# My first "turn off the camera" cancellation



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

I accept the ping and drive to location. I get there and it's one of those situations where the address is wrong. It shows a house number that does not exist on that street, and the pin is off in the woods. But happily I'm close enough that the timer starts running.

I get a phone call through the system but rather than except it I text back but I'm at the address, and I repeat the address back.

As I'm doing this I get a text from the guy saying "dude, you're a block from my house".

I again repeat the address I have and he text me back his actual address. I ask him to update the pick up and he does.

I get to the location and there's bags in the driveway. Obviously an airport run which I like. It was a couple and as they're about to get in the car the woman notices my multiple "in car recording" messages and asks if I'm really recording. I reply in the affirmative.

The woman says she doesn't like that and as she's getting in the car and after she gets in she says multiple times that she doesn't want the camera on. Happily I hadn't started the ride and the timer was just expiring. I canceled for "rider behavior".

They get out of the car and as I'm getting their bags out of the back the woman says "I just didn't want the camera on". I politely said "maybe the next driver won't have a camera".

Then I called Uber just to get the incident on record and I preserved the recordings.


----------



## Who is John Galt? (Sep 28, 2016)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> I accept the ping and drive to location. I get there and it's one of those situations where the address is wrong. It shows a house number that does not exist on that street, and the pin is off in the woods. But happily I'm close enough that the timer starts running.
> 
> I get a phone call through the system but rather than except it I text back but I'm at the address, and I repeat the address back.
> 
> ...


Was she dressed?

.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

Who is John Galt? said:


> Was she dressed?
> 
> .


Yes, she was dressed in Kmart. They were clearly your average white middle-class couple.


----------



## NotMe (Sep 5, 2017)

So you just load and unload luggage, spend 5 minutes of your life and burn some gas and get $3.75?


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

NotMe said:


> So you just load and unload luggage, spend 5 minutes of your life and burn some gas and get $3.75?


Yep should've stayed at the wrong address collect no show fee. Simple


----------



## NotMe (Sep 5, 2017)

Or turn off camera and have airport run.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

The much feared " _*average white middle-class couple*_

Any Bull Shit excuse to ride Empty
Then blame Khosrowshahi for:
Low Earning and their 0wn Shit Existence

Uber drivers&#129318;‍♂


----------



## RightTurnOnRed (Jun 15, 2018)

Riders requesting no video recording are considered high risk, which equates to high liability. What are these people going to request next ? Hey driver I'm running late, please refrain from using your brakes....😳


----------



## MajorBummer (Aug 10, 2019)

No camera, no ride!! its that simple,no matter who it is.
If you walk into a bank you will be recorded too.Do you ask them to shut off the camera? good luck with that.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

NotMe said:


> So you just load and unload luggage, spend 5 minutes of your life and burn some gas and get $3.75?


Welcome to the world of ride share.

The issue for me was I was already getting red flags. The guy calls for the ride and has the wrong address, not even on the correct street.

Then he text me "dude, you're a block away from my house" like it's my fault.

Then you've got the wacky wife who even though they are cameras everywhere she goes she's all freaked out because there's cameras in my car and is insisting I turn them off.

When I called Uber the nice support lady told me that you definitely don't want to turn your cameras off for people who want them off. They are probably problematic and they don't want a record of their behavior. That was her input.

A funny footnote for the story is when the lady was freaking out her husband was telling her to just relax. As I was driving away she was saying "but we need to get to the airport".


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Welcome to the world of ride share.
> 
> The issue for me was I was already getting red flags. The guy calls for the ride and has the wrong address, not even on the correct street.
> 
> ...


you did everything you could. The camera is required equipment these days PERIOD.


----------



## RightTurnOnRed (Jun 15, 2018)

NotMe said:


> Or turn off camera and have airport run.


Plus the high probability of a false allegation, followed by deactivation. Would make it the drivers last airport run. For sure.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> *When I called Uber the nice support lady told me* that you definitely don't want to turn your cameras off for people who want them off.


@LyftUberFuwabolewa : Uber Shill


----------



## RightTurnOnRed (Jun 15, 2018)

Wether or not we agree or disagree with the driver. The driver is the captain of the ship. It is well within the drivers discretion to grant or deny that riders request.


----------



## RaleighUber (Dec 4, 2016)

NotMe said:


> Or turn off camera and have airport run.


Only fools turn off the camera.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

Cold Fusion said:


> @LyftUberFuwabolewa : Uber Shill


Damn! My cover is blown here. I'll have to make a different account so I can keep shilling for Uber.

Oh but wait. How do you shill for Uber? Do you mean you saw me on the weekends standing on the side of the road with a sandwich board that says "drive for Uber"?


----------



## whatyoutalkinboutwillis (Jul 29, 2017)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Welcome to the world of ride share.
> 
> The issue for me was I was already getting red flags. The guy calls for the ride and has the wrong address, not even on the correct street.
> 
> ...


LOL at her crying about getting to the airport! So typical. If she'd just shut up, she'd have been there by now.


----------



## JaxUberLyft (Jan 9, 2019)

The MOMENT the impolite "wrong address" text appeared is the moment the ride should have been allowed to time out or cancelled.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

RightTurnOnRed said:


> Wether or not we agree or disagree with the driver. The driver is the captain of the ship.


Does this mean I can marry people now?



JaxUberLyft said:


> The MOMENT the impolite "wrong address" text appeared is the moment the ride should have been allowed to time out or cancelled.


I was very strongly leaning that way, and if he hadn't put the right address and I definitely would have let it time out.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Damn! My cover is blown here. I'll have to make a different account so I can keep shilling for Uber.


Forget a "different account" ur illiteracy & *Fear* of _average white middle class folk_ follows with your every keystroke.

Consider climbing to the top of your ignorance and jumping✔


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

You loaded the luggage prior to starting the ride?


----------



## Mkang14 (Jun 29, 2019)

Did she say she didn't want to get in the car until the camera was turned off or just voice her opinion?


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Very glad my other driving gig prohibits cameras of any type.


----------



## dnlbaboof (Nov 13, 2015)

they should add a dashcam warning to riders in the app that the driver can enable......dashcams otherwise come as a surprise and youll lose a few ratings points..........


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

have to say as a pax in a uber there has never been a camera. Only one was in a taxi, so far.

As a driver I won't have one as I don't drive at night AND my 2nd RS gig prohibits them all together. PLus, man are they ugly. Wires here wires there.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

Cold Fusion said:


> Consider climbing to the top of your ignorance and jumping✔


Wow. Trippy. Is that like "your karma ran over my dogma?



Cold Fusion said:


> <virtue_signal>
> Forget a "different account" ur illiteracy & *Fear* of _average white middle class folk_ follows with your every keystroke.
> </virtue_signal>


But what if I change my style? It would be so easy to imitate you and the other people here who virtue signal every chance they get. It's so much easier being in ideologue. It's easier to play one as a character for others to see, and it's an easier way to go through life. You can take all people and situations and put them into such convenient and limited categories. That way you don't have to think about the complexities of life.

It's funny how on this form if you mention someone's ethnicity or noticed something about an ethnicity you're immediately called a hater or a racist.

You're right. I'm sorry. All people and all cultures are all exactly the same all people are the same size and shape and color and all people think the same and all people want the same things. They are all equally good at academics, and sports etc. No difference whatsoever.

Just like how all of the different dog breeds are all the same size, they're colored exactly the same, with exactly the same skills and personality.



SHalester said:


> You loaded the luggage prior to starting the ride?


Yes and I'm so glad I did. You have more options if you haven't started the ride. I'm pretty sure you're paid the same for the wait time either way.



SHalester said:


> Very glad my other driving gig prohibits cameras of any type.


If you get deactivated over a false accusation will you still be glad?

If you don't like cameras, how do you feel about driving down the street with cameras on the traffic light posts? How do you feel about going into all the stores that have cameras? How about the bank? How about those portable, solar powered trailers with cameras on a mast that you see parked in strategic places?

We live in a world where once we exit our homes and move about chances are that our image will be captured by many cameras.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> You have more options if you haven't started the ride


I dunno. If my arse leaves the car to help I start the ride. On the drop off until my arse hits the seat I don't complete/end the ride. I'd have to see more opinions to see which way is best.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

Mkang14 said:


> Did she say she didn't want to get in the car until the camera was turned off or just voice her opinion?


Neither. You gave me a question with only one of two possible answers:

1. She didn't want to get into the car.
and
2. She voiced an opinion.

I think if you go back and read my post it's quite clear what happened. I she said multiple times that she didn't want the cameras on. Translation: She didn't want to ride in a vehicle with cameras. My vehicle has cameras. Ergo she didn't want to ride in my vehicle. I made that dream come true for her.


----------



## Soldiering (Jan 21, 2019)

JaxUberLyft said:


> The MOMENT the impolite "wrong address" text appeared is the moment the ride should have been allowed to time out or cancelled.


You got that right. I wouldn't have gone too their house. I can't stand pax who put their ride/GPS BS on me like I'm responsible.

They would be been shuffled for rudeness.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

SHalester said:


> I dunno. If my arse leaves the car to help I start the ride. On the drop off until my arse hits the seat I don't complete/end the ride. I'd have to see more opinions to see which way is best.


If you start the ride and then cancel, you won't get a cancellation fee and less you can explain something really good to the company.

If you haven't started the ride and you wait out the five minute timer and cancel it doesn't count against your cancellation rate. If you have started the ride and then you cancel it does count against your cancellation rate.

Assuming you get the same amount of money for pre-ride wait time or ride duration wait time, what is the advantage? I only see a downside.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> If you get deactivated over a false accusation will you still be glad?


Glad? Most likely not. I don't need Uber, I'm retired. Plus already have 2nd RS gig that I could always do more of in a false report situation.

As to cameras I just don't want or need on in my car. I'm sure there are some that are small, sleek and run on batteries because I'm sure as shite not going to have cords running all over my dash and here and there. I don't care if I'M videoed. That would 50 shades of ding dong. I just don't want butt ugly device in my ride. Plus, Uber doesn't accept recordings, yes? I also never drive at night where I think the arguement for video ability grows. 
PLus 2nd gig prohibits still or videos. I'd have to remove every single day b4 that gig shift began. Big pain. And if this puts me on an island mostly by myself (no camera) I'm very ok with that. No shrinking violet here.


----------



## Szjohnson (Dec 27, 2019)

Cold Fusion said:


> Forget a "different account" ur illiteracy & *Fear* of _average white middle class folk_ follows with your every keystroke.
> 
> Consider climbing to the top of your ignorance and jumping✔


Jesus man take a Valium


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

Soldiering said:


> You got that right. I wouldn't have gone too their house. I can't stand pax who put their ride/GPS BS on me like I'm responsible.
> 
> They would be been shuffled for rudeness.


Yeah, I was right on the fence about just staying where I was and letting the ride time out or going to their location.

In the time I've been doing this I have had a number of rides where for whatever reason the location was off but it turned out to be good riders and a good rides.

I picked up one rider and we were talking about how the riders apps off and get the location wrong. He told me that if he's laying in bed with his phone and books the ride it puts one of his neighbors addresses. If he sits up straight in bed and books the ride it puts the other neighbors address. If he sits up and leans back a little bit it puts the right address.

Unfortunately most people booked the ride while indoors, where GPS reception is poor.

Also I personally have seen it where you manually input the address and everything looks right until you try to book the ride and then the app changes the address.

So I do have sympathy for riders when that happens.

But they definitely should not have attitude about it.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> If you haven't started the ride and you wait out the five minute timer


ah, no. In this care the pax had luggage in the car. Kinda hard to wait 2+3 minutes if pax is already there and luggage in the car.
Otherwise, I don't start ride until I've done the 'say my name' 'confirm destination' roll dance. Luggage changes everything; I start once I begin assisting....for now....until I see compelling reason not to.


