# Quick Question: Must Rider be 18 yrs or older?



## LEAFdriver

I have a question....I just heard from another driver that riders (I'm assuming when not accompanied by the account holder) need to be at least 18 yrs of age. Is this true?

I've picked up a teenager for 3 trips now. (First time...I didn't know it was a 15 yo. It seems his Father ordered the ride for him. I thought it was the Father I was picking up until I got there).

The second and third times....I picked the kid up...and each time he almost damaged my car..SHOVING his hockey sticks/sports gear through my hatch back and almost hitting me in the head with them. He just seemed very disrespectful...and each time I had him as a PAX, I noticed my rating got dinged. 
If I get a ping from him again....can I refuse the ride if I know that he is unaccompanied by the account holder? If so, what should I say. Thanks for advice! (Also, do we have the right to 'CARD' a PAX?)


----------



## UberHammer

From: https://www.uber.com/legal/usa/terms

*USER REQUIREMENTS AND CONDUCT.*
The Service is not available for use by persons under the age of 18. You may not authorize third parties to use your Account, and you may not allow persons under the age of 18 to receive transportation or logistics services from Third Party Providers unless they are accompanied by you.


----------



## LEAFdriver

Thank you! I did not know this since I've never been put in this position before. Should I report the account holder then? Or just wait till I get another ping from him...arrive and cancel as a no show...since it's not the account holder that I am picking up?


----------



## UberHammer

LEAFdriver said:


> Thank you! I did not know this since I've never been put in this position before. Should I report the account holder then? Or just wait till I get another ping from him...arrive and cancel as a no show...since it's not the account holder that I am picking up?


Well, hopefully by now you can recognize the ping and avoid it.

If not, as soon as you recognize you're going to the pickup location again, cancel as "do not charge rider" and go offline to avoid the new request.

If Uber ever asks you about it, tell them it's an underage rider and refer Uber to their own legal terms.

It's a waste of time to report what's already happened. Uber doesn't give a shit. Not only do they ignore laws, they ignore their own terms and policies.

Just cover your ass if they question why you cancel the request. Cover your ass is really all drivers can do in UberWorld.


----------



## LEAFdriver

Well...I really wanted to avoid having a cancel or ignore on my record....considering they shouldn't be requesting in the first place. If I pick 'do not charge rider'....does it not go into my 'cancelled' quota then?


----------



## UberHammer

LEAFdriver said:


> Well...I really wanted to avoid having a cancel or ignore on my record....considering they shouldn't be requesting in the first place. If I pick 'do not charge rider'....does it not go into my 'cancelled' quota then?


It shows up as a driver cancel.

If you complain about this customer, you'll lose more than you'll gain, because Uber isn't going to do anything about it. They want the $1 SRF and the 20%, even if it means you breaking the law and losing money. If you complain, then they have to deal with a driver complaining, and all they want is for driver complaints to just go away. Every complaint you make is one complaint closer to being deactivated.


----------



## observer

LEAFdriver said:


> Thank you! I did not know this since I've never been put in this position before. Should I report the account holder then? Or just wait till I get another ping from him...arrive and cancel as a no show...since it's not the account holder that I am picking up?


One thing you need to realize is that if he is say 15 yrs old, and something goes wrong, he is able to sue you until he turns 18.

A long time ago, I hit a young kid I think he was 11-12 something like that, luckily he wasn't hurt. I forgot about it, many years later, when the kid turned 18, I got a notice from my insurance company stating they were closing his case.


----------



## Desert Driver

LEAFdriver said:


> Thank you! I did not know this since I've never been put in this position before. Should I report the account holder then? Or just wait till I get another ping from him...arrive and cancel as a no show...since it's not the account holder that I am picking up?


I transport persons under the age of 18 very frequently. We're cabs, and cabs give rides to kids all the time. I have one rider who pings me every morning at 7:17 and I take her to school when I'm available. I think she's 15 or 16. It's no big deal. Don't worry about transporting kids. Be more worried about Uber rate cuts.


----------



## UberHammer

Desert Driver said:


> I transport persons under the age of 18 very frequently. We're cabs, and cabs give rides to kids all the time. I have one rider who pings me every morning at 7:17 and I take her to school when I'm available. I think she's 15 or 16. It's no big deal. Don't worry about transporting kids. Be more worried about Uber rate cuts.


If you get into an accident, I pray James River doesn't play the "Uber's Terms and Conditions" card on you and refuse to cover it.


----------



## Desert Driver

UberHammer said:


> If you get into an accident, I pray James River doesn't play the "Uber's Terms and Conditions" card on you and refuse to cover it.


They don't pay anyway, so what difference would it make if I had a youngster in my car? The driver is ****ed regardless.


----------



## UberHammer

Desert Driver said:


> They don't pay anyway, so what difference would it make if I had a youngster in my car? The driver is ****ed regardless.


Excellent point!


----------



## Sacto Burbs

I got a low rating from a kid. Another kid, a teenager, was actually booking his own ride on his moms account as I stood there. No way I'm taking him. I told him to call his mother I marked it as a passenger no show.


----------



## Sacto Burbs

*Jodi at Uber* (Uber)

Jan 24, 14:08

Hi !

Thanks for reaching out, always happy to help!

Riders are allowed to request an Uber trip for other people. Usually, they are asked to text you, the driver, the information of who you are picking up. If you don't have the information you need in order to find the rider, please feel free to contact the rider (or person requesting the ride). But generally, as long as the trip is going, and you have verified that you picked up the right person, the trip will proceed as normal. The only times I have seen an issue is when the account holder cancels the ride, and the passenger is still in the vehicle (with the trip not over) Unfortunately, in this case, the rider would need to either a- exit the vehicle since the trip is over, b- request their own uber trip with their own account.

Let me know if you need anything else!

Jodi
*Uber Support
*

Jan 24, 00:52

Hi

This is happened to me several times this week.

I arrive, the account holder is not there. The person says Someone else ordered the Uber for them.

First, account holder was there and put her friend in the car and I took the friend to the airport

Second was a high school student who I took to his basketball practice

Third was someone who was not the account holder, and we picked up a second passenger and continued to destination

Last, the account holder actually called me and told me that I would be picking up his mother

What am I supposed to do in each of these situations?


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

LEAFdriver said:


> Thank you! I did not know this since I've never been put in this position before. Should I report the account holder then? Or just wait till I get another ping from him...arrive and cancel as a no show...since it's not the account holder that I am picking up?


I would accept then call and ask if you are picking the kid up. If they say yes tell them you have become aware that is against uber policy and that they should please cancel unless an adult will ride with the child.


----------



## troubleinrivercity

Desert Driver said:


> We're cabs


Uhh.
No. You're a cab company, if anything. Hope you've got your papers and insurance in order should anything happen to the kid while you're being paid pennies to guard his life.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> I transport persons under the age of 18 very frequently. We're cabs, and cabs give rides to kids all the time. I have one rider who pings me every morning at 7:17 and I take her to school when I'm available. I think she's 15 or 16. It's no big deal. *Don't worry about transporting kids*. Be more worried about Uber rate cuts.


*Yeah, except Uber prohibits it.*


----------



## scrurbscrud

LEAFdriver said:


> Well...I really wanted to avoid having a cancel or ignore on my record....considering they shouldn't be requesting in the first place. If I pick 'do not charge rider'....does it not go into my 'cancelled' quota then?


I haven't tried to get a cancellation fee on kid orders, yet. May try in the near future just to see what happens. Nothing pisses me off more than making a no pay run to an underage pax.


----------



## Sydney Uber

observer said:


> One thing you need to realize is that if he is say 15 yrs old, and something goes wrong, he is able to sue you until he turns 18.
> 
> A long time ago, I hit a young kid I think he was 11-12 something like that, luckily he wasn't hurt. I forgot about it, many years later, when the kid turned 18, I got a notice from my insurance company stating they were closing his case.


Whoa! Dodged a bullet there!


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> *Yeah, except Uber prohibits it.*


Who gives a shit? Uber also says I should accept 100% of my pings, but I don't. Uber also expects me to drive more than 10 minutes to pick up a pax, but I don't. You know as well as the rest of us, @scrurbscrud, that if we followed all Uber's rules and expectations that we'd make no money at all and we'd be driving for charity.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Who gives a shit? Uber also says I should accept 100% of my pings, but I don't. Uber also expects me to drive more than 10 minutes to pick up a pax, but I don't. You know as well as the rest of us, @scrurbscrud, that if we followed all Uber's rules and expectations that we'd make no money at all and we'd be driving for charity.


Drivers are certainly welcome to violate any rule at their own risk, obviously.


----------



## Desert Driver

I get a lot of pings from a boarding school not too far from my home. Most of these kids are 14 to 17 years old and are living on daddy's credit cards. Their parents actually encourage them to use Uber and Lyft for safe, reliable transportation. They're good paxs, I always earn 5 stars, and many of them have been well-trained on the etiquette of tipping. Not picking them up just because they're under 18 would be a stupid business move for me.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> Drivers are certainly welcome to violate any rule at their own risk, obviously.


We're already driving at horribly high risk anyway. That's how we make money at this game.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> We're already driving at horribly high risk anyway. That's how we make money at this game.


You are welcome to find out how much risk you have putting a child at risk in a potentially uninsured accident.

There is risk and there is insane risk.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> You are welcome to find out how much risk you have putting a child at risk in a potentially uninsured accident.
> 
> There is risk and there is insane risk.


You are 100% correct. Which is why I never, ever tread the path of insane risk. That would be, well...insane!


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> You are 100% correct. Which is why I never, ever tread the path of insane risk. That would be, well...insane!


I can only imagine the driver butcher job that the system would extract on any driver putting a kid in that situation.

A driver who knows their insurance is inadequate. A driver who knows Uber prohibits it.

And does it anyway.

Definition of insane risk doesn't get much higher.

Irresponsible is too polite of a term.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> I can only imagine the driver butcher job that the system would extract on any driver putting a kid in that situation.


That's an interesting POV, to be sure.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> That's an interesting POV, to be sure.


Some are willing to find out how far their asses can be put in a liability sling.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Make sure to offer the kids some candy, just to make an interesting opener to the jury by the prosecution.


----------



## scrurbscrud

The last thing I need in my life is for some 16 year old girl pax who is jacked in the head to sling an accusation my way.

It just ain't gonna happen.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> Make sure to offer the kids some candy, just to make an interesting opener to the jury by the prosecution.


Now you're just being silly. You know full well I don't provide water, gum, candy, mints, chargers, or anything else to my paxs. We've been down that path far too many times to cover that ground again.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> The last thing I need in my life is for some 16 year old girl pax who is jacked in the head to sling an accusation my way.
> 
> It just ain't gonna happen.


You run your business...I'll run mine. Deal?

See, I own and have been running multiple small businesses for better than 20 years. Part of being successful in any business is knowing how to perform a valid CBA. After a while, CBA becomes a mindset that a person applies any time a decision needs to be made. The longer you run your own operation or perform as an IC, @scrurbscrud, the more CBA will become a regular part of your evaluative process.

Anything else I can help you to understand, or are you good for now?


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> You run your business...I'll run mine. Deal?


Business? heh heh

I'll maintain that irresponsible is the term for those who drive children for hire without proper insurance and leave it at that.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> Business? heh heh
> 
> I'll maintain that irresponsible is the term for those who drive children for hire without proper insurance and leave it at that.


You are entitled to your opinion, regardless of how detached from reality it may be.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Certainly wouldn't define 'business' as driving children for hire without proper insurance. Maybe that flies in some drivers minds as a business.

Detached from reality much?


----------



## Sacto Burbs

Fuzzyelvis said:


> I would accept then call and ask if you are picking the kid up. If they say yes tell them you have become aware that is against uber policy and that they should please cancel unless an adult will ride with the child.


You don't know in advance. You find out when you arrive. Then you can be faced with a kid who is not been handed over to you by another adult. It plays on your sympathy. You feel sorry for the poor kid. And then you realize that it's their parent who put them in this position. Let them take the bus home. Five dollar no-show and I'm gone


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> The last thing I need in my life is for some 16 year old girl pax who is jacked in the head to sling an accusation my way.
> 
> It just ain't gonna happen.


Son, apparently you don't follow much news. Adults make false accusations for personal gain all the time. Problem there, of course, is the pathology of lying is set deeper into the psyche of an adult. Ergo, shaking that story is more difficult with an adult than it is with a younger person. Ultimately, any pax can say you copped a feel or whipped out your shmecki5e.

Anything else I can clear up for you?


----------



## scrurbscrud

The issue at hand is driving children unaccompanied by adults other than the driver:

A. Against Ubers specific directives not to do so
B. Uninsured

Notwithstanding a myriad of other legal issues that can put such children drivers at jeopardy.


----------



## Desert Driver

Sacto Burbs said:


> You don't know in advance. You find out when you arrive. Then you can be faced with a kid who is not been handed over to you by another adult. It plays on your sympathy. You feel sorry for the poor kid. And then you realize that it's their parent who put them in this position. Let them take the bus home. Five dollar no-show and I'm gone


Problem is, it's 11pm, the kid needs to get back to the dorm, and buses quit running an hour ago.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> The issue at hand is driving children unaccompanied by adults other than the driver:
> 
> A. Against Ubers specific directives not to do so
> B. Uninsured
> 
> Notwithstanding a myriad of other legal issues that can put such children drivers at jeopardy.


No need to apologize. I'm just helping you out.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> No need to apologize. I'm just helping you out.


No need to read or follow rulz and be irresponsible with children is great advice.

Thanks.


----------



## Sacto Burbs

The correct thing to do with children is - call their parents. No answer? Call child services. You have someone who has abandoned their child on a street corner.

Or let them walk home. It is no less safe out there than it was 40 years ago. Take the no-show fee.

Every time you bend the rules, the next driver gets flagged off. If I do end up taking the kid out of sympathy I'm going to get a low reading. When you break the rules that you screwed up for every other driver


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> No need to read or follow rulz and be irresponsible with children is great advice.
> 
> Thanks.


Jesus Christ, you make it sound like I would be so foolish as to provide livery services of any sort without the safety and security of a dual-view dash cam. Seriously?


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Jesus Christ, you make it sound like I would be so foolish as to provide livery services of any sort without the safety and security of a dual-view dash cam. Seriously?


Dash cam livery insurance (for children)? That's novel.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Here's a great idea for any driver thinking of transporting children for money.

A. Email Uber to see if James River or Uber will cover a child unaccompanied by their parent(s) or adult [other than you] being transported in cases of personal injury or death in an accident

and, if no, then

B. Email your own insurance company and find out

Since Desert Driver has special connections to a big wig or 2 with Uber where he drives, maybe he can inform us shortly as to Uber's perspective? I doubt he'll follow up with option B however.


----------



## scrurbscrud




----------



## Desert Driver

With boarding schools, parents often live out of state or out of country. Students are not permitted to have cars. Parents and school administrators are encouraging students to use TNCs. It makes sense.


----------



## Desert Driver

Excellent! Well done! Desert Driver is flattered.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> Here's a great idea for any driver thinking of transporting children for money.
> 
> A. Email Uber to see if James River or Uber will cover a child unaccompanied by their parent(s) or adult [other than you] being transported in cases of personal injury or death in an accident
> 
> and, if no, then
> 
> B. Email your own insurance company and find out
> 
> Since Desert Driver has special connections to a big wig or 2 with Uber where he drives, maybe he can inform us shortly as to Uber's perspective? I doubt he'll follow up with option B however.


We genuinely cherish your (attempted) wry wit, @scrurbscrud. Don't ever change. (We suspect you won't.)


----------



## observer

Desert Driver said:


> Problem is, it's 11pm, the kid needs to get back to the dorm, and buses quit running an hour ago.


Not the drivers problem.

Whoever made arrangements to get her home needs to make appropiate arrangements.

It is your business and obviously you will keep on doing it.

Good Luck.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> Dash cam livery insurance (for children)? That's novel.


Any livery driver who did even a modicum of CBA before getting into TNC driving surely has a dash cam, we will agree.


----------



## Desert Driver

observer said:


> Not the drivers problem.
> 
> Whoever made arrangements to get her home needs to make appropiate arrangements.
> 
> It is your business and obviously you will keep on doing it.
> 
> Good Luck.


That's what dash cams are for. Any livery driver operating without a dash cam is asking for trouble, regardless of pax age.


----------



## scrurbscrud




----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> That's what dash cams are for. Any livery driver operating without a dash cam is asking for trouble, regardless of pax age.


When you email Uber about them or James River covering insurance for unaccompanied minors during their fares you may also want to inquire as to their policy of putting minors on camera during Uber fares as well.

Should be interesting.


----------



## observer

Sydney Uber said:


> Whoa! Dodged a bullet there!


Yea, but I went over to the kids house and told their parents that if they sued me, I would sue them for child neglect, child abandonment, not supervising their child properly and a bunch of other stuff . I just wanted to preempt any future thoughts of sueing me. The kid was half a mile away from home and not hurt at all, his bike wasn't even damaged. But you know how things change when they see easy money.


----------



## duggles

What's tough is that it's not up to us to verify the age. Nor do we have any kind of age verification process available to us other than, "Fool, you look young, how old are you?" With maybe an additional, "Shit, I don't believe you. Show me your ID."

And yes, you can clean up the phrasing, but asking someone who may in fact be 18-20 what age they are because they look too young to ride, and you need to verify, is an easy way to get a shitty rating. If they can verify the name that the ping came from then they are good to go. Beyond that, in my mind (not that it counts for anything) Uber would be liable for not verifying. 

Watch out for midgets, too. They may be well over 18 and get really angry if you ask them for ID/age verification.


----------



## UberHammer

Drivers who know it's against Uber's Terms and Conditions to take unaccompanied underage drivers, and also know it's a potential insurance risk, but choose to do it aren't an issue. We're all adults here. If some drivers knows the issues and chooses to do it anyway, more power to them.

I'd estimate 99% of drivers don't know it's against Uber's Terms and Conditions, nor are aware of the potential insurance risk. That's a problem, and one Uber will never lift a finger to do anything about.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Driver: "Are you 18 or older?"

Under age pax: "Yes"

Driver: "Do you have an I.D. to prove it?"

Under age pax: "No."

cancel.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> Drivers who know it's against Uber's Terms and Conditions to take unaccompanied underage drivers, and also know it's a potential insurance risk, but choose to do it aren't an issue. We're all adults here. If some drivers knows the issues and chooses to do it anyway, more power to them.
> 
> I'd estimate 99% of drivers don't know it's against Uber's Terms and Conditions, nor are aware of the potential insurance risk. That's a problem, and one Uber will never lift a finger to do anything about.


True.

Uber's position on this is that the driver has to make an executive decision. They do NOT verify the age of anyone downloading the pax app.

An underage pax using daddy's credit card is good to go.


----------



## Luberon

Classic Uber catch-22. 
They write in their policy third persons and kids are not allowed. CSR and their body language tells you to pick anything with (or without) a pulse.
When you drive kids, 3rd parties and packages Uber gets SRF+20% regardless. If you complain too much they deactivate you for "low acceptance/high cancellation rate."
When you get into an accident or get into legal trouble by a disgruntled kid accusing you of abuse it is your royal ass on the line. Uber will be glad to help the authorities deep-fry you by pointing at their terms and conditions.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Luberon said:


> Classic Uber catch-22.
> They write in their policy third persons and kids are not allowed. CSR and their body language tells you to pick anything with (or without) a pulse.
> When you drive kids, 3rd parties and packages Uber gets SRF+20% regardless. If you complain too much they deactivate you for "low acceptance/high cancellation rate."
> When you get into an accident or get into legal trouble by a disgruntled kid accusing you of abuse it is your royal ass on the line. Uber will be glad to help the authorities deep-fry you by pointing at their terms and conditions.


The amounts of requests that are from minors is pretty low overall and wouldn't normally pose an issue to acceptance rates. If it did I'm pretty sure an adjustment would be made, if requested.

I have no interests in driving minors even with sufficient insurance and LIKE cancelling on them. Personal pleasure. My prerogative.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> When you email Uber about them or James River covering insurance for unaccompanied minors during their fares you may also want to inquire as to their policy of putting minors on camera during Uber fares as well.
> 
> Should be interesting.


My car. My rules. If the kids, parents, or admin don't like it...tough. They called me, not the other way around. I don't give two shots if they ride with me or not.

You have a lot to learn about surveillance laws. Let me give you a brief primer.

In my state, video-only surveillance can be conducted anywhere there is no expectation of privacy. Ergo, no cams in bathrooms, locker rooms, hotel rooms, etc. There is no expectation of privacy in a livery vehicle for public hire.
In my state, audio surveillance is legal as long as one of the recorded parties is aware of the recording. In my case, the informed party is me. Some states require that ALL parties be informed of audio recording, but those laws are changing as they hamper LE activities.
Hope this helps. Let me know if you'd like further details about surveillance statutes.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> My car. My rules. If the kids, parents, or admin don't like it...tough. They called me, not the other way around. I don't give two shots if they ride with me or not.
> 
> You have a lot to learn about surveillance laws. Let me give you a brief primer.
> 
> In my state, video-only surveillance can be conducted anywhere there is no expectation of privacy. Ergo, no cams in bathrooms, locker rooms, hotel rooms, etc. There is no expectation of privacy in a livery vehicle for public hire.
> In my state, audio surveillance is legal as long as one of the recorded parties is aware of the recording. In my case, the informed party is me. Some states require that ALL parties be informed of audio recording, but those laws are changing as they hamper LE activities.
> Hope this helps. Let me know if you'd like further details about surveillance statutes.


Yeah, I'm sure Uber would be interested to know your child recording habits for fares.

You know Uber prohibits it. You know your insurance and more than like James River and Uber will leave you hanging. And I'd bet Uber would have a problem with you recording kids, but just guessing on that one. I'm sure the media would have a field day with that kind of biz being done under Uber's flag.

Yet, you still do it.

I just have to call that a driver being irresponsible with children. There is no justifications for any of that, particularly for shit for pay.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> Yeah, I'm sure Uber would be interested to know your child recording habits for fares.
> 
> You know Uber prohibits it. You know your insurance and more than like James River and Uber will leave you hanging. And I'd bet Uber would have a problem with you recording kids, but just guessing on that one. I'm sure the media would have a field day with that kind of biz being done under Uber's flag.
> 
> Yet, you still do it.
> 
> I just have to call that a driver being irresponsible with children. There is no justifications for any of that, particularly for shit for pay.


Nothing illegal in doing what is legal. Always remember who is doing who the favor here.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Nothing illegal in doing what is legal. Always remember who is doing who the favor here.


Legal? LOL. IMHO drivers who do what you do should be immediately jailed for putting minors at risk.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> Legal? LOL. IMHO drivers who do what you do should be immediately jailed for putting minors at risk.


Look, I don't mind continuing to educate you, @scrurbscrud, but we honestly do expect you to attempt to be reasonable. That's not a dig, I'm just helping you out here.


----------



## Luberon

scrurbscrud said:


> The amounts of requests that are from minors is pretty low overall and wouldn't normally pose an issue to acceptance rates. If it did I'm pretty sure an adjustment would be made, if requested.
> 
> I have no interests in driving minors even with sufficient insurance and LIKE cancelling on them. Personal pleasure. My prerogative.


Number of requests by minors and 3rd persons are situation specific. A single cancellation can cut you out of guarantees and a few riders pinging repeatedly can mess with acceptance rates


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Look, I don't mind continuing to educate you, @scrurbscrud, but we honestly do expect you to attempt to be reasonable. That's not a dig, I'm just helping you out here.


You're promoting being irresponsible with children, violating Uber's directives and filming children for god sake.

get a clue.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Luberon said:


> Number of requests by minors and 3rd persons are situation specific. A single cancellation can cut you out of guarantees and a few riders pinging repeatedly can mess with acceptance rates


I'd be surprised if Uber wouldn't adjust those pings out of the equation if a driver requested it.

It would make great media fodder if they didn't.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> You're promoting being irresponsible with children, violating Uber's directives and filming children for god sake.
> 
> get a clue.


