & achieve Deactivation ✔
> 
> It's almost like you're an Uber shill reminding
> ...


WE ALL KNOW
HOW UBER & LYFT FOLLOW EVERY LAW !!!!!


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Diamondraider said:


> Disabled people would have this covered under Medicaid and disability insurance. Let's not be dramatic.


Not all disabled people get medicaid. Some are able to love nearly-typical lives BECAUSE of the dogs (or other medical equipment).



tohunt4me said:


> WE ALL KNOW
> HOW UBER & LYFT FOLLOW EVERY LAW !!!!!


Well, the ones they get sued over and settle before judgement so that there aren't any judgements against them, anyway.



vkandaharv said:


> You don't know what you're talking about.


Here's one public access test being given. The food test is at about 11:12. There are plenty of others all over the internet, as well. Keep in mind this is not task training, although this one shows the dog picking up its leash handle from the floor and giving it to the handler at several points. That part may straddle the line between PA test and tasking.








The Gift of Fish said:


> Absolutely. I reject fake service dogs whenever they come up and have not been deactivated.


So have I. And it wasn't the dog I rejected. It was the lying, scamming pax. If they lie about that, what else will they lie about to scam whatever?

THAT'S the problem. And I tell them that as I'm telling them I'm not taking them, and I point out that NJ has a law against faking a service animal. (You'll have to check your own state.)


----------



## charmer37 (Nov 18, 2016)

Uber and lyft are a revolving door type of gig, They will deactivate drivers for any reason. The only thing these crooked companies care about is ripping of the drivers and the passengers, I started the gig when it was paying good but got out of it before they made all the major changes. In the case of what happened to this driver I believe things happen for a reason, For me it was time to move on to something else.


----------



## Diamondraider (Mar 13, 2017)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Ironic, given that what was actually being sought from you was an answer in which a points-scoring attempt was not present.
> 
> Anyway, the question remains. Not all disabled people receive medicaid or disability insurance benefits.


If they don't, they can likely afford it.
How do you think they are paying for the ride. Either govt help or personal funds


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

Diamondraider said:


> No, it doesn't.
> 
> 
> Hold the phone!
> ...


Then put dog tags around your neck stating you have legs.

good god.

I'm asking no more of you than you of them.



SuzeCB said:


> Not all disabled people get medicaid. Some are able to love nearly-typical lives BECAUSE of the dogs (or other medical equipment).
> 
> 
> Well, the ones they get sued over and settle before judgement so that there aren't any judgements against them, anyway.
> ...


and I bet you have a dash cam as well.


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Absolutely. I reject fake service dogs whenever they come up and have not been deactivated.


Whoa. There is a very large distance between "fake" and ADA uncovered service animals. And by the way, a cat can be an emotional support animal, absolutely. Just because the ADA is behind the times (much like most needed federal legislation) does not mean that they are fake. However it is true that some people are adamant. I make a general assumption. If someone needs their animal with them enough to say that the animal is a service animal, then ADA or not, the animal is a service animal. The ADA defines the early recognized versions of service animals due to a time when much effort was being placed to the plight of the disabled. There was a time before there were disabled placards and designated parking, before ramps, before ADA, when disabled people of all disabilities were outcasts of society, left apart, left helpless to inaccessibility everywhere they tried to go. No wheelchairs on buses. No handicap restrooms. No holding bars. It was a harsh life. Elevators were built for the convenience of able bodied people and disabled people needed them so they went to ground floor apartments or elevator apartment buildings to live. They couldn't drive. They couldn't get jobs. There was a sweep of help for them finally and the ADA was written and passed. It was before the time came when other uses for animals to people as medical assistance, as hearing not seeing assistance, as emotional assistance. The kind of disabilities not addressed in the ADA. As drivers we are given latitude to recognize service animals that are written in the ADA, or other animals including uncovered service animals. But calling a different type of service animal fake is a poor judgment to make and if you act on that, you probably will be deactivated.


----------



## Youburr (Aug 22, 2019)

Just because you can legally decline to carry an emotional support dog doesn’t mean Uber has to defend that move and keep you online. You messed with pax sensibility.


----------



## RaleighUber (Dec 4, 2016)

WNYuber said:


> Although I haven't been driving Uber for very long, every night I secretly pray that I get deactivated.


Half way to the ranks of the "retired." Come on in, the money is fine....



LADryver said:


> As drivers we are given latitude to recognize service animals that are written in the ADA, or other animals including uncovered service animals. But calling a different type of service animal fake is a poor judgment to make and if you act on that, you probably will be deactivated.


"Service Animal" is a defined legal term and Uber's ADA policy applies ONLY to service animals. All other "uncovered service animals" are just pets. That is the law. You can drive who you want, but pretending "uncovered service animals" is a relevant term is spin. They are all "FAKE" in regard to ADA and Uber policy.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

SuzeCB said:


> Slander & Defamation of Character & actual and punitive damages arising therefrom.


yah, I think not. Maybe Uber, not the pax. No doubt the troll could find a ding dong lawyer to take the case. And once the judge got it; dismissal out of hand. AND nothing was public, no witnesses, no press, no nothing.


----------



## Diamondraider (Mar 13, 2017)

LADryver said:


> Whoa. There is a very large distance between "fake" and ADA uncovered service animals. And by the way, a cat can be an emotional support animal, absolutely. Just because the ADA is behind the times (much like most needed federal legislation) does not mean that they are fake. However it is true that some people are adamant. I make a general assumption. If someone needs their animal with them enough to say that the animal is a service animal, then ADA or not, the animal is a service animal. The ADA defines the early recognized versions of service animals due to a time when much effort was being placed to the plight of the disabled. There was a time before there were disabled placards and designated parking, before ramps, before ADA, when disabled people of all disabilities were outcasts of society, left apart, left helpless to inaccessibility everywhere they tried to go. No wheelchairs on buses. No handicap restrooms. No holding bars. It was a harsh life. Elevators were built for the convenience of able bodied people and disabled people needed them so they went to ground floor apartments or elevator apartment buildings to live. They couldn't drive. They couldn't get jobs. There was a sweep of help for them finally and the ADA was written and passed. It was before the time came when other uses for animals to people as medical assistance, as hearing not seeing assistance, as emotional assistance. The kind of disabilities not addressed in the ADA. As drivers we are given latitude to recognize service animals that are written in the ADA, or other animals including uncovered service animals. But calling a different type of service animal fake is a poor judgment to make and if you act on that, you probably will be deactivated.


'Uncovered service animal' is not a thing.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

LADryver said:


> Whoa. There is a very large distance between "fake" and ADA uncovered service animals. And by the way, a cat can be an emotional support animal, absolutely. Just because the ADA is behind the times (much like most needed federal legislation) does not mean that they are fake. However it is true that some people are adamant. I make a general assumption. If someone needs their animal with them enough to say that the animal is a service animal, then ADA or not, the animal is a service animal. The ADA defines the early recognized versions of service animals due to a time when much effort was being placed to the plight of the disabled. There was a time before there were disabled placards and designated parking, before ramps, before ADA, when disabled people of all disabilities were outcasts of society, left apart, left helpless to inaccessibility everywhere they tried to go. No wheelchairs on buses. No handicap restrooms. No holding bars. It was a harsh life. Elevators were built for the convenience of able bodied people and disabled people needed them so they went to ground floor apartments or elevator apartment buildings to live. They couldn't drive. They couldn't get jobs. There was a sweep of help for them finally and the ADA was written and passed. It was before the time came when other uses for animals to people as medical assistance, as hearing not seeing assistance, as emotional assistance. The kind of disabilities not addressed in the ADA. As drivers we are given latitude to recognize service animals that are written in the ADA, or other animals including uncovered service animals. But calling a different type of service animal fake is a poor judgment to make and if you act on that, you probably will be deactivated.


What separates a SA from an ESA is not the person's dependence on it, but rather the proven disposition, inclinations, and training of the animal.

My son has autism and a few other disabilities. One of our cats acts as his ESA (it's phenomenal, really), but as of yet, we haven't taken the route necessary to have it officially designated as such. We will be doing it soon. Won't take a lot, actually, and I don't mean going to one of those sketchy websites and paying $60. It takes some forms filled out by his neurologist and primary dr. ESAs aren't about the animal, they're about the person exclusively. Once it's done, no landlord or HOA will be able to say my son can't have his ESA, and won't be able to charge more for it, either.

I wouldn't suggest anyone outside our family try to pet Bear without approaching carefully and paying close attention. He's not an unfriendly cat at all. Very friendly. He's just also very play-aggressive with just about everyone except my son.

Even if he was a dog, he doesn't have the proven temperament where he could be trusted in public.

SAs DO. That's why they have Nearly-All-Access passes.

I don't discount the value of an ESA, whether or not the handler has official certification. It's been proven already that people that have pets heal faster when sick or injured, and live longer. But an SA IS different.


----------



## RaleighUber (Dec 4, 2016)

SuzeCB said:


> My son has autism and a few other disabilities. One of our cats acts as his ESA (it's phenomenal, really), but as of yet, we haven't taken the route necessary to have it officially designated as such. We will be doing it soon. Won't take a lot, actually, and I don't mean going to one of those sketchy websites and paying $60. It takes some forms filled out by his neurologist and primary dr. ESAs aren't about the animal, they're about the person exclusively. Once it's done, no landlord or HOA will be able to say my son can't have his ESA, and won't be able to charge more for it, either.


Glad your son is helped by his ESA. ESA's are relevant only to housing (Fed housing amendment act) and airline travel (Airline Carrier Access). The only law that applies to rideshare is ADA. Under ADA, it's a pet.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

RaleighUber said:


> Glad your son is helped by his ESA. ESA's are relevant only to housing (Fed housing amendment act) and airline travel (Airline Carrier Access). The only law that applies to rideshare is ADA. Under ADA, it's a pet.


Exactly.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

LADryver said:


> Whoa. There is a very large distance between "fake" and ADA uncovered service animals.


In terms of the ADA, there is no difference between a non-service animal falsely and knowingly presented as a service animal (a fake) and a non service animal unwittingly presented as a service animal by an ignorant owner, in that neither is a service animal.


> And by the way, a cat can be an emotional support animal, absolutely.


Yes, and? So can a chinchilla, a rabbit, a canary etc. There are even photos on the internet of an emotional support turkey at an airport about to be taken on a plane. It's a crazy, mixed up, topsy-turvy world.


> Just because the ADA is behind the times (much like most needed federal legislation) does not mean that they are fake.


What makes fakes fake is not whether the ADA is "behind the times" or not. What makes fakes fake is when pet owners know that their animal is not a service animal but try to pass it off as such in order to obtain a transportation benefit for their pet to which they are not entitled.


> However it is true that some people are adamant. I make a general assumption. If someone needs their animal with them enough to say that the animal is a service animal, then ADA or not, the animal is a service animal.


You are free to take any animal you choose in your own vehicle.


> The ADA defines the early recognized versions of service animals due to a time when much effort was being placed to the plight of the disabled.


Again, no. The original ADA of 1990 made no mention of service animals. It wasn't until 2010 that service animals were defined by the ADA and the right to take service animals into public places was codified into law. As late as 2010, the authors of these ADA amendments were fully aware of the existence of emotional support animals and they specifically mentioned and classified them in the new regulations as being excluded as service animals:










> As drivers we are given latitude to recognize service animals that are written in the ADA, or other animals including uncovered service animals. But calling a different type of service animal fake is a poor judgment to make and if you act on that, you probably will be deactivated.


Yet again, incorrect. The ADA makes no mention of any latitude given to service providers on recognizing service animals. The two questions that we are allowed to ask were written into the legislation, but the regulations deliberately do not provide any statement on how service providers should deal with animals that the service provider suspects do not comply with the regulations.


----------



## JPaiva (Apr 21, 2019)

SHalester said:


> sue the pax? for what exactly?


Fraud, slander, defamation of character resulting in loss of employment. Lets say you work in childcare and I tell your employer you are an unregistered sex offender. (which you arent) They let you go without question and tell you its because of what I told them. You could sue me for damages.



BigRedDriver said:


> And if it really was a service dog, this would open the driver up to an ADA lawsuit.
> 
> Somethings are better left alone.


If its really a service dog- it'll act appropriately and the owner won't have an attitude. As a security guard I've removed people carrying in their Chiuauau after they claimed it was an emotional support dog. Two weeks later thinking they were "smart" were back and claimed the same dog was now a service animal. Which it wasnt. Booted him again and he threatened to sue. I told them go ahead you arent allowed inside our food establishment with your pet and we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. Never seen the dude again. Screw these peoples laughable attempts at claiming their poorly behaved unleashed nonvested barking pet is a service animal. Any dog owner can quickly recognize the difference in the owner and dogs actions.


----------



## Misunderstood Pirate (Aug 25, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I simply asked the only legal question we are allowed to ask and she turned into a bitter harpy. She asked to cancel the ride. That was that.
> 
> I have ZERO legal liability here. We don't deserve to be harassed for asking the only legal question granted to us.


What's the point of asking the question? You caused your own demise. But since Uber says you are own boss don't worry. Lol



BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Because I knew she way lying and wanted to force her to lie some more and I wanted to ask the only legal question I was allowed to ask.
> 
> Moral of the story? You have no rights as a driver from Uber when it comes to service animals. ZERO.
> 
> ...


Moral of the story. You lose. We already know we have no rights period. Only newbies don't know this.



The Gift of Fish said:


> Absolutely. I reject fake service dogs whenever they come up and have not been deactivated.


Not yet. Give it time


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

BigRedDriver said:


> ok, see, the service dog is intended to be an extension of the human. It is intended to make the disabled as "whole" as can be. By putting a sign of any kind on the dog, you tell the world that the individual is disabled, giving him an identity of someone not whole.
> 
> its a bit like saying someone with a fake eye must wear a sign saying "This guy is less than you because he has a fake eye".


What a bunch of bologna. The very process of the ADA is showing that they need special laws to make them "whole". If you need an animal to make you "whole", you are conspicuous. Period.

The ADA was to improve access. That's all. All of this other nonsense is leftist hysteria. Equality is a myth.


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

The Gift of Fish said:


> In terms of the ADA, there is no difference between a non-service animal falsely and knowingly presented as a service animal (a fake) and a non service animal unwittingly presented as a service animal by an ignorant owner, in that neither is a service animal.
> Yes, and? So can a chinchilla, a rabbit, a canary etc. There are even photos on the internet of an emotional support turkey at an airport about to be taken on a plane. It's a crazy, mixed up, topsy-turvy world.
> What makes fakes fake is not whether the ADA is "behind the times" or not. What makes fakes fake is when pet owners know that their animal is not a service animal but try to pass it off as such in order to obtain a transportation benefit for their pet to which they are not entitled.
> You are free to take any animal you choose in your own vehicle.
> ...


I can not begin to believe your narrow-mindedness.



SuzeCB said:


> What separates a SA from an ESA is not the person's dependence on it, but rather the proven disposition, inclinations, and training of the animal.
> 
> My son has autism and a few other disabilities. One of our cats acts as his ESA (it's phenomenal, really), but as of yet, we haven't taken the route necessary to have it officially designated as such. We will be doing it soon. Won't take a lot, actually, and I don't mean going to one of those sketchy websites and paying $60. It takes some forms filled out by his neurologist and primary dr. ESAs aren't about the animal, they're about the person exclusively. Once it's done, no landlord or HOA will be able to say my son can't have his ESA, and won't be able to charge more for it, either.
> 
> ...


Let compassion enter the equation, and you might like your results.



RaleighUber said:


> Half way to the ranks of the "retired." Come on in, the money is fine....
> 
> 
> "Service Animal" is a defined legal term and Uber's ADA policy applies ONLY to service animals. All other "uncovered service animals" are just pets. That is the law. You can drive who you want, but pretending "uncovered service animals" is a relevant term is spin. They are all "FAKE" in regard to ADA and Uber policy.


Uber usually sides with the claim of service animal. Keep your principle if you must, but Uber does not.


----------



## nickd8775 (Jul 12, 2015)

I’ll take all dogs and determine during the ride if it’s a fake or real service animal. A fake service dog will always produce fake poop in my car. 
Now with Uber Pet available, there’s no need to lie about a pet because for a fee, a passenger with a pet could guarantee a willing driver.


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

Diamondraider said:


> Disabled people would have this covered under Medicaid and disability insurance. Let's not be dramatic.


You are wrong, wrong, wrong. My g is disabled. You are Wron, Wron, Wron.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


I would lawyer up and sue the lady.


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

SurgeMasterMN said:


> I would lawyer up and sue the lady.


Oh pleez. Most of us could see multiple ways of handling the situation without reaching this outcome. The primary test of liability is the reasonable person test. This would simply not pass that standard. Too many reasonable people see it differently.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> What a bunch of bologna. The very process of the ADA is showing that they need special laws to make them "whole". If you need an animal to make you "whole", you are conspicuous. Period.
> 
> The ADA was to improve access. That's all. All of this other nonsense is leftist hysteria. Equality is a myth.