----------



## Szjohnson (Dec 27, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> I accept the ping and drive to location. I get there and it's one of those situations where the address is wrong. It shows a house number that does not exist on that street, and the pin is off in the woods. But happily I'm close enough that the timer starts running.
> 
> I get a phone call through the system but rather than except it I text back but I'm at the address, and I repeat the address back.
> 
> ...


Interesting story, thanks for sharing it. I didn't even know that was a thing &#128514;. I think if I canceled every fool who doesn't know their own location and then tells me it's my fault, I'd lose half my riders lol


----------



## Soldiering (Jan 21, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Wow. Trippy. Is that like "your karma ran over my dogma?
> 
> 
> But what if I change my style? It would be so easy to imitate you and the other people here who virtue signal every chance they get. It's so much easier being in ideologue. It's easier to play one as a character for others to see, and it's an easier way to go through life. You can take all people and situations and put them into such convenient and limited categories. That way you don't have to think about the complexities of life.
> ...


If the DEMS have their way we would all be pastel. Bunch of ideologues, they are just serving their master.


----------



## part-timer (Oct 5, 2015)

Good job man, no idea what you were in for if you turned off the camera.


----------



## Soldiering (Jan 21, 2019)

SHalester said:


> Glad? Most likely not. I don't need Uber, I'm retired. Plus already have 2nd RS gig that I could always do more of in a false report situation.
> 
> As to cameras I just don't want or need on in my car. I'm sure there are some that are small, sleek and run on batteries because I'm sure as shite not going to have cords running all over my dash and here and there. I don't care if I'M videoed. That would 50 shades of ding dong. I just don't want butt ugly device in my ride. Plus, Uber doesn't accept recordings, yes? I also never drive at night where I think the arguement for video ability grows.
> PLus 2nd gig prohibits still or videos. I'd have to remove every single day b4 that gig shift began. Big pain. And if this puts me on an island mostly by myself (no camera) I'm very ok with that. No shrinking violet here.


Imaster.Im with you brother


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

SHalester said:


> Glad? Most likely not. I don't need Uber, I'm retired. Plus already have 2nd RS gig that I could always do more of in a false report situation.
> 
> As to cameras I just don't want or need on in my car. I'm sure there are some that are small, sleek and run on batteries because I'm sure as shite not going to have cords running all over my dash and here and there. I don't care if I'M videoed. That would 50 shades of ding dong. I just don't want butt ugly device in my ride. Plus, Uber doesn't accept recordings, yes? I also never drive at night where I think the arguement for video ability grows.
> PLus 2nd gig prohibits still or videos. I'd have to remove every single day b4 that gig shift began. Big pain. And if this puts me on an island mostly by myself (no camera) I'm very ok with that. No shrinking violet here.


If you want to install a camera and not have cables all over the place you can either do it properly yourself or pay some money to a professional and have things like cameras and radar detectors installed where you don't see the wires.

There are models that run on battery so that's another option.

Lyft and Uber most definitely do except dash cam video. They have excepted it from me and reviewed it a number of times.

I let the woman that I spoke to today at support know that I would be preserving the video of the incident. Later on in our conversation she let me know that she put a note in my account about what happened and should the customer make any kind of a complaint they would request that I send the video.

I think it's a really great thing that we can have dash cams to have that evidence in the event of a false accusation. I'm sure there are people in other jobs and professions who have had accusations made against them and they would be very glad if there was video and audio evidence of what really transpired.

Also - cams are really good to have for accident evidence. I've not had any accidents but I have provided my video to civilians and police and they were glad to have that as well.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> There are models that run on battery so that's another option.


that would be my only option. I don't want cords, holes, or installed permanently. Not in my ride, no sir.

And if I were to drive at night, then I'm sure I'd go for it. Uber doesn't accept and that really kills it there as well. If (when) I get a false complaint I'll deal with it (or not). 
the big item is my 2nd RS gig doesn't even allow them IN the car to begin with. Having to remove it every single day would be a huge pain in the wazu.

I do this for time, not huge pains in the wazu. :whistling:


----------



## sellkatsell44 (Oct 25, 2015)

Honestly y’all tripping.

what was so offensive about the camera that that lady had to make multiple remarks?

ok. Maybe it will turn out to be nothing. But someone whose making much ado about nothing, makes me think that the probability of something 💩💩 going on is higher then the usual ride.

is it really worth it?

to me, no.

and the whole help w:luggage in and out of the trunk, it wasn’t until the lady was tripping that then OP decided it wasn’t worth it...

This reminds me of all the times I have said to myself I should have done X when soemthing bad happens and I’m hitting myself 🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️ Because reflecting back I could have prevented it but I didn’t listen to my initial gut feeling/didn’t want to rock the boat or whatever.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

SHalester said:


> that would be my only option. I don't want cords, holes, or installed permanently. Not in my ride, no sir.
> 
> And if I were to drive at night, then I'm sure I'd go for it. Uber doesn't accept and that really kills it there as well. If (when) I get a false complaint I'll deal with it (or not).
> the big item is my 2nd RS gig doesn't even allow them IN the car to begin with. Having to remove it every single day would be a huge pain in the wazu.
> ...


I don't know why some people on this forum keep saying that Uber doesn't except the video. They do. What are you do is you upload it to YouTube, and you do it so it's unlisted, so it's not searchable or findable. The only way anyone can see it is if you send them the link. If you send the link to Uber they will review it


----------



## Mkang14 (Jun 29, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Neither. You gave me a question with only one of two possible answers:
> 
> 1. She didn't want to get into the car.
> and
> ...


Yeah but sometimes people just say stuff. I have a coworker that *****es and moans about every little ****ing thing. But when she is spoken too about her attitude all of a sudden she can get through the day fine.

If this kmart lady was actually given the option of camera on or I can take you, I suspect she might have changed her tone.

Just such a waste of your time and effort.


----------



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

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> I accept the ping and drive to location. I get there and it's one of those situations where the address is wrong. It shows a house number that does not exist on that street, and the pin is off in the woods. But happily I'm close enough that the timer starts running.
> 
> I get a phone call through the system but rather than except it I text back but I'm at the address, and I repeat the address back.
> 
> ...


Don't answer texts. Nothing good ever happens when you answer texts.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Then he text me "dude, you're a block away from my house" like it's my fault.


Rule#1. Never knowingly take a trip where you may get less than 5*.

He was already annoyed you weren't at his address. The timer was started, a shuffle was dropped in your lap.

Bags don't always mean airport. I've had a good number of trips with bags where pax are "going to the restaurant first" or some other BS.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

SHalester said:


> ah, no. In this care the pax had luggage in the car. Kinda hard to wait 2+3 minutes if pax is already there and luggage in the car.
> Otherwise, I don't start ride until I've done the 'say my name' 'confirm destination' roll dance. Luggage changes everything; I start once I begin assisting....for now....until I see compelling reason not to.


I think I just gave you two reasons in a previous post.



The Gift of Fish said:


> Don't answer texts. Nothing ever good happens when you answer texts.


So are you saying no communication? I prefer to communicate by text when I think the rider might be problematic because the rideshare companies have access to those texts



OldBay said:


> Rule#1. Never knowingly take a trip where you may get less than 5*.
> 
> He was already annoyed you weren't at his address. The timer was started, a shuffle was dropped in your lap.
> 
> Bags don't always mean airport. I've had a good number of trips with bags where pax are "going to the restaurant first" or some other BS.


I agree with everything. In 20/20 hineysight I would have shuffled


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Yes, she was dressed in Kmart. They were clearly your average white middle-class couple.


K- Mart still exists !?!?


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

tohunt4me said:


> K- Mart still exists !?!?


Yeah, there are a few in this area.



Mkang14 said:


> If this kmart lady was actually given the option of camera on or I can take you, I suspect she might have changed her tone.


And what do you think the chances are you would get a five star rating from that person?

I do believe cancellations greatly increase your chances of a false accusation. So there's no safe sure-fire option. But in this case I felt I had no choice. She was adamant about not wanting the cameras on.

I do think it's good for the troublesome passengers to be reminded from time to time that we are not just some slave they can kick around. Most people don't need prodding to be polite, courteous and personable. Most.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Got a late teen ager, trying to be cool/tuff.

Gets in, he's all wired up with his music blaring in both ears and says, looking at the sign, "There's a camera in here?"
I said, softy, "Yes".
He takes one ear bud out and says "Huh?"
I said, "Huh?"
He takes the other earbud out, I put the car in gear and go.
He says, "Is there a camera running in here?"
I said "Yes, with sound."
He says, "I don't see it."
I point to a pinhole in my mirror with a green light next to it, "It's really cool. Part of the mirror, and it sends the recording right to the cloud where no body can mess with it, like a drive."
Silence for a minute.
We get on the freeway.
He says, "I don't want it on while I'm in the car."
I say, "Oh, ok, I can let you out any time."
Silence for another minute.
"You'd let me out on the freeway?"
"I'm not a kidnapper and you are not a child. Do you want out?"
I took my foot off the accelerator to pull over ... 
He quickly said, "No."

Quiet ride the rest of the way.
How did he rate me? Don't know, didn't care.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> Got a late teen ager, trying to be cool/tuff.
> 
> Gets in, he's all wired up with his music blaring in both ears and says, looking at the sign, "There's a camera in here?"
> I said, softy, "Yes".
> ...


The theme song from "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" played in my head as I read this.

Well played, sir.


----------



## 5☆OG (Jun 30, 2019)

too many red flags to even go and get them..i dont drive a jeep so im not driving off the pavement. rider should have explained where he was from the moment you accpeted. i understand its a good ride,however its not worth the drama and frankly you got off on the back end with little to no drama..bags in the trunk? customer already in the car and you were able to unload the trunk and kick them out without having to call the police? very lucky...on a side note only paranoids and criminals have a problem being recorded. its not just for your safety its for everyones.


----------



## theMezz (Sep 29, 2018)

I have camera in and out as well as small white led sign. Not one wire visible. All under the trim and into fuse box. Most don’t even notice the camera at all - 2000 rides and two people mentioned the camera and that they thought it was a great idea.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

I’ve had other riders who were curious about the camera and even a few that I could see it was not to their liking. I even had one rider contact the rideshare company and make a complaint. During the ride all that happened was the writer asked me if I had a dash cam and I said yes. He voiced no objectionAll that came of that was I received an email from the rideshare company reminding me to follow all laws regarding Dash cams.

I’m sure they were many who would vehemently disagree but I would be fine if the rideshare company had a dash cam in the car that recorded when a ride is in progress and uploaded to the cloud. That way if they get a complaint they could check it out without even having to bother us.


----------



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

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> So are you saying no communication? I prefer to communicate by text when I think the rider might be problematic because the rideshare companies have access to those texts


Every rule has its exceptions, but generally no communication. Especially if the text is "You're a block away, dude".

Such texts are examples of Misplaced Moron Syndrome. The pax already holds the belief that the driver is a moron for going to a place where the pax is not. But, as we know, the actual moron is the pax for confirming in the app that he wants to send the driver to an incorrect location. So, if the pax has already self-identified via text as a moron, the chances are great that when you finally find him he will be

....... [Drum roll] .......

A moron.

Which was borne out in your example; the couple turned out to be non-transportables. You would have been better off shuffling at the original location and moving on.

Of course, you couldn't have known exactly what was going to happen, but when a pax texts you, your engaging that pax through text or phone call will very infrequently work in your favor.


----------



## Clothahump (Mar 31, 2018)

Cold Fusion said:


> Forget a "different account" ur illiteracy & *Fear* of _average white middle class folk_ follows with your every keystroke.
> 
> Consider climbing to the top of your ignorance and jumping✔


You need a period after 'account. You misspelled 'Your'. 'Fear' should not be capitalized. You need a period after 'jumping'.