Until you understand that my security and surveillance practices are perfectly legal, you're going to continue to look foolish under my tutelage. But I don't mind sharing my expertise and experience with you. I'm just delighted I'm helping you to become more educated...and profitable! That's why we're here, after all.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Until you understand that my security and surveillance practices are perfectly legal, you're going to continue to look foolish under my tutelage. But I don't mind sharing my expertise and experience with you. I'm just delighted I'm helping you to become more educated...and profitable! That's why we're here, after all.


I've seen drivers justify a lot of things here, BUT I see zero justifications for your 'business practices' whatsoever.

IN fact, if I were a parent and knew you were

A. Driving my kid without insurance and

B. Filming them

I might even make a call to my attorney or the D.A. or the media or all of the above.

I'm only surprised that Uber let's drivers who do this be on the road under their name. Pretty sure they'd deactivate you in a heartbeat.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> I've seen drivers justify a lot of things here, BUT I see zero justifications for your 'business practices' whatsoever.
> 
> IN fact, if I were a parent and knew you were
> 
> A. Driving my kid without insurance and
> 
> B. Filming them
> 
> I might even make a call to my attorney or the D.A. or the media or all of the above.
> 
> I'm only surprised that Uber let's drivers who do this be on the road under their name. Pretty sure they'd deactivate you in a heartbeat.


Well, see, there you go being foolish again. That would be a wasted call because in this state I am doing nothing illegal and my commercial insurance doesn't place limits on my pax's ages.

Are you getting tired of being run over by me yet? We would think you would be.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher

Desert Driver said:


> I transport persons under the age of 18 very frequently. We're cabs, and cabs give rides to kids all the time. I have one rider who pings me every morning at 7:17 and I take her to school when I'm available. I think she's 15 or 16. It's no big deal. Don't worry about transporting kids. Be more worried about Uber rate cuts.


POST # 8 /@Desert Driver : Projecting

a Generalization onto the Drivership
that results in Contract Violations
is Inciting Deactivation-worthy
Behavior.

If you're Driving without
Commercial or Hybrid Insurance that's
only your a•• in the sling. You're temp-
ting others to Endanger Themselves
which is Irresponsible, at best.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Well, see, there you go being foolish again. That would be a wasted call because in this state I am doing nothing illegal and my commercial insurance doesn't place limits on my pax's ages.
> 
> Are you getting tired of being run over by me yet? We would think you would be.


The only wee in this conversation is you referring to your self as a third party.

*I'm pretty sure it is entirely illegal to transport children for hire without commercial insurance in anyone's world except yours.*

And I'm also pretty sure Uber would cut you out of their biz equation if they knew you were transporting and filming children pax pinged on their platform to boot.


----------



## Chris Dee

I transport "under the age of 18" persons. The parents usually call me and I know ahead of time where they will be and what they will be wearing as well as their name. They are going back home from where ever they are, I confirm who they are and text or have them call their parents that they are in the vehicle. As a matter of fact I frequently get rides that are third party requests. Usually it's for taking house workers home after they are working late and the home owners don't want them taking the bus. Just be smart when you do this.


----------



## Sacto Burbs

Desert driver *does* have commercial insurance. Now what do you say?

But ... Show me any document that says that any educational institution wants their children to be using ride hailing app services in contravention of the services actual contract. Also that they understand that no child under 18 is allowed to use those services without the adult account holder being in the car with the minor.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> The only wee in this conversation is you referring to your self as a third party.
> 
> *I'm pretty sure it is entirely illegal to transport children for hire without commercial insurance in anyone's world except yours.*
> 
> And I'm also pretty sure Uber would cut you out of their biz equation if they knew you were transporting and filming children pax pinged on their platform to boot.


Well, son. You may be pretty sure, where as I have done the research and carry commercial insurance. I am entirely within the law In terms of surveillance and insurance.

You, son, have been owned...again. You're getting quite a valuable education today. You're very fortunate.


----------



## Desert Driver

Chris Dee said:


> I transport "under the age of 18" persons. The parents usually call me and I know ahead of time where they will be and what they will be wearing as well as their name. They are going back home from where ever they are, I confirm who they are and text or have them call their parents that they are in the vehicle. As a matter of fact I frequently get rides that are third party requests. Usually it's for taking house workers home after they are working late and the home owners don't want them taking the bus. Just be smart when you do this.


Very pragmatic approach, and a thoughtful comment. Well done. Be safe, be reasonable, be profitable.


----------



## Desert Driver

Sacto Burbs said:


> Desert driver *does* have commercial insurance. Now what do you say?
> 
> But ... Show me any document that says that any educational institution wants their children to be using ride hailing app services in contravention of the services actual contract. Also that they understand that no child under 18 is allowed to use those services without the adult account holder being in the car with the minor.


What I'm finding here is that schools are more concerned with safe transport of their students than silly policies, especially after some ugliness that happened with students hitchhiking. That's a real problem when you put a school on the outskirts of town, as they're now realizing. That's also why the schools make sure the parents are aware that students are using TNCs. I don't know if there is a waiver or permission slip or if it's just general notification. One of the features I like is that most of the kids use Lyft and they have been taught about the value and etiquette of tipping.
I used to hitchhike a lot when I was in college. But that was a different time and place. God that was fun though. The shit that people will tell a stranger is astounding.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Well, son. You may be pretty sure, where as *I* have done the research and *carry commercial insurance. *I am entirely within the law In terms of surveillance and insurance.
> 
> You, son, have been owned...again. You're getting quite a valuable education today. You're very fortunate.


Oh really? *In effect on an Uber trip too I bet?*

You may as well pimp doing street hails, oh, if caution is used.


----------



## headtheball

I had a similar experience last week so wrote in about it. Just got this from CSR

_Thanks for reaching out about this.

As an independent contractor, questions such as this are left to your discretion. You are certainly never required to start a trip with a passenger. If you completed a trip with a rider that you believe to be under an appropriate age and you'd like us to investigate further, feel free to let us know.

Hope this helps and please don't hesitate to reach out with additional questions._


----------



## headtheball

Total BS response. So I asked if it was ok to transport unaccompanied minors and if they are covered as regular pax.


----------



## Desert Driver

Casuale Haberdasher said:


> POST # 8 /@Desert Driver : Projecting
> 
> a Generalization onto the Drivership
> that results in Contract Violations
> is Inciting Deactivation-worthy
> Behavior.
> 
> If you're Driving without
> Commercial or Hybrid Insurance that's
> only your a•• in the sling. You're temp-
> ting others to Endanger Themselves
> which is Irresponsible, at best.


So get commercial insurance like I did and stop driving around like an uninsured fool. Problem solved.

Anything else I can help you navigate?


----------



## Desert Driver

headtheball said:


> Total BS response. So I asked if it was ok to transport unaccompanied minors and if they are covered as regular pax.


Of course they are covered. Why wouldn't they be, for the love of god?


----------



## headtheball

Desert Driver said:


> Of course they are covered. Why wouldn't they be, for the love of god?


Uh... first why are you in love with god? Thad dude created uber. 
Second, if uber says we shouldn't do something in the terms and we do it anyway, would that not risk invalidation of the insurance coverage? 
If children are covered by james river, then why do you carry commercial insurance? Do you were 2 condoms as well?


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> Oh really? *In effect on an Uber trip too I bet?*
> 
> You may as well pimp doing street hails, oh, if caution is used.


I would never take a street hail. I have written extensively about that here. Would you like me to help you to understand the dangers inherent? You were quite vocal last week about that very topic when I had to help you temper your caustic approach. And for the record, we appreciate your more civil tone since then. Thank you.


----------



## Desert Driver

headtheball said:


> Uh... first why are you in love with god? Thad dude created uber.
> Second, if uber says we shouldn't do something in the terms and we do it anyway, would that not risk invalidation of the insurance coverage?
> If children are covered by james river, then why do you carry commercial insurance? Do you were 2 condoms as well?


I won't discuss condoms, but I will tell you that I carry commercial insurance. Problem solved.
Anything else?


----------



## headtheball

latest from CSR

Happy to clarify! You are putting yourself at risk of incurring an offence. You might be stopped by police and fined $100-$250 or be denied boarding a van or taxi cab.

In a nutshell:

Infants from 0-1 years must be in the back seat strapped into a rear-facing car seat until they reach 20 pounds (9 kg)
Children between 1-8 years (or heaver than 20 pounds) must be in in the back seat (some exceptions apply) and strapped into either:
- A rear-facing car seat until they reach the maximum height/weight limit for the seat
- A front-facing car seat with a 5 point harness until they reach the maximum height/weight limit for the seat
- A booster seat if under 4 feet 9 inches (1.45 meters) and over the height/weight limit for a car seat
- A regular seat belt in the back seat if taller than 4 feet 9 inches.

Children 8 years and older legally are not required to use a car or booster seat (though booster seats are still recommended for shorter children until they fit a seat belt properly). However, they are required to use a seat belt and remain in the rear seat.
Note: The California regulations do not specify particular brands or types of car seats to use. However, as car seats may be designed and installed differently in the United States, make sure you choose the right car seat for your child and know how to install it properly using the LATCH system.

You have every right to decline a ride if you think that you are violating the law.

About your question about insurance policies, We do not recommend specific insurers or brokers. Drivers that partner with Uber's TNC subsidiary, Rasier-CA LLC, are covered by the commercial auto insurance program described at:http://blog.uber.com/ridesharinginsurance in addition to the coverage provided by their personal auto insurance.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> I would never take a street hail. I have written extensively about that here. Would you like me to help you to understand the dangers inherent? You were quite vocal last week about that very topic when I had to help you temper your caustic approach. And for the record, we appreciate your more civil tone since then. Thank you.


Me: Don't do what Uber says not to do in writing and that you agreed not to do in writing

You: I'm caustic and vocal

Lesson? Live within your agreements and don't try to spin facts to justify otherwise.


----------



## headtheball

Desert Driver said:


> I won't discuss condoms, but I will tell you that I carry commercial insurance. Problem solved.
> Anything else?


how much do you pay for your commercial insurance (if that is not a secret)?


----------



## scrurbscrud

headtheball said:


> latest from CSR
> 
> Happy to clarify! You are putting yourself at risk of incurring an offence. You might be stopped by police and fined $100-$250 or be denied boarding a van or taxi cab.
> 
> In a nutshell:
> 
> Infants from 0-1 years must be in the back seat strapped into a rear-facing car seat until they reach 20 pounds (9 kg)
> Children between 1-8 years (or heaver than 20 pounds) must be in in the back seat (some exceptions apply) and strapped into either:
> - A rear-facing car seat until they reach the maximum height/weight limit for the seat
> - A front-facing car seat with a 5 point harness until they reach the maximum height/weight limit for the seat
> - A booster seat if under 4 feet 9 inches (1.45 meters) and over the height/weight limit for a car seat
> - A regular seat belt in the back seat if taller than 4 feet 9 inches.
> 
> Children 8 years and older legally are not required to use a car or booster seat (though booster seats are still recommended for shorter children until they fit a seat belt properly). However, they are required to use a seat belt and remain in the rear seat.
> Note: The California regulations do not specify particular brands or types of car seats to use. However, as car seats may be designed and installed differently in the United States, make sure you choose the right car seat for your child and know how to install it properly using the LATCH system.
> 
> You have every right to decline a ride if you think that you are violating the law.
> 
> About your question about insurance policies, We do not recommend specific insurers or brokers. Drivers that partner with Uber's TNC subsidiary, Rasier-CA LLC, are covered by the commercial auto insurance program described at:http://blog.uber.com/ridesharinginsurance in addition to the coverage provided by their personal auto insurance.


Since you are in apparent dialog with an Uber CSR on this subject of minor pax, why don't you ask them point blank if they'll cover injury or death of an unaccompanied minor in case of an accident so we can all have it in writing (instead of the irrelevant cut n pastes they are accustomed to sending)
*
Thanks in advance.*


----------



## scrurbscrud

> Desert Driver said: ↑
> I won't discuss condoms, but I will tell you that I carry commercial insurance because the JR is mostly useless. Problem solved.
> Anything else?


First mention of this after being backed into a corner?

Whatever.

Still doesn't cut the mustard of violating Uber drivers policy. And if your policy is in any way hinged to Uber's coverage, dead end again.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> First mention of this after being backed into a corner?
> 
> Whatever.
> 
> Still doesn't cut the mustard of violating Uber drivers policy. And if your policy is in any way hinged to Uber's coverage, dead end again.


Mentioned what? Condoms? That's never been a topic here that I'm aware of.


----------



## headtheball

scrurbscrud said:


> Since you are in apparent dialog with an Uber CSR on this subject of minor pax, why don't you ask them point blank if they'll cover injury or death of an unaccompanied minor in case of an accident so we can all have it in writing (instead of the irrelevant cut n pastes they are accustomed to sending)


They just tell me to reference the insurance policy. won't answer my questions directly. .


----------



## scrurbscrud

headtheball said:


> They just tell me to reference the insurance policy. won't answer my questions directly. .


go figure. Uberspeak strikes again!

Freely translated: We really don't want to be forthright with drivers about drivers being on any particular hook from Uber's end, therefore we perform irrelevant cut and paste responses rather than direct factual truthful answers to legitimate questions and concerns regarding liability or real potential liability issues.


----------



## Sydney Uber

observer said:


> Yea, but I went over to the kids house and told their parents that if they sued me, I would sue them for child neglect, child abandonment, not supervising their child properly and a bunch of other stuff . I just wanted to preempt any future thoughts of sueing me. The kid was half a mile away from home and not hurt at all, his bike wasn't even damaged. But you know how things change when they see easy money.


What? Did you turn up in a suit, tie and gold watch?


----------



## scrurbscrud

headtheball said:


> They just tell me to reference the insurance policy. won't answer my questions directly. .


Perhaps the James River policy mentions drivers in violation of Uber's directives are not covered? Don't recall.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> Perhaps the James River policy mentions drivers in violation of Uber's directives are not covered? Don't recall.


But realistically, drivers who are relying on the JR policy for their coverage are truly flirting with disaster, we will agree.


----------



## headtheball

Pull at a little thread and the next thing you know you are drowning in a big pile of shit. 

With so many riders drivers now, there must have been an incident where a minor was injured during an uber ride. How can this not be known?


----------



## scrurbscrud

headtheball said:


> Pull at a little thread and the next thing you know you are drowning in a big pile of shit.
> 
> With so many riders drivers now, there must have been an incident where a minor was injured during an uber ride. How can this not be known?


Talked to a Lyft driver/pax recent who told me about a t-bone one of her friends was involved with with Lyft as a pax. Pax was injured. Lyft has apparently been coming through with coverage for the pax. She didn't know the status of the drivers situation, unfortunately.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> Talked to a Lyft driver/pax recent who told me about a t-bone one of her friends was involved with with Lyft as a pax. Pax was injured. Lyft has apparently been coming through with coverage for the pax. She didn't know the status of the drivers situation, unfortunately.


I can address this authoritatively . Drivers injured while driving TNC are covered only by their own health care coverage. I got that straight from Chris Boedeker, VP - Uber Risk Mgmt. I discussed that very topic in my lengthy write-up a few months ago. Nothing in the Uber or Lyft insurance covers bodily injury to TNC drivers injured on the job. Only exception, of course is if the TNC driver is not at fault, and further assuming that the driver at fault has insurance coverage.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> go figure. Uberspeak strikes again!
> 
> Freely translated: We really don't want to be forthright with drivers about drivers being on any particular hook from Uber's end, therefore we perform irrelevant cut and paste responses rather than direct factual truthful answers to legitimate questions and concerns regarding liability or real potential liability issues.


Know what, @scrurbscrud? That is the most factually accurate comment you've made in quite some time. Good on ya!


----------



## observer

Sydney Uber said:


> What? Did you turn up in a suit, tie and gold watch?


Lol, I went in my t-shirt, tattoos showing, ten gold chains around my neck and three homies, sitting in my lowrider.  JK.


----------



## Desert Driver

observer said:


> Lol, I went in my t-shirt, tattoos showing, ten gold chains around my neck and three homies, sitting in my lowrider.  JK.


Great mental picture...


----------



## UberHammer

headtheball said:


> They just tell me to reference the insurance policy. won't answer my questions directly. .


This means the answer to your question is no, and if reality unfolds you'll find James River using every angle they can to deny the claim... but let's live in a world where we don't talk about that. So go and get us that $1 SRF and 20%!


----------



## Desert Driver

UberHammer said:


> This means the answer to your question is no, and if reality unfolds you'll find James River using every angle they can to deny the claim... but let's live in a world where we don't talk about that. So go and get us that $1 SRF and 20%!


Exactly. The JR policy is pretty much useless to the drivers. And driving TNC without a commercial policy is akin to having sex with a drug addicted hooker without a raincoat. Everything's OK...until it's not.


----------



## observer

Desert Driver said:


> Great mental picture...


 I went by myself in my soccer mom astro van. But I just made it very clear to them, if they did sue me for some reason, I would sue them for not properly taking care of their kids.

If kid was genuinely hurt, I would have no problem with him getting medical treatment, I always carried great insurance coverage.

It was more of a bluff than anything else.


----------



## Uber-Doober

LEAFdriver said:


> I have a question....I just heard from another driver that riders (I'm assuming when not accompanied by the account holder) need to be at least 18 yrs of age. Is this true?
> 
> I've picked up a teenager for 3 trips now. (First time...I didn't know it was a 15 yo. It seems his Father ordered the ride for him. I thought it was the Father I was picking up until I got there).
> 
> The second and third times....I picked the kid up...and each time he almost damaged my car..SHOVING his hockey sticks/sports gear through my hatch back and almost hitting me in the head with them. He just seemed very disrespectful...and each time I had him as a PAX, I noticed my rating got dinged.
> If I get a ping from him again....can I refuse the ride if I know that he is unaccompanied by the account holder? If so, what should I say. Thanks for advice! (Also, do we have the right to 'CARD' a PAX?)


^^^
OK... don't tell me, I can guess. 
The OP is really Woody Allen. 
Right?


----------



## Uber-Doober

Desert Driver said:


> Any livery driver who did even a modicum of CBA before getting into TNC driving surely has a dash cam, we will agree.


^^^
It's the first thing that I would do if I began driving for Uber. 
We have really great ones at work that get set off if you go over a speed bump too fast or something like that, or you can press the red button at the bottom to set it off. 
It records up to 20 seconds before and after the incident and both forward and back. 
The video and sound, if any, are downloaded automatically when we drive up to the pumps at the end of the shift. 
I pushed the red button once and it resulted in an apology from my supervisor. 
They are invaluable.


----------



## Uber-Doober

OK... let's look at it this way since our society is full of litigiousness. 
Say that you stop to pick up some kid and you refuse to drive him for the myriad reasons already stated. 
So he runs for the bus and gets hit in a crosswalk darting into traffic. 
Now, the car that hit him is probably going to be at fault, but there might be some secondary liability to you if the parents decided to sue everybody in sight. 
You may not be found liable of any wrongdoing but after years in court and thousands of dollars, whose loss is it really?


----------



## Uber-Doober

headtheball said:


> latest from CSR
> 
> Happy to clarify! You are putting yourself at risk of incurring an offence. You might be stopped by police and fined $100-$250 or be denied boarding a van or taxi cab.
> 
> In a nutshell:
> 
> Infants from 0-1 years must be in the back seat strapped into a rear-facing car seat until they reach 20 pounds (9 kg)
> Children between 1-8 years (or heaver than 20 pounds) must be in in the back seat (some exceptions apply) and strapped into either:
> - A rear-facing car seat until they reach the maximum height/weight limit for the seat
> - A front-facing car seat with a 5 point harness until they reach the maximum height/weight limit for the seat
> - A booster seat if under 4 feet 9 inches (1.45 meters) and over the height/weight limit for a car seat
> - A regular seat belt in the back seat if taller than 4 feet 9 inches.
> 
> Children 8 years and older legally are not required to use a car or booster seat (though booster seats are still recommended for shorter children until they fit a seat belt properly). However, they are required to use a seat belt and remain in the rear seat.
> Note: The California regulations do not specify particular brands or types of car seats to use. However, as car seats may be designed and installed differently in the United States, make sure you choose the right car seat for your child and know how to install it properly using the LATCH system.
> 
> You have every right to decline a ride if you think that you are violating the law.
> 
> About your question about insurance policies, We do not recommend specific insurers or brokers. Drivers that partner with Uber's TNC subsidiary, Rasier-CA LLC, are covered by the commercial auto insurance program described at:http://blog.uber.com/ridesharinginsurance in addition to the coverage provided by their personal auto insurance.


^^^
Damn!
You mean I have to stop putting them on the center rear arm rest and duct-taping their heads to the center head restraint?


----------



## Uber-Doober

Desert Driver said:


> Only exception, of course is if the TNC driver is not at fault, and further assuming that the driver at fault has insurance coverage.


^^^
Oh, yeah.... I can see that now. 
After years, and dozens of appearances in court in a wheel chair, catheterized and immobile, the insurance company pays off, after of course only basic treatment was given to the driver to keep him alive instead of the immediate and expensive treatment that would have kept his spine from turning into an al-dente noodle if he had decent insurance coverage. 
Meanwhile, the Uber Gulfstream flies in and out of town attempting to buy the politicians........


----------



## Desert Driver

Uber-Doober said:


> OK... let's look at it this way since our society is full of litigiousness.
> Say that you stop to pick up some kid and you refuse to drive him for the myriad reasons already stated.
> So he runs for the bus and gets hit in a crosswalk darting into traffic.
> Now, the car that hit him is probably going to be at fault, but there might be some secondary liability to you if the parents decided to sue everybody in sight.
> You may not be found liable of any wrongdoing but after years in court and thousands of dollars, whose loss is it really?


Well stated. Bottom line: there's no more risk giving a kid a ride than anyone else


----------



## observer

Uber-Doober said:


> OK... let's look at it this way since our society is full of litigiousness.
> Say that you stop to pick up some kid and you refuse to drive him for the myriad reasons already stated.
> So he runs for the bus and gets hit in a crosswalk darting into traffic.
> Now, the car that hit him is probably going to be at fault, but there might be some secondary liability to you if the parents decided to sue everybody in sight.
> You may not be found liable of any wrongdoing but after years in court and thousands of dollars, whose loss is it really?


What happens if that same kid gets out of your car steps in front of same bus and gets hit? Are you liable?


----------



## Uber-Doober

observer said:


> What happens if that same kid gets out of your car steps in front of same bus and gets hit? Are you liable?


^^^
No. 
My responsibility ends when he gets out, and doesn't follow him into the dentists office. 
But the parents could construe that his getting hit by a bus is directly an effect of my refusing to drive him. 
Oh, and what if I used the kiddie latches on the door jamb of the car and he couldn't get out when that meteor hit the car?

It's like the old conundrum: 
Unfortunately a man fell out of a plane.
Fortunately, he was wearing a parachute.
Unfortunately, the parachute didn't open. 
Fortunately, there was a hay stack below him. 
Unfortunately, there was a pitchfork in the hay stack.
Fortunately, he missed the pitchfork. 
Unfortunately, he missed the hay stack.


----------



## headtheball

just went to the upber center and asked the ops manager. he said you should not take minors on there own and should report the account for deactivation.


----------



## Desert Driver

observer said:


> What happens if that same kid gets out of your car steps in front of same bus and gets hit? Are you liable?


Nope. I already hit the END RIDE button. I'm off the hook. Why?


----------



## observer

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> No.
> My responsibility ends when he gets out, and doesn't follow him into the dentists office.
> But the parents could construe that his getting hit by a bus is directly an effect of my refusing to drive him.
> Oh, and what if I used the kiddie latches on the door jamb of the car and he couldn't get out when that meteor hit the car?
> 
> It's like the old conundrum:
> Unfortunately a man fell out of a plane.
> Fortunately, he was wearing a parachute.
> Unfortunately, the parachute didn't open.
> Fortunately, there was a hay stack below him.
> Unfortunately, there was a pitchfork in the hay stack.
> Fortunately, he missed the pitchfork.
> Unfortunately, he missed the hay stack.


Well, if the man had stayed on the ground he wouldn't have fallen out of the plane. He could have still fallen but it wouldn't of killed him.