Stay just the way you are.

We need folks like you to fill up the bottom of the barrel!


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

BigRedDriver said:


> Stay just the way you are.
> 
> We need folks like you to fill up the bottom of the barrel!


According to you, there is no bottom of the barrel. See how that works?


----------



## Julescase2 (Apr 1, 2019)

LADryver said:


> What is your pedantic, irrelevant point?
> 
> 
> How do you believe so?


It's just odd, as you're speaking about something with such a lack of understanding it.

You clearly need to brush up on your ADA comprehension if you want to give opinions about the matter. Usually when someone is as cocky sounding as you, they presumably know something about something. Maybe not in your case but generally this is the way it works.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Julescase2 said:


> It's just odd, as you're speaking about something with such a lack of understanding it.
> 
> You clearly need to brush up on your ADA comprehension if you want to give opinions about the matter. Usually when someone is as cocky sounding as you, they presumably know something about something. Maybe not in your case but generally this is the way it works.


You must be new to the internet--especially UP.


----------



## Julescase2 (Apr 1, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> You must be new to the internet--especially UP.


Yes, only been reading UP for 3+ years. New for sure.



BogusServiceAnimal said:


> You must be new to the internet--especially UP.


You must be new to trying to understand the law. Funny thing, the law. People have to follow it. Imagine that!


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

Julescase2 said:


> It's just odd, as you're speaking about something with such a lack of understanding it.
> 
> You clearly need to brush up on your ADA comprehension if you want to give opinions about the matter. Usually when someone is as cocky sounding as you, they presumably know something about something. Maybe not in your case but generally this is the way it works.


You need to brush up on your worldliness.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Julescase2 said:


> Yes, only been reading UP for 3+ years. New for sure.
> 
> 
> You must be new to trying to understand the law. Funny thing, the law. People have to follow it. Imagine that!


Haha. You are new to the internet or oblivious to subtly of how people speak.

It was a dig to the fact that the internet is full of experts with zero qualifications. UP is one of the worst examples of this truth.


----------



## Julescase2 (Apr 1, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Haha. You are new to the internet or oblivious to subtly of how people speak.
> 
> It was a dig to the fact that the internet is full of experts with zero qualifications. UP is one of the worst examples of this truth.


You either know the law or don't. Expertise doesn't come into play with facts - it's pretty black or white. A fact is a fact is a fact.

Clearly you don't understand or haven't taken the time to read up on the ADA. That's fine. But when commenting about something you know nothing about, you're going to look silly saying things that are 100% nonsensical.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Julescase2 said:


> You either know the law or don't. Expertise doesn't come into play with facts - it's pretty black or white. A fact is a fact is a fact.
> 
> Clearly you don't understand or haven't taken the time to read up on the ADA. That's fine. But when commenting about something you know nothing about, you're going to look silly saying things that are 100% nonsensical.


I've fully read up on the ADA. It's very poorly written and needs to be gutted. It will be. Just a matter of time. Its original intent was accessibility, not fake equality and all of the nonsense it has empowered people who abuse it to do. It is is just used for frivolous lawsuits now. Handicapped people are not my equals. Period. They have equal rights under the law and that's it.


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I've fully read up on the ADA. It's very poorly written and needs to be gutted. It will be. Just a matter of time. Its original intent was accessibility, not fake equality and all of the nonsense it has empowered people who abuse it to do. It is is just used for frivolous lawsuits now. Handicapped people are not my equals. Period. They have equal rights under the law and that's it.


Well said.

"Under the ADA, it is training that distinguishes a service animal from other animals. Some service animals may be professionally trained; others may have been trained by their owners. However, the task that the service animal is trained to do must be directly related to the owner's disability."

Notice the paragraph above where it says that the service animal may be trained by its owner to do what actions that relate to the person's disability. Someone with a mental disability can train their animal to be in service to them. The OP's passenger had a claimed mental disability, and claimed that the dog did things for her that help her with basic tasks which are difficult for her in her disability. That dog was a qualified service animal.

I am disabled. I have had a service animal. He was a cat. He was a leash-walking, extremely well-behaving 22 pound cat. He saved my life and kept me safe. He gave me untold comfort. A cop once asked me if he was a service cat. I said yes. There was no other of discussion. The cop nodded. The same treatment was found in a university library. And pretty much everywhere I went. It was long before Uber, but the cat accompanied me 24/7. He passed away in 2007.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> According to you, there is no bottom of the barrel. See how that works?


stay stupid. It fits you.

I've been dealing with ADA issues since it's inception. 35 years as a commercial real estate Broker.

I've watched folks much smarter than you, spend Millions of dollars fighting it.

They all had one thing in common.

They all lost.

Good luck gubber, you're gonna need it.


----------



## O-Side Uber (Jul 26, 2017)

Anxiety is now considered a disability. ANY of us could get a doctor to prescribe a marijuana card to treat our anxiety , plus get a dog to ease the symptoms . We could then train the dog to fetch our weed off the table and bring it to us.. maybe even go fetch the lighter . Now it’s a service dog ?!!!!!


If you were to sue me, I would show the court my marijuana card that the doctor prescribed to me because I have a disability called anxiety . I would then show that I registered my dog on an ADA website. Also show a picture of the my dog with the vest I bought online . You would lose! 

I would then get an ADA lawyer to counter sue you and clean you out!!! 

Do I think this is right???? HELL NO!!!!!!!!

But it’s the way it is. Take all dogs or delete the app. You can’t win


----------



## IR12 (Nov 11, 2017)

SHalester said:


> the never-ending saga continues......


Never-ending & achieves nothing


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

O-Side Uber said:


> Anxiety is now considered a disability. ANY of us could get a doctor to prescribe a marijuana card to treat our anxiety , plus get a dog to ease the symptoms . We could then train the dog to fetch our weed off the table and bring it to us.. maybe even go fetch the lighter . Now it's a service dog ?!!!!!
> 
> If you were to sue me, I would show the court my marijuana card that the doctor prescribed to me because I have a disability called anxiety . I would then show that I registered my dog on an ADA website. Also show a picture of the my dog with the vest I bought online . You would lose!
> 
> ...


There will always be people trying to game the system.

the courts would bury that argument. The DOJ takes the ADA very serious. Not thinking a dog that fetches dope bags gonna cut it.


----------



## O-Side Uber (Jul 26, 2017)

BigRedDriver said:


> There will always be people trying to game the system.
> 
> the courts would bury that argument. The DOJ takes the ADA very serious. Not thinking a dog that fetches dope bags gonna cut it.


The dog doesn't need to be trained to do that much to be considered a service dog and there is no official training center. Dogs can be trained by the owner.

My weed joke is just one example. As far as Uber and lyft are concerned, just a pax calling in is good enough for them to deactivate any of us permanently


----------



## rkozy (Apr 5, 2019)

I've never had a dog vomit in my car. I've had a human vomit in my car.

I've never had a dog spill Starbucks in my car. I've had a human spill Starbucks in my car.

I've never had a dog eat BBQ chicken wings in my car and get sauce on the upholstery. I've had a human.....yada yada yada.

The moral of this story: If I had to chose between driving JUST DOGS or JUST HUMANS around all the time, my money is on the dogs. They tend to create less problems than humans.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

LADryver said:


> I can not begin to believe your narrow-mindedness


Would you care to elaborate? I have outlined the relevant facts relating to the ADA to you, no more and no less, without offering my own personal opinion. Therefore no inference can be made into any open mindedness or closed mindedness I have.

My reply was error-free. Facts are facts; they don't care about your feelings or whether you are offended by them or not.


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

LADryver said:


> Well said.
> 
> "Under the ADA, it is training that distinguishes a service animal from other animals. Some service animals may be professionally trained; others may have been trained by their owners. However, the task that the service animal is trained to do must be directly related to the owner's disability."
> 
> ...


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

LADryver said:


> You are cold.


No. You're trying to make this into a logic vs emotion matter, but that doesn't fit here. The fact that I have not posted my own opinion on the ADA regs does not mean that the subject is not emotive to me. To claim otherwise is naive. It is simply a preference of mine to limit discussions of facts to facts.

However, if you really, really, really want to know my personal, emotional view on this issue, I believe that the ADA needs to be amended as it is unfair and does not protect the rights of service providers. Insufficient consideration was given by the authors of the 2010 amendment (which referenced service animals) to the eventuality that it would lay service providers wide open to abuse from pet owners who would use the ADA as an "access all areas" pass for their pets. It is the disabled who should have "access all areas" passes, not pet owners. The only way I can see to achieve this would be to implement some kind of registration system for service animals, although a difficulty would be in who pays for it.


> You are inexperienced and sheltered from harsh realities.


Again, incorrect. You have no basis on which to take a view on my general life experiences, however in terms of the specifics to this discussion on the ADA and Uberlyft, I have already stated that I have plenty of experience with service animal fraudsters and dealing with Uberlyft when the false complaints of non-compliance come in against me.


> You do not view anything other than words.


So post some pictures/videos, instead of just words.


----------



## BritSilverFox (Jul 23, 2019)

WNYuber said:


> Although I haven't been driving Uber for very long, every night I secretly pray that I get deactivated.
> 
> #itsjustnotworthit


all you've got to do is .......... not run the app ... what's the challenge there ??


----------



## rkozy (Apr 5, 2019)

BritSilverFox said:


> all you've got to do is .......... not run the app ... what's the challenge there ??


The challenge is keeping the rent paid. People who complain about how Uber/Lyft isn't worth it, but keep doing it as their sole means of income have no other options in life. None whatsoever.

The reason this forum is filled with psychotic, hateful people who feel sorry for themselves is because Uber/Lyft has them by their non-employable balls. If it was as simple as obtaining a better job somewhere else, they'd already be doing that.

But, they can't obtain employment elsewhere. So they piss and moan about how unfair life is, hoping somebody will understand.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

BritSilverFox said:


> all you've got to do is .......... not run the app ... what's the challenge there ??


The guy in red:


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

The Gift of Fish said:


> No. You're trying to make this into a logic vs emotion matter, but that doesn't fit here. The fact that I have not posted my own opinion on the ADA regs does not mean that the subject is not emotive to me. To claim otherwise is naive. It is simply a preference of mine to limit discussions of facts to facts.
> 
> However, if you really, really, really want to know my personal, emotional view on this issue, I believe that the ADA needs to be amended as it is unfair and does not protect the rights of service providers. Insufficient consideration was given by the authors of the 2010 amendment (which referenced service animals) to the eventuality that it would lay service providers wide open to abuse from pet owners who would use the ADA as an "access all areas" pass for their pets. It is the disabled who should have "access all areas" passes, not pet owners. The only way I can see to achieve this would be to implement some kind of registration system for service animals, although a difficulty would be in who pays for it.
> Again, incorrect. You have no basis on which to take a view on my general life experiences, however in terms of the specifics to this discussion on the ADA and Uberlyft, I have already stated that I have plenty of experience with service animal fraudsters and dealing with Uberlyft when the false complaints of non-compliance come in against me.
> So post some pictures/videos, instead of just words.


I stand by my statements, as clearly you do yours. There are many types of services you can provide which would keep you from having to deal with the issues. The problem here is that you over-compute those who may lie about needing a service animal. The first thing they have to do is to reduce any expectations of being looked up to, or impress, or seem equal. They swallow their pride of self-sufficiency and tell of how dependent they are on an animal. People who commit fraud largely have big immovable egos and can not stand to be anything less than superior. So you want to knock down those who knock themselves down. That seems like a waste of energy. And you may like to ask yourself, what would Ford Prefect do?


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

LADryver said:


> There are many types of services you can provide which would keep you from having to deal with the issues.


Yes, if one would prefer not to deal with ADA issues in a public-facing capacity then one could choose not to work in a public-facing capacity. That statement is exceedingly obvious and adds nothing to the discussion.

I feel that you've nothing further to add of value to the discussion, so I'll be closing out this particular branch here.


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Yes, if one would prefer not to deal with ADA issues in a public-facing capacity then one could choose not to work in a public-facing capacity. That statement is exceedingly obvious and adds nothing to the discussion.
> 
> I feel that you've nothing further to add of value to the discussion, so I'll be closing out this particular branch here.


Arrogant grab of power that you do not possess.



rkozy said:


> The challenge is keeping the rent paid. People who complain about how Uber/Lyft isn't worth it, but keep doing it as their sole means of income have no other options in life. None whatsoever.
> 
> The reason this forum is filled with psychotic, hateful people who feel sorry for themselves is because Uber/Lyft has them by their non-employable balls. If it was as simple as obtaining a better job somewhere else, they'd already be doing that.
> 
> But, they can't obtain employment elsewhere. So they piss and moan about how unfair life is, hoping somebody will understand.


It can not be said of another time in the economy, but there are all kinds of choices. Look at other industries and moonlight in them. Parking is one industry that has so much turnover that your longevity is based solely on doing what is expected of you and not quitting. There are promotions like other industries. Retail is another. Movie Theaters. Truck Driving. Train for the license and you will be in a big rig in no time. Become a Secret Shopper. Become a Merchandiser. Take the Post Office Test. Take the Civil Service Test. Apply at UPS, FedEx, DHL, Airlines, and in Restaurants. And more. Look around. Replace the thing you hate with something that can change your life. Go back to school. Even completing one semester raises your job possibilities.

There is no such thing as no choices for someone engaging in as complex an activity as rideshare driving, given the personalities we deal with, the background check we passed, and the focus set on what we want.


----------



## Misunderstood Pirate (Aug 25, 2017)

SurgeMasterMN said:


> I would lawyer up and sue the lady.


Good luck


----------



## tc49821 (Oct 26, 2017)

OldBay said:


> Here is what doesn't make sense...
> 
> How does the passenger prove to Uber that they have a service animal?
> 
> ...


It's like some pax saying the driver drunk just for a free ride. Or the pax is just petty . The driver gets suspended for 24 to 48 hours. With out any actually proof.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Uber could release guidelines to for no animals in pool rides and be in compliance with the law. They just don't give a fahck


No. They can say no pets. But they can't ban service animals any more than they can a cane or walker or hearing aids. They would NOT be in compliance and neither would the driver.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> No. They can say no pets. But they can't ban service animals any more than they can a cane or walker or hearing aids. They would NOT be in compliance and neither would the driver.


I didn't say ban pets. I'm saying pet pax should be required to order Uber x and up.


----------



## lyft_rat (Jul 1, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.


You were deactivated because you feel entitled and confronted a pax, escalating a situation for no reason. You are not stable and should not be driving. Uber gets the win here to have you off the road.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I've fully read up on the ADA. It's very poorly written and needs to be gutted. It will be. Just a matter of time. Its original intent was accessibility, not fake equality and all of the nonsense it has empowered people who abuse it to do. It is is just used for frivolous lawsuits now. Handicapped people are not my equals. Period. They have equal rights under the law and that's it.


The ADA is litigation driven.

no wonder you got deactivated, you're story went from how well you treated the pax to the pax was not your equal.

Just another troll thread after all.

You all understand that the ADA Is a Civil rights act, right?

Good luck changing it. Won't happen


----------



## rkozy (Apr 5, 2019)

LADryver said:


> There is no such thing as no choices for someone engaging in as complex an activity as rideshare driving, given the personalities we deal with, the background check we passed, and the focus set on what we want.


For people like myself who regard ridesharing as a side gig for extra spending/saving money...better employment choices abound.

For people who are paranoid, spiteful, and unable to do anything that isn't 100% completely on their own terms...rideshare is the first, and only option.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

O-Side Uber said:


> Anxiety is now considered a disability. ANY of us could get a doctor to prescribe a marijuana card to treat our anxiety , plus get a dog to ease the symptoms . We could then train the dog to fetch our weed off the table and bring it to us.. maybe even go fetch the lighter . Now it's a service dog ?!!!!!
> 
> If you were to sue me, I would show the court my marijuana card that the doctor prescribed to me because I have a disability called anxiety . I would then show that I registered my dog on an ADA website. Also show a picture of the my dog with the vest I bought online . You would lose!
> 
> ...


----------



## JPaiva (Apr 21, 2019)

SuzeCB said:


> What separates a SA from an ESA is not the person's dependence on it, but rather the proven disposition, inclinations, and training of the animal.
> 
> My son has autism and a few other disabilities. One of our cats acts as his ESA (it's phenomenal, really), but as of yet, we haven't taken the route necessary to have it officially designated as such. We will be doing it soon. Won't take a lot, actually, and I don't mean going to one of those sketchy websites and paying $60. It takes some forms filled out by his neurologist and primary dr. ESAs aren't about the animal, they're about the person exclusively. Once it's done, no landlord or HOA will be able to say my son can't have his ESA, and won't be able to charge more for it, either.
> 
> ...


And when your sons non-service cat causes your ride to detour to the ER for treatment of hives swelling and other anaphylactic shock symptoms due to my extreme allergic reaction to cats- you are going to pick up the medical bill RIGHT? May as well chomp down on some peanuts on the way too. That way you can feel like you got you moneys worth.