And you called him illiterate?


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Then he text me "dude, you're a block away from my house" like it's my fault.


That's the point you cancel right there.


----------



## MothMan (May 15, 2016)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> I don't know why some people on this forum keep saying that Uber doesn't except the video. They do. What are you do is you upload it to YouTube, and you do it so it's unlisted, so it's not searchable or findable. The only way anyone can see it is if you send them the link. If you send the link to Uber they will review it


Don't have personal experience with Uber but Lyft support would not take any links from me last month. Had to be files and the files could not be very big or zipped. Wish I could remember the file size limitation but I don't. I also found that other entities that needed the same info were unable to accept links. I upgraded my Dropbox account to make it easier for me to get the files to other entities and kept getting the reply that their companies did not allow them to do it that way. Also discovered my wife's company does not allow her access to YouTube or Dropbox.


----------



## Cary Grant (Jul 14, 2015)

I've had several pax complain about my dash camera. They are invariably tourists from another state. Every single time they whine like a female canine, they are from a statist collectivist dominated blue state. I find that amusing and tell them "Welcome to the Republic of Texas."

Some ask why I have it. My answer "For my safety and security."

A small number reply "Your safety and security?" as if I'm making this stuff up.

I continue "Yes. Some passengers have proven to have evil intent and attempted to do me and my family financial harm. My camera footage has proved they behaved inappropriately or lied when they submitted a complaint. Uber and Lyft love footage. It makes their decision process very simple."

I have found that both Uber and Lyft will accept my videos as evidence. Especially when accompanied by a lawyer letter, or a subpoena, as has been necessary. Footage of a Becky doing the technicolor yawn has been persuasive, despite the Gryft policy to steal clean up fees.

If not for my dash camera, I'd have been out of the rideshare business several years ago. The dash camera has saved me from deactivation oblivion several times now, and as recently as this month, last month, and the month before.

I've curb kicked a couple of paxholes who would not shut up about my dash camera. Uber's customer service reps have told me more than once that I'm totally within my rights to punt them on the side of the Interstate, so I've done that. The looks on paxbag's faces when you dump them on the shoulder of a limited-access road a mile or more from an exit make this very entertaining. Especially when they have luggage, as the blue staters often do.



The Gift of Fish said:


> Every rule has its exceptions, but generally no communication. Especially if the text is "You're a block away, dude".
> 
> Such texts are examples of Misplaced Moron Syndrome. The pax already holds the belief that the driver is a moron for going to a place where the pax is not. But, as we know, the actual moron is the pax for confirming in the app that he wants to send the driver to an incorrect location. So, if the pax has already self-identified via text as a moron, the chances are great that when you finally find him he will be
> 
> ...


^^^This.

This is why I shuffle at the first whiff of negativity, be it text, phone, or face to face at the point of pick up. Sarcasm? Canceled. Rude? Canceled. Huffy? Canceled. Any negative comment about me, my car, a delay, or whatever...canceled.

When paxholes expose themselves so easily, we should thank them for doing us a solid, and reward them by making them pay a few dollars along with an additional delay. They might learn their lesson, or they might not. We can't fix stupid, nor cure malevolence. Either way, the canceling driver wins. I'll take the $4-5 in lieu of an airport run if I avoid having to deal with paxholes and their paxbaggery.

I've tried explaining to paxholes how to use the app so that they avoid pin errors, but there's no extra money in it, and all I get are low ratings and additional crude commentary, so F them, they aren't my problem. Their life will continue to be more difficult than necessary until they die.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> I think I just gave you two reasons in a previous post.


I'm not compelled yet. Let me know when Uber accepts vids; then I'll rethink and consider.


----------



## ColtDelta (Nov 11, 2019)

SHalester said:


> I'm not compelled yet. Let me know when Uber accepts vids; then I'll rethink and consider.


I sent Uber a private link to the video of the guy that claimed I was drunk or high snorting drugs in the back seat of my car. The stats show that the link was accessed one time. They most certainly did look at the video.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> I accept the ping and drive to location. I get there and it's one of those situations where the address is wrong. It shows a house number that does not exist on that street, and the pin is off in the woods. But happily I'm close enough that the timer starts running.
> 
> I get a phone call through the system but rather than except it I text back but I'm at the address, and I repeat the address back.
> 
> ...


Just say OK, I'll turn it off. Leave it on and take the ride. What are they going to do? Sue you for recording them in your car? How would they even know? 
Just do whatever it takes to keep your income as high as possible. Ignore the rest.


----------



## GreatWhiteHope (Sep 18, 2018)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> I accept the ping and drive to location. I get there and it's one of those situations where the address is wrong. It shows a house number that does not exist on that street, and the pin is off in the woods. But happily I'm close enough that the timer starts running.
> 
> I get a phone call through the system but rather than except it I text back but I'm at the address, and I repeat the address back.
> 
> ...


*She Learned That Day &#129305;*


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

ColtDelta said:


> They most certainly did look at the video.


I read that thread. And the zillions of others where Uber has told the driver no need to send vid, they don't need it. Which to believe?

If uber provides a decent vid rig and requires we have it, I'm all for it. Until then, not in my ride. Wasn't there a poll on this recently? I'm not on an island by myself (even tho I do prefer i am) on this issue of do or don't. For me, clearly a no. AND I can't have one in there anyway for 'other' RS gig. Where is nut man; he;d be yelling at me for not having one. sheesh.


----------



## RideshareUSA (Feb 7, 2019)

NotMe said:


> Or turn off camera and have airport run.


Along with a 1* rating and bs flags. Sure, good logic!


----------



## MajorBummer (Aug 10, 2019)

theMezz said:


> I have camera in and out as well as small white led sign. Not one wire visible. All under the trim and into fuse box. Most don't even notice the camera at all - 2000 rides and two people mentioned the camera and that they thought it was a great idea.


Massachusetts is a 2 party consent state for video recording.That means i have to let Pax know that there is a camera.
I put a couple signs back and front seat that read : For security purposes Audio and video is recorded inside this vehicle.Consent is given by entering the vehicle.
I bet Pax are thinking twice before doing anything stupid knowing they are being recorded.
Its better to have the camera and not need it than the other way around.
I have over 3000 rides and nobody ever pulled crap on me.Maybe the camera did the trick?


----------



## 1.5xorbust (Nov 22, 2017)

The driver is the boss not the pax.


----------



## touberornottouber (Aug 12, 2016)

RightTurnOnRed said:


> Riders requesting no video recording are considered high risk, which equates to high liability. What are these people going to request next ? Hey driver I'm running late, please refrain from using your brakes....&#128563;


Exactly. They were probably going to complain about him being in the "Wrong" place too and try to say he was rude, etc.


----------



## Buck-a-mile (Nov 2, 2019)

Oh hell, in San Diego smart street lamps collect video, audio, and undisclosed information.
For sure license plate recognition, audio recording with the ability to triangulate on gunshots, facial recognition, all included in metadata.

They can create a god's eye view of your movements in monitored areas of San Diego. 

A dash cam was the least of her problems.


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

SHalester said:


> Plus, Uber doesn't accept recordings, yes?


The police department and the judge/jury will.

-----

Pax: "Should I be worried about what you do with the recordings?"

Me: "Only if you make the top 5. Shouldn't be an issue unless you attack me, vomit or take your clothes off."


----------



## EphLux (Aug 10, 2018)

"dude, you're a block from my house" =
Immediate CANCEL

How long have you been at this?


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

Oh, it's been a while since I've posted this...


----------



## Buck-a-mile (Nov 2, 2019)

In SD after the "Taco Bell VP" incident we got a nebolus message saying something about dash cams that was clearly written to not be understood.

My take was, use a dash cam, cover your ass with local laws.

Anyway I have one.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> A funny footnote for the story is when the lady was freaking out her husband was telling her to just relax. As I was driving away she was saying "but we need to get to the airport".


This couple was probably ordering a ride with tight time margins. People that cannot plan their life properly then make absolutely high demands on everyone else as a projection for their deficiencies, deserve to miss there flights. I applaud you here. Bravo.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

SHalester said:


> Very glad my other driving gig prohibits cameras of any type.


What gig is that?


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> What gig is that?


HopSkipDrive


----------



## RideshareUSA (Feb 7, 2019)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> This couple was probably ordering a ride with tight time margins. People that cannot plan their life properly then make absolutely high demands on everyone else as a projection for their deficiencies, deserve to miss there flights. I applaud you here. Bravo.


"Author" & "Moderator" 
Hmmmmm.... &#129300;


----------



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

MothMan said:


> Don't have personal experience with Uber but Lyft support would not take any links from me last month. Had to be files and the files could not be very big or zipped. Wish I could remember the file size limitation but I don't. I also found that other entities that needed the same info were unable to accept links. I upgraded my Dropbox account to make it easier for me to get the files to other entities and kept getting the reply that their companies did not allow them to do it that way. Also discovered my wife's company does not allow her access to YouTube or Dropbox.


I just use an online file compressor when I send video to Uberlyft. I use the setting that compresses full HD video to 1Mb per minute. Quality suffers of course but not much and the videos are still plenty good enough to show whatever in-car D-baggery you need Uberlyft to see.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

SHalester said:


> HopSkipDrive


So it's a ride hailing service for kids and you're prohibited from using cameras?

That's a situation where you as the driver might want a camera more than any other time. If a child makes a false accusation about physical contact or anything sexual in nature you'll be screwed.

It's also interesting how that goes against every other aspect of service providers for kids. Schools and day care centers have cameras all over the place. Apparently parents want there to be video evidence whenever their children or at those facilities. But in this ride hailing service they don't want the cameras. Interesting.

oh wait. I just realized it's a California start up. Why should logic and reason apply. This is the land where people "camp" in front of businesses and crap in the street.

Now a ride hailing service where they trust you enough to drive their kids but don't trust you enough to have a camera makes sense.

Yes it's much better that your kid gets in a car and there's no video evidence of what happens.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

Mista T said:


> Oh, it's been a while since I've posted this...
> 
> View attachment 394552


"Safety is our top priority. So turn off your safety/security cameras or risk deactivation. Thank you."


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

Mista T said:


> Oh, it's been a while since I've posted this...
> 
> View attachment 394552


When did you receive that question was it recent? I'm curious if that is still their policy, that for merely having a camera in the car you can be permanently deactivated,


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> When did you receive that question was it recent? I'm curious if that is still their policy, that for merely having a camera in the car you can be permanently deactivated,


It doesn't seem that having the camera can get you deactivated. Just being reported for having the camera gets you deactivated.

Notice how they "frame" the deactivation threat with 2 or 3 generic paragraphs insinuating there are legal concerns with the camera. If you read the legal sentences closely, they don't really mention anything. They just say "follow the law. Please follow the law. We aren't saying you broke the law but follow the law." that's because a camera in a drivers own car isn't wiretapping and never will be. no one in the history of the world has ever been successfully sued and convicted of wiretapping for putting a security camera in their own car. Wiretapping only applies to places where there is an expectation of privacy. There is zero expectation of privacy in a strangers car. None. That stranger can hear everything you say. If someone else can hear your supposedly "private conversation", then wiretapping doesn't apply because it was never private to begin with.