In the end, it's the parents responsibilty to look after their own kids. How can they shift that responsibility to a driver.


----------



## Desert Driver

observer said:


> Well, if the man had stayed on the ground he wouldn't have fallen out of the plane. He could have still fallen but it wouldn't of killed him.
> 
> In the end, it's the parents responsibilty to look after their own kids. How can they shift that responsibility to a driver.


Exactly. And so many parents are telling their kids to ride Uber or Lyft as a safe means of transport after parties, while away at school, on dates, etc. And why not? _IT IS SAFE! _ Well, for the most part.


----------



## Uber-Doober

observer said:


> Well, if the man had stayed on the ground he wouldn't have fallen out of the plane. He could have still fallen but it wouldn't of killed him.
> 
> In the end, it's the parents responsibilty to look after their own kids. How can they shift that responsibility to a driver.


^^^
It's done in courtrooms all the time. 
Look at this, which has been part of Legal Theory in Law School for like... 100 years.

A man jumps off the top of a 40 story building to commit suicide. 
A man on the 20th floor with a gun shoots him in the head on the way down.
It was determined at autopsy that the gunshot to the head was the cause of death. 
Is the man on the 20th. floor guilty of murder? 
The answer is yes, because of the "could have, should have, would have, may have" crowd saying that there might have been some way that the man could have survived the fall from the top of a 40 story building although it never happened before in all of history. 
You can throw in all the maybe's you want to, but the fact of the matter is that these things end up in litigation all the time and will continue to do so for as long as there is a avaricious lawyer waiting to take a case.


----------



## observer

Desert Driver said:


> Exactly. And so many parents are telling their kids to ride Uber or Lyft as a safe means of transport after parties, while away at school, on dates, etc. And why not? _IT IS SAFE! _ Well, for the most part.


I really hope you are right.

But, chances are something bad will eventually happen to some kid in an Uber.

The media will have a field day with that one.


----------



## Uber-Doober

observer said:


> Well, if the man had stayed on the ground he wouldn't have fallen out of the plane. He could have still fallen but it wouldn't of killed him.
> 
> In the end, it's the parents responsibilty to look after their own kids. How can they shift that responsibility to a driver.


^^^
The guy that packed the chute is responsible... or if the guy who fell out of the plane packed it himself, then the school that taught him to pack the chute is responsible, or the school is out of business, then the governmental agency that licensed the school is liable. 
You can go back to the stone age with this one.


----------



## scrurbscrud

headtheball said:


> just went to the upber center and asked the ops manager. *he said you should not take minors *on there own* and should report the account for deactivation*.


Hey, good on you for taking that kind of initiative and sharing the facts!


----------



## headtheball

scrurbscrud said:


> Hey, good on you for taking that kind of initiative and sharing the facts!


Thanks, I was not very popular as this was a training for dropping the kids off at the pool. Coffee was shit, but I got a Tee-shirt, so not a total loss.

It kinda ended up being a shouting match between drivers and staff, as other drivers started to pile on as I asked real questions. Hilarious at times as staff tried to keep order. About 25 X riders. All clueless as ****.

For example, some old dear was concerned about lifting luggage as she is recovering from back surgery. She is like 70lb anyways. Pax tells her she had to stick a 50lb hard case in the trunk. Staff told her to do what she needs to keep her rating high but at the end of the day she is an indy contractor. I told her let the pax stick the bag in and if they give you a hassle, simply cancel the ride and leave that entitled DB on the street. Uber that shit on.

I spent some time after the meeting with several drivers telling them they need to join this site (and learn basics of uper math). Probably pointless as this group was at the very ass end of the learning curve.


----------



## scrurbscrud

headtheball said:


> Thanks, I was not very popular as this was a training for dropping the kids off at the pool.
> It kinda ended up being a shouting match between drivers and staff, as other drivers started to pile on as I asked real questions. Hilarious at times as staff tried to keep order. About 25 X riders. All clueless as ****.
> I spent some time after the meeting with several drivers telling them they need to join this site (and learn basics of uper math). *Probably pointless as this group was at the very ass end of the learning curve.*


Yeah, when you end up with drivers that can't understand or read the terms and conditions of their agreement to NOT DRIVE CHILDREN UNDER 18 you know the driver brain pool is pretty ****ed up. It's even more ****ed up when people outright disobey the rulz, knowing better. Might as well say **** Uber and go straight to street hails and picking up stray kids off the street.

Anyway good job on asking the right and tough questions to Uber. Sounds like you even got a straight answer, which is amazing in and of itself.

I wonder if Uber bothers to check the pedophile/sex offender lists before onboarding drivers?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

UberHammer said:


> It shows up as a driver cancel.
> 
> If you complain about this customer, you'll lose more than you'll gain, because Uber isn't going to do anything about it. They want the $1 SRF and the 20%, even if it means you breaking the law and losing money. If you complain, then they have to deal with a driver complaining, and all they want is for driver complaints to just go away. Every complaint you make is one complaint closer to being deactivated.


I don't think I'd do that... I'd cancel as a 'rider no-show' since the account holder (or other acceptable rider) did not show up. That way a) I get paid the cancellation fee and b) the cancel won't count against me. If the accountholder wants to challenge that with Uber, I can point to their own published policy and the worst that could happen is that I lose the cancellation fee.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I don't think I'd do that... I'd cancel as a 'rider n0-show' since the account holder (or other acceptable rider) did not show up. That way a) I get paid the cancellation fee and b) the cancel won't count against me. If the accountholder wants to challenge that with Uber, I can point to their own published policy and the worst that could happen is that I lose the cancellation fee.


Rightful cancellation fee. Unfortunately Lyft doesn't take the same approach to under age pax, although a driver could technically do the same because pax are advised to call the driver in advance and inform them under age pax situation to see if the driver wants to take the fare. IF NOT they are supposed to cancel. So going to hit them with it as well. **** these clowns.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Desert Driver said:


> You are entitled to your opinion, regardless of how detached from reality it may be.


or how valid it is

eye of the beholder

I enjoy both your posts, but in this case I'm on the side of scrurbscrud.
Mainly because all of the other little of Uber violations of policy or rules lead to, at max, deactivation. An incident - real or fabricated - involving a minor undoubtedly leads to headlines (at a minimum) and probably legal action, each of which would have a far reaching negative impact on my life.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> You are entitled to your opinion, regardless of how detached from reality it may be.


If your reality transposed a different contractual term than what it actually SEZ on this item I'd certainly say it's subject to questioning,

sufficiently done at this point.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> or how valid it is
> 
> eye of the beholder
> 
> I enjoy both your posts, but in this case I'm on the side of scrurbscrud.
> Mainly because all of the other little of Uber violations of policy or rules lead to, at max, deactivation. An incident - real or fabricated - involving a minor undoubtedly leads to headlines (at a minimum) and probably legal action, each of which would have a far reaching negative impact on my life.


Ya THINK?

geez, what some people won't do for $2.40.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Desert Driver said:


> Problem is, it's 11pm, the kid needs to get back to the dorm, and buses quit running an hour ago.


*WHO's problem?!*
When you make it your problem, you make it your liability.

Want to help?
Can't stand the thought of the poor kid standing under a lamppost at 11PM waiting for a ride?
*Teach them how to call for a TAXI*, wait with them till its arrival and you'll have done your good-deed for the day.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Ya THINK?
> 
> geez, what some people won't do for $2.40.


That's $2.40 before expenses.
In all likelihood, if you transport a minor you're actually PAYING for the privilege of taking on the legal liability.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> That's $2.40 before expenses.
> In all likelihood, if you transport a minor you're actually PAYING to take on the liability.


That's one of those deals where one accident could really jack a driver up for life, especially if they were at fault, uninsured, and driving against the company dictates.

No freakin' way.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> That's one of those deals where one accident could really jack a driver up for life, especially if they were at fault, uninsured, and driving against the company dictates.
> 
> No freakin' way.


Simple truth: Driving TNC without carrying your own commercial liability policy is a shitstorm waiting to happen. End of story.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> If your reality transposed a different contractual term than what it actually SEZ on this item I'd certainly say it's subject to questioning,
> 
> sufficiently done at this point.


It seems as though you were trying to make some sort of a point with that comment. And we appreciate that.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Had a kid request (DENIED by me) to run this 13-14 year old to a mall.

Guarantee if that kid happened to disappear with a perp anytime close to the time of driver delivery and they couldn't pin the perp, GUESS WHO would be the first suspect on the list? Uh, yeah. The driver. The costs of time or attorney's fees for something like this could be astronomical and potentially life ruining. 

Not even on my radar for consideration. The answer is not just HELL NO.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Simple truth: Driving TNC without carrying your own commercial liability policy is a shitstorm waiting to happen. End of story.


So is violating the terms of written agreements followed by incidents.

Drivers are idiots. I'd guarantee for every kid I've turned down somebody like you was driving in right behind me for their $2.40 fare.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> It seems as though you were trying to make some sort of a point with that comment. And we appreciate that.


Yeah, the point in question was reading comprehension.


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> So is violating the terms of written agreements followed by incidents.
> 
> Drivers are idiots. I'd guarantee for every kid I've turned down somebody like you was driving in right behind me for their $2.40 fare.


Still pissed about my model, are ya?


----------



## Desert Driver

scrurbscrud said:


> Yeah, the point in question was reading comprehension.


Actually, it was sentence construction and spelling on your part, we will agree. Would you like me to help you edit for clarity? I'm a very skilled editor, but you already know that.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Still pissed about my model, are ya?


No, just making an observation that some drivers can't read, let alone consider the risks attached to this particular scenario.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Actually, it was sentence construction and spelling on your part, we will agree. Would you like me to help you edit for clarity? I'm a very skilled editor, but you already know that.


IF you're making a claim that Uber allows it you are exceptionally off kilter.


----------



## UberHammer

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I don't think I'd do that... I'd cancel as a 'rider no-show' since the account holder (or other acceptable rider) did not show up. That way a) I get paid the cancellation fee and b) the cancel won't count against me. If the accountholder wants to challenge that with Uber, I can point to their own published policy and the worst that could happen is that I lose the cancellation fee.


Any reason the driver chooses when they cancel shows up on the driver's cancel rating. It's only when the rider cancels from their side that it doesn't count as a driver side cancel.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

UberHammer said:


> Any reason the driver chooses when they cancel shows up on the driver's cancel rating. It's only when the rider cancels from their side that it doesn't count as a driver side cancel.


If I cancel as a 'rider no-show' I am not penalized in my acceptance rate (or, as far as I know, my 'cancellation quota' - if there is such a thing) AND I get paid. YMMV


----------



## UberHammer

Michael - Cleveland said:


> If I cancel as a 'rider no-show' I am not penalized in my acceptance rate (or, as far as I know, my 'cancellation quota' - if there is such a thing) AND I get paid. YMMV


No cancels hit your acceptance rate. They hit your cancellation rate. They're cancels. And yes they do hit your cancellation rate. All reasons the driver cancels hit it.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

UberHammer said:


> No cancels hit your acceptance rate. They hit your cancellation rate. They're cancels. And yes they do hit your cancellation rate. All reasons the driver cancels hit it.


Again - YMMV, but I have a pretty high cancellation rate and have never heard Uber warn me about it... I suspect because according the the Uber Partner Agreement, they specifically give me the right to accept or decline any ride I choose - because I am an 'Independent Contractor'.

For me (and AGAIN: YMMV), the only measure I focus on now based on current rates and incentives, is my driver rating - because I have to maintain a certain level to qualify for SELECT status. Acceptance rate and Cancellation rate mean nothing to me.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> No cancels hit your acceptance rate. They hit your cancellation rate. They're cancels. And yes they do hit your cancellation rate. All reasons the driver cancels hit it.


I don't think paid cancels hit the cancel rate. Not the drivers fault for no shows and the driver gets paid.


----------



## observer

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> It's done in courtrooms all the time.
> Look at this, which has been part of Legal Theory in Law School for like... 100 years.
> 
> A man jumps off the top of a 40 story building to commit suicide.
> A man on the 20th floor with a gun shoots him in the head on the way down.
> It was determined at autopsy that the gunshot to the head was the cause of death.
> Is the man on the 20th. floor guilty of murder?
> The answer is yes, because of the "could have, should have, would have, may have" crowd saying that there might have been some way that the man could have survived the fall from the top of a 40 story building although it never happened before in all of history.
> You can throw in all the maybe's you want to, but the fact of the matter is that these things end up in litigation all the time and will continue to do so for as long as there is a avaricious lawyer waiting to take a case.





scrurbscrud said:


> Had a kid request (DENIED by me) to run this 13-14 year old to a mall.
> 
> Guarantee if that kid happened to disappear with a perp anytime close to the time of driver delivery and they couldn't pin the perp, GUESS WHO would be the first suspect on the list? Uh, yeah. The driver. The costs of time or attorney's fees for something like this could be astronomical and potentially life ruining.
> 
> Not even on my radar for consideration. The answer is not just HELL NO.


Not only that but even if found not guilty, you will be tainted for life.
You will never regain your reputation.


----------



## UberHammer

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Again - YMMV, but I have a pretty high cancellation rate and have never heard Uber warn me about it... I suspect because according the the Uber Partner Agreement, they specifically give me the right to accept or decline any ride I choose - because I am an 'Independent Contractor'.
> 
> For me (and AGAIN: YMMV), the only measure I focus on now based on current rates and incentives, is my driver rating - because I have to maintain a certain level to qualify for SELECT status. Acceptance rate and Cancellation rate mean nothing to me.


Don't get me wrong. Neither the acceptance rate nor the cancellation rate are defined at all in the Uber/Driver contract. They're made up out of thin air by Uber. Only the drivers rating by riders is defined in the contract (and what they can do if it is too low).

We as drivers could make up shit too... like an UberLie rating, which would be the number of times a week we hear another Uber lie. The UberLie rating has just as much contractual validity as acceptance and cancellation ratings... which is ZERO!

But Uber can chose to deactivate based on these non-contractual rates just as easily as they can deactivate you because your car has 4 wheels. What are you going to do about it? Nothing. Any lawyer you can afford can't compete with one a $40 billion company can buy.

If someone at Uber suggests in an internal meeting "Hey, cancels have skyrocketed recently... how do we combat this?", and the decision is made to make an example out of those with existing high cancel rates, what are you going to do if you're in the example group?


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> I don't think paid cancels hit the cancel rate. Not the drivers fault for no shows and the driver gets paid.


Everything I've heard from CSRs say otherwise.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

UberHammer said:


> We as drivers could make up shit too... like an UberLie rating, which would be the number of times a week we hear another Uber lie. The UberLie rating has just as much contractual validity as acceptance and cancellation ratings... which is ZERO!


LOL!


> But Uber can chose to deactivate based on these non-contractual rates just as easily as they can deactivate you because your car has 4 wheels. What are you going to do about it? Nothing. Any lawyer you can afford can't compete with one a $40 billion company can buy.


I disagree - and so does the ex NYC OpsManager - who mentioned a couple of weeks ago that a small claims suit in a local municipality gets Uber's attention and is settled quickly to prevent bad press that can reach investors. It is rarely ever worth a large corporation's time to hire a local atty to fight a small claims suit.



> If someone at Uber suggests in an internal meeting "Hey, cancels have skyrocketed recently... how do we combat this?", and the decision is made to make an example out of those with existing high cancel rates, what are you going to do if you're in the example group?


I'll hold Uber to its CONTRACTUAL agreement - locally - just as I would expect Uber to hold me to it.[/QUOTE]


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> Everything I've heard from CSRs say otherwise.


Can't really say. The only stat we're treated to is ping acceptance. Doesn't track on our end statistically from there (ping acceptance) that I'm shown.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

UberHammer said:


> Everything I've heard from CSRs say otherwise.


Unfortunately, ask a local CSR in different regions about some policy or another and you are likely to get different answers. First, every region employs its own rules (as each Raiser region is a separate and unique company/LLC) and second, the CSRs are just outsourced remote call operators.


----------



## headtheball

At the training, I also asked about parents riding with small children. Oops manager said take them if you want. My follow up was that transportation of a infant, not in an approved car seat, then it is a violation of traffic code. Taxi's are exempt for this requirement but we are not. This exposes driver to fines. 

Same answer, do what you need to do. You are an independent contractor. So I pushed and asked why don't you ask drivers if they have car seats rather than if they have stupid aux cords? Standard above my pay grade answer from Oops. 

So no kids for me.


----------



## scrurbscrud

headtheball said:


> At the training, I also asked about parents riding with small children. Oops manager said take them if you want. My follow up was that transportation of a infant, not in an approved car seat, then it is a violation of traffic code. Taxi's are exempt for this requirement but we are not. This exposes driver to fines.
> 
> Same answer, do what you need to do. You are an independent contractor. So I pushed and asked why don't you ask drivers if they have car seats rather than if they have stupid aux cords? Standard above my pay grade answer from Oops.
> 
> So no kids for me.


I turn down fares from pax with kids who should be in car seats but don't have them.

Call a cab. They don't have the same rulz we do.


----------



## Desert Driver

headtheball said:


> At the training, I also asked about parents riding with small children. Oops manager said take them if you want. My follow up was that transportation of a infant, not in an approved car seat, then it is a violation of traffic code. Taxi's are exempt for this requirement but we are not. This exposes driver to fines.
> 
> Same answer, do what you need to do. You are an independent contractor. So I pushed and asked why don't you ask drivers if they have car seats rather than if they have stupid aux cords? Standard above my pay grade answer from Oops.
> 
> So no kids for me.


I won't transport kids who require car seats. That's just a headache I don't need. But transporting teenagers is no big deal. I pick up kids at a nearby boarding school all the time. I also pick up kids who need to shuttle between mom's house and dad's place. The parents have no desire to face each other, so Uber/Lyft is the perfect solution for them without have to deal with taxi cab scuz.


----------



## Lidman

Again transporting pax from a to be for $$$ is either taxi/limo service. BTW Our company requires children 5 and under to have a car seat. Some make it sound like every taxi company is satan.

Also, enough of this term RIDE SHARING. If you have two or pax, that's the real definition of sharing a ride. If you have just one pax, who are they sharing the ride with?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Lidman said:


> Again transporting pax from a to be for $$$ is either taxi/limo service.


That's your opinion (shared by some, not others).



> Also, enough of this term RIDE SHARING. If you have two or pax, that's the real definition of sharing a ride.


Do let us know when your definition of ridesharing becomes the accepted standard.
In the meantime, deny it all you want, reality has a way of defining the semantics.

http://chicagodispatcher.com/ridesharings-blurry-definition-p2448-1.htm



> If you have just one pax, who are they sharing the ride with


JobSharing is two or more people sharing an office.
OfficeSharing is two or more people sharing an office.
MealSharing is two or more people sharing a meal.
RideSharing.... you get the idea.
*Still, it's semantics*.
'RideSharing' is not, as yet, a legal term in most jurisdictions in the US.


----------



## UberHammer

Michael - Cleveland said:


> That's your opinion (shared by some, not others).
> 
> Do let us know when your definition of ridesharing becomes the accepted standard.
> In the meantime, deny it all you want, reality has a way of defining the semantics.
> 
> http://chicagodispatcher.com/ridesharings-blurry-definition-p2448-1.htm
> 
> JobSharing is two or more people sharing an office.
> OfficeSharing is two or more people sharing an office.
> MealSharing is two or more people sharing a meal.
> RideSharing.... you get the idea.
> *Still, it's semantics*.
> 'RideSharing' is not, as yet, a legal term in most jurisdictions in the US.


And timesharing is two or more people sharing a time...

...oh wait, it's not.


----------



## Older Chauffeur

headtheball said:


> At the training, I also asked about parents riding with small children. Oops manager said take them if you want. My follow up was that transportation of a infant, not in an approved car seat, then it is a violation of traffic code. Taxi's are exempt for this requirement but we are not. This exposes driver to fines.
> 
> Same answer, do what you need to do. You are an independent contractor. So I pushed and asked why don't you ask drivers if they have car seats rather than if they have stupid aux cords? Standard above my pay grade answer from Oops.
> 
> So no kids for me.


No, taxis are not exempt in CA.
http://www.carseat.org/Legal/99_Enf.pdf


----------



## Desert Driver

Lidman said:


> Again transporting pax from a to be for $$$ is either taxi/limo service. BTW Our company requires children 5 and under to have a car seat. Some make it sound like every taxi company is satan.
> 
> Also, enough of this term RIDE SHARING. If you have two or pax, that's the real definition of sharing a ride. If you have just one pax, who are they sharing the ride with?


I agree. Ride sharing is carpooling or multiple paxs in my book. Even though Uber doesn't like the moniker, it is a taxi company, and that's all there is to it. And more municipalities aren't falling for the horseshit line of "We're not a transportation company. We're a technology company." Yeah, nice semantic games, Travis. You're running a high-tech taxi company. Own it, you ****ing asshole.


----------



## Desert Driver

headtheball said:


> At the training, I also asked about parents riding with small children. Oops manager said take them if you want. My follow up was that transportation of a infant, not in an approved car seat, then it is a violation of traffic code. Taxi's are exempt for this requirement but we are not. This exposes driver to fines.
> 
> Same answer, do what you need to do. You are an independent contractor. So I pushed and asked why don't you ask drivers if they have car seats rather than if they have stupid aux cords? Standard above my pay grade answer from Oops.
> 
> So no kids for me.


I'm thinking I may want to change my personal policy. I don't transport kids who require car seats. I just don't want the hassle. However, I do transport uncaged dogs for a $10 surcharge. Maybe I should do that with car seats - $10 surcharge to throw my canvas drop cloth over seat and install child car seat. What do you all think?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Lidman said:


> Again transporting pax from a to be for $$$ is either taxi/limo service. BTW Our company requires children 5 and under to have a car seat. Some make it sound like every taxi company is satan.
> 
> Also, enough of this term RIDE SHARING. If you have two or pax, that's the real definition of sharing a ride. If you have just one pax, who are they sharing the ride with?





UberHammer said:


> And timesharing is two or more people sharing a time...
> 
> ...oh wait, it's not.


yes, it is: two or more people sharing the TIME/OCCUPANCY of a dwelling.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Desert Driver said:


> Ride sharing is carpooling or multiple paxs in my book. Even though Uber doesn't like the moniker, it is a taxi company, and that's all there is to it.


That's all there is to it? If only...

Until the laws are written or Uber and Lyft lose in court, they ain't no taxi company until the courts say they are a taxi company.
And THAT is all there is to it.


----------



## UberHammer

Michael - Cleveland said:


> yes, it is: two or more people sharing the TIME/OCCUPANCY of a dwelling.


A timeshare is two or more people sharing a dwelling. They aren't sharing time at all. In fact, it's setup to AVOID sharing of time. Each participant is given separate (not shared) times they can use it.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

UberHammer said:


> A timeshare is two or more people sharing a dwelling. They aren't sharing time at all. In fact, it's setup to AVOID sharing of time. Each participant is given separate (not shared) times they can use it.


two or more people sharing a dwelling is called roommates. A timeshare is a sharing of time in the dwelling. but you knew that.


----------



## UberHammer

Michael - Cleveland said:


> two or more people sharing a dwelling is called roommates. A timeshare is a sharing of time in the dwelling. but you knew that.


Roommates share both the dwelling AND the time. Timeshare owners share the dwelling but do NOT share the time.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> I'm thinking I may want to change my personal policy. I don't transport kids who require car seats. I just don't want the hassle. However, I do transport uncaged dogs for a $10 surcharge. Maybe I should do that with car seats - $10 surcharge to throw my canvas drop cloth over seat and install child car seat. What do you all think?


As usual, the opposite of what you do...

I do drive kids with carseats IF their parents are with them. And where do you get the surcharge thingy from? New business deal? Hell, why not smack all Uber's pax with some baloney surcharge solely instigated by the driver? Like a 'gas' surcharge allowed to be arbitrarily tacked on at your discretion?