----------



## kevin92009 (Sep 11, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


It may be a blessing in disguise you won't have to deal with that thuggish company anymore And your life will be much better


----------



## sellkatsell44 (Oct 25, 2015)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> I didn't say ban pets. I'm saying pet pax should be required to order Uber x and up.


I'm not allergic to any cuties but some of my friends are.

if you're going to bring animals into the car you should not subject anyone else to it and clear with the driver they don't have any allergies.


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

rkozy said:


> For people like myself who regard ridesharing as a side gig for extra spending/saving money...better employment choices abound.
> 
> For people who are paranoid, spiteful, and unable to do anything that isn't 100% completely on their own terms...rideshare is the first, and only option.


You are describing every millionaire entrepreneur in the world!


----------



## Dice Man (May 21, 2018)

Some people are garbage.
I wish yo a better job.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

Just go to GLH. Tell em it wasn’t the dog that made you cancel, it was the pax refusing to empty the open container.

RESOLVED.


----------



## RaleighUber (Dec 4, 2016)

LADryver said:


> Uber usually sides with the claim of service animal. Keep your principle if you must, but Uber does not.


Uber never follows the law...if you want that you need to give up rideshare. But your claims are not related to the ADA.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

JPaiva said:


> And when your sons non-service cat causes your ride to detour to the ER for treatment of hives swelling and other anaphylactic shock symptoms due to my extreme allergic reaction to cats- you are going to pick up the medical bill RIGHT? May as well chomp down on some peanuts on the way too. That way you can feel like you got you moneys worth.


I'm saying that ESA's aren't the same. Where did I say an ESA has to be transported? Nowhere.

SAs do.

Read it again.


----------



## kevin92009 (Sep 11, 2016)

RaleighUber said:


> Uber never follows the law...if you want that you need to give up rideshare. But your claims are not related to the ADA.


money lets people break the law


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

I will say this very simply. If you are following the ADA, then follow it. But the ADA itself is flawed. It omits other service animals. You can decline a non-ADA service animal, but it is wrong to say they are fake.


----------



## 1prdcat (Nov 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


Uber seems to be lacking respect for it's drivers...I'm dealing with a similar situation and looking into court action...Interested in joining?


----------



## 58756 (May 30, 2016)

Blessing in disguise. Also I've mentioned it in the past but there is a 4k phenomena that has drivers deactivated around 4k mark

Get dashcam like these overhead ones I have


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

LADryver said:


> I will say this very simply. If you are following the ADA, then follow it. But the ADA itself is flawed. It omits other service animals. You can decline a non-ADA service animal, but it is wrong to say they are fake.


If they are not allowed the legal distinction of a Service Animal, then they are fake in regards to the law.

sure, you can claim a tiger as a Support Animal, but the legal claim is moot. The law allows dogs only.


----------



## 1prdcat (Nov 2, 2019)

Ozzyoz said:


> Blessing in disguise. Also I've mentioned it in the past but there is a 4k phenomena that has drivers deactivated around 4k mark
> 
> Get dashcam like these overhead ones I have
> View attachment 373387


Have one and consider an absolute must...but if Uber refuses to view for authenticity...what good is it...My complaint is deactivation for "fraudulent documents" with no explanation or proof...W.T.H.!


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

1prdcat said:


> Have one and consider an absolute must...but if Uber refuses to view for authenticity...what good is it...My complaint is deactivation for "fraudulent documents" with no explanation or proof...W.T.H.!


had the same thing. Took my documents to the GLH and was reactivated in 10 minutes even though support said I was permanently deactivated.

in my case, the guy that wrote down my VIN number on the inspection form wrote a 7 when he meant to write a 9. After discovering the mistake, instead of filling out a whole new form, he wrote the 9 over the 7.

the guy at the GLH took care of it and said that Uber support were a bunch of idiots.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

BigRedDriver said:


> The ADA is litigation driven.
> 
> no wonder you got deactivated, you're story went from how well you treated the pax to the pax was not your equal.
> 
> ...


The story went from how well I treated my pax, to the idiotic monstrosity that the ADA has been twisted into. The passenger was lying. Period. The passenger was unstable. Period.

A lying, unstable passenger was enabled to affect another person's livelihood because of Uber's stupid policy with supposed service animals and the poor legal language within the ADA. Period.


----------



## Youburr (Aug 22, 2019)

Did you report pax immediately?


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

lyft_rat said:


> You were deactivated because you feel entitled and confronted a pax, escalating a situation for no reason. You are not stable and should not be driving. Uber gets the win here to have you off the road.


4.95 over 4000 rides is the paragon of stability. I asked the only legal question available to me. I did not escalate the situation. The passenger is an unstable, lying, entitled churl that deserves to become disabled.



Youburr said:


> Did you report pax immediately?


Yes. Sent in immediate passenger was rude complaint with full details including passenger telling me to cancel the ride.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> The story went from how well I treated my pax, to the idiotic monstrosity that the ADA has been twisted into. The passenger was lying. Period. The passenger was unstable. Period.
> 
> A lying, unstable passenger was enabled to affect another person's livelihood because of Uber's stupid policy with supposed service animals and the poor legal language within the ADA. Period.


Sure, plus they are less than you as you stated earlier.

and you have dash cam footage to prove it?

Sorry, I don't believe you. Show the footage bigot.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

They'll eventually deactivate all of you because they will lower the rates and not keep any drivers around who know what we're supposed to be making.

Enjoy any supposed security you have while it lasts.



BigRedDriver said:


> Sure, plus they are less than you as you stated earlier.
> 
> and you have dash cam footage to prove it?
> 
> Sorry, I don't believe you. Show the footage bigot.


A person with disabilities is not my equal on a number of fronts. They have equal access to the law, and even special access to the law. AND THAT'S IT. They can't beat me in a race, outperform me at work, out qualify me, and often cannot out think me. The notion of leveling people for some faux equality has been argued against for hundreds of years.

You don't understand the definition of the word bigot, child. Please choose your words with purpose, knowledge, and authority.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> They'll eventually deactivate all of you because they will lower the rates and not keep any drivers around who know what we're supposed to be making.
> 
> Enjoy any supposed security you have while it lasts.
> 
> ...


I understand the word perfectly well.

and you were likely deactivated because of your bigoted attitude that's on full display here.

oh, and poof, you are now on ignore.


----------



## Youburr (Aug 22, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> 4.95 over 4000 rides is the paragon of stability. I asked the only legal question available to me. I did not escalate the situation. The passenger is an unstable, lying, entitled churl that deserves to become disabled.


The law is one thing. We ain't lawyers. We deliver customer service for TNCs. Uber can legally deactivate you for extra-legal reasons.


----------



## 1prdcat (Nov 2, 2019)

BigRedDriver said:


> had the same thing. Took my documents to the GLH and was reactivated in 10 minutes even though support said I was permanently deactivated.
> 
> in my case, the guy that wrote down my VIN number on the inspection form wrote a 7 when he meant to write a 9. After discovering the mistake, instead of filling out a whole new form, he wrote the 9 over the 7.
> 
> the guy at the GLH took care of it and said that Uber support were a bunch of idiots.


Thanxs for the info...What is GLH? I'm in Buffalo N.Y. and have spent 3 days on supposed " fraudulent documents"...No such thing...As to support...a group of non english speaking inividuals...with funny names.. who only know how to read scripted answers is not support...Sorry!



Youburr said:


> The law is one thing. We ain't lawyers. We deliver customer service for TNCs. Uber can legally deactivate you for extra-legal reasons.


Delivery quality customer is one thing...being abused by a rider is another matter entirely!


----------



## toyotarola (Apr 7, 2016)

I love how this idiot has been replying to every single person for 6 days! Are you going to tell me I'm sad or worthless or an idiot? I think you wanted to get deactivated, anyone with 4,000 trips knows the deal with animals. Your reaction and subsequent reactions in this thread are pedantic to say the least.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Youburr said:


> The law is one thing. We ain't lawyers. We deliver customer service for TNCs. Uber can legally deactivate you for extra-legal reasons.


We are each small businesses that Uber technically says are the SOLE providers of the service. Uber says that they only BOOK and insure the rides. Each ride is a contract between pax and driver with 100% of the money going to the driver under Uber's bizarre legal framework. We then PAY Uber what it decides we are supposed to pay for each ride. We have NO say in the matter, cannot handle the money, and have ZERO transparency over the tips and actual fares and passenger's information.

A judge has already called it legal fiction. I'll just sip on some cocktails and watch it all come crashing on their heads and sign up for every lawsuit under the sun.



toyotarola said:


> I love how this idiot has been replying to every single person for 6 days! Are you going to tell me I'm sad or worthless or an idiot? I think you wanted to get deactivated, anyone with 4,000 trips knows the deal with animals. Your reaction and subsequent reactions in this thread are pedantic to say the least.


I pop on and reply every now and then. You are sad and worthless and an idiot for defending the company that you hate and that exploits you. You are also sad and worthless for randomly antagonizing people on the internet. Pedantic, another word thrown about with little understanding of the meaning of the word. It doesn't make you sound smart when you misuse words just to sound impressive.


----------



## Youburr (Aug 22, 2019)

Cool. Let us know how that works out for you.


----------



## 58756 (May 30, 2016)

1prdcat said:


> Have one and consider an absolute must...but if Uber refuses to view for authenticity...what good is it...My complaint is deactivation for "fraudulent documents" with no explanation or proof...W.T.H.!


I've had an impaired driving report in Uber by some young drunk white guys and I linked the YouTube upload of the dashcam and my state has 1 party recording laws, Uber didn't acknowledge they watched it but I know they did because the reactivated me fast. My YouTube channel also had a view hit from Uber


----------



## 1prdcat (Nov 2, 2019)

Ozzyoz said:


> I've had an impaired driving report in Uber by some young drunk white guys and I linked the YouTube upload of the dashcam and my state has 1 party recording laws, Uber didn't acknowledge they watched it but I know they did because the reactivated me fast. My YouTube channel also had a view hit from Uber


Good for you...Being proactive is always good...This deactivation is for "fraudulent documents" with no explanation as to what documents they are referring to...No prior communications...nada! I'm offended and consider this defamation of character...Next stop...Attorney Generals Office!



BigRedDriver said:


> had the same thing. Took my documents to the GLH and was reactivated in 10 minutes even though support said I was permanently deactivated.
> 
> in my case, the guy that wrote down my VIN number on the inspection form wrote a 7 when he meant to write a 9. After discovering the mistake, instead of filling out a whole new form, he wrote the 9 over the 7.
> 
> the guy at the GLH took care of it and said that Uber support were a bunch of idiots.


Thanks for the heads up...will try.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

all this drivel with only one side of the story. amazing. For somebody happy about being terminated they sure like to talk about it a lot.

Go go and watch that door as it swings shut........


----------



## 1prdcat (Nov 2, 2019)

SHalester said:


> all this drivel with only one side of the story. amazing. For somebody happy about being terminated they sure like to talk about it a lot.
> 
> Go go and watch that door as it swings shut........


Oh dear...I'm preparing a Class Action Suit against them...nothing amazing about it!


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> all this drivel with only one side of the story. amazing. For somebody happy about being terminated they sure like to talk about it a lot.
> 
> Go go and watch that door as it swings shut........


Why in the world would I post something on a message board if I was at fault? Uber has a history of deactivation for false accusations. Good luck when you meet yours.

Haven't missed a beat in my earnings, for what it's worth. Making as much if not more with manifold peace of mind.

Just consider all of you warned.



1prdcat said:


> Oh dear...I'm preparing a Class Action Suit against them...nothing amazing about it!


There will be hundreds of lawsuits available to drivers over the next few years. Uber hasn't made any friends politically with their tax shelter.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

1prdcat said:


> Thanxs for the info...What is GLH? I'm in Buffalo N.Y. and have spent 3 days on supposed " fraudulent documents"...No such thing...As to support...a group of non english speaking inividuals...with funny names.. who only know how to read scripted answers is not support...Sorry!
> 
> 
> Delivery quality customer is one thing...being abused by a rider is another matter entirely!


Green Light Hub


----------



## LADryver (Jun 6, 2017)

BigRedDriver said:


> If they are not allowed the legal distinction of a Service Animal, then they are fake in regards to the law.
> 
> sure, you can claim a tiger as a Support Animal, but the legal claim is moot. The law allows dogs only.


No. They are simply not eligible for being treated the same as other service animals. There is nothing fake about it.


----------



## JPaiva (Apr 21, 2019)

What ever happened to the business owners right to refuse service to anyone for any reason? Don't like it, post your fake service dog complaint on social media, get an attorney and sue....Oh wait, its a fake service animal. Good luck with garnering community support. I didn't deny you because the chihuahua, I denied you because a dude toting around a chihuahua is obviously gay and not allowed in my car...kidding- before people start flipping out. No issue with gay people. But a dude toting around a chihuahua....yep


----------



## Matthew Thomas (Mar 19, 2016)

WNYuber said:


> Although I haven't been driving Uber for very long, every night I secretly pray that I get deactivated.
> 
> #itsjustnotworthit


You know things are bad when people WANT to get deactivated from screwber. Good thing I found something else to do. I have not driven since June and if I do drive again it will be more for social interaction rather than for money (I live near two college towns and college girls are fun........until they puke all over the side of your car lol).


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Why would I post something on a message board if I was at fault?


U have an inability to properly comprehend the realities
of an emotional situation because of your learned internal
Defense Mechanisms.
"it's their Fault! Not mine!"
U need to talk with a mental healthcare provider

Primitive Defense Mechanisms
1. Denial
Denial is the refusal to accept reality or fact, acting as if a painful event, thought or feeling did not exist. It is considered one of the most primitive of the defense mechanisms because it is characteristic of early childhood development.

Many people use denial in their everyday lives to avoid dealing with painful feelings or areas of their life they don't wish to admit.

https://psychcentral.com/lib/15-common-defense-mechanisms/


----------



## 1prdcat (Nov 2, 2019)

BigRedDriver said:


> Green Light Hub


Thanks so much...


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

1prdcat said:


> Thanks so much...


good luck. My GLH did right by me.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

any time any dog gets in your car you start recording audio....if there are any issues you make sure you got the paxes name on audio and let them know you got audio going

if the dog shows any signs of problems you make sure you get it on audio

make sure to file for unemployment, depending on which state you are in you should get some free money on Uber's behalf...we almost always win unemployment

all the more reason to love AB5 ...as independent contractors we have zero rights, zero appeals, zero help from unions via grievances


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


Don't like the way Uber or Lyft do business, but they made the right call here. Can't tell people with service animals they have to tell you in advance about them.


----------



## kcdrvr15 (Jan 10, 2017)

The lesson here is boys and girls, don't pick up or accept requests at PetSmart...

By the time you realize the dog is a fake service animal, it's too late to avoid the backlash.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Illini said:


> It may be too late now, but the easy solution is to take all service animals, no questions asked.
> If the animal makes a mess, take pics, and send it into Uber to claim a cleaning fee.
> I happen to love dogs, so I'll take them all.
> I've only had one dog that was claimed to be a service dog, and by just looking at the dog, and it's owner, there was zero doubt in my mind that he was telling the truth. The other dogs I've taken were announced as just pets, or emotional support dogs (which we CAN deny rides to).


If they LIE about a " SERVICE DOG"

IT is only fair to punish Them.

Ask for Cleaning Fee.


----------



## toyotarola (Apr 7, 2016)

[QUOTE="BogusServiceAnimal, post: 5539840,
I pop on and reply every now and then. You are sad and worthless and an idiot for defending the company that you hate and that exploits you. You are also sad and worthless for randomly antagonizing people on the internet. Pedantic, another word thrown about with little understanding of the meaning of the word. It doesn't make you sound smart when you misuse words just to sound impressive.
[/QUOTE]

Looks I have to explain English to Mr. PHD, you're pedantic because she told you it's a service animal and you damn well know what that means to an Uber driver, but you had to insist she was technically wrong and point that out, which no one (except you) gives a shit about. That would be #3 below.

*pedantic* (_comparative_ *more pedantic*, _superlative_ *most pedantic*)

Like a pedant, overly concerned with formal rules and trivial points of learning.
Being showy of one's knowledge, often in a boring manner.
Being finicky or fastidious, especially with language.


----------



## 1prdcat (Nov 2, 2019)

Demon said:


> Don't like the way Uber or Lyft do business, but they made the right call here. Can't tell people with service animals they have to tell you in advance about them.


Oh please...Termination for asking about the dog...from a highly rated driver...Ridiculous!!!


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

1prdcat said:


> Oh please...Termination for asking about the dog...from a highly rated driver...Ridiculous!!!


Let that be a lesson to you "New Member." You can fool some of the people all of the time or all of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. If you're a surly SOB and can't help but be an ahole to your coworkers and customers, you will eventually be fired from your jobs and even from Uber, the easiest gig in the world.