Regardless of the legalities, it's sad that lyft is threatening people with deactivation simply because someone doesn't like a camera


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> It doesn't seem that having the camera can get you deactivated. Just being reported for having the camera gets you deactivated.
> 
> Notice how they "frame" the deactivation threat with 2 or 3 generic paragraphs insinuating there are legal concerns with the camera. If you read the legal sentences closely, they don't really mention anything. They just say "follow the law. Please follow the law. We aren't saying you broke the law but follow the law." that's because a camera in a drivers own car isn't wiretapping and never will be. no one in the history of the world has ever been successfully sued and convicted of wiretapping for putting a security camera in their own car. Wiretapping only applies to places where there is an expectation of privacy. There is zero expectation of privacy in a strangers car. None. That stranger can hear everything you say. If someone else can hear your supposedly "private conversation", then wiretapping doesn't apply because it was never private to begin with.
> 
> Regardless of the legalities, it's sad that lyft is threatening people with deactivation simply because someone doesn't like a camera


The expectation of privacy is a legal term and it does apply in someways. But not in this case.

What matters are what the laws are in your state. I operate exclusively in single party consent states. That means as long as one person is aware of the cameras presence and consents to it being there then the legal hurdle has been met.

Regarding dash cams it's not an expectation of privacy issue, it's one of consent.

In some states are people being recorded have to give consent. They call that a two party consent state.

But you're right, Lyft's threat of deactivation is not because of breaking the law but merely for complaints.


----------



## JaredJ (Aug 7, 2015)

Why is it always the people no one gives two sh**s about that get bent out of shape about car cams as if they're going to disclose national secrets in the backseat when the only thing they want to talk about is their dog or the weather.

You know all her social media accounts are set to public because she doesn't have a clue but "oh, this dash cam makes me uncomfortable."


----------



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

The Gift of Fish said:


> if the text is "You're a block away, dude".


It seems very rude (to me), to address a complete stranger as "dude".



LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Yes it's much better that your kid gets in a car and there's no video evidence of what happens.


On the other hand, can you be accused of being a Pedo, for filming kids?
(Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't)


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> So it's a ride hailing service for kids and you're prohibited from using cameras?


yup, that is what I posted and that is what it is. Minors, I'm sure you get the 'why' of it?

Then again after reading your note in full I'm sure you don't get it. Now if only Uber did the same exact background and certification that HSD does there would be far fewer drivers........


----------



## part-timer (Oct 5, 2015)

SHalester said:


> yup, that is what I posted and that is what it is. Minors, I'm sure you get the 'why' of it?
> 
> Then again after reading your note in full I'm sure you don't get it. Now if only Uber did the same exact background and certification that HSD does there would be far fewer drivers........


God bless you man...I don't want to drive MY kids around, let alone countless random others. If we are ever in the same bar, you got a free one on me.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

part-timer said:


> .I don't want to drive MY kids around


i'm sensing a story there.........


----------



## part-timer (Oct 5, 2015)

SHalester said:


> i'm sensing a story there.........


I got a wife and 5 daughters, there are PLENTY of stories...


----------



## SatMan (Mar 20, 2017)

SHalester said:


> Glad? Most likely not. I don't need Uber, I'm retired. Plus already have 2nd RS gig that I could always do more of in a false report situation.
> 
> As to cameras I just don't want or need on in my car. I'm sure there are some that are small, sleek and run on batteries because I'm sure as shite not going to have cords running all over my dash and here and there. I don't care if I'M videoed. That would 50 shades of ding dong. I just don't want butt ugly device in my ride. Plus, Uber doesn't accept recordings, yes? I also never drive at night where I think the arguement for video ability grows.
> PLus 2nd gig prohibits still or videos. I'd have to remove every single day b4 that gig shift began. Big pain. And if this puts me on an island mostly by myself (no camera) I'm very ok with that. No shrinking violet here.


They do look at the video if you are involved in an accident.
https://uberpeople.net/threads/all-you-need-for-xmas-is-a-dash-cam.369552/



SHalester said:


> that would be my only option. I don't want cords, holes, or installed permanently. Not in my ride, no sir.
> 
> And if I were to drive at night, then I'm sure I'd go for it. Uber doesn't accept and that really kills it there as well. If (when) I get a false complaint I'll deal with it (or not).
> the big item is my 2nd RS gig doesn't even allow them IN the car to begin with. Having to remove it every single day would be a huge pain in the wazu.
> ...


Many have quick release buttons...And you can hide the wires. An accident can happen any time.


----------



## Woohaa (Jan 15, 2017)

RaleighUber said:


> Only fools turn off the camera.


There are many of those in this thread. They're actually taking the position that the driver should have turned off the camera. &#129318;&#127999;‍♂


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

SHalester said:


> yup, that is what I posted and that is what it is. Minors, I'm sure you get the 'why' of it?
> 
> Then again after reading your note in full I'm sure you don't get it. Now if only Uber did the same exact background and certification that HSD does there would be far fewer drivers........


You're right. I don't get it. Perhaps you could explain it to me.
Schools and day care centers have lots of cameras.

Everyplace else in the world where there are cameras such as stores, banks, outdoor surveillance there's no "no filming kids" policy.
So they trust you to take their kid but not to take their picture, right?

I think if there was somebody who I didn't trust to take my child's picture there's no way in hell I would let my child go with that person.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> The expectation of privacy is a legal term and it does apply in someways. But not in this case.
> 
> What matters are what the laws are in your state. I operate exclusively in single party consent states. That means as long as one person is aware of the cameras presence and consents to it being there then the legal hurdle has been met.
> 
> ...


Wiretapping doesn't apply at all in rideshare. You are jumping in a strangers car. You have no expectation of privacy in someone else's property

"What matters are what the laws are in your state. I operate exclusively in single party consent states. That means as long as one person is aware of the cameras presence and consents to it being there then the legal hurdle has been met."

uh no, the state wiretapping consent laws do not apply. First off, video cameras do not have anything to do with wiretapping. only audio recording applies in wiretapping. Second off, these consent laws do not apply because there is no expectation of privacy in a strangers vehicle which you are conveniently forgetting for some reason. If you don't understand this concept, call a wiretapping attorney for a consultation because it seems your understanding of the law needs improving . No uber driver has ever been convicted or tried for wiretapping for having a security dashcam recording audio in their own car. Ever. If you jump into a strangers car and have an expectation of privacy, a judge would laugh.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> Wiretapping doesn't apply at all in rideshare. You are jumping in a strangers car. You have no expectation of privacy in someone else's property
> 
> "What matters are what the laws are in your state. I operate exclusively in single party consent states. That means as long as one person is aware of the cameras presence and consents to it being there then the legal hurdle has been met."
> 
> uh no, the state wiretapping consent laws do not apply. First off, video cameras do not have anything to do with wiretapping, only audio recording. Second off, these consent laws do not apply because there is no expectation of privacy in a strangers vehicle. If you don't understand this concept, call a wiretapping attorney for a consultation because it seems your understanding of the law needs improving . No uber driver has ever been convicted or tried for wiretapping for having a security dashcam recording audio in their own car. Ever. If you jump into a strangers car and have an expectation of privacy, a judge would laugh.


ALL of the above, while it may be true in the state that the poster lives in (and he hasn't said where that is) is very much NOT true in the state I live in (and I haven't said what that is). So, I'm not going to argue about it with him when he doesn't even understand or care that laws are different in different states. It seems so obvious to me, and it is so foreign to others. Different states - different laws.
Why can't you guys stop making blanket statements about laws, and their application?
Somebody may believe you -- and you're wrong.

Judges in my state do _not_ laugh, when a poor entitled downtrodden minority whines about a big bad Uber driver doing _anything_ to them. 
Especially if the big bad Uber driver is an old white guy.
"Get a rope"


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> ALL of the above, while it may be true in the state that the poster lives in (and he hasn't said where that is) is very much NOT true in the state I live in (and I haven't said what that is). So, I'm not going to argue about it with him when he doesn't even understand or care that laws are different in different states. It seems so obvious to me, and it is so foreign to others. Different states - different laws.
> Why can't you guys stop making blanket statements about laws, and their application?
> Somebody may believe you -- and you're wrong.
> 
> ...


the law is the same in every state. wiretapping law is only applicable in places where there is an expectation of privacy. you are jumping into a strangers car? Ok then wiretapping law and all of its nuisances of "party consent" do not apply here because of that disqualifying factor. It is not a hard concept to grasp. I strongly advise you to read the law closer or consult an attorney to understand why wiretapping law does not apply in rideshare regardless of state.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> the law is the same in every state.


OMG


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> OMG


I'm a law student. Show me the state (or District of Columbia, or territory of the United States) where wiretapping law still applies even where there is no expectation of privacy (like a strangers vehicle). I'll wait

The "one-party, 2-party, lemon party consent" nonsense doesn't apply here because the conditions for wiretapping aren't satisfied. What is so hard to understand ? You are spreading misinformation on these boards causing other drivers to get deactivated because they put up awkward unnecessary signs in their car


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

Okay, can we separate some definitions? Wiretapping has to do with tapping a line, like a cell phone or Skype call, fax or land line. Audio recording, on the other hand, is different. There may be expectation to privacy, there may not be... But the laws that govern audio recording vary from state-to-state. Audio recording is not the same as wiretapping. A dash cam is (often) audio recording.


----------



## Dice Man (May 21, 2018)

You done the right thing.
About 4000 trips, nobody asked me to turn it OFF.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Mista T said:


> But the laws that govern audio recording vary from state-to-state.


In California, two party consent is necessary IF audio is recorded in addition to visual. Visual only does not require notification.
A sign notifying of it's existence must be 'prominently displayed', or a crime is committed.

I dunno about Florida, or Michigan, or New York, or Oregon.
But, I do know about California
And, I'm not even a law student.
But, if I was, I wouldn't try to apply California law to another state.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

Mista T said:


> Okay, can we separate some definitions? Wiretapping has to do with tapping a line, like a cell phone or Skype call, fax or land line. Audio recording, on the other hand, is different. There may be expectation to privacy, there may not be... But the laws that govern audio recording vary from state-to-state. Audio recording is not the same as wiretapping.


Wiretapping


UberBastid said:


> In California, two party consent is necessary.
> A sign notifying of it's existence must be 'prominently displayed', or a crime is committed.


you literally made that up. It's fiction. There is no requirement to "prominently display a sign" in any law in any state.

can you point to me which section or subsection of the wiretapping state penal code contains this "prominent sign" exception for wiretapping in California?

Or where did you even read the "prominent sign" propaganda ?


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> you literally made that up. It's fiction. There is no requirement to "prominently display a sign" in any law in any state.


http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-law_California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of *all parties to the conversation*. See Cal. Penal Code § 632. The statute applies to "confidential communications" -- i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation. See Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575, 576-77, 578-82 (Cal. 2002). A California appellate court has ruled that this statute applies to the use of hidden video cameras to record conversations as well. See California v. Gibbons, 215 Cal. App. 3d 1204 (Cal Ct. App. 1989)._

It took me seconds to research this ... and like I said, I'm not even a junior-student lawyer.

So, you don't need to have a 'prominent sign' as long you have a long conversation with each pax that gets in your car. I found a sign to be easier and fulfills the notification requirement.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-law_California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of *all parties to the conversation*. See Cal. Penal Code § 632. The statute applies to "confidential communications" -- i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation. See Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575, 576-77, 578-82 (Cal. 2002). A California appellate court has ruled that this statute applies to the use of hidden video cameras to record conversations as well. See California v. Gibbons, 215 Cal. App. 3d 1204 (Cal Ct. App. 1989)._
> 
> It took me seconds to research this ... and like I said, I'm not even a junior-student lawyer.
> 
> So, you don't need to have a 'prominent sign' as long you have a long conversation with each pax that gets in your car. I found a sign to be easier and fulfills the notification requirement.


So you believe the California state eavesdropping law applies in a strangers car? you think there's an expectation of privacy in a strangers vehicle?


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

The judge in Cali_fornia v. Gibbons_ wrote, in part that;
.._.if there is a recording of someone without their knowledge in a public or semi-public place like a street or restaurant, the person being recorded may or may not have an objectively reasonable expectation to privacy such that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation,and the reasonableness of the expectation of privacy depends on particular factual circumstances. Therefore, one cannot necessarily assume that they are in the clear simply because they are in a public place._

Welcome to California


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Schools and day care centers have lots of cameras.


and each parent signs a release waiver to have those cameras there. That is, the few schools that have live vid cameras; ditto daycar.