You could always just lie and say Uber sez it's OK. Probably sucker at least 30% of them. Must be paid in cash only.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> As usual, the opposite of what you do...
> 
> I do drive kids with carseats IF their parents are with them. And where do you get the surcharge thingy from? New business deal? Hell, why not smack all Uber's pax with some baloney surcharge solely instigated by the driver? Like a 'gas' surcharge allowed to be arbitrarily tacked on at your discretion?
> 
> *You could always just lie and say Uber sez it's OK.* Probably sucker at least 30% of them. Must be paid in cash only.


The contract between Uber and drivers DOES say it's OK.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> The contract between Uber and drivers DOES say it's OK.


Any charge for any reason?


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Any charge for any reason?


From section 4.1 of the contract:

In addition, the parties acknowledge and agree that as between you and Company, *the Fare is a recommended amount*, and the primary purpose of the pre-arranged Fare is to act as the default amount *in the event you do not negotiate a different amount.*


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

UberHammer said:


> Roommates share both the dwelling AND the time. Timeshare owners share the dwelling but do NOT share the time.


jesus, you love to hear yourself talk. You know exactly what a timeshare is and why it is called a time share. Can we now go back to our regularly scheduled program?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Any charge for any reason?


Yes... otherwise we would not be considered independent contractors. And this is the very nature of the federal law suits in California and Massachusetts.


----------



## UberHammer

Michael - Cleveland said:


> jesus, you love to hear yourself talk. You know exactly what a timeshare is and why it is called a time share. Can we now go back to our regularly scheduled program?


The etymology of English words can be whacky. It's why we drive on parkways, and park on driveways. There is no more time being shared in a timeshare than parking is occurring on parkways.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Yes... otherwise we would not be considered independent contractors. And this is the very nature of the federal law suits in California and Massachusetts.


It was an observation of a driver charged surcharge, imposed solely by the driver, and not Uber.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> From section 4.1 of the contract:
> 
> In addition, the parties acknowledge and agree that as *between you and Company,* the Fare is a recommended amount, and the primary purpose of the pre-arranged Fare is to act as the default amount in the event you do not negotiate a different amount.


Case of *selective emphasis* I'm afraid. Doesn't say crap about nailing pax with surcharges determined by a driver.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

UberHammer said:


> The etymology of English words can be whacky. It's why we drive on parkways, and park on driveways. There is no more time being shared in a timeshare than parking is occurring on parkways.


you really need to start driving again... Anything to take up some more of your time. A timeshare divides the total amount of time available in a dwellings which is 52 weeks, weeks being a measure of time, into deeded elements of the total which are shared among a group of owners.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> It was an observation of a driver charged surcharge, imposed solely by the driver, and not Uber.


Yes. The right to negotiate the fare is held by the driver and the rider. All Uber can do is make a recommendation. Nothing more. It's none of their business.

If it was their business, then the driver would either be an employee or a franchisee of Uber. Neither of which is a relationship Uber wants to have with drivers for other legal reasons.

So Uber has no right in the contract, or even outside of it, the set the fare rate. However, any driver who exercises their right to negotiate with the customer is quickly threatened by Uber using made up rules that don't exist in the contract.


----------



## UberHammer

Michael - Cleveland said:


> you really need to start driving again... Anything to take up some more of your time. A timeshare divides the total amount of time available in a dwellings which is 52 weeks, weeks being a measure of time, into deeded elements of the total which are shared among a group of owners.


Correct. The time is divided, not shared. Just like in rideshare, the rides are divided, not shared.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> Yes. The right to negotiate the fare is held by the driver and the rider. All Uber can do is make a recommendation. Nothing more. It's none of their business.
> 
> If it was their business, then the driver would either be an employee or a franchisee of Uber. Neither of which is a relationship Uber wants to have with drivers for other legal reasons.
> 
> So Uber has not right in the contract, or even outside of it, the set the fare rate. However, any driver who exercises their right to negotiate with the customer is quickly threatened by Uber using made up rules that don't exist in the contract.


Your citing says nothing of the sort.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

UberHammer said:


> Correct. The time is divided, not shared. Just like in rideshare, the rides are divided, not shared.


the ownership of the time is shared. otherwise it would be called dwelling sharing.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Your citing says nothing of the sort.


yes, the contract specifically says that the right to negotiate fares lies solely between the driver and the passenger, and that the fares published by Uber are only recommendations.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Your citing says nothing of the sort.


You're being obtuse. Uber can do nothing more than make a recommended fare. The recommended fare is only used when the driver and rider do not negotiate a different one.


----------



## UberHammer

Michael - Cleveland said:


> the ownership of the time is shared. otherwise it would be called dwelling sharing.


If the word reflected what is actually happening, then yes, it would be dwellingsharing, or realestatesharing, or condosharing, etc, etc... Time is the one thing that is NOT being shared. Again, etymology is funny sometimes.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Michael - Cleveland said:


> yes, the contract specifically says that the right to negotiate fares lies solely between the driver and the passenger, and that the fares published by Uber are only recommendations.


of course uber provides no easy means for either the passenger or of the driver to effect any fare other than the uber recommendation. and again, that is the nature of control being argued in the federal lawsuits.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> You're being obtuse. Uber can do nothing more than make a recommended fare. The recommended fare is only used when the driver and rider do not negotiate a different one.


Your citing has nothing to do with the pax. It's between Uber and the driver. The default agreed rate between the driver and Uber, for lack of any other agreement is the rate addendum.

None of this means drivers set their own fares with pax.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Your citing has nothing to do with the pax. It's between Uber and the driver. The default agreed rate between the driver and Uber, for lack of any other agreement is the rate addendum.
> 
> None of this means drivers set their own fares with pax.


The fees Uber charges the drivers for Uber's services are between Uber and the driver. It's a take it or leave it negotiation as those fees are established in the contract.

The fees the driver charges for the rider for the driver's services are between the rider and the driver. The contract between Uber and the driver can do nothing more than recommend a fare. It's none of their business to set it. If it was, drivers would be employees (or franchisees).


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> The fees Uber charges the drivers for Uber's services are between Uber and the driver. It's a take it or leave it negotiation as those fees are established in the contract.


Uh, yeah, that is exactly what it says. It also makes ZERO allowance for drivers cutting their own side charges with any pax ala DD's self imposed surcharge fees.


> The fees the driver charges for the rider for the driver's services are between the rider and the driver. The contract between Uber and the driver can do nothing more than recommend a fare. It's none of their business to set it. If it was, drivers would be employees (or franchisees).


Uber presents those same fares to the pax through their platform, who, when hooking into their platform, are provided drivers who've agreed to that fare and the attendant services for the fare to the pax.

None of this allows drivers to set their own side deals.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Uh, yeah, that is exactly what it says. It also makes ZERO allowance for drivers cutting their own side charges with any pax ala DD's self imposed surcharge fees.
> 
> Uber presents those same fares to the pax through their platform, who, when hooking into their platform, are provided drivers who've agreed to that fare and the attendant services for the fare to the pax.
> 
> None of this allows drivers to set their own side deals.


You're saying that Uber's software doesn't allow riders and drivers to negotiate a different fare. That's obvious.

The contract however says differently. The fact that Uber's software doesn't allow drivers to exercise their contractual rights is one reason why Uber is being sued for treating drivers as employees. The software functions like Uber drivers are employees.


----------



## Desert Driver

UberHammer said:


> From section 4.1 of the contract:
> 
> In addition, the parties acknowledge and agree that as between you and Company, *the Fare is a recommended amount*, and the primary purpose of the pre-arranged Fare is to act as the default amount *in the event you do not negotiate a different amount.*


Can you imagine how this a could play out....

Driver: OK, sir, here's your destination. Your Uber fare is $31.58 and that will charge to your credit card. My fare is $10.50. I will require my fare in cash, please.

Pax: What? Uber said the fare is inclusive and that tipping isn't necessary.

Driver: You are correct. The Uber fare is inclusive, by however Uber defines that term. And we're not talking about tipping here at all. What we're talking about is my fare for getting you here.

Pax: But Uber didn't say anything about a driver's fare.

Driver: Yeah, I'm not surprised. Uber fails to disclose a lot of things, especially to us drivers. So, do you have exact change for my fare?

Of course, the following morning the driver would be deactivated for doing *exactly* what the Uber contract says he is permitted to do.


----------



## UberHammer

Desert Driver said:


> Can you imagine how this a could play out....
> 
> Driver: OK, sir, here's your destination. Your Uber fare is $31.58 and that will charge to your credit card. My fare is $10.50. I will require my fare in cash, please.
> 
> Pax: What? Uber said the fare is inclusive and that tipping isn't necessary.
> 
> Driver: You are correct. The Uber fare is inclusive, by however Uber defines that term. And we're not talking about tipping here at all. What we're talking about is my fare for getting you here.
> 
> Pax: But Uber didn't say anything about a driver's fare.
> 
> Driver: Yeah, I'm not surprised. Uber fails to disclose a lot of things, especially to us drivers. So, do you have exact change for my fare?
> 
> Of course, the following morning the driver would be deactivated for doing *exactly* what the Uber contract says he is permitted to do.


This is one of many things that is broken in Uber. If they want to keep 100% control of the fare, I don't see how drivers don't become classified as employees (or franchisees). If they want to keep drivers as Independent Contractors, then their software will have to become something like Sidecar.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> You're saying that Uber's software doesn't allow riders and drivers to negotiate a different fare. That's obvious.


It was in response to DD's charging surcharges on the side with pax, outside of Uber's price expression to them.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> It was in response to DD's charging surcharges on the side with pax, outside of Uber's price expression to them.


Right! The software fails to provide for it. The contract however allows it.

What Uber's engineers do and what Uber's lawyers do are not in sync.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Of course, the following morning the driver would be deactivated for doing *exactly* what the Uber contract says he is permitted to do.


Nothing in Uber's agreement with drivers allows this:



desertdriver said:


> However, I do transport uncaged dogs for a $10 surcharge.


I assume you are talking about a dog unaccompanied by a pax?

The first time you pull that stunt with a seeing eye dog with a blind pax both you and Uber would be promptly sued.

And I doubt Uber allows such surcharges in any case. You can probably turn down the fare, but not cut a deal outside their app.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> Right! The software fails to provide for it. The contract however allows it.


That's why I asked you to cite it. There is no such provision for driver surcharges.



> What Uber's engineers do and what Uber's lawyers do are not in sync.


Don't know where you're getting the idea from to begin with.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> That's why I asked you to cite it. There is no such provision for driver surcharges.


I can't show something that is absent. It's absent in the Uber/Driver contract because the price of the fare is, legally speaking, none of Uber's business.

The driver and the rider are party A and party B in the exchange of transportation services. Uber is nothing but a third party (party C) providing paid technology services to the driver, and a free smartphone app to the rider. The rights of party A and party B in this exchange are either 1) established by a contract between party A and party B; or 2) established by legislated law. Uber, being a third party (party C) has no right to determine anything in that exchange of transportation service.

Uber is recognizing in the contract that they can only recommend the fare because that's all they can legally do WITHOUT making the driver an employee or franchisee of Uber. So that "recommended fare" is all you're going to find in this regard.

The contract between Uber and the drivers sets the law regarding the exchange of goods and services between Uber and the driver. Those are 1) leads, 2) software, 3) insurance, and 4) collection services. That's all. The exchange of transportation is the burden and responsibility of the driver. The contract even acknowledges that.



> Don't know where you're getting the idea from to begin with.


Uber is hiding behind the legal status of their workforce being independent contractors, but their engineers have created a platform that does not allow the independent contractors to exercise their legal rights. It essentially treats the drivers like they're employees of Uber.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> I can't show something that is absent.


Indeedy it ain't.



> It's absent in the Uber/*Driver contract* because the price of the fare is, legally speaking, none of Uber's business.


Yeah, *key phrase* huh? The platform construct is an agreement between UBER and platform users/drivers in our case. IT IS ONLY UBER that sets the fare and it is only UBER that can negotiate a different fare.



> The driver and the rider are party A and party B in the exchange of transportation services.


Not that simple. The arrangements between the parties are governed by an intermediary.



> Uber is nothing but a third party (party C) providing paid technology services to the driver, and a free smartphone app to the rider. The rights of party A and party B in this exchange are either 1) established by a contract between party A and party B; or 2) established by legislated law. Uber, being a third party (party C) has no right to determine anything in that exchange of transportation service.


Contractual illusion on your part. Uber drivers use the platform to provide fares for UBER customers.

Their brand, their platform, their insurance, their rulz in writing governing that relationship.



> Uber is recognizing in the contract that they can only recommend the fare because that's all they can legally do WITHOUT making the driver an employee or franchisee of Uber. So that "recommended fare" is all you're going to find in this regard.


It's not a recommendation for a fare. It's a prearranged agreement between the parties, driver and Uber, to provide the Uber pax.



> The contract between Uber and the drivers sets the law regarding the exchange of goods and services between Uber and the driver. Those are 1) leads, 2) software, 3) insurance, and 4) collection services. That's all. The exchange of transportation is the burden and responsibility of the driver. The contract even acknowledges that.


Indeed. For Uber's pax at their fare, agreed to by drivers. Nothing to do with any recommendation whatsoever. Or driver negotiations other than they agree to the price and terms set forth.



> Uber is hiding behind the legal status of their workforce being independent contractors, but their engineers have created a platform that does not allow the independent contractors to exercise their legal rights. It essentially treats the drivers like they're employees of Uber.


Hiding is your opinion. Pretty sure Uber's lawyers have a leg to stand on or they wouldn't be standing on it.

Independent only to the extent of using Uber or not. If drivers agree to their terms, rules and conditions, that's the agreement.

If they don't, they are in violation of the contract, and subject to rejection.

As it pertains to surcharges for dogs on the side, which is how this discussion came about, *no. *

And as it pertains to operating on the side, also no. No TNC driver can do that without entering into different independent territory. Cab or limo laws pertaining to the states.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Not that simple. The arrangements between the parties are governed by an intermediary.


If both parties allow for the arrangement to be arbitrated, then yes. Nothing the drivers and riders have agreed to establishes Uber as an arbitrator between them.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Contractual illusion on your part. Uber drivers use the platform to provide fares for UBER customers.


Uber is reporting to the IRS zero revenue on its books from riders. The only revenue Uber makes is fees it charges the drivers. The riders are not customers of Uber. They are nothing more than Users. Much like users of Facebook who buy nothing from Facebook.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> It's not a recommendation for a fare.


Ugh. I'm done with you. I can't help someone who denies something stated word for word in the contract.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> It was in response to DD's charging surcharges on the side with pax, outside of Uber's price expression to them.


I don't recall him saying that he charged on the side. Although that's probably how he is doing it. However he could under his agreement with uber, charge the passenger a surcharge and ask customer service to add that surcharge to the fare. Of course that can't really happen as a practical matter with uber.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I don't recall him saying that he charged on the side. Although that's probably how he is doing it. However he could under his agreement with uber, charge the passenger a surcharge and ask customer service to add that surcharge to the fare. Of course that can't really happen as a practical matter with uber.


I quoted him and you can read his quote as well.

Seems like some drivers aren't fond of being obedient slaves...Some break the terms of their agreements and some just don't drive, much..


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> Ugh. I'm done with you. I can't help someone who denies something stated word for word in the contract.


There is nothing in the terms of service agreement between a driver and a pax.

Perhaps you can focus on the issue of charging surcharges to pax outside of Uber's system to bring some clarity. Somehow or another you got led off into an irrelevant tangent.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> Uber is reporting to the IRS zero revenue on its books from riders. The only revenue Uber makes is fees it charges the drivers. The riders are not customers of Uber. They are nothing more than Users. Much like users of Facebook who buy nothing from Facebook.


I don't really know how you derive that either. They take their cut from the source of payment. We are not that source.

There seems to be some overblown view of drivers in your equations for some strange reason when we are merely subcontractors to Uber's system.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> There is nothing in the terms of service agreement between a driver and a pax.


Right. Because there isn't a contract between drivers and pax. With the lack of a contract law in place, the exchange of goods and services between the two is governed by legislative law.



> Perhaps you can focus on the issue of charging surcharges to pax outside of Uber's system to bring some clarity. Somehow or another you got led off into an irrelevant tangent.


The price of anything the driver does for the rider is not Uber's to set. The most Uber could even do for a surcharge between the driver and rider is recommend a price for it. Uber's lawyers aren't going to mention every possible thing a driver could charge a rider for. The fact that they even mention that Uber can recommend a fare establishes nothing that already isn't established by legislative law governing the driver/rider exchange.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> I don't really know how you derive that either. They take their cut from the source of payment. We are not that source.


If you didn't claim all safe rider fees and commissions on schedule C in your taxes, then you did it wrong. Because Uber told the IRS that you charged the rider for the SRF and total fare amount.



> There seems to be some overblown view of drivers in your equations for some strange reason when we are merely subcontractors to Uber's system.


By sending you a 1099-k, Uber didn't pay you to do anything for Uber. You however paid Uber the SRFs and 20% commission in exchange for: 1) leads; 2) software use; 3) insurance; and 4) collection services.

This isn't my opinion. This is how Uber is reporting the exchange of goods and services between riders and drivers, and between drivers and Uber to the IRS. It's a fact.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> Right. Because there isn't a contract between drivers and pax. With the lack of a contract law in place, the exchange of goods and services between the two is governed by legislative law.


Attorney's and contracts can do just about anything they please if it's legal.



> *The price of anything the driver does for the rider is not Uber's to set*. The most Uber could even do for a surcharge between the driver and rider is recommend a price for it. Uber's lawyers aren't going to mention every possible thing a driver could charge a rider for. The fact that they even mention that Uber can recommend a fare establishes nothing that already isn't established by legislative law governing the driver/rider exchange.


*Absurd.* Already went through the structure. There is zippo between drivers and pax, other than their execution of a pre agreed to contract arrangement AND FEE set by Uber between Uber and pax and between Uber and driver.

Drivers are not allowed to freelance that agreement with pax, period.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> If you didn't claim all safe rider fees and commissions on schedule C in your taxes, then you did it wrong. Because Uber told the IRS that you charged the rider for the SRF and total fare amount.
> 
> By sending you a 1099-k, Uber didn't pay you to do anything for Uber. You however paid Uber the SRFs and 20% commission in exchange for: 1) leads; 2) software use; 3) insurance; and 4) collection services.
> 
> This isn't my opinion. This is how Uber is reporting the exchange of goods and services between riders and drivers, and between drivers and Uber to the IRS. It's a fact.


Tax law and reporting to the IRS is a world of it's own with a completely unique set of IRS governance rules, particularly in the case of ride share. It's all new territory.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Attorney's and contracts can do just about anything they please if it's legal.


If all parties involved agree, that's correct. The rider is not an agreeing party in the Uber/Driver contract. The only prices the Uber/driver contract set are the services Uber is selling to the driver.



> *Absurd.* Already went through the structure. There is zippo between drivers and pax, other than their execution of a pre agreed to contract arrangement AND FEE set by Uber between Uber and pax and between Uber and driver.
> 
> Drivers are not allowed to freelance that agreement with pax, period.


Drivers are allowed to negotiate the price of the ride. Keep on denying it, and I'll keep on repeating it. All Uber can do is recommend. Nothing more.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Tax law and reporting to the IRS is a world of it's own with a completely unique set of IRS governance rules, particularly in the case of ride share. It's all new territory.


So because you don't understand it, it's not applicable.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> If all parties involved agree, that's correct. The rider is not an agreeing party in the Uber/Driver contract. The only prices the Uber/driver contract set are the services *Uber is selling to the driver.*


*Uh, yeah. *Why do you think a driver can freelance money arrangements with a pax?



> *Drivers are allowed to negotiate the price of the ride. *Keep on denying it, and I'll keep on repeating it. All Uber can do is recommend. Nothing more.


No, they can't OR they are running their own taxi service. And if they did REnegotiate already agreed on terms with pax their driver arrangements with Uber would more than likely be terminated and they are driving in violation of contract in any case.

Pretty sure Uber would make the same determination in about a heart beat if you asked them on this subject.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> *Uh, yeah. *Why do you think a driver can freelance money arrangements with a pax?


If you mean negotiate a price for the ride, it's because Uber has no right to take that right away from the driver and rider. If you are insinuating something other than that, then you are making a strawman of my argument.



> No, they can't OR they are running their own taxi service.


DRIVERS ARE RUNNING THEIR OWN TAXI SERVICE!!!

Uber is NOT in the transportation business.



> And if they did REnegotiate already agreed on terms with pax


A recommendation from a 3rd party is NOT an agreement between the two parties involved in the exchange.



> their driver arrangements with Uber would more than likely be terminated


Uber will deactivate them, but not because they violated their right to negotiate the price.



> and they are driving in violation of contract in any case.


Negotiating the price is not a violation of the contract, but you are right that any driver that tries it is put under a microscope to find another reason to fire them.



> Pretty sure Uber would make the same determination in about a heart beat if you asked them on this subject.


Even discussing this with Uber would put the driver under the microscope to be fired ASAP!


----------



## scrurbscrud

uberhammer said:


> Even discussing this with Uber would put the driver under the microscope to be fired ASAP!


Uh, yeah. If you think you can shuffle the terms of the prearranged ride with the pax, sadly mistaken.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Uh, yeah. If you think you can shuffle the terms of the prearranged ride with the pax, sadly mistaken.


Contractually, I as a driver have every right to do that.

Uber however has no more regard for the contractual law in its own contracts than it does for all the legislative laws it breaks. It doesn't give a shit what anyone's rights are.


----------



## Bob Smith

so what i want to know is, can i purchase a credit card reader for my phone and somehow charge riders for my services while by-passing the uber fee?

and how would I know how much to charge, uber doesnt show how much the ride is till you end it and it goes through. Would I have to pull out a map or something lol


----------



## Desert Driver

UberHammer said:


> Ugh. I'm done with you. I can't help someone who denies something stated word for word in the contract.


Kind of like arguing with @scrurbscrud, huh? That bloke is...thick.


----------



## Desert Driver

Bob Smith said:


> so what i want to know is, can i purchase a credit card reader for my phone and somehow charge riders for my services while by-passing the uber fee?
> 
> and how would I know how much to charge, uber doesnt show how much the ride is till you end it and it goes through. Would I have to pull out a map or something lol


Problem there is that you'd be a ********* and there would be zero insurance coverage.


----------



## UberHammer

Desert Driver said:


> Problem there is that you'd be a ********* and there would be zero insurance coverage.


How much is the Uber insurance really worth?


----------



## Desert Driver

UberHammer said:


> How much is the Uber insurance really worth?


True that. But a gypsy has even less than that shitty James River policy.


----------



## Bob Smith

i dated a girl whose step dad was a gypsy once, needless to say, it didnt work out.


----------



## Bob Smith

If insurance wasnt an issue, how many cancels would you get you think if you told passengers that they have to pay through your card swipe and not through the app? When would you tell them, in the beginning, middle or end of the trip? What if you just did this and collected rider cancel fees, im pretty sure you'd make more $$$


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> I don't really know how you derive that either. They take their cut from the source of payment. We are not that source.


You have either not read - or not understood - the Partner/Driver Agreement which very clearly establishes that the source of ALL monies come from what [we] the driver/partner charges the passenger - including the SRF. Uber does not charge riders any fees. Driver/Partners are SPECIFICALLY the source of all funds they handle as a third party.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Bob Smith said:


> so what i want to know is, can i purchase a credit card reader for my phone and somehow charge riders for my services while by-passing the uber fee?


Yes, you can get a credit card reader for your own use.
No, you cannot charge riders obtained through the Uber system for transportation related services with your card reader, bypassing the Uber system. In the agreement you have with Uber, you agree that in exchange for using the Uber app and service, that you will not bypass the Uber system in charging the customer for transportation services. You can, however, sell them unrelated stuff.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> *...*a driver can freelance money arrangements with a pax? No, they can't


You are sooo wrong. And that's not an opinion, it's a fact stated clearly in your Uber partner/driver agreement. (Again, the practical matter of actually exercising the right to negotiate is a different issue)


----------



## UberTaxPro

UberHammer said:


> Well, hopefully by now you can recognize the ping and avoid it.
> 
> If not, as soon as you recognize you're going to the pickup location again, cancel as "do not charge rider" and go offline to avoid the new request.
> 
> If Uber ever asks you about it, tell them it's an underage rider and refer Uber to their own legal terms.
> 
> It's a waste of time to report what's already happened. Uber doesn't give a shit. Not only do they ignore laws, they ignore their own terms and policies.
> 
> Just cover your ass if they question why you cancel the request. Cover your ass is really all drivers can do in UberWorld.