----------



## 1prdcat (Nov 2, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> Let that be a lesson to you "New Member." You can fool some of the people all of the time or all of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. If you're a surly SOB and can't help but be an ahole to your coworkers and customers, you will eventually be fired from your jobs and even from Uber, the easiest gig in the world.


You wait...eventually your time will come...with no recourse!


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

1prdcat said:


> You wait...eventually your time will come...with no recourse!


Chances are low unless you're an incompetent driver or socially inept, self-righteous, self-entitled dork who treats pax (especially women) like an inferior form of life.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Demon said:


> Don't like the way Uber or Lyft do business, but they made the right call here. Can't tell people with service animals they have to tell you in advance about them.


I can tell people with animals that proper etiquette is to let us know. Her answer was never "This is a service animal" in a calm way. Her reply was immediately hysterical and hostile. The woman was clearly unhinged. A person I would normally cancel the ride as rider behavior. I don't care what your disability is, if you are rude to your driver, you don't deserve a ride.



TemptingFate said:


> Chances are low unless you're an incompetent driver or socially inept, self-righteous, self-entitled dork who treats pax (especially women) like an inferior form of life.


You are a rather bizarre poster on here. Clearly a man with many issues. Likely fired from many jobs.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I can tell people with animals that proper etiquette is to let us know. Her answer was never "This is a service animal" in a calm way. Her reply was immediately hysterical and hostile. The woman was clearly unhinged. A person I would normally cancel the ride as rider behavior. I don't care what your disability is, if you are rude to your driver, you don't deserve a ride.
> 
> 
> You are a rather bizarre poster on here. Clearly a man with many issues. Likely fired from many jobs.


Wrong again OldBay/BogusAnimal. Never been fired from any job. Unlike you, I don't have issues working with women.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> Wrong again OldBay/BogusAnimal. Never been fired from any job. Unlike you, I don't have issues working with women.


You are incredibly odd. You try to make people think you're a woman by putting a woman's pic as your avatar and then you assume many things that aren't even remotely true. I can only be happy that I am not trapped in your sad, little mind.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> You are incredibly odd. You try to make people think you're a woman by putting a woman's pic as your avatar and then you assume many things that aren't even remotely true. I can only be happy that I am not trapped in your sad, little mind.


Yeah, you seem really happy.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> Let that be a lesson to you "New Member." You can fool some of the people all of the time or all of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. If you're a surly SOB and can't help but be an ahole to your coworkers and customers, you will eventually be fired from your jobs and even from Uber, the easiest gig in the world.


Uber was easily the most challenging job I have ever worked. The way you have no leverage against passengers who continually try to break the law with your vehicle was terrible to contend with. Multitasking was always a must. Challenges against violent crime and potential fatal accidents. As a full time driver, one truly deserves $40k a year plus benefits and the use of company vehicle. If you use your own vehicle, the salary should be increased to $55k a year.

You really diminish your own value by claiming this is an easy gig. I was content at $30 an hour, but barely. Anything less than that became diminishing returns, especially as both platforms are taking far more than they deserve.

I could bartend and make $50k a year at 40 hours a week and never live in fear that I might be stabbed to death while working.

Rideshare driving is incredibly challenging and the odds will eventually catch up to you.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Uber was easily the most challenging job I have ever worked. The way you have no leverage against passengers who continually try to break the law with your vehicle was terrible to contend with. Multitasking was always a must. Challenges against violent crime and potential fatal accidents. As a full time driver, one truly deserves $40k a year plus benefits and the use of company vehicle. If you use your own vehicle, the salary should be increased to $55k a year.
> 
> You really diminish your own value by claiming this is an easy gig. I was content at $30 an hour, but barely. Anything less than that became diminishing returns, especially as both platforms are taking far more than they deserve.
> 
> ...


If you find Uber challenging then you must be "differently abled."


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> If you find Uber challenging then you must be "differently abled."


That should give me special rights, like a service dog and unicorn status. I can't wait for my disabled privilege.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> That should give me special rights, like a service dog and unicorn status. I can't wait for my disabled privilege.


https://www.disability-benefits-help.org/disabling-conditions/mental-disorders


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I can tell people with animals that proper etiquette is to let us know. Her answer was never "This is a service animal" in a calm way. Her reply was immediately hysterical and hostile. The woman was clearly unhinged. A person I would normally cancel the ride as rider behavior. I don't care what your disability is, if you are rude to your driver, you don't deserve a ride.
> 
> 
> You are a rather bizarre poster on here. Clearly a man with many issues. Likely fired from many jobs.


Sorry, a person with a service animal doesn't have to let you know in advance. You're going to tell people who are disabled that they have to let a driver know in advance that they have a disability and then when they get upset you don't want to take accountability. That's why they made the right call.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Uber was easily the most challenging job I have ever worked


wut? have you ever even had a W2 job? RS almost no hurtles to getting hired. No interview. No supervisor, no manager, no execs. No nothing. Plus the moment your feeling are hurt you can go offline. Try that with a real job.


----------



## melusine3 (Jun 20, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


Get a job as a security guard. You wear their clothes, you drive their vehicles on their gas, it's an excellent gig.



CTK said:


> Nope nope nope - no proof required or available per the ADA, service animals are not registered or certified. Service animal laws are intended to make life easier for those with disabilities, and to protect their medical privacy. That some abuse it sucks, but changing the laws penalizes the very people they were created to help.


They ARE required to quietly sit on the floor, aren't they? This case it sounds like the dog didn't, which would be a hint it was a fake service dog.


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

melusine3 said:


> Get a job as a security guard. You wear their clothes, you drive their vehicles on their gas, it's an excellent gig.
> 
> 
> They ARE required to quietly sit on the floor, aren't they? This case it sounds like the dog didn't, which would be a hint it was a fake service dog.


That's just it tho - there is absolutely nothing that "proves" whether it's real or fake. Telling Uber you were justified refusing thre ride cause the dog jumped all over the car & therefore can't be a legit service dog won't work.

Bottom line? Rider utters the words "service animal", take the ride. Every single time. Or, refuse it and come here and whine about how unfair it is and how all of this shouldn't apply to you and your unique circumstances.

There is zero gray area in this issue, although so many on this forum argue that there is. It's black and white, it's really that simple.


----------



## Mtbsrfun (May 25, 2019)

Haha security job; worst job ever. You have no authority to do anything, having to watch people break laws and do things that you’re supposed to stop but you have to call a cop to act because of legal ramifications; most boring job and most frustrating job at the same time.

plus the pay is crap for the agonizing boredom you will suffer through.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

CTK said:


> That's just it tho - there is absolutely nothing that "proves" whether it's real or fake. Telling Uber you were justified refusing thre ride cause the dog jumped all over the car & therefore can't be a legit service dog won't work.
> 
> Bottom line? Rider utters the words "service animal", take the ride. Every single time. Or, refuse it and come here and whine about how unfair it is and how all of this shouldn't apply to you and your unique circumstances.
> 
> There is zero gray area in this issue, although so many on this forum argue that there is. It's black and white, it's really that simple.


Apparently passengers can tell you to cancel the ride and still get you deactivated just for asking the two legal questions.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

melusine3 said:


> Get a job as a security guard. You wear their clothes, you drive their vehicles on their gas, it's an excellent gig.
> 
> 
> They ARE required to quietly sit on the floor, aren't they? This case it sounds like the dog didn't, which would be a hint it was a fake service dog.


No, service animals are not required to sit on the floor, some of them need to sit in the person's lap.



BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Apparently passengers can tell you to cancel the ride and still get you deactivated just for asking the two legal questions.


But that isn't the issue that got you reported.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Demon said:


> No, service animals are not required to sit on the floor, some of them need to sit in the person's lap.
> 
> 
> But that isn't the issue that got you reported.


This was a blue heeler. It wasn't a lap dog.

That's EXACTLY the issue that got me reported. Pay attention.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> This was a blue heeler. It wasn't a lap dog.
> 
> That's EXACTLY the issue that got me reported. Pay attention.


Being arrogant and rude will get you deactivated.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> Being arrogant and rude will get you deactivated.


Surprising that you are still active then.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Surprising that you are still active then.


Better luck in your next job.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> Better luck in your next job.


So sad and bitter. Glad that driving drunks around gives you a sense of purpose.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> So sad and bitter. Glad that driving drunks around gives you a sense of purpose.


You're too good for this gig because you're so much smarter and better than everyone around you. If only they would listen to you and accept your superiority. I'm sure you'll find something suitable for your high standards soon. Have you thought about recyclables?


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> This was a blue heeler. It wasn't a lap dog.
> 
> That's EXACTLY the issue that got me reported. Pay attention.


The issue that got you reported was that you told someone with a service animal that they would have to tell you they were disabled before you picked them up.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> You're too good for this gig because you're so much smarter and better than everyone around you. If only they would listen to you and accept your superiority. I'm sure you'll find something suitable for your high standards soon. Have you thought about recyclables?


I'm sorry, but I'm having a much better conversation with a brick wall, presently.



Demon said:


> The issue that got you reported was that you told someone with a service animal that they would have to tell you they were disabled before you picked them up.


Absolutely not. I told someone with a dog that the polite thing was to let us know that they have one. After she told me it was a purported service animal she got aggressive when I asked her the only legal question available to me and told me I wasn't allowed to ask that question--which is incorrect. Flustered and hysterical, she told me to cancel the ride.

You can spin it however you like, but I did everything within Uber policy and scope of the ADA. However, Uber doesn't care when passengers lie. I'm almost certain the woman fabricated a story where I told her I wouldn't take the ride, which is the only thing that would have gotten me deactivated.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Flustered and hysterical, she told me to cancel the ride.


You're so good with people. Can't see how anyone wouldn't want you to be their driver.

Oh well. It's over now. Hopefully you won't have to deal with people ever again.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I'm sorry, but I'm having a much better conversation with a brick wall, presently.
> 
> 
> Absolutely not. I told someone with a dog that the polite thing was to let us know that they have one. After she told me it was a purported service animal she got aggressive when I asked her the only legal question available to me and told me I wasn't allowed to ask that question--which is incorrect. Flustered and hysterical, she told me to cancel the ride.
> ...


Yes, you can't tell passengers that. The rest of your story has now changed.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

You know the troll will go away when there are no new replies. Just saying.......


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> You're so good with people. Can't see how anyone wouldn't want you to be their driver.
> 
> Oh well. It's over now. Hopefully you won't have to deal with people ever again.


4000 rides at 4.95. Better than you.



Demon said:


> Yes, you can't tell passengers that. The rest of your story has now changed.


I can absolutely tell people that. The ADA doesn't prevent people from telling people with non-service animals what simple etiquette is. My story hasn't changed from the beginning. I feel like I'm having a conversation with an insane asylum on this board.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> 4000 rides at 4.95. Better than you.
> 
> 
> I can absolutely tell people that. The ADA doesn't prevent people from telling people with non-service animals what simple etiquette is. My story hasn't changed from the beginning. I feel like I'm having a conversation with an insane asylum on this board.


Obviously not without being deactivated. It isn't etiquette to tell people in advance that they are disabled, that's the whole point of ADA. 
Your story is in writing and it has changed. You seem to know a lot about asylums.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> 4000 rides at 4.95. Better than you.


Ratings don't matter, especially if you're deactivated. A deactivated driver's rating is 0.0.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Demon said:


> Obviously not without being deactivated. It isn't etiquette to tell people in advance that they are disabled, that's the whole point of ADA.
> Your story is in writing and it has changed. You seem to know a lot about asylums.


It hasn't changed an iota, genius.

When an animal clearly isn't a service animal, the burden of proof is on the passenger. I am not meant to alter my behavior with humans until I know for certain that they are indeed protected by the ADA. Once it was clear that the woman had a purported service animal, I asked the only legal question available to me, which sent her into a rage. She did not know the law of the ADA, which makes her almost 100% likely a lying byotch who deserves cancer.



TemptingFate said:


> Ratings don't matter, especially if you're deactivated. A deactivated driver's rating is 0.0.


Keep telling yourself that, harpie.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> who deserves cancer.


that was just wrong on every level. Go away.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> It hasn't changed an iota, genius.
> 
> When an animal clearly isn't a service animal, the burden of proof is on the passenger. I am not meant to alter my behavior with humans until I know for certain that they are indeed protected by the ADA. Once it was clear that the woman had a purported service animal, I asked the only legal question available to me, which sent her into a rage. She did not know the law of the ADA, which makes her almost 100% likely a lying byotch who deserves cancer.
> 
> ...


It's obvious who's the problem in this encounter.

Pedestrians have every right to cross the street in a cross-walk. The burden of stopping is on the driver. But if the driver runs them over, they are dead and it doesn't matter how right they think they were.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

You're both useless and on ignore now. Enjoy your sad miserable lives with one less victim in your petty sphere of influence.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> It hasn't changed an iota, genius.
> 
> When an animal clearly isn't a service animal, the burden of proof is on the passenger. I am not meant to alter my behavior with humans until I know for certain that they are indeed protected by the ADA. Once it was clear that the woman had a purported service animal, I asked the only legal question available to me, which sent her into a rage. She did not know the law of the ADA, which makes her almost 100% likely a lying byotch who deserves cancer.


So your story has just changed again.

Initially your story was that you told the woman it was impolite to have a service animal without alerting you first, which is illegal to require. Then, after saying that, you asked the question, to which the woman responded "to retrieve things". 
So, yeah, you broke the ADA law.



BogusServiceAnimal said:


> You're both useless and on ignore now. Enjoy your sad miserable lives with one less victim in your petty sphere of influence.


Sorry you don't like facts.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> that was just wrong on every level. Go away.


if you fake a service animal, you deserve cancer. sorry that this hurts your feelings.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> You're both useless and on ignore now. Enjoy your sad miserable lives with one less victim in your petty sphere of influence.


Thanks! Can you make sure that your alter ego @OldBay also ignores me.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

oh, my 2nd ignore list. woohoo. NOW scram troll


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> if you fake a service animal, you deserve cancer. sorry that this hurts your feelings.


How about if you wish cancer on someone else? What is the penalty there?


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> oh, my 2nd ignore list. woohoo. NOW scram troll


Your state sucks.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> if you fake a service animal, you deserve cancer. sorry that this hurts your feelings.


And you have what proof that it wasn't a service animal?


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

My entire state? Really? Ug, moderators need to close this never ending story.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> My entire state? Really? Ug, moderators need to close this never ending story.


Entire state. Except for the ocean and nature. It's not their fault that they've been overrun with miscreants.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

SHalester said:


> My entire state? Really? Ug, moderators need to close this never ending story.


You can see he's a real affable chap. Sadly misunderstood and wrongfully terminated. Haha.


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Apparently passengers can tell you to cancel the ride and still get you deactivated just for asking the two legal questions.


Do you really think your rider would have asked you to cancel if you hadn't antagonized her first? Right or wrong, you're the one who got penalized. I've said repeatedly in this thread and I'll repeat it: rider says service animal, smile and drive the car. Any other response - ANY OTHER response! - is risking deactivation.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

CTK said:


> Do you really think your rider would have asked you to cancel if you hadn't antagonized her first? Right or wrong, you're the one who got penalized. I've said repeatedly in this thread and I'll repeat it: rider says service animal, smile and drive the car. Any other response - ANY OTHER response! - is risking deactivation.


Asking the legal questions available to you is not antagonizing. If I have to put up with disrespectful passengers simply because they hide behind the ADA, I am happy to be out of the rideshare tax shelter.

The ADA is not meant to enable shitty behavior.

Especially from liars.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> It's not their fault that they've been overrun with miscreants


hello, **** I was on ignore? :errwhat: My state is just fine; kinda the reason it is one of the most populous. Most Uber drivers as well. I think all of them would have been aware PU was a Petco and the odds there would be a pet were like super high.

You error was letting them in your car when you are so not a pet or dog person. Then you asked a quite silly question once they were IN your vehicle. By that time just doing the ride would have been the correct behavior. I"m sure your car would have survived.

I suspect this even didn't happen and you are user id hopping here ie a troll. There are trolls here, but at least their posts are entertaining.

Please please put me back on ignore. Please¿


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

https://www.sfgate.com/travel/resou...-Sweets-BART-passengers-adorable-14812217.php
"Under the Department of Transportation Americans with Disabilities Act, Trost explained, transit entities are required to permit service animals to accompany individuals with disabilities in vehicles and facilities. Currently, the language of the law defines a "service animal" as "any guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to work or perform tasks for an individual with a disability.""

It's a good thing red state cretins don't work for BART or live in Ca.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

SHalester said:


> hello, **** I was on ignore? :errwhat: My state is just fine; kinda the reason it is one of the most populous. Most Uber drivers as well. I think all of them would have been aware PU was a Petco and the odds there would be a pet were like super high.
> 
> You error was letting them in your car when you are so not a pet or dog person. Then you asked a quite silly question once they were IN your vehicle. By that time just doing the ride would have been the correct behavior. I"m sure your car would have survived.
> 
> ...