If you don't understand they 'why' of no vids or photos of minors, then there is no hope.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> So you believe the California state eavesdropping law applies in a strangers car? Who's eavesdropping? The driver who was required to pick you up.


Yes. That's who would be fined and sued. The driver.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

SHalester said:


> If you don't understand they 'why' of no vids or photos of minors, then there is no hope.


Did you sign a consent form to Walmart for recording your minor? How about the amazon echo Show for recording your minor ? How about the cameras in the post office from the federal government?

Also I'm curious why your first thought is "sex" when the filming of minors occurs. That's quite odd



UberBastid said:


> Yes. That's who would be fined and sued. The driver.


Good luck with that. Wiretapping doesn't apply and no driver has ever been sued for eavesdropping either, but you can keep spreading your falsehoods and propaganda. I'll keep countering it with truth and facts



SHalester said:


> yup, that is what I posted and that is what it is. Minors, I'm sure you get the 'why' of it?


No. No one understands the "why" of what you're talking about. Minors are not protected from being photographed because photography is not a crime in America. Actually, photography is a protected civil right in America (amendment 1 of the us constitution: freedom of the press).


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> your first thought is "sex


wut? pretty sure I've not posted that word here....ever...well not today and not this thread.

Let's be clear since you are confused. I don't have a vid rig because I don't want one for several reasons. One being HSD prohibits them from even being installed in the car. I also don't want to wreck my ride with more RS stuff. I don't drive nights, so I don't see a big reason to have one. And the fact Uber doesn't exactly require them or even ever ask for them that also is a reason. 
And if you don't GET while HSD would not allow them, there really really is no hope.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> Did you sign a consent form to Walmart for recording your minor?


In California, WalMart doesn't use audio unless you are in their security section (detained) and in there, there are signs everywhere that audio/visual recording equipment is in use, and that sign is right in the video recording.


MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> Wiretapping doesn't apply and no driver has ever been sued for eavesdropping either, but you can keep spreading your falsehoods and propaganda. I'll keep countering it with truth and facts


Did you see the legal citations I posted?
I remember having a conversation with my atty once. I asked him if a course of action that I was considering was legal. I gave him my interpretation of the law, he told me the other way it can be interpreted, and then he said, "It is in a gray area and would have to be decided by a judge. And, I want you to know that I will defend you to your last nickle. Do you want to start this fight?"
He told me it's ok with him - he had a kid in college at the time and tuition was a biotch.
I decided I'd just put a sign up ... or whatever.
You come to Cali and fight that fight, we need another crusader.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> In California, WalMart doesn't use audio unless you are in their security section (detained) and in there, there are signs everywhere that audio/visual recording equipment is in use, and that sign is right in the video recording.
> 
> Did you see the legal citations I posted?
> I remember having a conversation with my atty once. I asked him if a course of action that I was considering was legal. I gave him my interpretation of the law, he told me the other way it can be interpreted, and then he said, "It is in a gray area and would have to be decided by a judge. And, I want you to know that I will defend you to your last nickle. Do you want to start this fight?"
> ...


you have to use common sense. What judge would find it unreasonable for a driver to record their passengers for security reasons? One false report can get a driver fired. There needs to be accountability. A strangers vehicle has never been considered a place where expected privacy occurs. Ever

Eavesdropping law doesn't apply


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

You haven't actually been admitted to a law school have you?
What year?
What school?


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> You haven't actually been admitted to a law school have you?
> What year?
> What school


Even if that were true, why does it matter? You don't have to go to law school to become a lawyer. You can take the bar exam in California without going to law school

Nice job Changing the subject after getting proven wrong. In the entire history of the United States, How many drivers have been convicted of eavesdropping again? 0.0 or 0.00?


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> Even if that were true, why does it matter? You don't have to go to law school to become a lawyer. You can take the bar exam in California without going to law school
> 
> Nice job Changing the subject after getting proven wrong. In the entire history of the United States, How many drivers have been convicted of eavesdropping again? 0.0 or 0.00?


I have a lawyer that will defend you 'to your last nickle'.
He's good too.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> Wiretapping doesn't apply at all in rideshare. You are jumping in a strangers car. You have no expectation of privacy in someone else's property
> 
> "What matters are what the laws are in your state. I operate exclusively in single party consent states. That means as long as one person is aware of the cameras presence and consents to it being there then the legal hurdle has been met."
> 
> uh no, the state wiretapping consent laws do not apply. First off, video cameras do not have anything to do with wiretapping. only audio recording applies in wiretapping. Second off, these consent laws do not apply because there is no expectation of privacy in a strangers vehicle which you are conveniently forgetting for some reason. If you don't understand this concept, call a wiretapping attorney for a consultation because it seems your understanding of the law needs improving . No uber driver has ever been convicted or tried for wiretapping for having a security dashcam recording audio in their own car. Ever. If you jump into a strangers car and have an expectation of privacy, a judge would laugh.


Wire tapping is a self explaining term. It means to tap into a phone line or cable physically. Though today that can be done digitally. But basically it means to intercept communications traveling through a medium.

Electronic eavesdropping is a broader category which could cover something like a concealed dash cam In violation of state laws.

If you have a dash cam in a single party consent state you have nothing to worry about.

In a two party consent state you have to have the consent of all your passengers in order to record.

it may be enough to have a sign that says "by entering this vehicle you consent to being video recorded". To be safe you'd probably want to announce to all your riders as they get in that they're being recorded, just like a lot of businesses do when you call them and they advise you that you are on a recorded line.

You would need to check with the laws in your state.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

> *You haven't actually been admitted to a law school have you?
> What year?
> What school*


*Even if that were true, why does it matter? *

I didn't say it was true. I asked questions.
It's ok if you want to plead the fifth ...


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

SHalester said:


> and each parent signs a release waiver to have those cameras there. That is, the few schools that have live vid cameras; ditto daycar.
> 
> If you don't understand they 'why' of no vids or photos of minors, then there is no hope.


You obviously are not a teacher or mentor at heart. Nobody has ever enlightened or educated someone by just keep saying to them if you don't get it then there's no hope.

For the record, you have not tried to explain why you can't record children in your car.

Honestly, I'm just trying to put the logic together.

So you people that work for that rideshare company are so well vetted that there are no undesirables amongst you.

In fact if those same standards were applied to Lyft and Uber you feel that many of us would not be on the road. I guess cause there's so many pervs among us.

Yet at the same time, you're all such a bunch of pervs that you're not allowed to have cameras, because if you did, then after dropping the kids off you'd watch the videos and masturbate.

Am I getting warmer?


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Wire tapping is a self explaining term. It means to tap into a phone line or cable physically. Though today that can be done digitally. But basically it means to intercept communications traveling through a medium.
> 
> Electronica eavesdropping is a broader category which could cover something like a concealed dash cam In violation of state laws.
> 
> ...


A concealed dash cam is not a crime in any state. This is because a strangers car doesn't satisfy the condition of a place with an expectation of privacy, therefore your party consent stuff doesn't apply here

Approximately 0.0 uber drivers have been tried for eavesdropping with their cameras. 0.0 have been convicted. This is in the past 100 years in America. Let me know if you find more up to date statistics that are contrary to this


----------



## TeleSki (Dec 4, 2014)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Welcome to the world of ride share.
> 
> Then he text me "dude, you're a block away from my house" like it's my fault.
> 
> Anyone that texts me "dude, you're at the wrong spot" when I'm parked in front of the address on the app, is an automatic cancellation (after the timer expires, off course).


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> A concealed dash cam is not a crime in any state. This is because a strangers car doesn't satisfy the condition of a place with an expectation of privacy, therefore your party consent stuff doesn't apply here
> 
> Approximately 0.0 uber drivers have been tried for eavesdropping with their cameras. 0.0 have been convicted. This is in the past 100 years in America. Let me know if you find more up to date statistics that are contrary to this


You are wrong sir. Before you give people bad information you really should inquire more.

In all states having a recording device that none of the parties being recorded have consented to is a crime. That's regardless of whether or not the devices is concealed. The issue is whether or not the recording is consensual.

Some states are what is called a "single party consent state" which means that as long as one party has consented to the recording that is enough. If you have your own recording device, we get a concealed or not, it is understood that since it is your device you consent.
some states are what is called "two party consent state" which means that all parties being recorded must consent to the recording.

That last one actually makes more sense. Just because one person gives their consent doesn't mean you should be able to do it to all of them.

Imagine how that would apply if there were five women, and only one of them gave consent for a sexual act yet you performed that act with the other four as well without their consent.


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> A concealed dash cam is not a crime in any state. This is because a strangers car doesn't satisfy the condition of a place with an expectation of privacy, therefore your party consent stuff doesn't apply here


I admire your conviction to your belief, however you are incorrect. CA (and WA, where I sometimes drive) are 2 party states. In these states, EVERY person being recorded must give consent. By displaying a sign, we are letting them know that audio recordings take place. Unless they object, they have given _informed_ consent or _implied_ consent.

When researching this (after my nasty warning from Lyft) I found specific laws, as well as examples.

Example: a news reporter with cameraman approaches you, sticks a microphone in your face and asks what you think about Trump. It is obvious you are being recorded, so if you speak then you have given consent.

Counter example: a stranger with a hidden recording device approaches you, in a public place (like a restaurant) and asks a question. You don't realize you are being recorded, therefore their actions (in CA) are illegal, in general.


----------



## LordBinky (Dec 11, 2019)

A Pittsburgh law firm's website has a section on this topic, and they state that notices are required to be displayed advising passengers that a recording device is in operation. So to be on the safe side I'll follow their advice before that of some anonymous forum poster on here. I doubt a court would take his/her word over the legal advice of a qualified attorney.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

Mista T said:


> I admire your conviction to your belief, however you are incorrect. CA (and WA, where I sometimes drive) are 2 party states. In these states, EVERY person being recorded must give consent. By displaying a sign, we are letting them know that audio recordings take place. Unless they object, they have given _informed_ consent or _implied_ consent.
> 
> When researching this (after my nasty warning from Lyft) I found specific laws, as well as examples.
> 
> ...


You do not need consent to record audio in public places or in places where there is no expectation of privacy. You realize that right? Do you know what freedom of the press is?


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> You do not need consent to record audio in public places or in places where there is no expectation of privacy. You realize that right? Do you know what freedom of the press is?


I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I did my own research, and came to the conclusions that I did. I suppose if there were money involved I would dig deeper, call attorneys, etc. But since there is not, this is as far as I'm willing to go.

&#128513;


----------



## Kimoverman (Oct 22, 2019)

SHalester said:


> Glad? Most likely not. I don't need Uber, I'm retired. Plus already have 2nd RS gig that I could always do more of in a false report situation.
> 
> As to cameras I just don't want or need on in my car. I'm sure there are some that are small, sleek and run on batteries because I'm sure as shite not going to have cords running all over my dash and here and there. I don't care if I'M videoed. That would 50 shades of ding dong. I just don't want butt ugly device in my ride. Plus, Uber doesn't accept recordings, yes? I also never drive at night where I think the arguement for video ability grows.
> PLus 2nd gig prohibits still or videos. I'd have to remove every single day b4 that gig shift began. Big pain. And if this puts me on an island mostly by myself (no camera) I'm very ok with that. No shrinking violet here.


Who do you drive for that prohibits cameras? Just curious &#129335;&#127996;‍♀


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Kimoverman said:


> Who do you drive for that prohibits cameras?