Also, you could take a pic of the kid who's parents are to lazy to take him to hockey practice just in case you need it. I've had this happen a few times and its always at wealthy people's houses. Who in their right mind would pawn their kid off on a complete stranger? The father should probably be reported to your states child welfare agency. That might fix his lazy ass and cover yours! @LEAFdriver


----------



## Desert Driver

Here's an idea that I may implement. I already hit my paxs for a surcharge for uncaged pets other than assistance pooches. So why not charge an unaccompanied minor fee? Airlines do it. There's no reason why we can't do it. We're IC's, after all. I'm going to mull this over and I may create a new policy for Desert Driver.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You are sooo wrong. And that's not an opinion, it's a fact stated clearly in your Uber partner/driver agreement. (Again, the practical matter of actually exercising the right to negotiate is a different issue)


Try it some time. Don't forget to inform your 'partner' of what you did.

You know, see what happens.

Nothing in Uber's agreement allows drivers to freelance fares with pax.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You have either not read - or not understood - the Partner/Driver Agreement which very clearly establishes that the source of ALL monies come from what [we] the driver/partner charges the passenger - including the SRF. Uber does not charge riders any fees. *Driver/Partners are* SPECIFICALLY *the source of all funds* they handle as a third party.


Pay sources are irrelevant to the quotients in any case.

TNC's, generally speaking are 'brokers' between the pax and driver. They take a cut from the action. *The pay comes from pax, obviously.*

Not much different than a home seller. The seller has a home. The money comes from the buyer. Broker takes a cut for negotiating the price and terms between the parties. In TNC's the driver has the house that the pax are paying a preset agreed by all parties price for said house/transport.

Nothing in this arrangement allows drivers to change or alter the terms.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> TNC's, generally speaking are 'brokers' between the pax and driver.


You can believe what you want - but you're just making shit up that has no legal basis.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You can believe what you want - but you're just making shit up that has no legal basis.


Like I said. Ask Uber if you can cut your own monetary arrangements with pax. Should settle it in a hurry.

Chickenshit notwithstanding.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Try it some time. Don't forget to inform your 'partner' of what you did.
> You know, see what happens.Nothing in Uber's agreement allows drivers to freelance fares with pax.


Back peddle much? You can read - and you know I said (above) that a partner can't 'freelance' [related services] with a rider obtained through the Uber system. That's not what we were discussing, and you know it. You have said repeatedly that Uber establishes fares while everyone else who reads English here has told you that Uber, legally, only establishes recommended fares and that drivers and passengers are free to negotiate fares directly between them, without any input or oversight from Uber..


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Back peddle much? You can read - and you know I said (above) that a partner can't 'freelance' [related services] with a rider obtained through the Uber system. That's not what we were discussing, and you know it.


I know nothing of the sort. This topic came up specifically regarding DD charging a surcharge outside the Uber app.



> You have said repeatedly that Uber establishes fares while everyone else who reads English here has told you that Uber, legally, only establishes recommended fares and that drivers and passengers are free to negotiate fares directly between them, without any input or oversight from Uber..


They can call them whatever they want. Try to clear charging more with Uber and see how far it gets you.

At least Uberhammer has sense enough to know they'll say hell no. I'm only surprised you think otherwise.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> I know nothing of the sort. This topic came up specifically regarding DD charging a surcharge outside the Uber app.
> 
> They can call them whatever they want. Try to clear charging more with Uber and see how far it gets you.
> 
> At least Uberhammer has sense enough to know they'll say hell no. I'm only surprised you think otherwise.


I've stated, repeatedly, that Uber makes no option available to implement THEIR policy. That doesn't change the FACT that it IS their policy.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I've stated, repeatedly, that Uber makes no option available to implement THEIR policy. That doesn't change the FACT that it IS their policy.


If you even remotely think you can cut your own financial deal with pax and Uber that would be sadly mistaken.

Verify in writing if you see how you can do otherwise. Or better yet, do it, inform Uber and, you know, see what happens.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

I have several times sent a request to my local CSRs with a trip number requesting that they make an adjustment to the fare and they have accommodated my request, without issue. Those were requests to reduce a fare - or not charge the rider. I have not yet had occasion to request that a fare be increased (because Uber doesn't provide any means for me to show that a fare increase was agreed to by the pax).


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I have several times sent a request to my local CSRs with a trip number requesting that they make an adjustment to the fare and they have accommodated my request, without issue. Those were requests to reduce a fare - or not charge the rider. I have not yet had occasion to request that a fare be increased (because Uber doesn't provide any means for me to show that a fare increase was agreed to by the pax).


Really has nothing to do with *charging the pax a driver imposed surcharge on the side, which was the crux of the observation.*


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Really has nothing to do with *charging the pax a driver imposed surcharge on the side, which was the crux of the observation.*


you're back peddling after stating repeatedly that pax/driver cannot negotiate fares... the point on which you are wrong.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> you're back peddling after stating repeatedly that pax/driver cannot negotiate fares... the point on which you are wrong.


READ the prior conversation please. I am specifically talking about drivers charging a driver imposed surcharge apart from the Uber app ala Desert Drivers 'uncaged dog' charge that he hit's pax with on the SIDE.

It was Uberhammer who claimed drivers can charge pax what they want, *which is a separate bogus claim that you are also entertaining.*


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Pay sources are irrelevant to the quotients in any case.
> 
> TNC's, generally speaking are 'brokers' between the pax and driver. They take a cut from the action. *The pay comes from pax, obviously.*
> 
> Not much different than a home seller. The seller has a home. The money comes from the buyer. Broker takes a cut for negotiating the price and terms between the parties. In TNC's the driver has the house that the pax are paying a preset agreed by all parties price for said house/transport.
> 
> Nothing in this arrangement allows drivers to change or alter the terms.


If there is only one real estate agent in the deal, one of the parties is either a fool, or is in the business of selling real estate.

The commission on every real estate deal is split by both agents in the deal. One agent represents each party in the transaction.

If both parties agree to let a third party determine the price, that's called arbitration, and the person doing it is an arbitrator. This is EXACTLY what Uber is doing, but neither riders nor drivers have agreed to this.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Like I said. Ask Uber if you can cut your own monetary arrangements with pax. Should settle it in a hurry.
> 
> Chickenshit notwithstanding.


What Uber's contract says, and what Uber does, are not the same. This is obvious. I don't know why you keep going back to the "watch what Uber does" argument. The fact that what they do is not consistent with the contract is the entire point.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> What Uber's contract says, and what Uber does, are not the same. This is obvious. I don't know why you keep going back to the "watch what Uber does" argument. The fact that what they do is not consistent with the contract is the entire point.


Your claim: The deal is between the driver and the pax, therefore we can charge what we want.

Me: Try it and see what happens.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> If there is only one real estate agent in the deal, one of the parties is either a fool, or is in the business of selling real estate.
> 
> The commission on every real estate deal is split by both agents in the deal. One agent represents each party in the transaction.
> 
> If both parties agree to let a third party determine the price, that's called arbitration, and the person doing it is an arbitrator. This is EXACTLY what Uber is doing, but neither riders nor drivers have agreed to this.


Uber is acting more in the role of a more difficult legal position of dual agent/broker representing both parties. Arbitration only comes into play in case of disputes between the parties and is done by a third party with no horse in the race.

They could even come close to the role of an arbitraguer:
DEFINITION of '_Arbitrageur_' A type of investor who attempts to profit from price inefficiencies in the market by making simultaneous trades that offset each other and capturing risk-free profits.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Your claim: The deal is between the driver and the pax, therefore we can charge what we want.
> 
> Me: Try it and see what happens.


What happens is Uber fails to execute the contract. That's the entire point.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> What happens is Uber fails to execute the contract. That's the entire point.


Pretty sure some enterprising attorney's would have slit their money bag and ran off with it already at this point.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Uber is acting more in the role of a more difficult legal position of dual agent/broker representing both parties. Arbitration only comes into play in case of disputes between the parties and is done by a third party with no horse in the race.
> 
> They could even come close to the role of an arbitraguer:
> DEFINITION of '_Arbitrageur_' A type of investor who attempts to profit from price inefficiencies in the market by making simultaneous trades that offset each other and capturing risk-free profits.


I completely agree. The problem is neither the rider nor the driver gave Uber the authority to do that on their behalf.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Pretty sure some enterprising attorney's would have slit their money bag and ran off with it already at this point.


http://uberlawsuit.com/


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> I completely agree. The problem is neither the rider nor the driver gave Uber the authority to do that on their behalf.


Da proof is in da doin. Try it if you think you have a legal toehold and see what happens.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> http://uberlawsuit.com/


Piss in the wind for drivers. Windfall for attorneys. Why, just like UBER!


----------



## Desert Driver

UberHammer said:


> What Uber's contract says, and what Uber does, are not the same. This is obvious. I don't know why you keep going back to the "watch what Uber does" argument. The fact that what they do is not consistent with the contract is the entire point.


Sometimes you have to draw a picture with big, simple graphics in order for people to grasp even the simplest of constructs. @scrurbscrud comes to mind, we will agree.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Sometimes you have to draw a picture with big, simple graphics in order for people to grasp even the simplest of constructs. @scrurbscrud comes to mind, we will agree.


Pretty sure if Uber found out you were surcharging pax on the side they'd punt your ass.

Equally sure you won't let them know.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Pretty sure if Uber found out you were surcharging pax on the side they'd punt your ass.
> 
> Equally sure you won't let them know.


I'm pretty sure they'd punt his ass too. Again, that's the entire point. They're punting him for exercising his contractual rights.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> I'm pretty sure they'd punt his ass too. Again, that's the entire point. They're punting him for *exercising his contractual rights.*


*Your opinion. *

Nothing I see in any of our agreement that we can set up our own fare deals with the pax on the side.


----------



## Desert Driver

UberHammer said:


> http://uberlawsuit.com/


That lawsuit is going to be one fun roller coaster to watch. The depositions are going to shine a harsh light on the slipperiness and unscrupulousness with which Uber operates. Pull up a lawn chair, grab some popcorn, and get big glass of Country Time.


----------



## DrJeecheroo

As long as I'm using my own car, and enduring all the expenses associated with it, uber has no say if I get some hails. And I they deactivated me for it, I could care less. UBER breaks their own rules anyways.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> *Your opinion. *
> 
> Nothing I see in any of our agreement that we can set up our own fare deals with the pax on the side.


Negotiating the price of the fare is his right. The only reason he is doing it on the side is because Uber has failed to execute the contract. There's no where in the software for him to exercise his right.


----------



## DrJeecheroo

Desert Driver said:


> That lawsuit is going to be one fun roller coaster to watch. The depositions are going to shine a harsh light on the slipperiness and unscrupulousness with which Uber operates. Pull up a lawn chair, grab some popcorn, and get big glass of Country Time.


With billions of $$$ at their disposal UBER will hire a battery of lawyers, that'll make OJ"s look like amateurs.


----------



## scrurbscrud

DrJeecheroo said:


> As long as I'm using my own car, and enduring all the expenses associated with it, *uber has no say if I get some hails*. And I they deactivated me for it, I could care less. UBER breaks their own rules anyways.


What stage is that in the grief cycle again? Oh, yeah, denial.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> Negotiating the price of the fare is his right. The only reason he is doing it on the side is because Uber has failed to execute the contract. There's no where in the software for him to exercise his right.


NOR is there in the agreement. I asked you to cite where that exists.

You cited what Uber and the driver agreed to as the default fare, which is the agreed rule of the contract.


----------



## Desert Driver

DrJeecheroo said:


> With billions of $$$ at their disposal UBER will hire a battery of lawyers, that'll make OJ"s look like amateurs.


I thought OJ's were amateurs.

I remember when Johnny Cochran dirt napped. I smiled. But I will always be thankful for him giving rise to the Jackie Chiles character on Seinfeld.


----------



## DrJeecheroo

Desert Driver said:


> I thought OJ's were amateurs.


Well there you have it.


----------



## Desert Driver

DrJeecheroo said:


> Well there you have it.


One of my favorite lines from Fletch.


----------



## DrJeecheroo

scrurbscrud said:


> What stage is that in the grief cycle again? Oh, yeah, denial.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5832


Denial= Don't even (k)now I am lying.


----------



## DrJeecheroo

scrurbscrud said:


> What stage is that in the grief cycle again? Oh, yeah, denial.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5832


Keep throwing your sarcasm this way boy,,,,, we know you like to argue just for the sake of arguing.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> NOR is there in the agreement. I asked you to cite where that exists.
> 
> You cited what Uber and the driver agreed to as the default fare, which is the agreed rule of the contract.


It's not in the Uber/driver agreement because it can't define the driver/rider relationship UNLESS the driver is an Uber employee (or franchisee). All the Uber/driver agreement can do is recommend a rate for the driver/rider exchange of services, which is all it does.

You can keep asking to see it in the agreement, but it's ridiculous to expect to see something that defines an exchange of services between A and B in an agreement between B and C. B would have to be an employee of C, for C to define the A/B exchange. Uber's lawyers know this. Which is why they don't even try to take ownership of setting the fare.


----------



## scrurbscrud

DrJeecheroo said:


> Keep throwing your sarcasm this way boy,,,,, we know you like to argue just for the sake of arguing.


Who's we? Don't you know a logical fallacy when we is just you? It's called argumentum ad populous or ad numerum. A claim of being right based on a 'we' that doesn't exist or that the 'we' by virtue of numbers means they are correct. A very large number of people can be very wrong.

I'd refer you to the thread where a driver was busted for street hailing.

If your claim is that you are going to resort to illegal activity because of Uber I'd say they pushed you past a logical reaction point.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> *It's not in the Uber/driver agreement*.


I thought that was what you were prior claiming? That the contract allows it but the software doesn't. I can't see it in the contract either. If it was there, I'd have to agree.

The FARE SCHEDULE is the agreed default fare.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> I thought that was what you were prior claiming?


A lot of your posts have me dumbfounded as to why you posted. Perhaps you should read what people are typing instead of trying to be Mr. Speed Post Quoter.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> A lot of your posts have me dumbfounded as to why you posted. Perhaps you should read what people are typing instead of trying to be Mr. Speed Post Quoter.


Or you are jumping around the issue that Uber drivers have a pretty much rock solid agreement to drive for a pre agreed rate based on some obscure non-existing in writing relationship with the pax allowing otherwise.


----------



## DrJeecheroo

It's fun watching these back and forths, get out the popcorn.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> Or you are jumping around the issue that Uber drivers have a pretty much rock solid agreement to drive for a pre agreed rate based on some obscure non-existing in writing relationship with the pax allowing otherwise.


It's amazing how my repeating the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over again is perceived as "jumping around" by you.


----------



## DrJeecheroo

"Mr. Speed Post Quoter." That's pretty accurate. If you said 2 +2 =4, and he'd find a way to negate that.


----------



## scrurbscrud

This started out as a simple observation from what desertdriver is doing. Charging a surcharge on the side.

I say he's screwed if he gets caught by Uber because nothing in the agreement with Uber allows that to happen.

It's not that difficult to understand. It is difficult to claim otherwise apart from written proof OR doing it with written 'on the side' approval from Uber as proof.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> It's amazing how my repeating the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over again is perceived as "jumping around" by you.


You claimed we can charge Uber pax on the side.

I say you're full of it.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> You claimed we can charge Uber pax on the side.
> 
> I say you're full of it.


No I did not. I said the contract between Uber and drivers DOES say it's OK to a response you made to DD about charging the rider more.

The contract does NOT allow it to occur on the side however, nor have I even claimed, or even insinuated it did. You got hung up on that red herring all on your own.

Whatever the pax and driver negotiate as the fare has to be done IN the Uber software... but Uber is failing to execute the contract by enabling that capability in the software. If Uber's software was a proper execution of the Uber/driver contract, Desert Driver could simply add $10 to the fare for the uncaged dog.

Here is how this all started for your recollection:



UberHammer said:


> scrurbscrud said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Desert Driver said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm thinking I may want to change my personal policy. I don't transport kids who require car seats. I just don't want the hassle. However, I do transport uncaged dogs for a $10 surcharge. Maybe I should do that with car seats - $10 surcharge to throw my canvas drop cloth over seat and install child car seat. What do you all think?
> 
> 
> 
> As usual, the opposite of what you do...
> 
> I do drive kids with carseats IF their parents are with them. And where do you get the surcharge thingy from? New business deal? Hell, why not smack all Uber's pax with some baloney surcharge solely instigated by the driver? Like a 'gas' surcharge allowed to be arbitrarily tacked on at your discretion?
> 
> Y*ou could always just lie and say Uber sez it's OK.* Probably sucker at least 30% of them. Must be paid in cash only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The contract between Uber and drivers DOES say it's OK.
Click to expand...


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> No I did not. *I said the contract between Uber and drivers DOES say it's OK.*





UberHammer said:


> *It's not in the Uber/driver agreement*.


*Pick one.*


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> *Pick one.*


It's both.


----------



## DrJeecheroo

But I don't recall seeing in the agreement where uber says ...it is forbidden to take pax on the side...


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> It's both.


And you wonder? heh heh

I addressed the fact that the agreement has a fixed predetermined fare outcome agreed to by driver and Uber called the default rate schedule fare. Which we also affirm every time they cut our throats.


----------



## scrurbscrud

DrJeecheroo said:


> But I don't recall seeing in the agreement where uber says ...it is forbidden to take pax on the side...


What you do apart from Uber is your own business.


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> And you wonder? heh heh
> 
> I addressed the fact that the agreement has a fixed predetermined fare outcome agreed to by driver and Uber called the default rate schedule fare. Which we also affirm every time they cut our throats.


It's not FIXED! It's recommended. Nothing more.

The right for the pax and rider to negotiate a price for the exchange of the drivers transportation is defined in legislative law, unless the pax and driver agree to a contract that gives their rights to another party to do so, say for example Uber. So the right of the pax and driver to negotiate is not defined in the Uber/driver contract, because it has no business defining that. By acknowledging it can do nothing more than recommend a fare it is saying it's okay for the rider and driver to negotiate a fare, despite it NOT BEING THE SOURCE OF THAT RIGHT!!!!


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> It's not FIXED! It's recommended. Nothing more.


You can scroll up to see the prior contract terms, that the fare is the default fare.

"and *the primary purpose of the pre-arranged Fare is to act as the default amount*"

Drivers *abbrogate pax negotiations* to the above by mutual agreement. ^^^

Old saying in contract law. The fine print giveth and the fine print taketh away. Used it many times myself. "We know you have this remedy, but in lieu of that you agree to this instead."


----------



## UberHammer

scrurbscrud said:


> You can scroll up to see the prior contract terms, that the fare is the default fare.
> 
> "and *the primary purpose of the pre-arranged Fare is to act as the default amount*"
> 
> Drivers *abbrogate pax negotiations* to the above by mutual agreement. ^^^
> 
> Old saying in contract law. The fine print giveth and the fine print taketh away. Used it many times myself. "We know you have this remedy, but in lieu of that you agree to this instead."


You very conveniently cutoff the rest of that sentence. Here is the entire sentence you partially quoted, with what you continue to ignore in bold and underlined:

"In addition, the parties acknowledge and agree that as between you and Company, the Fare is a recommended amount, and the primary purpose of the pre-arranged Fare is to act as the default amount *in the event you do not negotiate a different amount*."

And with that I'm done dealing with your ignorance. So on ignore you go. Bye!


----------



## Desert Driver

UberHammer said:


> It's not in the Uber/driver agreement because it can't define the driver/rider relationship UNLESS the driver is an Uber employee (or franchisee). All the Uber/driver agreement can do is recommend a rate for the driver/rider exchange of services, which is all it does.
> 
> You can keep asking to see it in the agreement, but it's ridiculous to expect to see something that defines an exchange of services between A and B in an agreement between B and C. B would have to be an employee of C, for C to define the A/B exchange. Uber's lawyers know this. Which is why they don't even try to take ownership of setting the fare.


Trying to have a rational discussion with @scrurbscrud is akin to screaming into a bucket, you will agree.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> You very conveniently cutoff the rest of that sentence. Here is the entire sentence you partially quoted, with what you continue to ignore in bold and underlined:
> 
> "In addition, the parties acknowledge and agree that as between you and Company, the Fare is a recommended amount, and the primary purpose of the pre-arranged Fare is to act as the default amount *in the event you do not negotiate a different amount*."
> 
> And with that I'm done dealing with your ignorance. So on ignore you go. Bye!


I've pointed out a couple of basic observations with the verbiage.

One, *it's not between driver and a pax *NOR does it allow driver and pax negotiations. *It's between Uber and drivers*. For lack of an alternative negotiated fare *with UBER, the default rate is the rate. *

Negotiations with UBER are abbrogated by default to the default fare for lack of an alternative negotiated fare.

*It has ZERO to do with drivers negotiating with pax.*

Pout from there.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Trying to have a rational discussion with @scrurbscrud is akin to screaming into a bucket, you will agree.


I've asked him to show in writing where he can negotiate with pax. *He can't, so he's pissed.*


----------



## UberHammer

Desert Driver said:


> Trying to have a rational discussion with @scrurbscrud is akin to screaming into a bucket, you will agree.


Yep. Every time he's shown the truth in black and white, he responds by leaping to another angle to try and argue it another way... and then accuses me of "jumping around".

I also recall in another post he said he doesn't have access to the contract. All drivers have access to it. Is he not a driver? Is he a shill?


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> Yep. Every time he's shown the truth in black and white, he responds by leaping to another angle to try and argue it another way... and then accuses me of "jumping around".
> 
> I also recall in another post he said he doesn't have access to the contract. All drivers have access to it. Is he not a driver? Is he a shill?


I said nothing from the start other than to show me IN WRITING where you get to negotiate fares with pax.

So put up or move on.


----------



## Desert Driver

UberHammer said:


> Yep. Every time he's shown the truth in black and white, he responds by leaping to another angle to try and argue it another way... and then accuses me of "jumping around".
> 
> I also recall in another post he said he doesn't have access to the contract. All drivers have access to it. Is he not a driver? Is he a shill?


He is not a shill. He just has poor reading skills and lacks critical thinking ability. Once I figured that out about @scrurbscrud l backed way off and I now go easy on the li'l feller.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> He is not a shill. *He just has poor reading skills and lacks critical thinking ability.*


Or I'm not interested in phony spin on these subjects and prefer facts. Nice try though.

If you have any facts to contribute other than your acknowledged violations of your agreement with Uber, chime in all you please.

Just because you don't like to hear you are violating your written agreement with Uber *doesn't give place to pointless personal insult pile ons with others who pander to such nonsense.*


----------



## UberHammer

Desert Driver said:


> He is not a shill. He just has poor reading skills and lacks critical thinking ability. Once I figured that out about @scrurbscrud l backed way off and I now go easy on the li'l feller.


Ah yes. Warm milk.... then someday, solid food.


----------



## duggles

http://consumerist.com/2015/03/11/p...r-kids-to-school-even-though-its-not-allowed/


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Not much different than a home seller. The seller has a home. The money comes from the buyer. Broker takes a cut for negotiating the price and terms between the parties.


You also know nothing about real estate.
Real Estate brokers are hired by one or both parties to facilitate the purchase and/or sale of real estate. While an agent for the broker may assist the party who is under contract with them in negotiating with the other party, they, *like Uber*, can only make recommendations (on terms and pricing). The decisions are made by the primary parties to the transaction and the broker, *like Uber*, is paid a commission based on the sale price agreed to by the primary parties.

Even your own examples don't support your arguments.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Your claim: The deal is between the driver and the pax, therefore we can charge what we want.
> 
> Me: Try it and see what happens.