I tried putting your post in google translate and a Looney Tunes video came up. I'm sorry for your loss.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Looney Tunes best cartoon ever. Try again. T R O L L


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Asking the legal questions available to you is not antagonizing. If I have to put up with disrespectful passengers simply because they hide behind the ADA, I am happy to be out of the rideshare tax shelter.
> 
> The ADA is not meant to enable shitty behavior.
> 
> Especially from liars.


Clearly your rider felt antagonized as evidenced by her request for you to cancel the ride as well as her report to Uber, so I would beg to differ.

The world is filled with scumballs and liars, that's a fact. The best we can hope for is to defend ourselves from their scams, and as far as Uber and service animals are concerned, there's only one way to do that. When a rider says "service animal", smile and drive the car. There's just no way around that.


----------



## roadapple (Mar 13, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


I was lucky. I had a lady with a "service cat", and I'm very... repeat VERY allergic to cats. No mention of a cat, it had no "service animal" collar, sweater, etc. just a cat that she was carrying around like it was a 3 month old baby. Needless to say, I told her I couldn't do the cat and I explained why, she called me a Nazi Trump supporter and got out of the car and complained to Uber. I told them my side and they didn't do anything to me. Unless you've got a car that someone else is paying for, Uber isn't worth it. I had a Prius and it ended up costing me many thousands of dollars in maintenance/repairs, plus would I have hit the deer at 2am or been rear ended on I-75 at 11pm IF I had not of been driving Uber? NOT!


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

roadapple said:


> I was lucky. I had a lady with a "service cat", and I'm very... repeat VERY allergic to cats. No mention of a cat, it had no "service animal" collar, sweater, etc. just a cat that she was carrying around like it was a 3 month old baby. Needless to say, I told her I couldn't do the cat and I explained why, she called me a Nazi Trump supporter and got out of the car and complained to Uber. I told them my side and they didn't do anything to me. Unless you've got a car that someone else is paying for, Uber isn't worth it. I had a Prius and it ended up costing me many thousands of dollars in maintenance/repairs, plus would I have hit the deer at 2am or been rear ended on I-75 at 11pm IF I had not of been driving Uber? NOT!


FYI- Only dogs and horses are recognized services animals. Cats don't qualify. 
There's no exemption under ADA for drivers who may be allergic to service animals. If you are allergic to service animals then you either drive the person and suffer or risk deactivation for violating the law.
Read up on the law, be informed, but don't be obtuse like the OP. Customer is always right is usually a good policy to follow when it comes to service animals.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

roadapple said:


> I was lucky. I had a lady with a "service cat", and I'm very... repeat VERY allergic to cats. No mention of a cat, it had no "service animal" collar, sweater, etc. just a cat that she was carrying around like it was a 3 month old baby. Needless to say, I told her I couldn't do the cat and I explained why, she called me a Nazi Trump supporter and got out of the car and complained to Uber. I told them my side and they didn't do anything to me. Unless you've got a car that someone else is paying for, Uber isn't worth it. I had a Prius and it ended up costing me many thousands of dollars in maintenance/repairs, plus would I have hit the deer at 2am or been rear ended on I-75 at 11pm IF I had not of been driving Uber? NOT!


I guess people with allergies are going to have to apply for protections from the ADA.


----------



## teh744 (Apr 14, 2018)

I let them bring them..... then I take a pic of the hair left behind..... then they get hit a cleaning charge.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I guess people with allergies are going to have to apply for protections from the ADA.


Doesn't work that was if you are an independent contractor.


----------



## Khandker (Feb 10, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


Sue Uber, not the lady


----------



## 142605 (Mar 4, 2018)

SHalester said:


> curious what answer could she have given that you would have accepted and completed the ride?


The funny part is there is no provision in the law or Uber policy to decline a ride regardless of the answer. She could say "he speaks to my thoughts" and you'd still have to drive them.


----------



## Greenfox (Sep 12, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Your state sucks.


What state?

I don't own any shares in the republiikkkOFkaaalifornia.



Authority said:


> The funny part is there is no provision in the law or Uber policy to decline a ride regardless of the answer. She could say "he speaks to my thoughts" and you'd still have to drive them.


I want an animal to SPEAK TO MY THOUGHTS! What the fruck?


----------



## 142605 (Mar 4, 2018)

everydayimubering said:


> if she couldn't prove that it was a service animal -


1). It is ILLEGAL to ask for "proof".

2). There is no such thing as "proof". There is no card, no paper work, no vest, etc. Thats all fake. The law requires no proof so there is no such thing as proof.

I agree that the law SHOULD require proof, but it was determined to be too much of a burden for the disabled. What the law makers didn't anticipate or account for was the rampant abuse of the law, which is why it should be revisited today.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

lyft_rat said:


> You were deactivated because you feel entitled and confronted a pax, escalating a situation for no reason.


Not so. I feel entitled to confront pax whom I suspect of trying to pass their pets off as service animals, and I do so. Whenever I want. As for the reason, I don't like people trying to advantage.

And no, the reason the driver was canned was not for exercising his rights or due to any alleged instability (which there is no evidence of). He was deactivated because he did not follow correct procedure.


----------



## 142605 (Mar 4, 2018)

The Gift of Fish said:


> He was deactivated because he did not follow correct procedure.


How so? He accepted the ride. He asked the legally allowed question. Seems like he did to me?


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Authority said:


> How so? He accepted the ride. He asked the legally allowed question. Seems like he did to me?


No, with Uberlyft you are guilty until proven innocent. So, in order to demonstrate innocence you need........... proof. Video evidence of the interaction with pax with the dog handler admitting that it is an emo dog and therefore not a service animal is sufficient proof. It's what I rely upon when I am suspended for refusing service to an emo dog or other pet.

There have been times when I was convinced that a dog was not a service animal however the handler knew how to answer the tasks question so I had no choice but to take them.



Authority said:


> The funny part is there is no provision in the law or Uber policy to decline a ride regardless of the answer. She could say "he speaks to my thoughts" and you'd still have to drive them.


A pax once did answer the tasks question with "He says hello". I replied that in all my years I had never come across a talking dog and refused her service. The ADA states that, in order to qualify as a service animal, the dog must perform a task it has been trained for, and that task must be related to a disability experienced by the handler. So this pax disqualified herself because (1) dogs, even when highly trained, can't speak and (2) simply speaking to the owner would not be directly related to a disability.

I also had a pax claim that the task their dog had been trained to perform was to sit. Again, service was denied on the basis that a dog sitting down would not be assistive to a disabled person.


----------



## 142605 (Mar 4, 2018)

The Gift of Fish said:


> A pax once did answer the tasks question with "He says hello". I replied that in all my years I had never come across a talking dog and refused her service. The ADA states that, in order to qualify as a service animal, the dog must perform a task it has been trained for, and that task must be related to a disability experienced by the handler. So this pax disqualified herself because (1) dogs, even when highly trained, can't speak and (2) simply speaking to the owner would not be directly related to a disability.
> 
> I also had a pax claim that the task their dog had been trained to perform was to sit. Again, service was denied on the basis that a dog sitting down would not be assistive to a disabled person.


In both cases you would be deactivated and potentially sued. Neither the ADA nor Uber have granted you the authority to evaluate a disabled persons answer as to the service their service animal performs.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Authority said:


> In both cases you would be deactivated and potentially sued.


That is incorrect, Uberlyft does suspend
me when pax make false complaints over service animals, then they reinstate me after seeing the video evidence. In other posts I have posted the emails from Uber and Lyft when the suspensions happened and then the emails confirming reinstatement after video evidence was submitted. They can be found if you were interested in doing a search for them.


> Neither the ADA nor Uber have granted you the authority to evaluate a disabled persons answer as to the service their service animal performs.


Correct, there is no licencing process by which the ADA certifies judges of service animal status. The ADA states that service providers must accommodate service animals. When Uberlyft sees on video that no service animal was presented, and that the owner confirms on video that no service animal was presented then Uberlyft is satisfied that no offence occurred. I am, too.


----------



## 142605 (Mar 4, 2018)

The Gift of Fish said:


> When Uberlyft sees on video that no service animal was presented, and that the owner confirms on video that no service animal was presented then Uberlyft is satisfied that no offence occurred. I am, too.


You are confused. If they say it's a service animal, it's a service animal. You don't get to decide wether or not you believe them or evaluate whether the service they say it performs is valid. Uber could care less what your opinion is.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Authority said:


> You are confused. If they say it's a service animal, it's a service animal.


Incorrect. Have a read of the ADA regulations. Nowhere does it say that the definition of a service animal is that its owner says it is. The actual definition is that a service animal is a dog that has been trained to perform task(s) related to the person's disability and that the dog is not an emotional support animal.

In all of my refusals of service, the pax either failed to say that the dog had been trained for a task related to a disability or they admitted it was an emotional support animal. 


> You don't get to decide wether or not you believe them or evaluate whether the service they say it performs is valid.


On the contrary; that is precisely what I do.


> Uber could care less what your opinion is.


Correct, Uberlyft does not care what my opinion is. It is for this reason that I send in the video evidence of the encounter so that they can decide if the ADA was contravened by me. In every instance they have decided to side with me, deciding that no service animal discrimination took place, and reinstated me from each suspension.

There's no point in continuing this back-and-forth. If you're unhappy with the way Uberlyft handles the false reports made against me and or my reinstatements then of course you are free to report them and me to the Department of Justice. Good luck.


----------



## 142605 (Mar 4, 2018)

The Gift of Fish said:


> If you're unhappy with the way Uberlyft handles the false reports made against me and or my reinstatements then of course you are free to report them and me to the Department of Justice.


"Department Of Justice"?! You are really really confused, which is fine, until you spew misinformation to others.

Uber animal complaints aren't a trial and they don't solicit or accept your opinion or evidence or allow for an appeal.

Also the Justice Department doesn't enforce the ADA.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Authority said:


> "Department Of Justice"?! You are really really confused, which is fine, until you spew misinformation to others.


Lol, in this country the DOJ is responsible for enforcing laws. The clue is in the word "justice".

It looks like you need a little help. I attach below a helpful screenshot from the Department of Justice's website. It contains information on how to file an ADA complaint. With the Department of Justice. In fact, the title of the article in the Department of Justice's website is:

"How to file an Americans with Disabilities Act Complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice".

If you use a mobile browser, there is a simplified version available, which you are likely to need.

Any other questions, please ask someone else. I don't mind educating people, but with you there would be too much work involved.


----------



## 142605 (Mar 4, 2018)

Authority said:


> "Department Of Justice"?! You are really really confused, which is fine, until you spew misinformation to others.
> 
> Uber animal complaints aren't a trial and they don't solicit or accept your opinion or evidence or allow for an appeal.
> 
> Also the Justice Department doesn't enforce the ADA.


Again you are hopelessly confused, and misleading others. The example you gave would be a CIVIL case. The Justice Department would have NO ROLE.


----------



## sellkatsell44 (Oct 25, 2015)




----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Authority said:


> Again you are hopelessly confused, and misleading others. The example you gave would be a CIVIL case. The Justice Department would have NO ROLE.


Lol, you demonstrate that you are one of those guys who will argue and push back even when things presented to you in black and white.

As I said above, we're done here.


----------



## 1prdcat (Nov 2, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> Chances are low unless you're an incompetent driver or socially inept, self-righteous, self-entitled dork who treats pax (especially women) like an inferior form of life.


I am a women! Uber is majority owned by Saudis...they have a different way of doing things...Good luck and try not being so ugly to others!


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks (Aug 5, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> If I am forced to put up with a disrespectful passenger with a fake service dog, I will fall on my sword.
> 
> I asked the only legal question I was allowed to ask and canceled the ride per the passenger's request. False claims of service animals and disrespectful passengers are not covered by the ADA.


With a dash-cam this would have been fixed.
But it's not to late, I would file a police report, since it's a criminal offense. In AZ I think.

Trigger a police investigation, take papers to Uber. Obviously it was not a service animal and it would have to be corrected.

If not you should file a claim in arbitration with police report handy. I would.

Sorry this happened!


----------



## DannyboyLee (Mar 31, 2019)

Yeah, I was deactivated for basically not being the guy in the photo that was me. I left to the Uber hub to figure out what the cause was and they said someone was driving my car, that I didn't fit the description...ummm, only difference was I had long hair. Oh that is right, the rider had a problem with people with long hair as it wasn't professional. Anyhow, I was a little irritated but I help my composure through that crazy dude and with Uber employees at the hub and they reactivated me. 

You may need to go up there personally and try to describe the situation but if you are sincere, you might get reinstated without any penalty.


----------



## Dekero (Sep 24, 2019)

Service or other animal gets in my car.. ok no problem I'll take them.. but they WILL BE on the floorboard... U/L just say I have to take them. They don't and can't tell me where in the car they have to ride. If the passenger has a problem with that then it's on them. I agreed to take them..... On my terms. 

You will not be sitting your entitled Mutt on my leather seats to have him scratch them up with his claws. Get his ass in the floor board... And he best stay there...


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Dekero said:


> Service or other animal gets in my car.. ok no problem I'll take them.. but they WILL BE on the floorboard... U/L just say I have to take them. They don't and can't tell me where in the car they have to ride. If the passenger has a problem with that then it's on them. I agreed to take them..... On my terms.
> 
> You will not be sitting your entitled Mutt on my leather seats to have him scratch them up with his claws. Get his ass in the floor board... And he best stay there...


Legally they can have the service animal sits where it needs to sit. That may be on the owner's lap or the seat.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> I didn't say ban pets. I'm saying pet pax should be required to order Uber x and up.


That's a ban. That bans service animals from pool. Illegal. That's like saying you have to call a cab because we won't let your service animal on the bus.



Dekero said:


> Service or other animal gets in my car.. ok no problem I'll take them.. but they WILL BE on the floorboard... U/L just say I have to take them. They don't and can't tell me where in the car they have to ride. If the passenger has a problem with that then it's on them. I agreed to take them..... On my terms.
> 
> You will not be sitting your entitled Mutt on my leather seats to have him scratch them up with his claws. Get his ass in the floor board... And he best stay there...


I see deactivation in your future when you tell someone with a blood sugar sniffing dog it can't be near their face to smell their breath.


----------



## Dekero (Sep 24, 2019)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> That's a ban. That bans service animals from pool. Illegal. That's like saying you have to call a cab because we won't let your service animal on the bus.
> 
> 
> I see deactivation in your future when you tell someone with a blood sugar sniffing dog it can't be near their face to smell their breath.


Uber doesn't say I have to treat it like a human. But I'd be fine with it on their lap as well.. just not on my leather... As long as I don't deny the ride I see no issue...


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> That's a ban. That bans service animals from pool. Illegal. That's like saying you have to call a cab because we won't let your service animal on the bus.
> 
> 
> I see deactivation in your future when you tell someone with a blood sugar sniffing dog it can't be near their face to smell their breath.


Okay let them pick pool but don't match them with anyone. Some people are allergic enough to dogs to close their throat.

What happens when you have that pax in car the get a pool ping to a ADA dog ride?

You have to chose one pax now and both have ADA accommodations.



Dekero said:


> Uber doesn't say I have to treat it like a human. But I'd be fine with it on their lap as well.. just not on my leather... As long as I don't deny the ride I see no issue...


No, it actually is in the law you can't separate pax from service animal


----------



## Dekero (Sep 24, 2019)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Okay let them pick pool but don't match them with anyone. Some people are allergic enough to dogs to close their throat.
> 
> What happens when you have that pax in car the get a pool ping to a ADA dog ride?
> 
> ...


If putting said mutt by their feet is separating them... I hope the anxiety doesn't kill them.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

Dekero said:


> If putting said mutt by their feet is separating them... I hope the anxiety doesn't kill them.


It doesn't matter how far you separate them. If said separation interferes with the animals ability to do its job.

I know this shit is just one big headache sometimes?

Here's another one for you guys to wrap your head around

If wheelchair pax orders a pool ride, is it discrimination to charge him for 3 seats, which I believes bump you up to Uber X

It's the same scenario if pax has very large service dog such a great dame.


----------



## Dekero (Sep 24, 2019)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> It doesn't matter how far you separate them. If said separation interferes with the animals ability to do its job.
> 
> I know this shit is just one big headache sometimes?
> 
> ...


Yeah I'm gonna accidentally be unable to locate the passenger for 5 mins... I'm just not doing it....


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

Dekero said:


> Yeah I'm gonna accidentally be unable to locate the passenger for 5 mins... I'm just not doing it....


Just watch out for this guy. I swear the fuker is impossible to shuffle, it's like he can hear you breathing or something -o:


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

I have a lawyer pursuing different claims against Uber presently. Not interested in going back on the platform. Feeling better than I have in awhile. I recommend everyone examine how much this gig is worth it to them to turn these pricks into millionaires.


----------



## Dekero (Sep 24, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I have a lawyer pursuing different claims against Uber presently. Not interested in going back on the platform. Feeling better than I have in awhile. I recommend everyone examine how much this gig is worth it to them to turn these pricks into millionaires.