HopSkipDrive


----------



## Kimoverman (Oct 22, 2019)

SHalester said:


> HopSkipDrive


Oh ok. I'm in Atlanta Georgia. Never heard of them. Hope it's good for you.&#128516;


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Kimoverman said:


> Hope it's good for you


They certainly pay more.


----------



## theMezz (Sep 29, 2018)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> I don't know why some people on this forum keep saying that Uber doesn't except the video. They do. What are you do is you upload it to YouTube, and you do it so it's unlisted, so it's not searchable or findable. The only way anyone can see it is if you send them the link. If you send the link to Uber they will review it


Accept not except

I have told people I have the camera in case of an issue and Uber or the police want to view it.


----------



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

Ping.Me.More said:


> It seems very rude (to me), to address a complete stranger as "dude".


I don't find it rude, but this kind of thing showcases perfectly why pax being able to text drivers is of such benefit to drivers. It's a huge positive - these pax remotely self-identify as non-transportables, saving us the trouble of driving to them / wasting time.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

Mista T said:


> Example: a news reporter with cameraman approaches you, sticks a microphone in your face and asks what you think about Trump. It is obvious you are being recorded, so if you speak then you have given consent.
> 
> Counter example: a stranger with a hidden recording device approaches you, in a public place (like a restaurant) and asks a question. You don't realize you are being recorded, therefore their actions (in CA) are illegal, in general.


secretly recording a stranger in a public place (or publically accessible private-owned place) is not illegal. That's why it's called public. You are very misinformed.



Mista T said:


> I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I did my own research, and came to the conclusions that I did. I suppose if there were money involved I would dig deeper, call attorneys, etc. But since there is not, this is as far as I'm willing to go.
> 
> &#128513;


This is not a debate. The law is crystal clear. It is not illegal to secretly record audio in a public place like a restaurant. Period. Whether you want to accept this fact is another story


----------



## sellkatsell44 (Oct 25, 2015)

The Gift of Fish said:


> I don't find it rude, but this kind of thing showcases perfectly why pax being able to text drivers is of such benefit to drivers. It's a huge positive - these pax remotely self-identify as non-transportables, saving us the trouble of driving to them / wasting time.


----------



## Wildgoose (Feb 11, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> A funny footnote for the story is when the lady was freaking out her husband was telling her to just relax. As I was driving away she was saying "but we need to get to the airport".


May be someone was having affair. Are you sure he was her husband. Just to go to air port, why bother a camera? there will be camera every where at the air port.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

Don't know about all 50 states but..

Specifically the law in Florida states that you can't have a camera anywhere that has a reasonable expectation of privacy, the list of examples they give is places like bathrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms, hotel rooms ect. Most states seem to interpret this as anywhere in a public place you would undress.

The back of a taxi/uber DOES NOT fall under any interpretation i have ever found for expectation of privacy for video.

In the state of Florida there's absolutely no question that as long as you arn't doing an upskirt/downshirt angle your perfectly fine with a camera going with or without a sign. That being said i'd post a sign on the inside and outside of all 3 passenger doors by the handles. Cause lawyers...



Now if someone wants you to turn off the camera they get the boot.

"The passenger made me feel unsafe and i felt like it was a very real risk of something very bad was going to happen if i did."

If I get this situation while i'm in the taxi..



"Well Sir/madam, I honestly can't access the camera footage myself and no one ever bothers to watch them unless there's an investigation of a specific incident". This right here has ended the discussion in a marked taxi..


----------



## UberPoolNo (Dec 30, 2019)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Yep should've stayed at the wrong address collect no show fee. Simple


yes anything more is waste of time and never end well


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

theMezz said:


> Accept not except


Yeah, sorry. That was Siri.

You guys realize that there are multiple laws that are applicable regarding cameras right? It's complicated.

There are state laws, and there are federal laws. I'm sure you guys know there are some federal laws that become applicable when you do something crossing the state line. But there are other federal laws that you can break without crossing the state line. So you can't say that federal laws don't apply if you don't cross a state line. It's complicated.

There are some laws regarding the use of recording devices that become applicable because the subject had a "reasonable expectation of privacy". There are other laws regarding recording which have to do with consent. It's complicated.

Some laws regarding recording that are civil. News crews can set up a camera on the street and film people walking by for a news story without their consent. A movie production company won't do the same thing and use your image in a movie because they will be sued civilly for payment. Same thing is true for someone filming for a commercial. If you use someone's likeness for commercial gain without their express permission that person can sue for a financial settlement. The people making the movie or commercial can't just say "you had no expectation of privacy". Sometimes it's what you do with the recording that matters. It's complicated.

The laws vary from state to state. Some laws don't apply if you're only capturing the persons image. Other laws apply if you record their conversations. It's complicated.

I'm just trying to point out that there are a variety of applicable laws. There is not just the single standard of "an expectation of privacy".


----------



## 7Miles (Dec 17, 2014)

I don't know why I was deactivated.


----------



## ObsidianSedan (Jul 13, 2019)

SHalester said:


> have to say as a pax in a uber there has never been a camera. Only one was in a taxi, so far.
> 
> As a driver I won't have one as I don't drive at night AND my 2nd RS gig prohibits them all together. PLus, man are they ugly. Wires here wires there.


Take a ride in Chicago. I've ridden quite a few times there and have never been in a car without a camera. As to ugly wires, I had my camera professionally installed at a car stereo shop. No visible wires and I didn't take up my cigarette lighter jack to power it.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

ObsidianSedan said:


> e never been in a car without a camera


The only camera I saw as a pax was an official taxi; none of my uber drivers had them. I looked at dashcams avail and they are were too big and too ugly. Still not swayed I 'need' one for day time driving. If I were inclined it would need to be battery powered, sleek, small and opposite of ugly. And quick disconnect is required.


----------



## Cary Grant (Jul 14, 2015)

Dash cameras are like life insurance and parachutes.

When you need a dash camera for your protection, either you have a dash camera (or life insurance, or a parachute), or you won't need it ever again.


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

I agree, no camera no ride.


----------



## simont23 (Jul 24, 2019)

NotMe said:


> Or turn off camera and have airport run.


Or pretend to turn off camera and have airport run. After all, the whole Uber empire is built on falsehood and trickery.


----------



## blackjackross (Dec 16, 2016)

I've had only one rider refuse to continue the ride----that's in over 5000 rides given since I've had the camera on. Not negotiable, "Don't like the camera?----Bye".

I guess these folks never use elevators, shop in a mall, go to a bar, eat in a restaurant or enter any office building. Privacy!? That ship has sailed a long time ago. Lock yourself up in your house and don't turn on your phone or computer if you want to maintain your "privacy".


----------



## dave_guy (Aug 2, 2017)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Welcome to the world of ride share.
> 
> The issue for me was I was already getting red flags. The guy calls for the ride and has the wrong address, not even on the correct street.
> 
> ...


Anyone that says dude to me, I am not interested....


----------



## Phil Lee (Apr 29, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> A funny footnote for the story is when the lady was freaking out her husband was telling her to just relax. As I was driving away she was saying "but we need to get to the airport".


I put in my profile they will be recorded, if they don't accept that, they have to cancel.


----------



## GrumpZilla (Nov 7, 2019)

Cold Fusion said:


> @LyftUberFuwabolewa : Uber Shill


Standard forum comment when user has nothing clever to add.


----------



## Matthew Thomas (Mar 19, 2016)

Crap like this is why I no longer drive.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

Matthew Thomas said:


> Crap like this is why I no longer drive.


But you still hang out on the form?

That would be like giving up the profession of being an undertaker but continuing your subscription to "Mortuary Today"


----------



## Ttown Driver (Sep 24, 2019)

I'm not sure why you didn't answer the phone.
The app is so screwed up - at least in my city - I gladly confirm where the pickup is.
In fact, last night I had a pickup - street address irrelevant - ping showed beyond Bldg 5, which puts them in the river.
Pax called, they were visiting the complex so they didn't know they were in Bldg 3.
That aside, when I'm asked about my camera I say, "Yes that's so if an idiot hits us, we can ALL sue him."
Doubt it would have worked with this "lady",
If you had completed the trip, if she had anything to do with it, of course no tip and a poor rating.

For the future, maybe try, "Sorry ma'am, THEY don't allow me to turn it off."


----------



## Matthew Thomas (Mar 19, 2016)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> But you still hang out on the form?
> 
> That would be like giving up the profession of being an undertaker but continuing your subscription to "Mortuary Today"


Actually I rarely ever come on here. I only come on to see how screwber is making the lives of drivers more miserable. Also your analogy sucks!


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

Matthew Thomas said:


> Actually I rarely ever come on here. I only come on to see how screwber is making the lives of drivers more miserable. Also your analogy sucks!


My analogy sucks? Or maybe it blows!

Dude I think you just turn schadenfreude into saddenfreude.


----------



## uberist (Jul 14, 2016)

Next time just tell them you wont shut them for both of your protections.

If they dont want the ride than move on.


----------



## Hornplayer (Jan 17, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> When I called Uber the nice support lady told me that you definitely don't want to turn your cameras off for people who want them off. They are probably problematic


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS.

Hmm, might not be a bad idea to put another sign next to the ones you already have: "The next UBER might let you ride without a camera." Let them draw their own conclusions.


----------



## Boston Bill (Jul 13, 2019)

SHalester said:


> I dunno. If my arse leaves the car to help I start the ride. On the drop off until my arse hits the seat I don't complete/end the ride. I'd have to see more opinions to see which way is best.


Me to


----------



## JaxUberLyft (Jan 9, 2019)

OldBay said:


> Rule#1. Never knowingly take a trip where you may get less than 5*.


EXACTLY my M.O. - if ANYTHING looks remotely sideways about an upcoming ride, dump it right now. That specifically includes the slightest sign of initial discontent by the rider.

The moment of truth is when the driver chooses to start the ride...in other words, GIVES UP THE ABILITY TO CANCEL!

Do that ONLY when you are as sure as you can reasonably be that everything is on the up-and-up. Forget the fact that you drove x minutes and y miles to the pickup point...that's what economists and business decision makers call a "sunk cost"...money gone and unrecoverable regardless of future events.

The moment the ride is started there is a huge shift in the balance of power from the driver to the rider. The moment a driver starts a ride their U/L future is squarely in the hands of the rider. Keep this truth constantly in mind as long as a ride is active.

U/L are constantly being sued for alleged negligence every time a bad driver rider story makes the news. Therefore, especially since new drivers are a dime a dozen, they'll deactivate in a heartbeat regardless of fault.

We see time and again that angry / drunk / high pax can and will make up nonsense for whatever reason often leading to serious heartache for the driver. The deck is stacked against us.


----------



## Fargle (May 28, 2017)

Cold Fusion said:


> @LyftUberFuwabolewa : Uber Shill


Yeah, this is very strange. I always get clinically stupid people with Uber support.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Imagine how that would apply if there were five women, and only one of them gave consent for a sexual act yet you performed that act with the other four as well without their consent.


I'm not sure where you're going but I like where you're going with this.


----------



## HonoluluHoku (Jul 2, 2019)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> You do not need consent to record audio in public places or in places where there is no expectation of privacy. You realize that right? Do you know what freedom of the press is?


Just a side note ... I'm way late with this, but as a journalist for almost 30 years, I can tell you that you don't understand "freedom of the press." That is separate from the "reasonable expectation of privacy" issue. Best not to conflate the two.
Cheers!


----------



## seawulf (Nov 13, 2019)

I'm sure you did everything you could to avoid this situation. How long are you likely to even keep recordings from your camera anyway? It's most likely you would only even look at them if there were a problem on a ride. Even if you like your job who wants to relive their work day in their time off anyway? The cameras I've tried have managed space by saving the newest recordings over the oldest ones. If this is the case, maybe explaining that it wouldn't even remain on your device for long may have made her feel better. Unless you're backing the vids up to the web the moment they're recorded you're not really benefiting from having a camera recording your rides anyway. If they're smart they'd grab your phone(tablet/camera/etc.) Vids backed up to the cloud should periodically be deleted as well.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

seawulf said:


> ...How long are you likely to even keep recordings from your camera anyway?...