As I've said: I have, and Uber hasn't batted an eye.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You also know nothing about real estate.
> Real Estate brokers are hired by one or both parties to facilitate the purchase and/or sale of real estate. While an agent for the broker may assist the party who is under contract with them in negotiating with the other party, they, *like Uber*, can only make recommendations (on terms and pricing). The decisions are made by the primary parties to the transaction and the broker, *like Uber*, is paid a commission based on the sale price agreed to by the primary parties.
> 
> Even your own examples don't support your arguments.


I've been a real estate broker for more than 3 decades. I know how the business operates.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> As I've said: I have, and Uber hasn't batted an eye.


Unlikely as well. And if you did it was outside of Uber's platform in any case of measure, which is NOT allowed with an Uber generated pax.


----------



## UberTaxPro

Desert Driver said:


> My car. My rules. If the kids, parents, or admin don't like it...tough. They called me, not the other way around. I don't give two shots if they ride with me or not.
> 
> You have a lot to learn about surveillance laws. Let me give you a brief primer.
> 
> In my state, video-only surveillance can be conducted anywhere there is no expectation of privacy. Ergo, no cams in bathrooms, locker rooms, hotel rooms, etc. There is no expectation of privacy in a livery vehicle for public hire.
> In my state, audio surveillance is legal as long as one of the recorded parties is aware of the recording. In my case, the informed party is me. Some states require that ALL parties be informed of audio recording, but those laws are changing as they hamper LE activities.
> Hope this helps. Let me know if you'd like further details about surveillance statutes.


Can I fly a drone with a camera around my neighbors house and windows?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Unlikely as well. And if you did it was outside of Uber's platform in any case of measure, which is NOT allowed with an Uber generated pax.


Not only do you just make shit up, but now you're going to tell me what I did?
You've demonstrated well exactly what kind of a person you are.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Not only do you just make shit up, but now you're going to tell me what I did?
> You've demonstrated well exactly what kind of a person you are.


I'm saying if you are charging Uber pax on the side and they knew about it, you'd be cut loose in a heartbeat.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> I've been a real estate broker for more than 3 decades. I know how the business operates.


SO which is correct - your absurd example of what a real estate broker does or mine?
We both know the answer to that.
And we both know that escrow companies, not brokers, handle the distribution of funds in home sales that are brokered by agents.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> I'm saying if you are charging Uber pax on the side and they knew about it, you'd be cut loose in a heartbeat.


That's what you're saying NOW.
You have also said that under the Uber driver agreement the driver and passenger cannot negotiate the fare for a trip - which is blatantly false.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> SO which is correct - your absurd example of what a real estate broker does or mine?We both know the answer to that.


Didn't bother to read your re-description of what you thought I said for obvious reasons. I'll stand by my example. Uber functions similarly to a dual broker acting with both pax and driver. Sorry if the simplicity of it got by you.


> And we both know that *escrow companies, *not brokers, handle the distribution of funds in home sales that are brokered by agents.


Uber acts as *a transportation broker*.

If you need a law citing some states apply *that specific term.*


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> That's what you're saying NOW.
> You have also said that under the Uber driver agreement *the driver and passenger cannot negotiate the fare for a trip - which is blatantly false*.


*You are sadly mistaken.*

Fork up the claim in writing.


----------



## Desert Driver

UberTaxPro said:


> Can I fly a drone with a camera around my neighbors house and windows?


No. Why do you ask?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Didn't bother to read your re-description of what you thought I said for obvious reasons. I'll stand by my example. Uber functions similarly to a dual broker acting with both pax and driver. Sorry if the simplicity of it got by you. Uber acts as *a transportation broker*.


hey, if you want to see the sky as black while everyone else sees is as blue, that's your problem, doesn't effect me in the least.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> hey, if you want to see the sky as black while everyone else sees is as blue, that's your problem, doesn't effect me in the least.


When you show up in writing where you can set fares with pax, let me know.

Otherwise that nonsense claim has run it's course.


----------



## uberThere

Desert Driver said:


> Exactly. The JR policy is pretty much useless to the drivers. And driving TNC without a commercial policy is akin to having sex with a drug addicted hooker without a raincoat. Everything's OK...until it's not.


Talk about disturbing metal pictures. *shutter*


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> *You are sadly mistaken.*Fork up the claim in writing... When you show up in writing where you can set fares with pax, let me know.


*Why, will that stop you from spewing your misinformation?*

Michael 
Jan 06 15:25 
re: Trip id xxxxxx-xxxxxx-xxxxxx 

Please add the mileage detailed below to the trip for this fare. 
Passenger is in agreement with this adjustment...

TRIP DETAILS: 
6 JAN Trip xxxxxx-xxxxxx-xxxxxx-xxxxx 
[trip details & waypoints deleted]
Duration: 33:01 
Distance 24.04 mi 

Thank you, 
Michael


UBER RESPONSE
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- 
Steven (Uber) 
Jan 06 16:37 

Hi Michael,
Thanks for writing in, I've adjusted the fare to $52.01 which is the estimated cost from the pick-up location.
Let me know if you have any other questions or check out our FAQ!

Best,
Steven

Uber | Community Support
If you travel for work and hate expense reports, you'll love Uber for Business.​

-------------------
NOTE: This is the only request I ever made to adjust a fare up in price. All other requests I've made have been to issue a credit of some amount (and all have been executed by Uber CSRs without question).


----------



## Desert Driver

uberThere said:


> Talk about disturbing metal pictures. *shutter*


Metal?


----------



## Lidman

Picture made out of 'metal". Makes sense.


----------



## scrurbscrud

What in the world does that have to do with the discussion of you setting your own fare with the pax?

Move on. Or have the last irrelevant word if you please.



Michael - Cleveland said:


> *Why, will that stop you from spewing your misinformation?*
> 
> Michael
> Jan 06 15:25
> re: Trip id xxxxxx-xxxxxx-xxxxxx
> 
> Please add the mileage detailed below to the trip for this fare.
> Passenger is in agreement with this adjustment...
> 
> TRIP DETAILS:
> 6 JAN Trip xxxxxx-xxxxxx-xxxxxx-xxxxx
> [trip details & waypoints deleted]
> Duration: 33:01
> Distance 24.04 mi
> 
> Thank you,
> Michael
> 
> UBER RESPONSE
> --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
> Steven (Uber)
> Jan 06 16:37
> 
> Hi Michael,
> Thanks for writing in, I've adjusted the fare to $52.01 which is the estimated cost from the pick-up location.
> Let me know if you have any other questions or check out our FAQ!
> 
> Best,
> Steven
> 
> Uber | Community Support
> If you travel for work and hate expense reports, you'll love Uber for Business.​
> 
> -------------------
> NOTE: This is the only request I ever made to adjust a fare up in price. All other requests I've made have been to issue a credit of some amount (and all have been executed by Uber CSRs without question).


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> What in the world does that have to do with the discussion of you setting your own fare with the pax?
> Move on. Or have the last irrelevant word if you please.


The passenger and I negotiated a total fare (it was a complicated trip) -
I requested Uber implement the negotiated fare -
Uber complied.

To quote you: _Sorry if the simplicity of this escapes you._


----------



## uberThere

Desert Driver said:


> Metal?


Mental..damn spell check.


----------



## UberHammer

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Not only do you just make shit up, but now you're going to tell me what I did?
> You've demonstrated well exactly what kind of a person you are.


I can't see you who you are responding too, so I'm assuming it's that scrub guy. Put him on ignore. This whole thread cleaned up like I put it through a car wash. It's amazing!


----------



## Desert Driver

UberHammer said:


> I can't see you who you are responding too, so I'm assuming it's that scrub guy. Put him on ignore. This whole thread cleaned up like I put it through a car wash. It's amazing!


Out of pity, I still read the posts by @scrurbscrud. I don't reply to him much anymore because I got to feeling bad for the constant schooling I was giving him and he just continued to make himself look like a tool by debating someone he had no business engaging with. I was feeling embarrassed for the poor bloke.


----------



## UberHammer

Desert Driver said:


> Out of pity, I still read the posts by @scrurbscrud. I don't reply to him much anymore because I got to feeling bad for the constant schooling I was giving him and he just continued to make himself look like a tool by debating someone he had no business engaging with. I was feeling embarrassed for the poor bloke.


I understand. I however reserve pity to those who deserve it. Such as those who are not responsible for the situation they find themselves suffering from. Scrub is making his own bed, so I have no pity on him that he has to lie in it.


----------



## Desert Driver

UberHammer said:


> I understand. I however reserve pity to those who deserve it. Such as those who are not responsible for the situation they find themselves suffering from. Scrub is making his own bed, so I have no pity on him that he has to lie in it.


Judging by his posts, the man ( @scrurbscrud ) is a complete moron. Is it his fault he's a moron, or it that something he has no control over? That was s philosophical question, of course, but one worthy of debate.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Gentlemen, the question is one of TNC drivers performing their business illegally. You should know by common sense that is bad for any driver.

This would include driving children when strictly forbidden to do so and agreed to by a driver in writing and charging pax a 'surcharge' from a TNC platform generated pax, which is blatantly ILLEGAL.

You might think it's funny or cute or good biz to engage in such antics. I don't.

Simple as that.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The passenger and I negotiated a total fare (it was a complicated trip) -
> I requested Uber implement the negotiated fare -
> Uber complied.
> 
> To quote you: _Sorry if the simplicity of this escapes you._


Please describe how a fare adjustment in which you did NOT alter the fare by changing the Uber stated charges, applies to the matter of a driver imposed surcharge to a pax after a fare order.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> Judging by his posts, the man ( @scrurbscrud ) is a complete moron. Is it his fault *he's a moron*, or it that something he has no control over? That was s philosophical question, of course, but one worthy of debate.


Why don't you try focusing on the facts and leave the slurs behind? I'm not that difficult to communicate with.
*
You charge pax a surcharge.* TNC's and their drivers are prohibited by law to do such things. The essence of TNC regulations is that the ride and the fare MUST be PREARRANGED.

So you might understand that you make yourself a potential victim of the law by such illegal freelancing? Is this too complicated for you to grasp?


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> I understand. I however reserve pity to those who deserve it. Such as those who are not responsible for the situation they find themselves suffering from. Scrub is making his own bed, so I have no pity on him that he has to lie in it.


Look Uberhammer. Nothing in driver/Uber agreements allow us to set fares with pax. How you came up with that notion is not justifiable in any way shape or form, NOR are you able to prove or justify such a stance.

Pouting of course is always an option.


----------



## UberHammer

Desert Driver said:


> Judging by his posts, the man ( @scrurbscrud ) is a complete moron. Is it his fault he's a moron, or it that something he has no control over? That was s philosophical question, of course, but one worthy of debate.


Good point. I may reconsider my criteria of extending pity. He may in fact be worthy of pity, as you eloquently point out.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Please describe how a fare adjustment in which you did NOT alter the fare by changing the Uber stated charges, applies to the matter of a driver imposed surcharge to a pax after a fare order.


The pax and I negotiated a fare that was mutually acceptable - I reported it to Uber - Uber implemented it without any issue.
Have more questions, ask someone else. As others - I'm done explaining the same thing over and over to you. Your intransigence is not cause for me to continue repeating myself.

Done.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The pax and I negotiated a fare that was mutually acceptable - I reported it to Uber - Uber implemented it without any issue.
> Have more questions, ask someone else. As others - I'm done explaining the same thing over and over to you. Your intransigence is not cause for me to continue repeating myself.
> 
> Done.


And you adjusted the minute fare? Per mile fare? Drop fee? OR none of these?

A MILEAGE cost addition, if wrong in distance, is far from a right for drivers to alter set fees with pax.

Elaborate.


----------



## Lidman

scrurbscrud said:


> And you adjusted the minute fare? Per mile fare? Drop fee? OR none of these?
> 
> A MILEAGE cost addition, if wrong in distance, is far from a right for drivers to alter set fees with pax.
> 
> Elaborate.


 Good question! Maybe it was mentioned earlier this thread, but then again you could post the whole Gettysburg address on here and it gets lost in the shuffle. Being that this thread is now 17 pages long.

Question to Michael: Did you agree on a set amount? I was just curious because we've done that arrangement with certain pax. Sometimes I charge a pax a set amount based the on the most direct way to get there, but take a route that's shorter in time, longer in distance.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Here is the specific verbiage from the 11/14 driver/Uber agreement which I did not have access to until chicabby posted it here a few minutes ago. It reads as follows:

"You shall always have the right to: (i) *charge a fare that is less* than the pre-‐arranged Fare; or (ii) negotiate, at your
request, *a Fare that is lower* than the pre-‐arranged Fare (each of (i) and (ii) herein, a
"Negotiated Fare"). Company shall consider all such requests from you in good faith."

Down is OK. Up, no good. Additional surcharges by driver off App? lol

Pretty simple, eh?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Lidman said:


> Question to Michael: Did you agree on a set amount? I was just curious because we've done that arrangement with certain pax. Sometimes I charge a pax a set amount based the on the most direct way to get there...


Yes.
But it doesn't matter.

The point is, that, per the driver and rider agreement, PAX and Driver can negotiate any fare they want and Uber HAS TO implement it. Other wise, Uber has CONTROL over the fare - and that would make the driver an EMPLOYEE rather than an Independent Contractor. And Uber isn't about to do anything that establishes driver's as employees while two federal law suits are making their way to jury trials (in CA and MA).


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Yes.
> But it doesn't matter.
> 
> The point is, that, per the driver and rider agreement, *PAX and Driver can negotiate any fare* they want and Uber HAS TO implement it. Other wise, Uber has CONTROL over the fare - and that would make the driver an EMPLOYEE rather than an Independent Contractor. And Uber isn't about to do anything that establishes driver's as employees while two federal law suits are making their way to jury trials (in CA and MA).


*Utter B.S. if you read the driver agreement.*

And what pax is going to allow that anyway without *****ing to Uber that it violates publicly published pricing.

Your instance of proof with a mileage distance price adjustment is meaningless as proof.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Here is the specific verbiage from the 11/14 driver/Uber agreement which I did not have access to until chicabby posted it here a few minutes ago. It reads as follows:
> 
> "You shall always have the right to: (i) *charge a fare that is less* than the pre-‐arranged Fare; or (ii) negotiate, at your request, *a Fare that is lower* than the pre-‐arranged Fare (each of (i) and (ii) herein, a "Negotiated Fare"). Company shall consider all such requests from you in good faith." Down is OK. Up, no good. Additional surcharges by driver off App? lolPretty simple, eh?


The fact that some people do not know how to read a legal agreement is not my problem. The fact that the 'right to negotiate a lower fare' is mentioned and a higher fare is not mentioned, does not preclude the right to negotiate a higher fare. Typical Uber-eze language. The quoted section above conveniently letft out the relevant, legally binding language preceding the example in the agreement:

4.1
...
In addition, the parties acknowledge and agree that as between you and Company, *the Fare is a recommended amount*, *and the primary purpose of the pre-arranged Fare is to act as the default amount in the event you do not negotiate a different amount*.​
"DIFFERENT amount" - not just 'lower' amount.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> *Utter B.S. if you read the driver agreement.*



Some of us actually know how to read. You are not among us.



> Your instance of proof with a mileage distance price adjustment is meaningless as proof.


Meaningless to you is not my problem
It's meaningful to me because it worked - and I couldn't care less whether you believe it or not. What you believe does not affect me in any way whatsoever.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The fact that some people do not know how to read a legal agreement is not my problem.


Yeah, and some drivers read what doesn't even exist.



> The fact that the 'right to negotiate a lower fare' is mentioned and a higher fare is not mentioned, does not preclude the right to negotiate a higher fare. Typical Uber-eze language. *The quoted section above conveniently letft out* the relevant, legally binding language preceding the example in the agreement:
> 
> 4.1
> ...
> In addition, the parties acknowledge and agree that as between you and Company, *the Fare is a recommended amount*, *and the primary purpose of the pre-arranged Fare is to act as the default amount in the event you do not negotiate a different amount*.​
> DIFFERENT amount - not just 'lower' amount.


The default fare is a publicly represented fare to pax that PAX and drivers agree to. That is WHY it can't be negotiated HIGHER. It would subject Uber to lawsuit. Not much different than a taxi charging higher than their published fares without pax notifications and agreeing to it.

And Uber is sure as hell not equipped to deal with pax authorized HIGHER charges on the fly either. What are they going to do? Take your say so? Wait until a CSR communicates that it's OK to do a trip by verifying in writing from a pax it's OK? Who are you kidding?

Driver fantasy land in here.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> It's meaningful to me because it worked - .


There is nothing you have proven other than an obscure claim from a longer distance travel than what the app may have shown. Utterly meaningless.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> "DIFFERENT amount" - not just 'lower' amount.


And that statement, as has been pointed out SEVERAL TIMES now, *only pertains to the driver and UBER, the COMPANY.*

It has nothing to do with you negotiating higher fares with PAX.

You think Uber is going to negotiate a higher fare with you? Why would they? Token bullshit on Uber's part.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> The default fare is a publicly represented fare to pax that PAX and drivers agree to. That is WHY it can't be negotiated HIGHER. It would subject Uber to lawsuit. Not much different than a taxi charging higher than their published fares without pax notifications and agreeing to it.


You are misinformed - and misinforming others.

Here's what the RIDER agreement says about payments and fares:

*4. Payment*

_You understand that use of the Services may result in payments by you for the services you receive from a Third Party Provider ("Charges"). After you have received services obtained through your use of the Service, Uber will facilitate payment of the applicable Charges on behalf of the Third Party Provider, as such Third Party Provider's limited payment collection agent, using the preferred payment method designated in your Account, and will send you a receipt by email. Payment of the Charges in such manner shall be considered the same as payment made directly by you to the Third Party Provider. Charges will be inclusive of applicable taxes where required by law. Charges paid by you are final and non-refundable, unless otherwise determined by Uber. You retain the right to request lower Charges from a Third Party Provider for services received by you from such Third Party Provider at the time you receive such services. *Uber will respond accordingly to any request from a Third Party Provider *_[edit: That's the driver] _*to modify the Charges for a particular service*._​As Uber says - not in its marketing materials - but IN YOUR DRIVER AGREEMENT, the published fares are recommendations to be used in the event that the parties do not directly negotiate a fare. There is nothing ambiguous about that.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> And that statement, as has been pointed out SEVERAL TIMES now, *only pertains to the driver and UBER, the COMPANY.*


Wrong - again. Completely wrong.
The agreement specifically states that the negotiated fare is NOT between Uber and any party,
but between The rider and the driver.

You are just plain obstinate.
The Uber agreements - both rider and driver - SPECIFICALLY state that the PARES are determined by the Rider and the "Third Party Provider" (driver) and that in the absence of any such negotiated fare, Uber's recommended fares will be used to set a DEFAULT fare for the ride.

But believe what you want - your misinformation doesn't affect me.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> _* You retain the right to request lower Charges* _



*yeah, I can read.*


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Wrong - again. Completely wrong.
> The agreement specifically states that the negotiated fare is NOT between Uber and any party,
> but between The rider and the driver.


"the parties acknowledge and agree that as *between you and Company,* the Fare is a recommended amount, and the primary purpose of the pre-‐arranged Fare *is *to act as *the default amount* in the event you do not negotiate a different amount. You shall always have the right to: (i) *charge a fare that is less"

Yeah, I can read.

Company apparently looks like PASSENGER to you for some odd reason.
*
go figure


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> "the parties acknowledge and agree that as *between you and Company,* the Fare is a recommended amount, and the primary purpose of the pre-‐arranged Fare *is *to act as *the default amount* in the event you do not negotiate a different amount. You shall always have the right to: (i) *charge a fare that is less"
> Yeah, I can read.
> Company apparently looks like PASSENGER to you for some odd reason.*
> go figure


You really need a remedial reading course.
That's the driver agreement - You and the company - Driver and Uber:
_ "... agree the Fare is a recommended amount, and the purpose of the pre-‐arranged Fare *is *to act as *the default amount* in the event you do not negotiate a different amount."_

The agreement states that you can lower a fare. By NOT saying you cannot raise a fare, it also means you that can negotiate a higher fare.
*The omission is not a mistake - it is purposeful and defining... for good reason, as discussed above.*


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The agreement states that you can lower a fare. *By NOT saying you cannot raise a fare, it also means you that can negotiate a higher fare.
> The omission *is not a mistake - it is purposeful and defining... for good reason, as discussed above.


First off you do understand, again, that statement is only between you and Uber. You have NO agreement whatsoever to be your own TNC or TAXI inserting random HIGHER fares at your discretion by LAW. You do understand that, right?

I guess you're really saying* you insert a DRIVER FANTASY VERBIAGE CLAUSE that really doesn't even exist with a party who does not exist in the contract.*

Why didn't you say so from the start, that you were making up your own contract in your head with a party you don't even have contract or legal rights with to set fares, and we could have agreed.

What universe do you live in?

As a reminder we do NOT operate under our own auspices, but under the GRANTING of the state to the TNC's only and DRIVERS under their wing as essentially independent contractors who are SUBBING OUT to TNC granted authority. Only the TNC can call shots on fares unless it is LOWER by Uber's accepting it as such.

We do not get to make up our own rules.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Some drivers have the delusion that they are independent taxi's. Drivers are not independent TAXI's. 

They can only drive UNDER a TNC authorization, which includes the TNC setting fares and providing insurance to do so, that is cleared by the state.

Drivers in their own independent taxi fantasy world have ZERO authorization by law to perform such services.

They are merely SUB associates who drive under laws given through authorization to TNC's.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> First off you do understand, again, that statement is only between you and Uber. You have NO agreement whatsoever to be your own TNC or TAXI inserting random HIGHER fares at your discretion by LAW. You do understand that, right?.


 believe what you want - your misinformation doesn't affect me.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Some drivers have the delusion that they are independent taxi's. Drivers are not independent TAXI's.
> They can only drive UNDER a TNC authorization, which includes the TNC setting fares and providing insurance to do so, that is cleared by the state.
> Drivers in their own independent taxi fantasy world have ZERO authorization by law to perform such services. They are merely SUB associates who drive under laws given through authorization to TNC's.


 believe what you want - your misinformation doesn't affect me.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> *The omission is not a mistake - it is purposeful and defining... for good reason, as discussed above.*


*You are reading what doesn't exist.*  Omission means *'there is nothing there in writing.'*

You have no state granting by law for taxi driving. You drive for a TNC only and they set the fares.

You have NO contract whatsoever with any pax. You don't get to negotiate with pax. You don't have the authority to set fares with pax. You are not a taxi cab company nor do you fall under THEIR LAWS.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> believe what you want - your misinformation doesn't affect me.


IF you are operating under OMISSION, *meaning you get to make shit up that doesn't exist*, you are right in your own head but not by law or by contract.


----------



## scrurbscrud

and people wonder why we need laws?

I've learned one thing about this business. That the drivers are not too bright.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> believe what you want - your misinformation doesn't affect me.


Yeah, Michael rolls out of his own head, but can't substantiate anything in writing, but stakes his claim on OMISSION. Non existing contract verbiage.

Classic gypsy.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Just to stick a fork in the ass clown contract reading and self interpretation demonstration held in this thread, HERE is why TNC drivers do not get to set fares with pax or change them after the fact once a pax is in the ride or charge them cash on the side for other 'fare' deals. Most states are going to have similar LEGAL directives:

*"Online apps*
Online dispatch applications, which are sometimes called mobile apps or online apps, allow people to request dispatch of drivers for trips or to accept payments for trips via the Internet using mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets. *Drivers for transportation network companies may only accept payment for fares through an online dispatch application; they may not accept cash fares.*

*TNC Rates
Application dispatch system rates must be transparent to customers in the online app when they request service and before they confirm the ride*. The total fare, a fare range or a rate by distance or time must be displayed clearly on the application dispatch system. The system must also clearly display, *before the ride is confirmed*, any variables that may result in higher rates or fares, including tips, waiting time, demand pricing *or any other surcharges."*

The above is from Seattle:

http://www.seattle.gov/business-reg...ransportation-network-companies/tnc-companies
http://www.seattle.gov/business-reg...ransportation-network-companies/tnc-companies
This, from Colorado legislation:

"A TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANY SHALL MAKE AVAILABLE TO PROSPECTIVE RIDERS THE METHOD BY WHICH THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANY CALCULATES FARES OR THE APPLICABLE RATES BEING CHARGED AND AN OPTION TO RECEIVE AN ESTIMATED FARE"- "A PERSON SHALL NOT OPERATE A TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANY IN COLORADO WITHOUT FIRST HAVING OBTAINED A PERMIT FROM THE COMMISSION"

160,000 Uber drivers all setting their own fares with pax?