The gig ain't worth a thing to me... But the tax write off against my wife's 80k income taxation and subsequent huge refund check each year... Is worth every penny... Thx Uncle Sam.


----------



## gooddolphins (Apr 5, 2018)

O-Side Uber said:


> Sadly it would take several drivers getting their faces chewed off to change any ADA type laws. I had to let a young woman with a pit bull into my car a few months back because she declared it a service animal. It clawed and damaged my seat and spent the ride sniffing my neck. If it had bitten me I would have FOR SURE sued her. HOWEVER.....
> 
> I do not recommend suing a pax for the fake service animal crap. In my case, the woman that ultimately got me kicked off Uber had divulged to the reps that she had PTSD , anxiety and whatever other invisible disabilities one can conjure up.
> 
> I would've lost in court if I had persued her and that would of opened the doors for her to sue me. I'm lucky I only lost access to the Uber app.


A loss to the Uber app is actually a gain


----------



## Youburr (Aug 22, 2019)

Actual service animal riders are the worst tippers out of all the dog job titles out there which we as drivers do encounter. However they at least tip a single $ to pay for the vacuum at the gas station. So a few extra minutes scrubbing the floor with the nozzle and possibly a mini lint roller because dogs. And don’t skip the cleanup because you don’t want your pax to spend the next week sneezing in your car.


----------



## melusine3 (Jun 20, 2016)

Mtbsrfun said:


> Haha security job; worst job ever. You have no authority to do anything, having to watch people break laws and do things that you're supposed to stop but you have to call a cop to act because of legal ramifications; most boring job and most frustrating job at the same time.
> 
> plus the pay is crap for the agonizing boredom you will suffer through.


It depends upon the gig. They work really well around my other job schedule, and otherwise I have a steady 3 day's worth of pay coming every week. I think only boring people get bored. How sad for you.


----------



## everydayimubering (Aug 5, 2017)

It is said "If you're bored being by yourselves - you must be in bad company!"


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Okay let them pick pool but don't match them with anyone. Some people are allergic enough to dogs to close their throat.
> 
> What happens when you have that pax in car the get a pool ping to a ADA dog ride?
> 
> ...


The only accommodation you make is to let the allergic person in your car. If they have allergies that bad there's nothing you can do.

I take foster cats to adoptions and I'm sure my car is full of allergens even if I clean it regularly.

What does a bus driver do? That's the same thing.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> The only accommodation you make is to let the allergic person in your car. If they have allergies that bad there's nothing you can do.
> 
> I take foster cats to adoptions and I'm sure my car is full of allergens even if I clean it regularly.
> 
> What does a bus driver do? That's the same thing.


You conveniently swapped pax around. &#128530;

The person with the allergies is pax 1

The service animal is with pax 2


----------



## Smooth954 (Aug 25, 2014)

Sue Uber and the unnamed passenger for wrongful termination and fraud and hope to get the passengers information through discovery


----------



## 0311DevilDAWGGG (Jul 7, 2019)

Lmfao “I secretly hope I get deactivated” 

Me 100% holy shit is this what everyone else is thinking?

In the past two months, I’ve literally talked about conspiracy theories to half of my passengers. Sometimes, I won’t even let them get a breath in. Hilarious. Secretly hoping they get so freaked out that they report me and I am freed from the chains of Uber’s wrath. 

Almost 3 years a slave. **** me. BUMPPPPPP


----------



## luvgurl22 (Jul 5, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> If I am forced to put up with a disrespectful passenger with a fake service dog, I will fall on my sword.
> 
> I asked the only legal question I was allowed to ask and canceled the ride per the passenger's request. False claims of service animals and disrespectful passengers are not covered by the ADA.


I'm really sorry to hear that you were deactivated. Not because they are a great company or it's a joy to drive their entitled passengers around, but just because I know this may temporarily affect your income. That being said, if you decide to drive with Lyft, I would, next time, either cancel before said passenger gets to you ( if you see them before they see you), wait until you end the ride & report them, one star them & request a cleaning fee. It's just not worth it to argue with grown up children. They have zero common sense or empathy for the next person. Luckily, with Lyft, so far you report a passenger immediately, ( call trust & safety directly), they tend to ignore any customer complaint. I wish you luck out there.



everydayimubering said:


> If you prefer not to have dogs in your vehicle, you should've asked her *before *she got into your car and canceled if she couldn't prove that it was a service animal - *before* letting her in and starting the trip.
> Once you started the trip and then asked her stupid questions about the type of services her dog performed - you were actually being disrespectful of the rider to the point that she couldn't bear to continue with the ride. She was clearly offended and took revenge by hitting back where it hurts most.
> If you had a camcorder you could let Uber view it to decide if you were in the wrong - but you didn't. One can only feel sorry this happened to you but it is no one else's fault. Think positive maybe it was a blessing in disguise.


That wasn't being disrespectful at all. We are allowed to ask that.


----------



## JPaiva (Apr 21, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> 4000 rides at 4.95. Better than you.
> 
> 
> I can absolutely tell people that. The ADA doesn't prevent people from telling people with non-service animals what simple etiquette is. My story hasn't changed from the beginning. I feel like I'm having a conversation with an insane asylum on this board.


You are correct that you can ask what service the animal is trained to provide. And you are also correct, there are way too many idiots posting on this board, and driving ride share. Best case scenario you would refuse the ride and call the police to create a record about the fake service animal. This will get you the paxholes personal information and you can then sue. I'd cancel in a heartbeat on anyone with an attitude. People with actual service animals don't act like complete basket cases when you ask what it does.


----------



## shirleyujest (Jul 19, 2015)

Umm, you know that you don't have to drive for Uber if you don't want to, don't you? And you won't get a severance bonus if you're deactivated.


----------



## newell138 (Jan 1, 2016)

shirleyujest said:


> Umm, you know that you don't have to drive for Uber if you don't want to, don't you? And you won't get a severance bonus if you're deactivated.


But its like a drug, you get addicted to the extra income. I was deactivated a couple months ago, 4 years, 4.98 rating and they wouldn't tell me why. I had to go to the GLH in Philly to find out. It turns out a rider from 2018, yes a year prior complained about me saying I was acting inappropriate in a sexual manner and she felt uncomfortable. It turned out to be a blessing in disguise though, because my life is so much more relaxed not constantly worrying about turning the app on whenever I have a free moment chasing the extra dollars. 
The crazy thing is I still get notices from them like Happy Birthday, etc. I am unable to log onto my account in any fashion and I also am unable to use the pax app either. I can't get my tax info and after repeated calls and emails I have gotten nowhere. I'm assuming they will mail me a 1099 or something come February but probably not and at that point I will have to file a complaint w/ the IRS.


----------



## RideshareUSA (Feb 7, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


Hi back to PetSmart and ask the staff if they now her. You need her contact info because she forgot something in your car. If this works, BAM, you've got her. Next call is to an attorney.


----------



## shirleyujest (Jul 19, 2015)

newell138 said:


> But its like a drug, you get addicted to the extra income. I was deactivated a couple months ago, 4 years, 4.98 rating and they wouldn't tell me why. I had to go to the GLH in Philly to find out. It turns out a rider from 2018, yes a year prior complained about me saying I was acting inappropriate in a sexual manner and she felt uncomfortable. It turned out to be a blessing in disguise though, because my life is so much more relaxed not constantly worrying about turning the app on whenever I have a free moment chasing the extra dollars.
> The crazy thing is I still get notices from them like Happy Birthday, etc. I am unable to log onto my account in any fashion and I also am unable to use the pax app either. I can't get my tax info and after repeated calls and emails I have gotten nowhere. I'm assuming they will mail me a 1099 or something come February but probably not and at that point I will have to file a complaint w/ the IRS.


They're legally obligated to send you a 1099 at the end of the year. They don't just write you off the books.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

shirleyujest said:


> They're legally obligated to send you a 1099 at the end of the year. They don't just write you off the books.


I'll get severance through a nice settlement check.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I wish I could sue this passenger. Impersonating a service animal is against Arizona state law.





O-Side Uber said:


> I got deactivated from Uber over a year ago for basically the same situation! Mine was a pool ride!!! ? I've been driving for Lyft ever since . It's disgusting that a horrible person like that can take someone's job away. Sorry this happened to you!


Yes, you guys CAN SUE the paxholes, win lost earnings, and likely get reactivated as well.

What you do is sue them for "defamation and damages" through small claims court because the paxholes lied to your TNC about what you said/did, causing the TNC to terminate you.

Your lawsuit will force them to prove to the court that the animal was a trained service animal, not just a pet, because they told the TNC it was a service animal.

With a subpoena you can get the court to force the TNC to reveal the paxhole's name and contact info. Then sue the paxhole, prove defamation, and win damages (money you would have earned if you had not been deactivated).

As part of the settlement, you can likely get them to tell the TNC they lied about you and request that the TNC reinstate you.

I know this process sounds daunting, but you can do it without an attorney. Most small claims courts have help desks and provide guidance, there are a lot of self-help books about the process, and there's always Google.

Here is what the justices consider when hearing these types of cases -










source: Disability Issues Brief

btw, I'm not an attorney and this is not legal advice ;-)


----------



## O-Side Uber (Jul 26, 2017)

Grokit said:


> Yes, you guys CAN SUE the paxholes, win lost earnings, and likely get reactivated as well.
> 
> What you do is sue them for "defamation and damages" through small claims court because the paxholes lied to your TNC about what you said/did, causing the TNC to terminate you.
> 
> ...


That is thoughtful of you to take the time to post this info. My concern would be that if I lost in small claims , the pax could turn around and sue me right back.

Uber sucks donkey balls and I'm happy to not be working for them anymore. Lyft isn't as busy , but I make it work. The hassle of suing that young woman just to get my shitty Uber job back doesn't seem worth it. I admitted to Uber that I canceled on the pax and that's all they needed to permanently ban me .

If I had just said she was a no show and I never talked to her.. they MAY have given me a second chance. But with any Uber allegations, if you admit to it.. that's it..you're banned. There's no guilty with a good excuse for a judge to decide on. It's a black and white rule that U/L have.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

O-Side Uber said:


> That is thoughtful of you to take the time to post this info. My concern would be that if I lost in small claims , the pax could turn around and sue me right back.


Certainly. There's another way to do this that won't give her the opportunity to counter-sue you. You still get paid, just not as much.

Get an attorney to send her a certified letter declaring your "intent to sue" her unless she makes financial restitution before some deadline. The letter should demonstrate that you will win in court, if it goes that far.

A good letter will cause her to sh!t her pants. She will go running to an attorney, who will advise her to negotiate a settlement with you, out of court.

Attorneys do this all the time.

---
Edit: forgot to mention- proving defamation is a slam-dunk when it involves someone losing their livelihood because someone else lied about them to their employer (or TNC).


----------



## Lovelife (May 16, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


I once picked up a pax from a park. Before I got to her she asked if it was OK that she has a dog. When I got to her, her dog clearly was not a service dog. Had no issue with her dog. I personally have no problem with pets as long as they are well behaved and don't go to bathroom in my car. Not worth getting into argument and getting deactivated unless you have another means of paying bills.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Grokit said:


> Certainly. There's another way to do this that won't give her the opportunity to counter-sue you. You still get paid, just not as much.
> 
> Get an attorney to send her a certified letter declaring your "intent to sue" her unless she makes financial restitution before some deadline. The letter should demonstrate that you will win in court, if it goes that far.
> 
> ...


If it's a service animal the letter will just give her grounds to sue the driver.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

Demon said:


> If it's a service animal the letter will just give her grounds to sue the driver.


... for what? Exercising his legal rights?

Given how there are no legally-recognized certifications for service animals, it's only a service animal for her if the court determines it was trained before the incident to respond to commands to perform tasks that help her overcome her disability.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Grokit said:


> ... for what? Exercising his legal rights?
> 
> Given how there are no legally-recognized certifications for service animals, it's only a service animal for her if the court determines it was trained before the incident to respond to commands to perform tasks that help her overcome her disability.


There is no legal right to deny a service animal.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

Demon said:


> There is no legal right to deny a service animal.


Agreed. We are wasting time going around on this. What is your point?


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Grokit said:


> Agreed. We are wasting time going around on this. What is your point?


Unless the driver has some solid proof that this wasn't a service animal that course of action could lead to him getting counter sued.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

Demon said:


> Unless the driver has some solid proof that this wasn't a service animal that course of action could lead to him getting counter sued.


I'm sure her attorney would threaten to counter-sue him in order to illicit the same fear of being sued that you are displaying now.

But it would be a total waste of money for her to actually follow through with such a lawsuit solely against the driver because her damages of being denied that ride were minimal.

How much money or time did his cancellation cost her? Was she late to an appointment? Her damages were likely $100 at most. Whereas, what were his damages from being terminated by Uber - losing his livelihood? Major!! $10-15k easy.

...

Where do you get the idea that he has to have solid proof? Don't you think people have the right to make reasonable assessments of a situation?

All he has to do is tip the "scale of justice" in his favor by showing how a 'reasonable person' could have also concluded that her pet was being used for emotional support - not as a trained service animal. With that belief in mind, he had the right to cancel on her.

Then it falls to the rider to overcome this reasonable belief by proving that her pet was, in fact, a trained service animal that helps her to overcome her disabilities.

...

Millions of people use the small claims courts every year to get restitution. Don't be afraid of seeking justice.


----------



## Elpresidentte (Nov 22, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I'd say at this point I am more interested in a lawyer who smells blood in the water in this situation. I have heard that they settle quickly in these situations with lost wages and paying unemployment, as they are presently losing many cases of misclassifying drivers as independent contractors. I would only pursue the case if it is accepted on a contingency, as I'm just not interested in paying out of pocket in the matter.
> 
> I think I was more patient in the past. After repeated exposure to disrespectful passengers, I've simply stood my ground on more matters. If I could go back in time and change the scenario, would I? No. I handled myself professionally and followed all parameters of the law. Uber is at fault in this situation for enabling problematic passengers.
> 
> What's most interesting was that I immediately contacted Uber about the ride after she got out of the car. It might have been my forthright contact with Uber that got me deactivated, which is even worse. Uber has zero legal ground in this matter and would lose a lawsuit pretty easily.


What was Uber's initial response to you??? Did they even state those famous "We're gonna investigate it "???


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Elpresidentte said:


> What was Uber's initial response to you??? Did they even state those famous "We're gonna investigate it "???


Account on hold for investigation.


----------



## Elpresidentte (Nov 22, 2019)

So afterwards they said your permanently gone??? Did they hear your story or no???


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Elpresidentte said:


> So afterwards they said your permanently gone??? Did they hear your story or no???


They heard my side, which means the byotch had to have lied.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> They heard my side, which means the byotch had to have lied.


Not based on what you wrote here.



Grokit said:


> I'm sure her attorney would threaten to counter-sue him in order to illicit the same fear of being sued that you are displaying now.
> 
> But it would be a total waste of money for her to actually follow through with such a lawsuit solely against the driver because her damages of being denied that ride were minimal.
> 
> ...


A reasonable person would ask the two questions and know for sure. 
The guy admitted to Uber during the investigation that he was wrong, what justice is there for him to seek?


----------



## shirleyujest (Jul 19, 2015)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I'll get severance through a nice settlement check.


Yeah, that's not gonna happen.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

Demon said:


> A reasonable person would ask the two questions and know for sure.


So, by your logic, a reasonable person would know for sure that this little girl has NOT eaten any chocolate cake.








Demon said:


> The guy admitted to Uber during the investigation that he was wrong, what justice is there for him to seek?


He didn't admit "that he was wrong." He admitted that he cancelled on her.

It's just *your* conjecture that he was wrong because *you *believe everything passengers tell you.

But reasonable people don't believe what other people tell them blindly. Reasonable people can use their own judgment.


----------



## enom47 (Oct 18, 2017)

IMMA DRIVER said:


> It should be required that all service dogs must wear Service Dog ID tags during any form of transportation. So then an Uber driver's only question would be. "Can I see your dog's service tag?". Problem solved.


If your asking to see a tag, then you don't like animals in your car this has nothing to do with animal being service or not.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Grokit said:


> So, by your logic, a reasonable person would know for sure that this little girl has NOT eaten any chocolate cake.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That isn't my logic, that's just the logic you're ascribing to me and then debating that. You posted a video where the parent asked 5 questions, drivers can ask 2. You also posted a video that's an apples & oranges comparison to the topic we're discussing. A driver may not be able to tell if an animal is a service animal without asking the 2 questions, and there aren't any laws about parents with kids and cake. So again, a reasonable person asks the 2 questions and then follows the law.

It's not my conjecture that the driver is in the wrong, it's Uber's. Uber did an investigation and Uber made the decision to remove the driver from the app based on what the driver said. If this driver wants "justice" they would need to go after Uber, it's not the pax's decision who stays on the app.


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> If I am forced to put up with a disrespectful passenger with a fake service dog, I will fall on my sword.
> 
> I asked the only legal question I was allowed to ask and canceled the ride per the passenger's request. False claims of service animals and disrespectful passengers are not covered by the ADA.