The cards in my cameras are big enough that they store an entire days worth of recording and then some.

If I've had a ride that I think might be problematic then either right after that or at the end of the day I will swap in a spare set of cards.

If I've had a ride that I really really think will be problematic I preserve the video to my laptop.

I carry an on-the-go reader that fits my computer.


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

I can get several days on my 256 GB card in car 1 and 1 week plus on my 400 GB card in car 2.

I retain all my dash cam footage from both the interior and exterior camera when ever I have a PAX in the car. Started doing this in the beginning of 2019 and in 1 year I have 5 GB of saved files. Takes me about 10 minutes per day to go through the files and delete ones with out PAX. Then I let the files transfer from card to Hard drive over night. Usually takes 2-4 hours depending on how full I let the card get.


----------



## I_Like_Spam (May 10, 2015)

A lot of people are concerned that they will be part of a viral youtube, and don't really want to go that way. Particularly if they are doing something they want to keep private, even if it is legal.

When I was driving a cab, one of the local politicians used to take a ride from a gay tavern here in town, but homosexuality really wasn't part of his public persona. Would not have liked to see that on the news.


----------



## waldowainthrop (Oct 25, 2019)

I_Like_Spam said:


> When I was driving a cab, one of the local politicians used to take a ride from a gay tavern here in town, but homosexuality really wasn't part of his public persona. Would not have liked to see that on the news.


Interesting story, but he was doing that in public and anyone could have outed him. Not only does he not have an expectation of privacy on the way to the bar, anyone could have legally (and in many cases, morally) taken pictures of him inside or outside the bar.

If I had a person saying "I'm on my way to the strip club and my family can't know so can you turn your camera off", that would be a flat "no". Someone asking for a reasonable amount of discretion is fine, but a rideshare car is a pretty public place and not an anonymous context at all. I don't think the "two party consent" laws apply at all in rideshare with dash cams (I am not a lawyer).

People who have such significant privacy concerns need private hired transportation and a disguise.


----------



## DrivingUberPax (Apr 25, 2018)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> I accept the ping and drive to location. I get there and it's one of those situations where the address is wrong. It shows a house number that does not exist on that street, and the pin is off in the woods. But happily I'm close enough that the timer starts running.
> 
> I get a phone call through the system but rather than except it I text back but I'm at the address, and I repeat the address back.
> 
> ...


The nerve of some people is mind boggling. There's literally cameras everywhere. Don't like it, drive yourself. Problem solved.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

I_Like_Spam said:


> A lot of people are concerned that they will be part of a viral youtube, and don't really want to go that way. Particularly if they are doing something they want to keep private, even if it is legal.
> 
> When I was driving a cab, one of the local politicians used to take a ride from a gay tavern here in town, but homosexuality really wasn't part of his public persona. Would not have liked to see that on the news.


I had something similar with a guy who (i suspect) didn't want his wife to know he went to a local gay club.

I jokingly told him that next time he should call the cab to his neighbors house and wear a mask.

Next time i got his fare low and behold the dude called the cab to his neighbors house and is wearing a rubber S&M mask.


----------



## Frank White Philly (Jan 15, 2020)

If that ever happens to me, I'd easily and quickly tell the pax that it's a hard negative on my turning the camera off. And if they don't like it, we can cancel/end/not start the ride


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> So you believe the California state eavesdropping law applies in a strangers car? you think there's an expectation of privacy in a strangers vehicle?


It's a vehicle-for-hire when on the app, and as such, different terms apply than if you were just giving a friend a ride.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> In California, two party consent is necessary IF audio is recorded in addition to visual. Visual only does not require notification.
> A sign notifying of it's existence must be 'prominently displayed', or a crime is committed.
> 
> I dunno about Florida, or Michigan, or New York, or Oregon.
> ...


No where does it say anything in the california state statutes about prominently displaying signs. Don't make up fictional laws and post it. It's misleading



SuzeCB said:


> It's a vehicle-for-hire when on the app, and as such, different terms apply than if you were just giving a friend a ride.


You didn't answer the question. Is there an expectation of privacy in a strangers vehicle where the stranger is within listening distance? If you believe you have privacy with some stranger hearing everything you can say, you are severely misinformed.


----------



## itendstonight (Feb 10, 2019)

Honest question: which is safer? A hidden camera or an overt camera with sign? The hidden would be more reactive security while overt would be proactive security


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

itendstonight said:


> Honest question: which is safer? A hidden camera or an overt camera with sign? The hidden would be more reactive security while overt would be proactive security


The problem is there are too many camera haters out there. Multiple reports of a camera can get you deactivated. Not worth having an overt camera which is another reason i never understand the sign lovers


----------



## itendstonight (Feb 10, 2019)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> The problem is there are too many camera haters out there. Multiple reports of a camera can get you deactivated. Not worth having an overt camera which is another reason i never understand the sign lovers


Who get described for cams? Has it happened? State law allows it, every business has one, hidden or overt. Many with signage. Your car is your business .. self employed is a business


----------



## SatMan (Mar 20, 2017)

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/R2XNNTWXUQ/?tag=ubne0c-20


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> No where does it say anything in the california state statutes about prominently displaying signs. Don't make up fictional laws and post it. It's misleading


It's easy enough to check. Google it.
IF audio is included in the recording, notification is necessary. IF visual only is recorded, it is not.
(This is for California only, YMMV)
But, hey Google it.

And, good job on reviving an OLD THREAD.
Are you high? Bored?
Spun?

Good luck brother.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> It's easy enough to check. Google it.
> IF audio is included in the recording, notification is necessary. IF visual only is recorded, it is not.
> (This is for California only, YMMV)
> But, hey Google it.


You are quoting eavesdropping laws. That law does not apply in places with no expectation of privacy (such as a strangers vehicle with a stranger driving). If you said your debit cards pin number in the uber ride, you reasonably expect the driver not to hear it? Are you serious? Learn the law


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> No where does it say anything in the california state statutes about prominently displaying signs. Don't make up fictional laws and post it. It's misleading
> 
> 
> You didn't answer the question. Is there an expectation of privacy in a strangers vehicle where the stranger is within listening distance? If you believe you have privacy with some stranger hearing everything you can say, you are severely misinformed.


If you work in an office and can close a door so that no one outside the door can see you, it's still perfectly legal in NJ and some other states for your boss to have a hidden camera in there recording video. You're at work, with no expectation of privacy except in the bathroom.

In NJ, the "reasonable expectation of privacy" rule applies to video only. NJ is a single-party consent state with regard to audio recordings -- only one party to the conversation needs to know and consent to the audio recording with no need to inform the others. I don't know if that changes if the others ASK, though, so if asked I tell the truth. I just don't offer the information.

So, to answer your question with regard to VISUAL recording only, maybe. Maybe not. In a car for hire, no reasonable expectation of privacy. In a friend's car, maybe.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

SuzeCB said:


> If you work in an office and can close a door so that no one outside the door can see you, it's still perfectly legal in NJ and some other states for your boss to have a hidden camera in there recording video. You're at work, with no expectation of privacy except in the bathroom.
> 
> In NJ, the "reasonable expectation of privacy" rule applies to video only. NJ is a single-party consent state with regard to audio recordings -- only one party to the conversation needs to know and consent to the audio recording with no need to inform the others. I don't know if that changes if the others ASK, though, so if asked I tell the truth. I just don't offer the information.
> 
> So, to answer your question with regard to VISUAL recording only, maybe. Maybe not. In a car for hire, no reasonable expectation of privacy. In a friend's car, maybe.


There is no "reasonable expectation of privacy rule" in New Jersey (Or any state). The American government uses laws and not rules. "No Reasonable expectation of privacy" is the condition where (when satisfied) the wiretapping and eavesdropping laws do not apply. It is not a rule. It is a written condition of eavesdropping laws. This condition is satisfied in uber rides, making eavesdropping laws inapplicable in an Uber ride. The passenger can lawfully audio record the driver and the driver can lawfully audio record the passenger. They may do the recording (without consent and in all 50 states and districts) because eavesdropping laws do not apply. Period.



SuzeCB said:


> "NJ is a single-party consent state with regard to audio recordings -- only one party to the conversation needs to know and consent to the audio recording with no need to inform the others. I don't know if that changes if the others ASK, though, so if asked I tell the truth. I just don't offer the information."


this is false. You may audio record anyone in any of the 50 states regardless of the consent conditions becsuse eavesdropping laws do not apply in places with no privacy. We are talking about a strangers vehicle with a stranger within listening distance. No one sane would reasonably have an expectation of privacy with a stranger sitting right next to them


SuzeCB said:


> "In a car for hire, no reasonable expectation of privacy."


That is my entire point. what are you arguing then if you agree with me?



SuzeCB said:


> So, to answer your question with regard to VISUAL recording only, maybe.


You may record in your own home and your own car. there's no maybes.


----------



## Jon77 (Dec 6, 2018)

If somebody tells me they want me to turn off the camera that means I really need my camera to be on.

About four years ago I had a guy bring in his car into the shop for a brake job and then when he saw the cameras up on the ceiling he wanted me to turn them off.

I told him there’s three cameras inside and two cameras outside, and I couldn’t turn them all off.
I very strongly suggested that he could go down the street to another shop, I told him that they probably don’t have cameras over there.
But I was sure they did have cameras over there since it’s co-located with a gas station, but I just wanted him out.

What a freak, some people are just so weird, I have often wondered what was that clown thinking of doing..
You can’t be too cautious when dealing with the general public.


----------



## JaredJ (Aug 7, 2015)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> No where does it say anything in the california state statutes about prominently displaying signs. Don't make up fictional laws and post it. It's misleading
> 
> 
> You didn't answer the question. Is there an expectation of privacy in a strangers vehicle where the stranger is within listening distance? If you believe you have privacy with some stranger hearing everything you can say, you are severely misinformed.


A visible notice has to be posted in the vehicle if the Dash Cam records audio. Cvc 26708 (B)13
Source: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum=26708

Please don't Necro old threads. That's what the search function is for. This has been covered numerous times on this forum.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

I often find myself at a wrong location for a pickup It’s not because the passenger doesn’t know where he is or because he accidentally entered the wrong address. It’s because he didn’t enter the exact address, he let the app use “current location” and the app got it wrong. I’ve seen this happen when someone calls for a ride from their kitchen in the back of their home or from an upper floor of a high-rise. When it happens I just call or text the passenger, get the correct address and go there

the “dude” thing would bother me too, but I just chalk it up to a generational difference.. I usually assume it’s meant to convey disrespect, but I’m usually wrong.. Usually it’s just a figure of speech

I don’t use a camera. And In over 5000 rides I’ve never wished I had one. But if I did use one I wouldn’t be surprised if a passenger was to object and I’d have an answer ready for the passenger that is uncomfortable. Something like “its there to protect us both” or “I dont like it either but my wife insists” or “put yourself in my place, you would want one too if you had strangers in your car all night long”l

“bottom line is this: I understand, your position but I’m going to leave it on, Do you want to go to the airport now, or do you want to call for another car? It’s your decision”

Bottom line: is I like airport runs too and if what I have is a typical middle class couple going to the airport, I’d find a way to complete the ride or at least try


----------



## theMezz (Sep 29, 2018)

SHalester said:


> PLus, man are they ugly. Wires here wires there.