*FAT CHANCE.*


----------



## nicoj36

LEAFdriver said:


> Well...I really wanted to avoid having a cancel or ignore on my record....considering they shouldn't be requesting in the first place. If I pick 'do not charge rider'....does it not go into my 'cancelled' quota then?


Accept right away and cancel within 8 secs and it won't count against u or ur record. Just pick "other" as reasoning.


----------



## UberHammer

I can't see any post scrub is making, but I know exactly what he is posting based on the other people's posts. A lot of more of the same. I'm glad I don't have to read anymore of it.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Most states are going to have similar LEGAL directives*.*


First, most states DON'T have any legislation regulating TNC's - and even fewer have any laws regulating ridesharing.
Second, those states that do have any legislation at all, regulate the TNC's and the TNC's employees. The state has no means, method or right to regulate 'ridesharing' between private parties. (ie: as a driver, it can illegal for you to solicit fares, but the state cannot make it illegal for you as a private individual to solicit you neighbor to give you ride and pay you for your time and expense).

Of course, all of this well beyond the topic at hand which is that UBER SPECIFIACALLY SAYS IT'S PUBLISHED FARES ARE ONLY RECOMMENDED FARES TO BE USED IN THE ABSENSE OF A FARE NEGOTIATED BY THE DRIVER AND RIDER.

And absolutely nothing you say, rant about, obfuscate or otherwise blabber can change that.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> IF you are operating under OMISSION, *meaning you get to make shit up that doesn't exist*, you are right in your own head but not by law or by contract.


The only one making shit up is you. Learn how to read... then learn how to read a legal document. You asked for proof, I provided it.
Now, I'm asking you for proof of your assertion:
Give the Uber partner agreement to an attorney and have them answer the question: "do drivers and passengers have the right under this agreement to negotiate a fare to their mutual agreement?"
Don't want to go to that trouble? Fine...
take any pax you like, negotiate and agree to a fare that is higher than the Uber estimate/recommendation, and
ask Uber to adjust the fare for that trip to your negotiated fare.
Provide them with adequate information to prove it is a legitimate request agreed to by the pax...
*and then post Uber's response here... just as I did.*


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> 160,000 Uber drivers all setting their own fares with pax? *FAT CHANCE.*


Agreed.
But it is perfectly acceptable under the terms of *both* the Uber driver and passenger agreements.
And you miss the point of WHY it's acceptable: If Uber exerted control over the price a driver charged, then Uber would, by virtue of that control, be deemed to have control over it drivers as employees rather than Independent Contractors. Until such time as Uber is forced by the courts to classify its drivers as employees, Uber will NEVER claim to have control over the fares negotiated between drivers and passengers.

Believe what you want. Your beliefs do not affect me in any way whatsoever.


----------



## Desert Driver

UberHammer said:


> I can't see any post scrub is making, but I know exactly what he is posting based on the other people's posts. A lot of more of the same. I'm glad I don't have to read anymore of it.


But don't you miss @scrurbscrud just a little bit? I mean, he's fun in that same way that your cousin's autistic neighbor is kind of fun. Just be careful not to upset him.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Yeah, Michael rolls out of his own head, but can't substantiate anything in writing, but stakes his claim on OMISSION.


scrubscud simply chooses to ignore what he doesn't like and he can't provide any proof to back up his absurd assertions.

He can believe what he wants. His beliefs do not affect me in any way whatsoever.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> Look Uberhammer. Nothing in driver/Uber agreements allow us to set fares with pax.


*yeah... except THIS:*

_4.1
...
In addition, the parties acknowledge and agree that as between you and Company, the Fare is a recommended amount, and the primary purpose of the pre-arranged Fare is to act as the default amount in the event you do not negotiate a different amount._​


> How you came up with that notion is not justifiable in any way shape or form, NOR are you able to prove or justify such a stance.


*... unless one can read.*


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Desert Driver said:


> But don't you miss @scrurbscrud just a little bit?


(to paraphrase a country song...)
How can I miss him if he won't go away?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

scrurbscrud said:


> You have NO contract whatsoever with any pax. You don't get to negotiate with pax. You don't have the authority to set fares with pax.


"The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over."
― Joseph Goebbels

(Thank you, Uberdawg)


----------



## Guest

My comments from this recent thread:
*have you noticed an increased usage from parents who uber their kids around?*
Discussion in 'Stories' started by Lyft4uDC, Mar 2, 2015.

_
"Exactly what is the liability here? I get all kinds of pickups at high schools. uber says you must be 18 to have an account.

But these underage passengers are using their own phones. They must be lying to uber.

All I need is an underage teenage girl riding in my car under false pretenses to have some kind of brain-fart about my alleged behavior.

You all know who goes to jail."_

18 pages of discussion here when the answer seems obvious.
As far as I know none of us are lawyers.
ID suspect teenagers, kinda like the liquor store? Yes.
What a hassle. But better than the possible consequences.


----------



## observer

You guys are like 7-11.


----------



## Uber-Doober

observer said:


> Not only that but even if found not guilty, you will be tainted for life.
> You will never regain your reputation.


^^^
Actually, my first "real" pick up of the day is a kid going to a private school and his dad is a really famous lawyer here in Vegas and also nationally.
I've been invited over there for 4th. of July parties, Easter, Thanksgiving, and even Channukah. 
Great family. 
They love me... and just parenthetically, I'm safe. 
And they trust me, which is the most valuable as far as I'm concerned.

Oh, and BTW... they never tip until the end of the year, and then..... Ka-BOOM..... comes the check in the mail. 
Yeh, they have my address. Why not? Lawyers can find out almost anything. LOL.


----------



## Uber-Doober

observer said:


> You guys are like 7-11.


^^^
And, what's that supposed to mean?


----------



## Lidman

Next to dunkin donuts, they make great coffee, even better then starbucks.


----------



## Desert Driver

mike888 said:


> My comments from this recent thread:
> *have you noticed an increased usage from parents who uber their kids around?*
> Discussion in 'Stories' started by Lyft4uDC, Mar 2, 2015.
> 
> _
> "Exactly what is the liability here? I get all kinds of pickups at high schools. uber says you must be 18 to have an account.
> 
> But these underage passengers are using their own phones. They must be lying to uber.
> 
> All I need is an underage teenage girl riding in my car under false pretenses to have some kind of brain-fart about my alleged behavior.
> 
> You all know who goes to jail."_
> 
> 18 pages of discussion here when the answer seems obvious.
> As far as I know none of us are lawyers.
> ID suspect teenagers, kinda like the liquor store? Yes.
> What a hassle. But better than the possible consequences.


I discussed this near the beginning of the thread. Transporting the under-18 crowd carries the exact same risk as ferrying anyone else about. Regardless of age of pax, one should always have an inward-facing dashcam in their car. That's what I have and I have no worries about a kid or anyone else pulling the false accusation shit on me. And it's perfectly legal because there is no expectation of privacy in a livery car for hire. And an added benefit is that when you get the Uber flash from intoxicated betties, you have a delightful video clip.

When you do go to a dashcam, here's the one you'll want. I love this one...

http://thedashcamstore.com/blackvue-1080p-dual-lens-wifi-dashcam-dr650gw-2ch/

If you're new to the world of dashcams and aren't sure you want to drop coin, here's a great little starter unit...

http://thedashcamstore.com/dual-lens-car-dvr-with-gps-g-sensor-dvr-r300/

P.S. Uninformed peckerwoods like @scrurbscrud will tell you that recording minors in your car is illegal. It isn't. Now, if you're touching those minors or enticing them into illegal behavior, then you're putting your own nuts in the vise. But simply recording the activity inside your vehicle is perfectly legal, safe, and advisable.


----------



## Desert Driver

observer said:


> You guys are like 7-11.


Can I get a Slim Jim and a Big Gulp, please?


----------



## waker81

_Transporting the under-18 crowd carries the exact same risk as ferrying anyone else about_

Not true. If you transport an unaccompanied minor you breached the Partner Agreement - if anything were to happen you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Rider TOS are very specific - no one under the age of 18 unless accompanied by the owner of the Rider account. Driver Agreement is very clear as well - only Users (account holder) or those authorized by User. Users (account holder) cannot authorize a minor so if you transport an unaccompanied minor you are in violation of the Partner Agreement. There isn't an insurance policy in the world that will cover you after you knowingly breached a contract.


----------



## UberHammer

Desert Driver said:


> But don't you miss @scrurbscrud just a little bit? I mean, he's fun in that same way that your cousin's autistic neighbor is kind of fun. Just be careful not to upset him.


It's more like a blind kid telling me over and over that since he can't see what I and many others do see, then it's not there. Not fun at all.


----------



## Desert Driver

waker81 said:


> _Transporting the under-18 crowd carries the exact same risk as ferrying anyone else about_
> 
> Not true. If you transport an unaccompanied minor you breached the Partner Agreement - if anything were to happen you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Rider TOS are very specific - no one under the age of 18 unless accompanied by the owner of the Rider account. Driver Agreement is very clear as well - only Users (account holder) or those authorized by User. Users (account holder) cannot authorize a minor so if you transport an unaccompanied minor you are in violation of the Partner Agreement. There isn't an insurance policy in the world that will cover you after you knowingly breached a contract.


I've news for you, if anything ugly happens while driving for Uber, the driver is ****ed regardless of the age of the pax. The James River policy doesn't cover much of anything at all. That's the very reason drivers need to carry their own commercial policy like I do. As such, I can transport whoever I feel like picking up. That's why I have no problem accepting pings from a nearby boarding school. Plus, a lot of those kids have been well-trained on the etiguette of tipping. t's all good, once you know what you're doing. But if you're driving for a TNC and you don't have your own commercial insurance policy, you're playing Russian roulette with your car and your safety. we will agree.


----------



## waker81

yes a commercial policy is prudent but even a commercial policy will not cover you when you knowingly (and repeatedly) breach a contract


----------



## Desert Driver

waker81 said:


> yes a commercial policy is prudent but even a commercial policy will not cover you when you knowingly (and repeatedly) breach a contract


True. But my commercial policy has no restrictions on age of pax in my car. The only requirement is that I have a safety belt for every pax, whether they choose to use them or not. So, it's all good.


----------



## observer

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> And, what's that supposed to mean?


No matter what time of day I can count on scrubs and Michael being here, 24-7.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Desert Driver said:


> *P.S. Uninformed peckerwoods* like @scrurbscrud will tell you that recording minors in your car is illegal. It isn't. Now, if you're touching those minors or enticing them into illegal behavior, then you're putting your own nuts in the vise. But simply recording the activity inside your vehicle is perfectly legal, safe, and advisable.


Resorting to continual personal slurs ain't going to change the specific agreement verbiage in Uber's setup that says not to do what you promote.

Simple as that. Spin from there as you please.

*Drivers who don't follow written directives are petty contract violators.*

Filming kid pax is an entirely different matter. One that puts any driver over the top imho.


----------



## scrurbscrud

observer said:


> No matter what time of day I can count on scrubs and Michael being here, 24-7.


I wouldn't be but the new Lyft driver onboarding has screwed my weekly pay for nearly 2 weeks now. I know when not to waste my time on the street and waste it at home posting here between Netflix shows...


----------



## scrurbscrud

waker81 said:


> yes a commercial policy is prudent but even a commercial policy will not cover you when you knowingly (and repeatedly) breach a contract


Brilliant deduction. Some drivers actually read and adhere to what they agreed not to do.


----------



## scrurbscrud

UberHammer said:


> It's more like a blind kid telling me over and over that since he can't see what I and many others do see, then it's not there. Not fun at all.


No, you and Michael just haven't been exposed to contracts that say you have a choice between A. and B. but B is the default choice and A won't happen.


----------



## Uber-Doober

Desert Driver said:


> True. But my commercial policy has no restrictions on age of pax in my car. The only requirement is that I have a safety belt for every pax, whether they choose to use them or not. So, it's all good.


^^^
No duct tape?


----------



## scrurbscrud

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The only one making shit up is you. Learn how to read... then learn how to read a legal document. You asked for proof, I provided it.
> Now, I'm asking you for proof of your assertion:
> Give the Uber partner agreement to an attorney and have them answer the question: "do drivers and passengers have the right under this agreement to negotiate a fare to their mutual agreement?"
> Don't want to go to that trouble? Fine...
> take any pax you like, negotiate and agree to a fare that is higher than the Uber estimate/recommendation, and
> ask Uber to adjust the fare for that trip to your negotiated fare.
> Provide them with adequate information to prove it is a legitimate request agreed to by the pax...
> *and then post Uber's response here... just as I did.*


Michael, the flaws in your personal interpretation have been pointed to at length.

You have no contract with pax nor do you have a right to alter Uber's fares (who are you kidding but yourself?) with pax.

You took a mileage distance fare adjustment and tried to make a case of it when it had nothing to do with the question to begin with.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> No duct tape?


Maybe off camera?


----------



## Uber-Doober

scrurbscrud said:


> Maybe off camera?


Not that I'm into S & M or anything like that.... but S &M in my neighborhood means Sequins and Mascara.


----------



## Desert Driver

I just dropped off a delightful young fraulein at a private prep academy. Upon dropping her off her dad texted me, "Thank you for delivering my daughter safely."
How can ya not feel good about that?


----------



## Desert Driver

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> No duct tape?


I'm more of a bungee cord man.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Uber-Doober said:


> Not that I'm into S & M or anything like that.... but S &M in my neighborhood means Sequins and Mascara.


I'm sure all those gaps on Desert Dogs camera recording drive from erasing previous pax recordings won't come back to haunt him either when it comes to driving kids.


----------



## Uber-Doober

scrurbscrud said:


> Resorting to continual personal slurs ain't going to change the specific agreement verbiage in Uber's setup that says not to do what you promote.
> 
> Simple as that. Spin from there as you please.
> 
> *Drivers who don't follow written directives are petty contract violators.*
> 
> Filming kid pax is an entirely different matter. One that puts any driver over the top imho.


^^^
Yeah, but how about drivers that follow "written directives" to the "T" and then are fired for doing so?


----------



## observer

scrurbscrud said:


> I wouldn't be but the new Lyft driver onboarding has screwed my weekly pay for nearly 2 weeks now. I know when not to waste my time on the street and waste it at home posting here between Netflix shows...


Lol, I'm on here almost as much as you guys.


----------



## Uber-Doober

scrurbscrud said:


> I'm sure all those gaps on Desert Dogs camera recording drive from erasing previous pax recordings won't come back to haunt him either when it comes to driving kids.


^^^
I really love a lively discussion.


----------



## scrurbscrud

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> Yeah, but how about drivers that follow "written directives" to the "T" and then are fired for doing so?


Pick a card, any card. Oops. You lose.


----------



## Desert Driver

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> Yeah, but how about drivers that follow "written directives" to the "T" and then are fired for doing so?


Well, as experienced drivers, you and I both know that to be successful with Uber, you have know how and where to game the system. Drivers who get deactivated for any reason have not figured out the fundamentals of driving for Uber.


----------



## SCdave

So here is a question... it is for those who allow Minors by themselves (I don't but some do) and also when an Adult/Parent is also in the vehicle.

Who is responsible for having minor put on their seat belts in these three situations?

1) Only minor PAX in vehicle (or with only other minors),
2) Minor PAX with another PAX (not parent) who is an Adult,
3) Minor PAX with Parent


----------



## chi1cabby

*Parents are using Uber to shuttle their kids home, even though it's not *
MAYA KOSOFF
http://www.businessinsider.com/parents-using-uber-to-shuttle-kids-home-2015-3#comments

@LEAFdriver @UberHammer @observer @Desert Driver are @uberpeople.net forum members excerpted in the article!

HT to @UberCemetery for posting the article in Monthly News Thread.


----------



## Desert Driver

chi1cabby said:


> *Parents are using Uber to shuttle their kids home, even though it's not *
> MAYA KOSOFF
> http://www.businessinsider.com/parents-using-uber-to-shuttle-kids-home-2015-3#comments
> 
> @LEAFdriver @UberHammer @observer @Desert Driver are @uberpeople.net forum members excepted in the article!
> 
> HT to @UberCemetery for posting the article in Monthly News Thread.


Well now how cool is that!


----------



## chi1cabby

Desert Driver said:


> Well now how cool is that!


It's doubly cool, bud! 
*Parents are using Uber to shuttle their kids home, even though it's not allowed*
http://m.sfgate.com/technology/busi...-using-Uber-to-shuttle-their-kids-6132369.php


----------



## observer

chi1cabby said:


> *Parents are using Uber to shuttle their kids home, even though it's not *
> MAYA KOSOFF
> http://www.businessinsider.com/parents-using-uber-to-shuttle-kids-home-2015-3#comments
> 
> @LEAFdriver @UberHammer @observer @Desert Driver are @uberpeople.net forum members excepted in the article!
> 
> HT to @UberCemetery for posting the article in Monthly News Thread.


Thanks chi for the heads up. Sounds like this writer put the ball into Ubers court. Uber needs to clarify this issue.


----------



## LEAFdriver

chi1cabby said:


> *Parents are using Uber to shuttle their kids home, even though it's not *
> MAYA KOSOFF
> http://www.businessinsider.com/parents-using-uber-to-shuttle-kids-home-2015-3#comments
> 
> ]@LEAFdriver[/B] @UberHammer @observer @Desert Driver are @uberpeople.net forum members excerpted in the article!
> 
> HT to @UberCemetery for posting the article in Monthly News Thread.


Cool.  I kept ignoring the article until Chi1cabby pointed out we were quoted in it!

Now that I've read it.....No wonder Uber drivers are not clear on this subject. If I didn't highlight the line below in *BOLD PRINT*.....how easy it is to totally skip over this *EXTREMELY VAGUE* mention that _'no one under 18.....are allowed to use the Services_." They do not make this clear at ALL! All I ever kept reading is that an account holder can 'order' an uber for another rider. Never mentioning that the 'other rider' had to be 18 or over. But who did they think those 'other riders' would be? Even parents assumed that it must mean it's ok to send their kids an Uber. 

Quoted from the article:

In its privacy policy, the company says:
"The Company cares about the safety of children. Because our Services are not directed toward minors, *no one under 18 (and certainly no children under 13) are allowed to register with or use the Services*. We do not knowingly collect personal information from anyone under the age of 18. If we discover that we have collected personal information from a person under 18, we will delete that information immediately. If you are a parent or guardian of a minor under the age of eighteen (18) and believe he or she has disclosed Personal Information to us, please contact us at [email protected]"
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/parents-using-uber-to-shuttle-kids-home-2015-3#ixzz3UbZ2Co9l


----------



## UberHollywood

Is there a limit to how often we can accept and then cancel right away?


----------



## UberHollywood

Took two young guys from Brentwood to bh to meet of of the grandparents for dinner. Talk about entitled, but they were cool. How about the possibility of being accused and investigated for something inappropriate be done/with a minor where the accusation is false ? I guess it helps if it is the parent that requested it.....

It was also 3.9 si I would have taken them anywhere they wanted. Talked about being grounded etc, also one didn't like his first name (whitworth). Kinda cool I yhink


----------



## dandy driver

LEAFdriver said:


> I have a question....I just heard from another driver that riders (I'm assuming when not accompanied by the account holder) need to be at least 18 yrs of age. Is this true?
> 
> I've picked up a teenager for 3 trips now. (First time...I didn't know it was a 15 yo. It seems his Father ordered the ride for him. I thought it was the Father I was picking up until I got there).
> 
> The second and third times....I picked the kid up...and each time he almost damaged my car..SHOVING his hockey sticks/sports gear through my hatch back and almost hitting me in the head with them. He just seemed very disrespectful...and each time I had him as a PAX, I noticed my rating got dinged.
> If I get a ping from him again....can I refuse the ride if I know that he is unaccompanied by the account holder? If so, what should I say. Thanks for advice! (Also, do we have the right to 'CARD' a PAX?)


with credit card companies now issuing cards to newborn babies there is no age restriction for the customers


----------



## dandy driver

UberHammer said:


> It shows up as a driver cancel.
> 
> If you complain about this customer, you'll lose more than you'll gain, because Uber isn't going to do anything about it. They want the $1 SRF and the 20%, even if it means you breaking the law and losing money. If you complain, then they have to deal with a driver complaining, and all they want is for driver complaints to just go away. Every complaint you make is one complaint closer to being deactivated.


don't take it personally over 200,000 former drivers have been deactivated its just company policy


----------



## dandy driver

Fuzzyelvis said:


> I would accept then call and ask if you are picking the kid up. If they say yes tell them you have become aware that is against uber policy and that they should please cancel unless an adult will ride with the child.


you can purchase additional liability insurance from your coverage company to handle this it will only cost you about 5000 dollars more a month on your insurance


----------



## dandy driver

LEAFdriver said:


> I have a question....I just heard from another driver that riders (I'm assuming when not accompanied by the account holder) need to be at least 18 yrs of age. Is this true?
> 
> I've picked up a teenager for 3 trips now. (First time...I didn't know it was a 15 yo. It seems his Father ordered the ride for him. I thought it was the Father I was picking up until I got there).
> 
> The second and third times....I picked the kid up...and each time he almost damaged my car..SHOVING his hockey sticks/sports gear through my hatch back and almost hitting me in the head with them. He just seemed very disrespectful...and each time I had him as a PAX, I noticed my rating got dinged.
> If I get a ping from him again....can I refuse the ride if I know that he is unaccompanied by the account holder? If so, what should I say. Thanks for advice! (Also, do we have the right to 'CARD' a PAX?)


you can get additional commercial liability coverage for this situation call your insurance company like I did it will only cost you about $5000 a month


----------



## dandy driver

scrurbscrud said:


> Drivers are certainly welcome to violate any rule at their own risk, obviously.


have you ever tried to get customer service or email corporate headquarters while the customer you just picked up is assaulting you in your car


----------



## dandy driver

UberHammer said:


> If you get into an accident, I pray James River doesn't play the "Uber's Terms and Conditions" card on you and refuse to cover it.


make sure you get maximum commercial liability coverage for this it's only about five thousand dollars a month at the end of the year bill it back to the company and when they don't pay take them to court and file civil damages against


----------



## zMann

dandy driver said:


> don't take it personally over 200,000 former drivers have been deactivated its just company policy


This is a huge number


----------



## zMann

LEAFdriver said:


> Cool.  I kept ignoring the article until Chi1cabby pointed out we were quoted in it!
> 
> Now that I've read it.....No wonder Uber drivers are not clear on this subject. If I didn't highlight the line below in *BOLD PRINT*.....how easy it is to totally skip over this *EXTREMELY VAGUE* mention that _'no one under 18.....are allowed to use the Services_." They do not make this clear at ALL! All I ever kept reading is that an account holder can 'order' an uber for another rider. Never mentioning that the 'other rider' had to be 18 or over. But who did they think those 'other riders' would be? Even parents assumed that it must mean it's ok to send their kids an Uber.
> 
> Quoted from the article:
> 
> In its privacy policy, the company says:
> "The Company cares about the safety of children. Because our Services are not directed toward minors, *no one under 18 (and certainly no children under 13) are allowed to register with or use the Services*. We do not knowingly collect personal information from anyone under the age of 18. If we discover that we have collected personal information from a person under 18, we will delete that information immediately. If you are a parent or guardian of a minor under the age of eighteen (18) and believe he or she has disclosed Personal Information to us, please contact us at [email protected]"
> Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/parents-using-uber-to-shuttle-kids-home-2015-3#ixzz3UbZ2Co9l


It's very important to know. Thank you


----------



## LEAFdriver

LEAFdriver said:


> I have a question....I just heard from another driver that riders (I'm assuming when not accompanied by the account holder) need to be at least 18 yrs of age. Is this true?
> 
> I've picked up a teenager for 3 trips now. (First time...I didn't know it was a 15 yo. It seems his Father ordered the ride for him. I thought it was the Father I was picking up until I got there).
> 
> The second and third times....I picked the kid up...and each time he almost damaged my car..SHOVING his hockey sticks/sports gear through my hatch back and almost hitting me in the head with them. He just seemed very disrespectful...and each time I had him as a PAX, I noticed my rating got dinged.
> If I get a ping from him again....can I refuse the ride if I know that he is unaccompanied by the account holder? If so, what should I say. Thanks for advice! (Also, do we have the right to 'CARD' a PAX?)