Actually you started with your snarky bs attitude "you know, it's polite to let the driver blahblahblah". 
Oh, and retrieving items for folks is one of the many trained jobs service animals do.

You are correct you are allowed to ask "What service is the animal trained to do?" 
But there is, in fact, one other question you are allowed to ask. 
"Is your animal a service animal?" and after they answer in the affirmative you shut your trap and drive... 
Because there is no way to prove them to be lying as far as Uber is concerned.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> Actually you started with your snarky bs attitude "you know, it's polite to let the driver blahblahblah".
> Oh, and retrieving items for folks is one of the many trained jobs service animals do.
> 
> You are correct you are allowed to ask "What service is the animal trained to do?"
> ...


It is the polite thing to do. Passengers who think they're entitled to my car beyond the original scope of rideshare can go **** themselves. This whole experiment has gone sideways. Passengers don't behave the same in cabs. I'm okay being done with the thieving bastards and the whining pax.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> It is the polite thing to do. Passengers who think they're entitled to my car beyond the original scope of rideshare can go @@@@ themselves. This whole experiment has gone sideways. Passengers don't behave the same in cabs. I'm okay being done with the thieving bastards and the whining pax.


No, it isn't.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> It is the polite thing to do. Passengers who think they're entitled to my car beyond the original scope of rideshare can go @@@@ themselves. This whole experiment has gone sideways. Passengers don't behave the same in cabs. I'm okay being done with the thieving bastards and the whining pax.


OP remains obstinately remorseless about violating the ADA, the law that unequivocally requires drivers to transport people with disabilities - and their service animals. Deactivation is the correct and fair outcome.


----------



## DriveNM (Apr 13, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


Unfortunate this happened to you. I have been reported falsely twice: the first time for being under the influence (24 hours off) and the 2nd for aggressive behavior (seven days off). Was this event your third report from a pax? Just wondering if my next report will be my third strike and I am out.


----------



## IMMA DRIVER (Jul 6, 2017)

enom47 said:


> If your asking to see a tag, then you don't like animals in your car this has nothing to do with animal being service or not.


I love animals but everyone is different. Most driver's don't want a dog or any animal in their car. But pax are telling driver's they have a service dog when it's a companion &#128021;. A tag would eliminate any discrepancies.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> OP remains obstinately remorseless about violating the ADA, the law that unequivocally requires drivers to transport people with disabilities - and their service animals. Deactivation is the correct and fair outcome.


This is not my fight, but I do enjoy a good debate, so let's tango...

Unless I missed an admission of guilt in these 23 pages, the only action the OP has remained "obstinately remorseless" about was refusing to provide service to a rider he believed and still believes was attempting to commit service animal fraud against him.

How did you make the jump to believing he actually violated the ADA? I hope it wasn't based on the findings of the TNC's "investigation," in which they were only able to ask the rider the same two questions that drivers are able to ask.

For if so, how do you know that the rider did not lie to both the OP and the TNC's investigator?


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

IMMA DRIVER said:


> I love animals but everyone is different. Most driver's don't want a dog or any animal in their car. But pax are telling driver's they have a service dog when it's a companion &#128021;. A tag would eliminate any discrepancies.


Drivers agreed to take service animals. 
The tag would create more problems. Anyone could just write "certificate" on a piece of paper and they have a service animal.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

Grokit said:


> This is not my fight, but I do enjoy a good debate, so let's tango...
> 
> Unless I missed an admission of guilt in these 23 pages, the only action the OP has remained "obstinately remorseless" about was refusing to provide service to a rider he believed and still believes was attempting to commit service animal fraud against him.
> 
> ...


Read his posts again. He thinks riders with service animals owe him an explanation due to his sense of entitlement about his ownership of his car and according to his rules of politeness. Requiring proof, warning, or explanation of any kind violates the ADA.
Doesn't matter what OP thinks is the right thing to do. 


BogusServiceAnimal said:


> It is the polite thing to do. Passengers who think they're entitled to my car beyond the original scope of rideshare can go @@@@ themselves. This whole experiment has gone sideways. Passengers don't behave the same in cabs. I'm okay being done with the thieving bastards and the whining pax.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

Demon said:


> You posted a video where the parent asked 5 questions, drivers can ask 2. ... and there aren't any laws about parents with kids and cake.


&#129300; &#129300; &#129300; 
Ummm... yeah.... but how is any of that relevant?

You zoomed in with laser-like focus to the leaves of the trees and missed seeing the forest.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> Requiring proof, warning, or explanation of any kind violates the ADA.


Close, but no cigar. Better said:

Requiring proof, warning, or explanation of any kind *from a disabled person with a trained service animal* violates the ADA.

Because it is *NOT* a violation of the ADA to require proof, warning, or explanation of any kind from non-disabled people (or disabled people with under-trained service animals).

...

You may find his actions morally reprehensible, but how do you know that he ever violated the ADA?


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

DriveNM said:


> Unfortunate this happened to you. I have been reported falsely twice: the first time for being under the influence (24 hours off) and the 2nd for aggressive behavior (seven days off). Was this event your third report from a pax? Just wondering if my next report will be my third strike and I am out.


First.



Grokit said:


> This is not my fight, but I do enjoy a good debate, so let's tango...
> 
> Unless I missed an admission of guilt in these 23 pages, the only action the OP has remained "obstinately remorseless" about was refusing to provide service to a rider he believed and still believes was attempting to commit service animal fraud against him.
> 
> ...


I didn't even refuse to offer them service. I simply told them it was polite to let us know that they have a dog before we get to the pick up. They told me to cancel the ride. I followed their request.

Just a quick update to all. I'm so much happier not Ubering my day away.

It's not worth it. Period. Even at $60K a year, it is not worth it.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

Grokit said:


> Close, but no cigar. Better said:
> 
> Requiring proof, warning, or explanation of any kind *from a disabled person with a trained service animal* violates the ADA.
> 
> ...


Nice try.
It's not up to OP to determine whether a person is disabled, whether they require a service animal, or whether the animal is truly a service animal. If a rider claims that their animal is a service animal, that's it. End of story. No proof or evidence is needed (or possible). That's the ADA requirement for public transportation providers. That's why Uber/Lyft are strict about compliance.

Forcing disabled people to prove their disability to OP would violate their rights.

Technically, under ADA, OP can ask "Is this animal a service animal?" and "What service is it trained to perform?" But in practice, there is no point in asking those questions because even if OP does not believe the rider, does not believe it is a service animal trained to perform a service, refusing to transport the rider may very well lead to deactivation.

Just buck up and transport any rider claiming to have a service animal or be willing to take deactivation as a consequence. There is no way to win an argument with a rider who claims that you discriminated against them because of their disability.


----------



## Greenfox (Sep 12, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> Nice try.
> It's not up to OP to determine whether a person is disabled, whether they require a service animal, or whether the animal is truly a service animal. If a rider claims that their animal is a service animal, that's it. End of story. No proof or evidence is needed (or possible). That's the ADA requirement for public transportation providers. That's why Uber/Lyft are strict about compliance.
> 
> Forcing disabled people to prove their disability to OP would violate their rights.
> ...


Honestly I grin and BEAR it, but its all bullshit. That dog better be able to juggle wh'ores whilst shitting GOLD BRICKS and even THEN I say no dice.

Americans are so gawd damn entitled and lazy they all need to be shot ... out of a cannon into the fake sun.


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

Why anybody would make a stink over a dog is beyond me. Even if there were no such thing as the ADA I'd still just shut up and take them.


----------



## nonononodrivethru (Mar 25, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> Nice try.
> It's not up to OP to determine whether a person is disabled, whether they require a service animal, or whether the animal is truly a service animal. If a rider claims that their animal is a service animal, that's it. End of story. No proof or evidence is needed (or possible). That's the ADA requirement for public transportation providers. That's why Uber/Lyft are strict about compliance.
> 
> Forcing disabled people to prove their disability to OP would violate their rights.
> ...


I see you think this is your thread now.

This speaks volumes about you.


----------



## Dekero (Sep 24, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> OP remains obstinately remorseless about violating the ADA, the law that unequivocally requires drivers to transport people with disabilities - and their service animals. Deactivation is the correct and fair outcome.


We do not have to UNEQUIVOCALLY transport people with disabilities. It actually states in the ADA guidelines that if the passenger cannot use the service under their own doing, then they are not entitled to it. Thus I AM NOT A MEDICAL TRANSPORT and if you can't handle your shyt.... Order an ambulance.

As for dogs. I have no issue. But they will be spending their trip on the floorboard not my leather seats... So I have accepted them openly which ADA requires, but it does not say I cannot dictate where they ride .... And therefore I will. If the passenger finds that an issue they can cancel, but I accepted them openly. Thus it's on them.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Grokit said:


> &#129300; &#129300; &#129300;
> Ummm... yeah.... but how is any of that relevant?
> 
> You zoomed in with laser-like focus to the leaves of the trees and missed seeing the forest.


When you try to compare apples and oranges it won't be relevant.

Your point had nothing to do with the topic.



Dekero said:


> We do not have to UNEQUIVOCALLY transport people with disabilities. It actually states in the ADA guidelines that if the passenger cannot use the service under their own doing, then they are not entitled to it. Thus I AM NOT A MEDICAL TRANSPORT and if you can't handle your shyt.... Order an ambulance.
> 
> As for dogs. I have no issue. But they will be spending their trip on the floorboard not my leather seats... So I have accepted them openly which ADA requires, but it does not say I cannot dictate where they ride .... And therefore I will. If the passenger finds that an issue they can cancel, but I accepted them openly. Thus it's on them.


Actually it does say that. The animal needs to be where it can do its job.


----------



## Diamondraider (Mar 13, 2017)

rkozy said:


> I've never had a dog vomit in my car. I've had a human vomit in my car.
> 
> I've never had a dog spill Starbucks in my car. I've had a human spill Starbucks in my car.
> 
> ...


Never had a dog defecate in my car...


----------



## Dekero (Sep 24, 2019)

Demon said:


> When you try to compare apples and oranges it won't be relevant.
> 
> Your point had nothing to do with the topic.
> 
> ...


If he can't do it job a foot away on the floor I can't help him...


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Dekero said:


> If he can't do it job a foot away on the floor I can't help him...


No one is asking you to help them. You're just legally required to let the dog where it needs to be to do its job.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

Demon said:


> When you try to compare apples and oranges it won't be relevant. Your point had nothing to do with the topic.


That is one possibility.

Another possibility is:

When one illustrates a point, using an apples-to-apples comparison that another can only perceive as being an apples-to-oranges comparison, the point will also not be perceived.

Still another possibility is:

When one illustrates a point, using an apples-to-apples comparison that another understands as a valid apples-to-apples comparison, but obstinately dismisses as an invalid apples-to-oranges comparison, then the valid point will also be ignored and dismissed.


----------



## Dekero (Sep 24, 2019)

Demon said:


> No one is asking you to help them. You're just legally required to let the dog where it needs to be to do its job.


I guess we'll cross this bridge the day it occurs... Cuz it's floorboard or curb.. they can decide and I don't give 2 Shyts what Uber or ADA says.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

1prdcat said:


> Oh please...Termination for asking about the dog...from a highly rated driver...Ridiculous!!!


Uber will get what it deserves for such shoddy practices !


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> If a rider claims that their animal is a service animal, that's it. End of story. No proof or evidence is needed (or possible). That's the ADA requirement for public transportation providers. That's why Uber/Lyft are strict about compliance.


I keep asking you how the OP broke the ADA (as you declared earlier) and you keep dodging my question. What you said above comes closest to addressing the question, but even it is muddled up, as you only make inferences. Some clarification is needed.

Are you suggesting that every time a RideShare driver either asks more than the two allowed questions or cancels on a rider than has a animal, that driver violated the Americans with Disabilities Act?

Yes or No


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

Grokit said:


> I keep asking you how the OP broke the ADA (as you declared earlier) and you keep dodging my question. What you said above comes closest to addressing the question, but even it is muddled up, as you only make inferences. Some clarification is needed.
> 
> Are you suggesting that every time a RideShare driver either asks more than the two allowed questions or cancels on a rider than has a animal, that driver violated the Americans with Disabilities Act?
> 
> Yes or No


No. Are you trolling?

I just stated that you can comply with the ADA but still be deactivated if a rider complains about discrimination so you're better off taking them and not trying to cancel.

I explained this many times over and haven't dodged anything through 25 pages of discussion with people, many of whom, like the OP, either do not know or do not care about complying with the ADA.

By his own admission, OP berated the pax for her "impoliteness" in not informing him in advance that she had a dog. His expectation of notification from the pax violates the ADA. They don't have to request special permission or give notice to drivers. Drivers are expected to treat disabled pax and their service animals like any other pax.

IMO, OP has severe attitude problems beyond ADA (in the highly offensive way he describes women, for instance) and he deserved to be deactivated for his treatment of pax in his story.

In reality, I think his story is BS and never even happened. OldBay just used a sockpuppet account to spread his hateful misogyny and rile everyone up about the hardships of ADA on drivers. The writing style gives it away.


----------



## nonononodrivethru (Mar 25, 2019)

Tempting fate is a windbag. The more wrong he is, the louder he becomes.


----------



## kc ub'ing! (May 27, 2016)

kc ub'ing! said:


> 9 pages! It's so simple. If you enjoy driving rideshare, take every dog. If you refuse, you will be deactivated.
> 
> No it isn't a service dog. Take it anyway.


15 more pages?!! I done gave y'all the word already. I give!


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> By his own admission, OP berated the pax for her "impoliteness" in not informing him in advance that she had a dog. His expectation of notification from the pax violates the ADA.


Am I a troll? What I am is confused as to why reasonable-sounding people, such as you and @Demon, are not able to discern when a law has been been broken.

In the quote above, you demonstrated that the OP's action satisfied the discrimination "element" of the ADA statute and then inferred _incorrectly_ that the satisfaction of that one element constituted a violation of the law itself.

No, for a crime to have been committed the accused's actions must satisfy all of the elements of the statute, not just the most obvious one. The ADA statute requires that these five elements be satisfied:

Pax must be disabled
Service animal must be fully-trained (under-trained not sufficient)
Service animal must help the Pax cope with a disability
Discrimination must occur (as defined by law)
Location must be public space, such as a RideShare vehicle
Yes, the OP discriminated against a Pax with her pet in a protected publicly-accessible place, BUT how do you know that elements 1-3 of the ADA were also satisfied? How do know that the Pax told the truth to the TNC's investigator?

Unless you have superhuman ESP-like powers that enable you to see into the mind of the Pax, you have no clue whether the Pax was telling the truth, and thus you have no clue whether the OP broke the ADA statute.

That's why I kept asking you to prove that the OP broke the ADA - because I knew you couldn't.

If you, @Demon, or anyone else wants to stubbornly cling to the belief that the OP broke the ADA, without any knowledge of whether the Pax was disabled and had a fully-trained service dog that helped her to deal with disability, then let's do a thought experiment -

I'm thinking of an incident in which one person took another's life. With your ESP powers you will be able to look into my mind and know whether the perpetrator was guilty of

Involuntary Manslaughter,
Manslaughter, or
Murder
I will even give you some hints: Although each crime shares the common 'element' of taking another's life, they each differ with respect to additional elements, which must also be satisfied. An act of Murder requires 'premeditation' and 'intent', Manslaughter only requires 'intent', and neither element can be present in an act of Involuntary Manslaughter.

You have no clue. Just as you have no clue whether the OP broke the ADA


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

Grokit said:


> Am I a troll? What I am is confused as to why reasonable-sounding people, such as you and @Demon, are not able to discern when a law has been been broken.
> 
> In the quote above, you demonstrated that the OP's action satisfied the discrimination "element" of the ADA statute and then inferred _incorrectly_ that the satisfaction of that one element constituted a violation of the law itself.
> 
> ...


Talk about not having a clue....
Given your argument, drivers can never be shown to violate the ADA because we never know if riders claiming disability are truly disabled.
But it's not up to drivers to determine the veracity of riders' claims of disability. Drivers must accept riders' claims without demanding proof. Demanding proof of disability is a violation of the ADA. 
Back to law school for you.


----------



## Dodger Royal (Nov 27, 2019)

tohunt4me said:


> Uber will get what it deserves for such shoddy practices !


Couple of more $billion$ ?


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

TemptingFate said:


> Given your argument, drivers can never be shown to violate the ADA because we never know if riders claiming disability are truly disabled.


Thank you for making my point! We never know for sure because the TNC steps in and literally "settles out of court" with the pax, thereby preventing the truth from being known. We are routinely being deactivated and losing our livelihood due to service dog fraud.



TemptingFate said:


> But it's not up to drivers to determine the veracity of riders' claims of disability. Drivers must accept riders' claims without demanding proof. Demanding proof of disability is a violation of the ADA.


Why do you keep pushing the company line? Why keep telling people what the RideShare companies want them to do?