Not if they are properly installed. You don't see any wires with mine, Installer did a great job. 2000 rides and only 3 people mentioned that I was smart to have a camera.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> If you haven't started the ride and you wait out the five minute timer and cancel it doesn't count against your cancellation rate. If you have started the ride and then you cancel it does count against your cancellation rate.
> 
> Assuming you get the same amount of money for pre-ride wait time or ride duration wait time, what is the advantage? I only see a downside.


In my market pre-ride wait time pays MORE. But it does not start until after 2 minutes.


----------



## Dekero (Sep 24, 2019)

NotMe said:


> Or turn off camera and have airport run.


And a real nice false accusation.... Yeah great plan... HARD PASS



SHalester said:


> Very glad my other driving gig prohibits cameras of any type.


Sorry but that's about dumb... Let's drive kids around who live to lie.... And Ohhhh don't have any proof of what happened ... Yeah ummmm no.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Dekero said:


> Let's drive kids around who live to lie.


dude, you are WAY too jaded. I see the point of prohibiting dash cams when all your pax are minors. It's the DRIVERS they are concerned with, not the kids. 
I have 2 kids I run around. 1st grader and an 11th grader. Both on spectrum. The 1st grader way on the spectrum, but she is fun. HS kid doesn't speak much. Buds go in and that is that for the next hour. 
Haven't picked a middle schooler yet. THEY are monsters (I worked at a MS for a year).

Your brush is just way too wide, ok? And the color is way too harsh. Here, take a chill pill. :roflmao::whistling:


----------



## Jon77 (Dec 6, 2018)

These cameras has saved me numerous times, as I am a manager I take the brunt of an irate, scamming or irrational customer.
Two months ago a girl actually tried to claim that she brought her car in undamaged, it was really great that we had the camera footage to prove otherwise.
The body damage was clearly visible.

We also have had police ask for footage from the outside camera twice over the years, because of incidents that happened in the parking lot while we were closed.


















This next photo is a police report from when I was attacked while driving as an Uber driver.
I was brand new so I did not have a camera, I was punched in the back of the head repeatedly while I was driving, this drunk then proceeded to do $1500 damage to my car, luckily the Newport police found him and arrested him 









He was convicted and found guilty despite my lack of video evidence,
But I got really lucky that the police were able to find and arrest him, even though he was trying to hide.

In the late 80's on my very first job as a newly minted mechanic I was working in Pacoima.
I go into the stockroom to get some spark plugs to do a tuneup and when I came back outside there was a girl on the floor with a man standing over her pointing a pistol at her head.

If he would've pulled the trigger and killed her I would've been the second in line because I was only 5 feet away from them, a prime witness.
Cameras were not popular back then so we did not have any.
I could've been murdered and the crime never been solved.

During the LA riots me and my friend went downtown to protect my uncles business, long story short I ended up getting two gunshots in my chest.
The man that shot me was convicted and sent to prison but then he sued me in civil court.
It took me four years to win that case but I lost my business because I had to pay for the costs of defending myself.
A simple camera would avoided all of that nightmare.
But it was still the early 90s and cameras were not prominent like they are today.

If you've been driving and have never had anything happen to you, then that's great you're lucky.
Your luck may continue for the next 20 years.
You may never get accused of driving drunk or making inappropriate comments because the passenger is vindictive or wants a free ride.

But my experience dealing with the general public and random strangers that I do not know has not been good.
In my car the one that is titled in my name, the camera stays on if the passenger doesn't like it they can walk.


----------



## Tony73 (Oct 12, 2016)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Yes, she was dressed in Kmart. They were clearly your average white middle-class couple.


Middle class doesn't shop at k-mart. We go to Burlington and Express.


----------



## freddieman (Oct 24, 2016)

RaleighUber said:


> Only fools turn off the camera.


Depends. This couple was a middle aged couple going to airport. Probably a profitable run with probably a rematch from the airport. The lady probably didn't want any video ending up on youtube.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

JaredJ said:


> A visible notice has to be posted in the vehicle if the Dash Cam records audio. Cvc 26708 (B)13
> Source: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum=26708
> 
> Please don't Necro old threads. That's what the search function is for. This has been covered numerous times on this forum.


If you think that BS unconstitutional backwards california law would ever hold up in court, you're mistaken. Show me case or appellate law where a california driver was convicted of having dashcam without a sign. I'll wait.


----------



## Dekero (Sep 24, 2019)

SHalester said:


> dude, you are WAY too jaded. I see the point of prohibiting dash cams when all your pax are minors. It's the DRIVERS they are concerned with, not the kids.
> I have 2 kids I run around. 1st grader and an 11th grader. Both on spectrum. The 1st grader way on the spectrum, but she is fun. HS kid doesn't speak much. Buds go in and that is that for the next hour.
> Haven't picked a middle schooler yet. THEY are monsters (I worked at a MS for a year).
> 
> Your brush is just way too wide, ok? And the color is way too harsh. Here, take a chill pill. :roflmao::whistling:


Ok part timer.... Cuz never has A child on the spectrum been abused.... Much safer than driving normal kids around with no backup cam for proof of how things went... We live in a different time than u and I grew up... Get a camera... Hell I got a spare one you can have....


----------



## JaredJ (Aug 7, 2015)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> If you think that BS unconstitutional backwards california law would ever hold up in court, you're mistaken. Show me case or appellate law where a california driver was convicted of having dashcam without a sign. I'll wait.


You asked for where the law states it's required and I provided. If you're interested in the efficacy of the law or whether it's constitutional, that's your prerogative. Not interested in your reductive attitude.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

JaredJ said:


> You asked for where the law states it's required and I provided. If you're interested in the efficacy of the law or whether it's constitutional, that's your prerogative. Not interested in your reductive attitude.


Reductive attitude? The point of this forum isn't to win arguments. It's to find solutions for drivers. Yes it seems technically illegal to use a dash cam without a sign in California. However, if I was a driver in California, I would not care about that stupid law and if I was somehow in the rare chance convicted, I would appeal it because it is stupid and contrary to eavesdropping laws. Why does that dash cam need a sign, but not a passenger filming the driver with their phones camera? I have many questions to ask in a court about this which would get the case thrown out


----------



## OldUncleDave (Apr 22, 2019)

LyftUberFuwabolewa said:


> Welcome to the world of ride share.
> 
> The issue for me was I was already getting red flags. The guy calls for the ride and has the wrong address, not even on the correct street.
> 
> ...


1) I get a lot of wrong address. The PAX uses the "Location" GPS button, it will be a house in any direction.

2) "Dude..." I think it's irritating as hell, but it's how the jerk talks. One Drive thru restaurant I hit, the guy calls me "Boss". Just hate it.

3) I agree, my Dash Cam don't get shut off for no one! I explain (lie) that insurance requires it for a RS driver, as evidence for accidents.



SHalester said:


> I read that thread. And the zillions of others where Uber has told the driver no need to send vid, they don't need it. Which to believe?
> 
> If uber provides a decent vid rig and requires we have it, I'm all for it. Until then, not in my ride. Wasn't there a poll on this recently? I'm not on an island by myself (even tho I do prefer i am) on this issue of do or don't. For me, clearly a no. AND I can't have one in there anyway for 'other' RS gig. Where is nut man; he;d be yelling at me for not having one. sheesh.


you have mentioned your " other rideshare " doesn't allow Dash Cams. Which company? Is it in the TOS?


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

OldUncleDave said:


> your " other rideshare " doesn't allow Dash Cams. Which company


HopSkipDrive. And yes. No cameras of any type.


----------



## Phil Lee (Apr 29, 2019)

I have notice in my profile. It says the exterior and interior will be recorded audio and video. Acceptance of the ride is acceptance of my TOS. They can cancel if they don't agree to it.


----------



## JaredJ (Aug 7, 2015)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> Reductive attitude? The point of this forum isn't to win arguments. It's to find solutions for drivers. Yes it seems technically illegal to use a dash cam without a sign in California. However, if I was a driver in California, I would not care about that stupid law and if I was somehow in the rare chance convicted, I would appeal it because it is stupid and contrary to eavesdropping laws. Why does that dash cam need a sign, but not a passenger filming the driver with their phones camera? I have many questions to ask in a court about this which would get the case thrown out


To clarify, you're debating the merits of a law that doesn't apply to you? Lol

I texted an attorney friend that happened to have done a criminal appeal that involved the statute. He is currently licensed in CA. Based on his expertise, recording in private requires notice, which is governed by statute on private parties. It is not a 4th amendment issue unless a Criminal case is implicated. Notice doesn't apply to criminal investigations or recording in public. There was a 2 party consent law thrown out in Illinois State Supreme Court that tried to require consent for public recordings. Operating a private vehicle for hire is considered a private domain.


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

JaredJ said:


> To clarify, you're debating the merits of a law that doesn't apply to you? Lol
> 
> I texted an attorney friend that happened to have done a criminal appeal that involved the statute. He is currently licensed in CA. Based on his expertise, recording in private requires notice, which is governed by statute on private parties. It is not a 4th amendment issue unless a Criminal case is implicated. Notice doesn't apply to criminal investigations or recording in public. There was a 2 party consent law thrown out in Illinois State Supreme Court that tried to require consent for public recordings. Operating a private vehicle for hire is considered a private domain.


"Operating a private vehicle for hire is considered a private domain."

lol. it doesn't work like that. Who told you that? operating a private business like Walmart is also a private domain. you can still Lawfully film in this private domain because there's no expectation of privacy in a Walmart, just as there's no expectation of privacy in a strangers vehicle with a stranger within listening distance

if you expect privacy in an Uber ride, do you trust stating your debit card PIN number during the ride? Social security number? And you reasonably believe No one (you don't want to hear it ) .including the driver will hear it ? Because that is the threshold and condition for determining whether there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in a place.


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

MiamiUberGuy5 said:


> if you expect privacy in an Uber ride, do you trust stating your debit card PIN number during the ride? Social security number? And you reasonably believe No one (you don't want to hear it ) .including the driver will hear it ? Because that is the threshold and condition for determining whether there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in a place.


I had a pax on his speaker phone talking to his bank to get his password reset. He verified all his personal information except for his PIN number to the rep on the phone, all being recorded by my dash cam. Some people are stupid.


----------



## Steven Ambrose (Sep 25, 2016)

I don't like a lot of things, but those dash cams are for the driver's safety and protection as much as it is for the rider's safety and protection


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Steven Ambrose said:


> I don't like a lot of things, but those dash cams are for the driver's safety and protection as much as it is for the rider's safety and protection


Exactly. And when it boils right down to it - the pax has two choices: not like it and ride, or, not like it and walk.
But, I give odds that even walking he's gonna be on camera.


----------



## Dekero (Sep 24, 2019)

I don't give AF WHO has a problem with my dash cam.... They are welcome to walk... Problem solved...


----------



## MiamiUberGuy5 (Feb 20, 2019)

FLKeys said:


> . Some people are stupid.


 some or most


----------



## Steven Ambrose (Sep 25, 2016)

UberBastid said:


> Exactly. And when it boils right down to it - the pax has two choices: not like it and ride, or, not like it and walk.
> But, I give odds that even walking he's gonna be on camera.


I have been a rider in plenty of cars that have a dash cam. At least you had the courtesy to alert the rider of this.... most drivers don't. As far as I am concerned, your car is like your house..... private domain.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Steven Ambrose said:


> I have been a rider in plenty of cars that have a dash cam. At least you had the courtesy to alert the rider of this.... most drivers don't. As far as I am concerned, your car is like your house..... private domain.


Private for ME, it is my house.
From a guests perspective, it is a benevolent dictatorship and you have only the rights I grant.


----------



## Steven Ambrose (Sep 25, 2016)

UberBastid said:


> Private for ME, it is my house.
> From a guests perspective, it is a benevolent dictatorship and you have only the rights I grant.


This is starting to sound mildly kinky.... then so be it. ☺☺☺☺☺☺


----------