Guess what? I just got a ping again tonight from the Father of the 15 yr old boy in question. Chicago pings are not even displaying the PAX's names anymore....so I accepted it based on the location. After I looked at the address again and saw the account holder's name....I recognized it as the Father of this boy. So, I pull over into a store parking lot and proceed to call the Father on the phone. Right away, he has an attitude. I tell him that I cannot pick up his son unless the 'account holder' (i.e. this boy's Father) is accompanying him. He starts getting irate and tells me that he's in another state and that he's been using Uber for his son for 6 months and he will CONTINUE to do so! I told him it's against Ubers regulations - but he would NOT listen to me. He acted like I was just making it up!  He just told me: "Don't accept the request then! I'm going to continue calling Ubers anyway!" He hung up....and waited until 4 min and 50 seconds and then he cancelled the ride. I immediately used the 'Report a serious rider concern' and reported the way this man berated me! Do you think this would merit this Father's account to be deactivated? Unfortunately, Uber keeps making it harder and harder to recognize the problem rider accounts without accepting them first. (Since we see no names and no ratings now!) I'm still waiting for a reply back from Uber. I'll post it here when I hear something back!


----------



## SCdave

Saw this article in NY Times, " For Some Teenagers, 16 Candles Mean It's Time to Join Uber" _http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/09/s...mean-its-time-to-join-uber.html?smid=re-share_

Talks about how fewer teens are wanting to get drivers license when they hit 16 yrs old and more taking Uber to hit the mall, go on dates, etc... No mention of it being illegal or against Uber Policy. Hmmm, just find this strange, especially being a NY Times article.

Different laws in NY? Different Uber Policy in NY? Can't believe Uber Intern didn't spot this and that Uber didn't contact the NY Times.


----------



## LEAFdriver

SCdave said:


> Saw this article in NY Times, " For Some Teenagers, 16 Candles Mean It's Time to Join Uber" _http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/09/s...mean-its-time-to-join-uber.html?smid=re-share_
> 
> Talks about how fewer teens are wanting to get drivers license when they hit 16 yrs old and more taking Uber to hit the mall, go on dates, etc... No mention of it being illegal or against Uber Policy. Hmmm, just find this strange, especially being a NY Times article.
> 
> Different laws in NY? Different Uber Policy in NY? *Can't believe Uber Intern didn't spot this and that Uber didn't contact the NY Times*.


I can believe it!


----------



## SCdave

LEAFdriver said:


> I can believe it!


Well, yes...me too.

Kind of like Tabaco Companies many many years ago marketing Cigarettes towards kids (future customers) but "not marketing towards kids". Or now I guess it would be marketing Vapor Products to kids.

16 year olds who don't want a drivers license/car are the ideal Uber/TNC customer. So is Uber not having this article corrected in "the" major newspaper in the USA a proof that Uber policy is to allow underaged kids to use Uber?


----------



## LEAFdriver

*I've been back and forth with Uber CSR's for over a month on this subject. Today, I get this email:

Liam* (Uber)

May 5, 17:33

Hi *****,

Thanks for reaching out here-- happy to clarify. We _do_ allow underaged riders to ride alone in vehicles on the Uber platform. The only thing we don't allow is them having their own account (since they can't legally agree to our terms and conditions.)

We only deactivate an underage rider's account if the underage rider is the actual accountholder-- otherwise, as in this case, they haven't done anything wrong.

Best,

*Liam*
-------------------------

*DISCUSS!!! 

(BTW, this was in response to having to cancel a ride when upon arrival I find an 11 yr old boy and his 7 yr old sister with a ton of sporting equipment in tow...and NO parent/guardian/18 yr old in sight!)*


----------



## SCdave

LEAFdriver said:


> *I've been back and forth with Uber CSR's for over a month on this subject. Today, I get this email:
> 
> Liam* (Uber)
> 
> May 5, 17:33
> 
> Hi *****,
> 
> Thanks for reaching out here-- happy to clarify. We _do_ allow underaged riders to ride alone in vehicles on the Uber platform. The only thing we don't allow is them having their own account (since they can't legally agree to our terms and conditions.)
> 
> We only deactivate an underage rider's account if the underage rider is the actual accountholder-- otherwise, as in this case, they haven't done anything wrong.
> 
> Best,
> 
> *Liam*
> -------------------------
> 
> *DISCUSS!!!
> 
> (BTW, this was in response to having to cancel a ride when upon arrival I find an 11 yr old boy and his 7 yr old sister with a ton of sporting equipment in tow...and NO parent/guardian/18 yr old in sight!)*


How about asking this CSR - " So when if I get sued by the parents of a 11 yr old and 7 yr old who I gave a ride to without their parents in the vehicle, you're okay that I bring in a copy of this email to my court appearance"?


----------



## Kalee

UberHammer said:


> It shows up as a driver cancel.
> 
> If you complain about this customer, you'll lose more than you'll gain, because Uber isn't going to do anything about it. They want the $1 SRF and the 20%, even if it means you breaking the law and losing money. If you complain, then they have to deal with a driver complaining, and all they want is for driver complaints to just go away. Every complaint you make is one complaint closer to being deactivated.


This is absolutely true. I turned in to Uber a 15 yr old kid using the service. They replied with the bs canned reply on how they take these matters seriously.
But yet to this day(2 months later), that same kid is making ride requests every time I'm in my neighborhood.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

LEAFdriver said:


> *I've been back and forth with Uber CSR's for over a month on this subject. Today, I get this email:
> 
> Liam* (Uber)
> 
> May 5, 17:33
> 
> Hi *****,
> 
> Thanks for reaching out here-- happy to clarify. We _do_ allow underaged riders to ride alone in vehicles on the Uber platform. The only thing we don't allow is them having their own account (since they can't legally agree to our terms and conditions.)
> 
> We only deactivate an underage rider's account if the underage rider is the actual accountholder-- otherwise, as in this case, they haven't done anything wrong.
> 
> Best,
> 
> *Liam*
> -------------------------
> 
> *DISCUSS!!!
> 
> (BTW, this was in response to having to cancel a ride when upon arrival I find an 11 yr old boy and his 7 yr old sister with a ton of sporting equipment in tow...and NO parent/guardian/18 yr old in sight!)*


How do you know who the account holder is? And this seems to directly contradict their official policy.


----------



## LEAFdriver

Fuzzyelvis said:


> How do you know who the account holder is? * And this seems to directly contradict their official policy*.


EXACTLY MY REACTION!!!  Here is the email I sent back to them. (Haven't heard back from them yet. Should be interesting to see how they back peddle on this one!)
------------------------------------------------------
Liam,

OMG! Seriously? You guys are totally exasperating! Make up your minds! These quotes are from your OWN information:

*USER REQUIREMENTS AND CONDUCT.
The Service is not available for use by persons under the age of 18. You may not authorize third parties to use your Account, and you may not allow persons under the age of 18 to receive transportation or logistics services from Third Party Providers unless they are accompanied by you*. You may not assign or otherwise transfer your Account to any other person or entity. You agree to comply with all applicable laws when using the Services, and you may only use the Services for lawful purposes (_e.g._, no transport of unlawful or hazardous materials). You will not in your use of the Services cause nuisance, annoyance, inconvenience, or property damage, whether to the Third Party Provider or any other party. In certain instances you may be asked to provide proof of identity to access or use the Services, and you agree that you may be denied access to or use of the Services if you refuse to provide proof of identity.

*ALSO,*

Uber explicitly doesn't allow users under the age of 18 to make an account or use its service without an adult. In its *privacy policy*, the company says:

"The Company cares about the safety of children. *Because our Services are not directed toward minors, no one under 18 (and certainly no children under 13) are allowed to register with or use the Services.* We do not knowingly collect personal information from anyone under the age of 18. *If we discover that we have collected personal information from a person under 18, we will delete that information immediately*. If you are a parent or guardian of a minor under the age of eighteen (18) and believe he or she has disclosed Personal Information to us, please contact us at [email protected]"

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/parents-using-uber-to-shuttle-kids-home-2015-3#ixzz3ZJljM8FZ

*AND AGAIN, How do you explain this reply I got a month ago?*

Your request (26456913) has been updated. To add additional comments, reply to this email.

*Cha* (Uber)

Apr 4, 17:08

Hi *****,

As an independent contractor, Uber partner really has to be keen in observing his rider.It's very professional manner that you were able to figure out that your rider might be under 18.

You are certainly never required to start a trip with a passenger who you believe is under 18.

I know that it would be hard now to refuse a request specially when you were already met by the rider and it was a right thing that you warned her.

Thanks for sharing this one! If there is any other scenes like this,just email us again.Have a nice day!

Best,

Cha
*Uber Support*


----------



## LEAFdriver

waker81 said:


> Not the first time a CSR provided bad information.
> 
> From Rider TOS (https://www.uber.com/legal/usa/terms): _ The Service is not available for use by persons under the age of 18. You may not authorize third parties to use your Account, and you may not allow persons under the age of 18 to receive transportation or logistics services from Third Party Providers unless they are accompanied by you._
> 
> *Let the kid in the car - start trip - are you 18? If no, is your parent coming? If no, end trip and immediately report problem with the rider through the app - at least you will get paid something for your trouble*.


Wish I had thought of this on Saturday when I was trying to make the guarantees! Would it still count as a 'completed trip' though? This is what was so extra irritating to me on Saturday! I'm trying to get my 1.5 trips per hour....and I keep getting pinged by underage kids that I was told we could NOT take! I was following THEIR RULES...and I get PENALIZED! Dealing with both of these underage riders...that I reported to them LAST MONTH....kept me offline for other riders for at least an hour!! Then, of course, according to THEM...I did not qualify for the guarantees.


----------



## LEAFdriver

*Here is the latest response I just got today! Notice how there is not even the slightest hint of an apology?  Their website is still not updated to reflect this IF it is indeed true. This response did not even address the issue of one 'ACCOUNT HOLDER' who admitted to me she was only 17. They totally ignored that part altogether!

Liam* (Uber)

May 6, 15:15

Hi *****,

Thanks for your response here. We have made up our minds here-- the licensing agreement and privacy policy you're referencing simply haven't been updated since June of last year. Some of our own policies _have_ been updated since that time, and this is one of them (note that the licensing agreement also allows us to update some conditions without notification.)

*As an Ops manager on the Global Policy team, please consider my word the final word on this subject-- we do allow minors to ride alone on the Uber platform, they simply cannot be account holders.*

Best,

*Liam*


----------



## SCdave

LEAFdriver said:


> *Here is the latest response I just got today! Notice how there is not even the slightest hint of an apology?  Their website is still not updated to reflect this IF it is indeed true. This response did not even address the issue of one 'ACCOUNT HOLDER' who admitted to me she was only 17. They totally ignored that part altogether!
> 
> Liam* (Uber)
> 
> May 6, 15:15
> 
> Hi *****,
> 
> Thanks for your response here. We have made up our minds here-- the licensing agreement and privacy policy you're referencing simply haven't been updated since June of last year. Some of our own policies _have_ been updated since that time, and this is one of them (note that the licensing agreement also allows us to update some conditions without notification.)
> 
> *As an Ops manager on the Global Policy team, please consider my word the final word on this subject-- we do allow minors to ride alone on the Uber platform, they simply cannot be account holders.*
> 
> Best,
> 
> *Liam*


So an individual is making policy statements prior to the Rider TOS being updated to reflect the new policy.

Hmmmm...Uber legal must be thrilled with this?


----------



## LEAFdriver

*Wow. There are no words. The audacity. Here's the latest email. 

Liam* (Uber)

May 6, 18:31

*****--

Uber reserves the right to make policy changes with notification. You also have the right to accept/decline any specific trip at any time, and to my knowledge Uber has not instructed you to specifically decline a trip due to the rider being a minor.

I do apologize for any inconvenience caused by any confusion, but please note that we are not able to make any type of payment here.

Best,

*Liam

(Apparently Uber 'Operations' would make excellent politicians) *


----------



## UberHammer

Trying to get a good grip on Uber's policies is like trying to get a good grip on a "soup sandwich".


----------



## Kalee

LEAFdriver said:


> *Here is the latest response I just got today! Notice how there is not even the slightest hint of an apology?  Their website is still not updated to reflect this IF it is indeed true. This response did not even address the issue of one 'ACCOUNT HOLDER' who admitted to me she was only 17. They totally ignored that part altogether!
> 
> Liam* (Uber)
> 
> May 6, 15:15
> 
> Hi *****,
> 
> Thanks for your response here. We have made up our minds here-- the licensing agreement and privacy policy you're referencing simply haven't been updated since June of last year. Some of our own policies _have_ been updated since that time, and this is one of them (note that the licensing agreement also allows us to update some conditions without notification.)
> 
> *As an Ops manager on the Global Policy team, please consider my word the final word on this subject-- we do allow minors to ride alone on the Uber platform, they simply cannot be account holders.*
> 
> Best,
> 
> *Liam*


I would like to know if minors are excluded from coverage on the insurance policy.


----------



## LEAFdriver

*Can you believe this? So....apparently Uber has the 'right' to update policy......but NOT INFORM their partners! *

*Liam
help.uber.com
May 6, 20:58
Liam,

You cannot be serious. What is the meaning of THIS in your Legal Statement?
The Service is not available for use by persons under the age of 18. You may not authorize third parties to use your Account, and you may not allow persons under the age of 18 to receive transportation or logistics services from Third Party Providers unless they are accompanied by you.
Are you going to say it doesn't mean what it says? I have never ever in my life dealt with a company so gifted in double-speak! I'd love to hear your explanation.
---------------------------------------------
Liam* (Uber)
May 7, 08:31
Hi *****,
No double-speak here-- this documentation simply has not been updated to reflect the most up to date policy, as I mentioned several times previously. Again, *Uber reserves the right to update policy without notification.*

Liam


----------



## waker81

BS - from the Rider TOS below

"Uber may amend the Terms related to the Services from time to time. Amendments will be effective upon Uber's posting of such updated Terms at this location or the amended policies or supplemental terms on the applicable Service(s)."


----------



## waker81

Thank you

You may want to inform Liam with Uber Denver of the same - he seems to be making policy on his own.

May 6, 15:15

Hi *****,

Thanks for your response here. We have made up our minds here-- the licensing agreement and privacy policy you're referencing simply haven't been updated since June of last year. Some of our own policies have been updated since that time, and this is one of them (note that the licensing agreement also allows us to update some conditions without notification.)

As an Ops manager on the Global Policy team, please consider my word the final word on this subject-- we do allow minors to ride alone on the Uber platform, they simply cannot be account holders.

Best,

Liam

*From:* Leslie (Uber Partner Support) [mailto: [email protected]]
*Sent:* Friday, 8 May, 2015 13:49
*To:* *Subject:* [Uber] Re: Unaccompanied Minors










##- Please type your reply above this line -##

Your request (31345955) has been updated. To add additional comments, reply to this email.

*Leslie* (Uber)

May 8, 10:48

Hey -

At this time, anyone who is under 18 should be accompanied by an adult while using the service.

Other general information about How to use Uber along with a direct link to our Terms of Service can be found here:
Uber Terms of Service
How to use Uber

*Leslie*
help.uber.com

May 8, 08:05

Hi ,

There seems to be some confusion on the part of riders on Uber's policy on unaccompanied minors. The Rider TOS seem to be pretty clear - "The Service is not available for use by persons under the age of 18. You may not authorize third parties to use your Account, and you may not allow persons under the age of 18 to receive transportation or logistics services from Third Party Providers unless they are accompanied by you."

Similarly, the Privacy policy seems to state the same - "The Company cares about the safety of children. Because our Services are not directed toward minors, no one under 18 (and certainly no children under 13) are allowed to register with or use the Services."

Are there any exceptions to the above stated policy?

Thank you for your time


----------



## LEAFdriver

Wow. Unbelievable! Wait-let me take that back! This is Uber! It is totally believable! Thank you for that update! I will still keep hounding Liam until I get an honest, straightforward answer from them! (Is that even possible?) Please keep us updated here if you hear back from Leslie.  This is getting to be more and more like an episode of the Three Stooges!


----------



## Saleem hatoum

LEAFdriver said:


> *I've been back and forth with Uber CSR's for over a month on this subject. Today, I get this email:
> 
> Liam* (Uber)
> 
> May 5, 17:33
> 
> Hi *****,
> 
> Thanks for reaching out here-- happy to clarify. We _do_ allow underaged riders to ride alone in vehicles on the Uber platform. The only thing we don't allow is them having their own account (since they can't legally agree to our terms and conditions.)
> 
> We only deactivate an underage rider's account if the underage rider is the actual accountholder-- otherwise, as in this case, they haven't done anything wrong.
> 
> Best,
> 
> *Liam*
> -------------------------
> 
> *DISCUSS!!!
> 
> (BTW, this was in response to having to cancel a ride when upon arrival I find an 11 yr old boy and his 7 yr old sister with a ton of sporting equipment in tow...and NO parent/guardian/18 yr old in sight!)*


Here is from Uber website:

*User Requirements and Conduct.*
The Service is not available for use by persons under the age of 18. You may not authorize third parties to use your Account, and you may not allow persons under the age of 18 to receive transportation or logistics services from Third Party Providers unless they are accompanied by you. You may not assign or otherwise transfer your Account to any other person or entity. You agree to comply with all applicable laws when using the Services, and you may only use the Services for lawful purposes (_e.g._, no transport of unlawful or hazardous materials). You will not in your use of the Services cause nuisance, annoyance, inconvenience, or property damage, whether to the Third Party Provider or any other party. In certain instances you may be asked to provide proof of identity to access or use the Services, and you agree that you may be denied access to or use of the Services if you refuse to provide proof of identity.

*I have been through this before and contacted Uber. They were fuming, said they have confirmed the rider let his under age kids use it and they suspended his account.*


----------



## YouWishYouKnewMe

scrurbscrud said:


> Drivers are certainly welcome to violate any rule at their own risk, obviously.


Well said
Be mad at Uber and ruin your own life is not the way I do things


----------



## LEAFdriver

Saleem hatoum said:


> *I have been through this before and contacted Uber. They were fuming, said they have confirmed the rider let his under age kids use it and they suspended his account.*


OMG. Wow. Totally different answer than they gave me. Liam says that we ARE allowed to pick up pax under 18 yrs old without account holder present and pretty much told me to ignore what it says on the website. They DON'T suspend underage riders. Not in my area anyway!


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

Amazing how a "quick question" is now 22 pages of discussion and no clear answer.


----------



## YouWishYouKnewMe

I believe the answer is no rides for unaccompanied minors
The rest is driver misinterpretation


----------



## YouWishYouKnewMe

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Amazing how a "quick question" is now 22 pages of discussion and no clear answer.


----------



## MrsUberJax

http://www.hopskipdrive.com/


----------



## FitDriver

Desert Driver said:


> I transport persons under the age of 18 very frequently. We're cabs, and cabs give rides to kids all the time. I have one rider who pings me every morning at 7:17 and I take her to school when I'm available. I think she's 15 or 16. It's no big deal. Don't worry about transporting kids. Be more worried about Uber rate cuts.


If you transport someone under the age of 18 does that invalidate insurance from Uber since it is against their own rules?


----------



## waker81

FitDriver said:


> If you transport someone under the age of 18 does that invalidate insurance from Uber since it is against their own rules?


Yes!!


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

YouWishYouKnewMe said:


> I believe the answer is no rides for unaccompanied minors
> The rest is driver misinterpretation


That's what I thought, too.
But I now have it writing (to protect myself) that Uber doesn't really care.

Earlier this week I picked up a pax at a local hospital... young man, wearing a lab coat and sporting a hospital ID Tag. I asked how long he'd been working at this hospital and he told me was just doing a summer internship - a HIGH SCHOOL summer internship. I asked what year he was going into in the fall and he said he'd be a junior. That means he was 16. 17 tops.

This was a very bright kid and I didn't want to give him a hard time...
but I did explain to him the Uber 'rules' about drivers transporting unaccompanied minors -
and told him that if he ever gets turned down for a ride by a driver due to his age, not get annoyed with the driver -
that because of the rules the driver would have no insurance coverage in the event of an accident.
I asked him to explain this to his friends too so that they wouldn't give a driver a hard time.
He was great - understood completely.

After I dropped him and ended the trip I shot a quick note to Uber asking:

_Account holder, rider was under 18 years old... 
would Uber have covered the passenger with insurance in the event of an accident since Uber policy is no unaccompanied minors as passengers?_​
First answer I got was copy/paste about Uber's insurance coverage limits and how I don't need to have commercial insurance...
but it never answered my question.
So I wrote again:

_Thanks for the information, however, why did you completely ignore my question?
I had a passenger in my car, alone, who told me they were 16 years old.
Uber has instructed drivers not to provide rides to unaccompanied minors.

I want to know, if I find myself in a situation with an unaccompanied minor in my car, if Uber and it's liability insurance will cover the ride?

It's a simple question - please provide a direct and clear answer.
_
_Thank you,_​
This time, I got an uncharacteristically candid and direct response:

------------------------- From Uber -------------------------
*
Question: I want to know if I find myself in a situation with an unaccompanied minor in my car, if Uber and it's liability insurance will cover the ride?

Answer: Yes.

Best,

______ at Uber*​----------------------------------------------------------------

So there you have it...
Uber says one thing in it's policy, but still allows and covers unaccompanied minors.

I'm glad that all rides are at my discretion - and that I can turn down a ride request from a minor,
but I am VERY glad to know that the Uber insurance IS still in place when/if I do transport an unaccompanied minor.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

FitDriver said:


> If you transport someone under the age of 18 does that invalidate insurance from Uber since it is against their own rules?


I thought it did -
but I checked with Uber earlier this week (see my post above)
and NO - *it does NOT invalidate insurance from Uber*.


----------



## UberHammer

Uber lies.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

UberHammer said:


> Uber lies.


Yup.
That's why I was so shocked to get such a direct answer from a CSR who may not (or may) have the authority to say what they did.
All I know is that I have the documentation on file now.
I'm covered - even if someone else gets a different answer
(right up until I hear from Uber that the policy is different than what they sent me).


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Amazing how a "quick question" is now 22 pages of discussion and no clear answer.


------------------------- From Uber -------------------------
*
Question: I want to know if I find myself in a situation with an unaccompanied minor in my car, if Uber and it's liability insurance will cover the ride?

Answer: Yes.

Best,

______ at Uber*
----------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## observer

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Yup.
> That's why I was so shocked to get such a direct answer from a CSR who may not (or may) have the authority to say what they did.
> All I know is that I have the documentation on file now.
> I'm covered - even if someone else gets a different answer
> (right up until I hear from Uber that the policy is different than what they sent me).


There is probably some language in driver/uber contract that says if it's not in contract it isn' t valid. So even if you have it in writing from a CSR they probably do not have the authority to change anything.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

observer said:


> There is probably some language in driver/uber contract that says if it's not in contract it isn' t valid. So even if you have it in writing from a CSR they probably do not have the authority to change anything.


That's not the way it works. It's the way people who write contracts HOPE it works, but if I ever have to take Uber to court because they deny an insurance claim because I had an unaccompanied minor in my car on an Uber trip, the record of the exchange I had with Uber is all I need. It would never even make it to court.

I can't remember what the principle in contract law is called, but basically any answer to a question I am provided *after* having entered into the agreement takes precedence over the earlier contract wording.

And the opposite would apply if I asked the question and got the answer before entering the agreement and then entered an agreement with a different answer.

It's the MOST CURRENT INFO you get that applies...
that's why the agreement says something to the effect that Uber can change the terms of the agreement at any time and just notify you of the change... like they do with pricing and fees.


----------