We are Independent Contractors - masters of own domains - not employees that are told what to do.

When a pax with a dog wants a ride we have the right to refuse. We also have the legal right to inform the pax that if they file a false report with our TNC we have the right to sue them for defamation and damages.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

Grokit said:


> Thank you for making my point! We never know for sure because the TNC steps in and literally "settles out of court" with the pax, thereby preventing the truth from being known. We are routinely being deactivated and losing our livelihood due to service dog fraud.
> 
> Why do you keep pushing the company line? Why keep telling people what the RideShare companies want them to do?
> 
> ...


Go for it master of your domain. You'll likely be justifiably deactivated for discriminating against people with disabilities.

I don't have much good to say about Uber but they are right about strictly enforcing the ADA. The risk/benefit equation requires that drivers serve self-identified disabled people without creating obstacles like demanding notification, requiring proof, harassing disabled riders, cancelling on those with service animals, etc.

If people lie about disability or camouflage pets as service animals and this results in drivers being unjustly deactivated - tough luck. It's not up to drivers to determine whether pax are lying about their disability. Drivers must accept drivers' claims or suffer potential deactivation. That's the price we pay to ensure that the disabled are not discriminated against - as intended by the ADA, a federal law.

Technically, you could try to sue a lying pax and pursue a civil action to recover damages like lost Uber wages but likelihood of success seems slim and the cost would probably exceed any reward.


----------



## sellkatsell44 (Oct 25, 2015)

Wouldn’t it be something if uber actually created a blog with driver tips including a post about what to do when one is faced with a customer that has an animal with them?

1. the two questions you can ask
2. The fact that you are required by Ada to take and not discriminate unless the pax failed 1.

🤯🤯🤯


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

sellkatsell44 said:


> Wouldn't it be something if uber actually created a blog with driver tips including a post about what to do when one is faced with a customer that has an animal with them?
> 
> 1. the two questions you can ask
> 2. The fact that you are required by Ada to take and not discriminate unless the pax failed 1.
> ...


Interrogating pax with the 2 questions may be legal but still leaves driver open to potential deactivation. Speaking from experience, it's far better to just give the ride.

Uber does give some guidance here as you may already know. 
https://www.uber.com/drive/resources/accessibility/


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Grokit said:


> Am I a troll? What I am is confused as to why reasonable-sounding people, such as you and @Demon, are not able to discern when a law has been been broken.
> 
> In the quote above, you demonstrated that the OP's action satisfied the discrimination "element" of the ADA statute and then inferred _incorrectly_ that the satisfaction of that one element constituted a violation of the law itself.
> 
> ...


You'll have to show me where I said a driver has to break the law to be deactivated.


----------



## EphLux (Aug 10, 2018)

Rider Text: "I have a dog with me"
Driver: (uninstalls Uber app and turns on Lyft app - or vise versa).


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

Demon said:


> You'll have to show me where I said a driver has to break the law to be deactivated.


WTF I never said that you did. -o:-o:-o:-o:


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Grokit said:


> WTF I never said that you did. -o:-o:-o:-o:


It's there in writing.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Grokit said:


> Am I a troll? What I am is confused as to why reasonable-sounding people, such as you and @Demon, are not able to discern when a law has been been broken.
> 
> In the quote above, you demonstrated that the OP's action satisfied the discrimination "element" of the ADA statute and then inferred _incorrectly_ that the satisfaction of that one element constituted a violation of the law itself.
> 
> ...


I did not discriminate. I asked what service her dog preformed and she proceeded to become a hell demon from there. I did not cancel the ride of my own accord, I simply followed the hell demon's instructions.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I did not discriminate. I asked what service her dog preformed and she proceeded to become a hell demon from there. I did not cancel the ride of my own accord, I simply followed the hell demon's instructions.


That's not what your original story was.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I did not discriminate. I asked what service her dog preformed and she proceeded to become a hell demon from there. I did not cancel the ride of my own accord, I simply followed the hell demon's instructions.


Even though you may believe that the semantics of your "would have been polite" statement protected you doing something outrightly discriminatory, you would need the aid of a very good attorney and a lenient judge to keep you out of trouble for these reasons:

First and foremost, beyond asking the two allowed questions, making almost any negative statement about the law, the animal, or the situation has been found by the courts to be discrimination. For if not but for the presence of the animal, the negative statement never would have been uttered. Second, although you didn't state that she was required to inform you in advance about her dog, you implied that she was at fault for not doing so, even though the statute specifically prohibits such advance warnings from being requested. Third, you quite plainly implied that you would have treated her differently than you treated your other pax, had you known that she had a dog (for why else would you want a warning).

Game Over.



TemptingFate said:


> It's not up to drivers to determine whether pax are lying about their disability.


I know that you believe you are acting in everyone's best interests. You are not an industry shill. You are concerned about everyone's welfare, both the drivers and the truly disabled. You come across to me as the eldest daughter trying her best to take care of all her siblings in a troubled home, where the parents are not acting as parents should. Keeping your loved ones safe requires manipulation. It is not enough to tell them what they *should* do; you have to tell them what they *must* do.



TemptingFate said:


> Technically, you could try to sue a lying pax and pursue a civil action to recover damages like lost Uber wages but likelihood of success seems slim and the cost would probably exceed any reward.


Are your negative opinions about the supposed low likelihood of success, high costs, and low rewards based upon any actual knowledge of how cases play out in the small claims court? If so, please back up your negativity with the supporting evidence.



Demon said:


> It's there in writing.


Where?


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> You conveniently swapped pax around. &#128530;
> 
> The person with the allergies is pax 1
> 
> The service animal is with pax 2


Makes no difference. If they get on a bus they may find a service animal (or 10) already on the bus. Or the next 10 pax may have a service animal. So what's your point?



BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I'll get severance through a nice settlement check.


Depends how much they paid you...



Grokit said:


> Even though you may believe that the semantics of your "would have been polite" statement protected you doing something outrightly discriminatory, you would need the aid of a very good attorney and a lenient judge to keep you out of trouble for these reasons:
> 
> First and foremost, beyond asking the two allowed questions, making almost any negative statement about the law, the animal, or the situation has been found by the courts to be discrimination. For if not but for the presence of the animal, the negative statement never would have been uttered. Second, although you didn't state that she was required to inform you in advance about her dog, you implied that she was at fault for not doing so, even though the statute specifically prohibits such advance warnings from being requested. Third, you quite plainly implied that you would have treated her differently than you treated your other pax, had you known that she had a dog (for why else would you want a warning).
> 
> Game Over.


Great points.


----------



## kcdrvr15 (Jan 10, 2017)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Passengers don't behave the same in cabs.


Well, yea they do... just saying.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

Demon said:


> That's not what your original story was.


Are you daft? It is 100% what the original story is. Go through and read, if you know how to.



Grokit said:


> Even though you may believe that the semantics of your "would have been polite" statement protected you doing something outrightly discriminatory, you would need the aid of a very good attorney and a lenient judge to keep you out of trouble for these reasons:
> 
> First and foremost, beyond asking the two allowed questions, making almost any negative statement about the law, the animal, or the situation has been found by the courts to be discrimination. For if not but for the presence of the animal, the negative statement never would have been uttered. Second, although you didn't state that she was required to inform you in advance about her dog, you implied that she was at fault for not doing so, even though the statute specifically prohibits such advance warnings from being requested. Third, you quite plainly implied that you would have treated her differently than you treated your other pax, had you known that she had a dog (for why else would you want a warning).
> 
> ...


I did not imply anything. The dog had ZERO characteristics of being a service animal. Without being told that it was a service animal, I told her that it was polite to let the drivers know that they have a dog before hand. Would I have taken her if she let me know? Absolutely. I appreciate it when pax are considerate and do not assume they have unwarranted liberty to special privilege to my vehicle--a non-service animal is a special privilege.

Did I still accept the ride even though the passenger did not offer that information beforehand? Yes. Was I completely within my rights as a driver to express my desire that passengers with non-service animals give the drivers a bit of a heads up before we arrive? Emphatically, yes.

I would do it the same way one million times over again. I refuse to kowtow to belligerent humans in any regard.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I appreciate it when pax are considerate and do not assume they have unwarranted liberty to special privilege to my vehicle--a non-service animal is a special privilege....Was I completely within my rights as a driver to express my desire that passengers with non-service animals give the drivers a bit of a heads up before we arrive? Emphatically, yes.


If a pax wants to bring along, let's say a pet cat, which by definition can not be a service animal because it's the wrong species, then you can say whatever you wish. There are no laws granting people the special privilege of bringing their non-service animals along for the ride.

As you can tell from my previous posts, I believe drivers should have the ability to stand their ground and refuse service to what they are fully-convinced are non-service animals.

But... Once you roll your dice and crap out, it falls to you to go after the pax yourself in small claims court before you can persuade the TNC's to take you back. A lot of people say that they're going to do this, but I haven't heard of anyone that actually follows through.

@moJohoJo just got hit with a similar deactivation. I suggest you team up with him and any other similarly deactivated drivers, go through the small claims court process together, sharing your tips and what you learn along the way.

BTW, Don't believe what your attorneys told you about not having a case against the pax or it being too costly to fight. I've dealt with a lot of attorneys and I know that they're not going to advise you about small claims court because they can't represent you there.

All it takes is time and no more than a couple hundred dollars to complete a case through small claims court. I just gave @moJohoJo a dozen tips. Check them out. Going it alone is not as intimidating as you may think.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Grokit said:


> Even though you may believe that the semantics of your "would have been polite" statement protected you doing something outrightly discriminatory, you would need the aid of a very good attorney and a lenient judge to keep you out of trouble for these reasons:
> 
> First and foremost, beyond asking the two allowed questions, making almost any negative statement about the law, the animal, or the situation has been found by the courts to be discrimination. For if not but for the presence of the animal, the negative statement never would have been uttered. Second, although you didn't state that she was required to inform you in advance about her dog, you implied that she was at fault for not doing so, even though the statute specifically prohibits such advance warnings from being requested. Third, you quite plainly implied that you would have treated her differently than you treated your other pax, had you known that she had a dog (for why else would you want a warning).
> 
> ...


In the post where I pointed it out.


----------



## Grokit (Sep 8, 2019)

Demon said:


> In the post where I pointed it out.


Why do you keep posting these near-useless one-liners that add virtually nothing to the conversation? I have no clue what you are talking about and we've been going around in circles for almost 10 posts now.

You do realize that no variant of the term "deactivated" appeared in my post, so I couldn't have possibly said what you accused me of saying.

But who knows? Maybe you thought it was acceptable to rearrange the letters in my words so that you could see the phrase that you wanted to see. Trying to make sense of your convoluted reasoning is hurting my head.


----------



## O-Side Uber (Jul 26, 2017)

Cold Fusion said:


> You illustrated perfectly how to Escalate a sensitive
> Situation & achieve Deactivation ✔
> 
> It's almost like you're an Uber shill reminding
> ...


I agree with you. I've taken all dogs on Lyft because it's not worth the hassle. I learned my lesson. I even accepted a Pit bull service dog that damaged my seat !

What would of been nice is if Lyft and Uber warned us that regardless of whether the pax had a legit service dog or not, you will be fired for questioning it. They could of also warned us that the pax may look completely normal and not disabled . At the end of the day there is an extreme lack of training with ride-share.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

O-Side Uber said:


> I agree with you. I've taken all dogs on Lyft because it's not worth the hassle. I learned my lesson. I even accepted a Pit bull service dog that damaged my seat !
> 
> What would of been nice is if Lyft and Uber warned us that regardless of whether the pax had a legit service dog or not, you will be fired for questioning it. They could of also warned us that the pax may look completely normal and not disabled . At the end of the day there is an extreme lack of training with ride-share.


Training ?????


----------



## O-Side Uber (Jul 26, 2017)

tohunt4me said:


> Training ?????


I know you're joking &#128579; but..There really should be! It took 10 years to finally give some advice on what topics are considered not cool to ask. I remember 3 years ago signing up for Uber , and they literally told me NOTHiNG . Happy trails , that's about it. I had to learn it all the hard way. I did come to this site before I drove. Hopefully most aspiring drivers at least do that.


----------



## nonononodrivethru (Mar 25, 2019)

O-Side Uber said:


> I know you're joking &#128579; but..There really should be! It took 10 years to finally give some advice on what topics are considered not cool to ask. I remember 3 years ago signing up for Uber , and they literally told me NOTHiNG . Happy trails , that's about it. I had to learn it all the hard way. I did come to this site before I drove. Hopefully most aspiring drivers at least do that.


As courts began to rule misclassification of employment status, training and wrongful deactivation will become very salient points.


----------



## O-Side Uber (Jul 26, 2017)

nonononodrivethru said:


> As courts began to rule misclassification of employment status, training and wrongful deactivation will become very salient points.


This is messing up a lot of other gigs people do for income. Uber and Lyft are just the tip of the ice berg. I'm hearing it from various passengers . Everyone is freaking out. Companies are allegedly now hiring a few in house employees and no longer contracting out to independent workers. It's a mess. I hope they dump it like the Obama care mandate .


----------



## JPaiva (Apr 21, 2019)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Welp, after a year of 4.95 rating and 4000 rides, one lying byotch got me deactivated.
> 
> I picked her up in front of a Petsmart and she got into the car. The dog is sitting on my seats and has zero appearance of a service animal. I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup. She immediately turned into a hell demon and said that she didn't care and that besides, "it's a service animal". I simply asked, "What service does your animal perform?"
> 
> ...


Name, address and a police report. There is civil liability here. Defamation of character, lost wages etc. Several states have made claiming fictitious service animals a criminal offense. But the police can very much determine the identity of this person. Then sue the bejeeezus out of them.


----------



## rkozy (Apr 5, 2019)

O-Side Uber said:


> At the end of the day there is an extreme lack of training with ride-share.


I didn't know during my first several months that you couldn't take unaccompanied minors. Uber and Lyft just throw the app at you and say, "Here. Go drive strangers around for pennies on the dollar."


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

O-Side Uber said:


> I agree with you. I've taken all dogs on Lyft because it's not worth the hassle. I learned my lesson. I even accepted a Pit bull service dog that damaged my seat !
> 
> What would of been nice is if Lyft and Uber warned us that regardless of whether the pax had a legit service dog or not, you will be fired for questioning it. They could of also warned us that the pax may look completely normal and not disabled . At the end of the day there is an extreme lack of training with ride-share.


And an extreme lack of common sense.


----------



## BBslider001 (Apr 24, 2019)

And to add to this thread, Lyft deactivated my account this morning..at my request. They can suck a dikk. Worst company in the world. The "support" asked me if he could resolve my issue. I said "yep, deactivate my account". Parasites.


----------



## 58756 (May 30, 2016)

O-Side Uber said:


> I agree with you. I've taken all dogs on Lyft because it's not worth the hassle. I learned my lesson. I even accepted a Pit bull service dog that damaged my seat !
> 
> What would of been nice is if Lyft and Uber warned us that regardless of whether the pax had a legit service dog or not, you will be fired for questioning it. They could of also warned us that the pax may look completely normal and not disabled . At the end of the day there is an extreme lack of training with ride-share.


A Pitbull is a service dog? Lol what if it really goes to service and scalps the person? Those are dangerous


----------



## kc ub'ing! (May 27, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> I mentioned that it's polite to let the drivers know that you have a dog before we get to the pickup


One day you'll have the maturity and judgment to recognize, the words above are what doomed you!

The smarminess even drips from my reposting to this day! You told your rider you did not want her dog in you car: just in other words. You certainly deserved your rider's ire and your deactivation is completely understandable.

I'm positive the pooch was not a service dog. Take it anyway! If you like driving rideshare that is. Any luck with that $60k, 40hr/week gig yet? Still looking for mine. Till then I'll continue driving and taking fake service animals!


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

kc ub'ing! said:


> One day you'll have the maturity and judgment to recognize, the words above are what doomed you!
> 
> The smarminess even drips from my reposting to this day! You told your rider you did not want her dog in you car: just in other words. You certainly deserved your rider's ire and your deactivation is completely understandable.
> 
> I'm positive the pooch was not a service dog. Take it anyway! If you like driving rideshare that is. Any luck with that $60k, 40hr/week gig yet? Still looking for mine. Till then I'll continue driving and taking fake service animals!


Cool story, bro. Keep on letting yourself get ****ed in the ass. I'll keep my dignity and take a settlement check.


----------



## kc ub'ing! (May 27, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Cool story, bro. Keep on letting yourself get @@@@ed in the ass. I'll keep my dignity and take a settlement check.


So no job yet... Go ahead and pay the energy bill with your dignity.


----------



## BogusServiceAnimal (Oct 28, 2019)

kc ub'ing! said:


> So no job yet... Go ahead and pay the energy bill with your dignity.


Job + settlement check. Thanks for playing.


----------



## kc ub'ing! (May 27, 2016)

BogusServiceAnimal said:


> Job + settlement check. Thanks for playing.


Nope. Don't believe you dog hater!


----------

