# Lawyer/pax says Lyft's "re-dispatch" is a breach of contract



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

Had a nice-guy lawyer on board on an Uber ride yesterday, and we had an interesting conversation about Lyft. He asked how I liked the two companies, and I told him fine, but both have their pluses and minuses.

I mentioned Lyft's policy of offering a ride and then taking it away -- which Lyft calls re-dispatch.

*He said that practice is a very clear breach of contract.*

I have had a pretty good business law course and know the requirements for a valid contract, but had never considered it that way. What's required for a valid contract, basically, is three things: offer, acceptance, and consideration. Consideration means each party receives something of value. I said there was no consideration because if there is no ride, I don't get paid.

The lawyer said that's not true. He said I receive consideration in the form of Lyft's promise that there is a legitimate passenger to be picked up. I am providing consideration to Lyft by driving in the direction of the pickup with the intent of fulfilling their promise of a ride to the pax. Offer, acceptance, consideration for both parties to the contract.

He says that *if Lyft arbitrarily cancels the ride* -- for the real or pretext reason of providing better service to the pax -- *they are in breach of contract*. The way he explained it, it makes sense and it would be interesting to see how Lyft would react if some lawyer called them on this practice.


----------



## Irishjohn831 (Aug 11, 2017)

We’re gonna sue Lyft
We’re gonna sue the Lyft driver who took the ride after you. 
We’re gonna sue the passenger 
We’re gonna sue the air that the ping that was sent, then taken away travelled thru before hitting your phone.


----------



## LyftinCG (Jul 14, 2017)

However - using that logic - when DRIVERS cancel (for all of the various reasons stated on these boards) - lyft could maybe claim damages as well....if it works one way....the other must also apply.


----------



## InertialObserver (Aug 16, 2017)

Okay, here's my take on it (studied law, not an attorney, not legal advice): There are two contracts in play. 

The contract between the pax and the driver, and the contract between the driver and Lyft. 
(The contract between the pax and Lyft is irrelevant here.)

Contract between pax and driver: Pax - Will you drive me? Driver - Yes, if you will pay me. Pax - I agree to pay you. Driver - I agree to drive you. (Included in this contract is the clause that the pax can cancel within 2 mins without penalty, and after 2 mins can cancel with a $5 penalty. Driver can cancel at any point without penalty.)

Contract between Lyft and driver - Lyft - Pax Ryan wants to contract with you to drive him somewhere. Can I connect you? Driver - Yes, I'm willing to contract with Ryan to drive him somewhere. I accept the connection. Driver - I completed the contract with Ryan. Lyft - Here is the money Ryan paid for the ride, as agreed, minus our agreed-upon commission. 

There is no provision in the contract between Lyft and driver that Lyft may cancel the contract with or without penalty, with the exception (I assume) of technical difficulties such as losing connection with the server. 

There is also no provision in the contract that Lyft can reroute. If Lyft reroutes the driver to pick up Rhonda, then the driver is now heading to pick up a pax with whom he/she has not accepted a contract. I'd say that driving towards that pax is de facto acceptance, and I'd also say that now we're running afoul of employment law. Well, we drivers aren't - Lyft is. 

Contractors accept or reject each contract proposal. Employees go where they're told.


----------



## LyftinCG (Jul 14, 2017)

InertialObserver said:


> Okay, here's my take on it (studied law, not an attorney, not legal advice): There are two contracts in play.
> 
> The contract between the pax and the driver, and the contract between the driver and Lyft.
> (The contract between the pax and Lyft is irrelevant here.)
> ...


Well - the contract between the Pax and Lyft IS relevant because that is where the damages occur to them if you as a contractor default on your agreement to take the connection they offer to you in exchange for a fee.

Again - not saying that there isn't some merit to the argument Lyft should not re-dispatch - but you must accept that the "cancellations after calling a PAX to find out destination", or cancelling after acceptance of a long ride to keep accept rates up, etc. also could be breach of contract - so be careful what you wish for....


----------



## Leo1983 (Jul 3, 2017)

Lyft and Uber will do what they want without consequences. I’m in Los Angeles and all the people in charge of regulating Lyft or even higher government won’t even reply to my requests. 
They’re all in the tech companies pockets. 
I guess we didn’t learn a lesson with Bernie Madoff. Lyft and Uber are corporate ponzie schemes. I can’t wait for all the investors to lose their money. 
I’m going to laugh so hard.


----------



## Jo3030 (Jan 2, 2016)

I will be in line when they get sued.


----------



## Dropking (Aug 18, 2017)

LyftinCG said:


> Well - the contract between the Pax and Lyft IS relevant because that is where the damages occur to them if you as a contractor default on your agreement to take the connection they offer to you in exchange for a fee.
> 
> Again - not saying that there isn't some merit to the argument Lyft should not re-dispatch - but you must accept that the "cancellations after calling a PAX to find out destination", or cancelling after acceptance of a long ride to keep accept rates up, etc. also could be breach of contract - so be careful what you wish for....


Be careful about a lawsuit against an individual driver for canceling an individual pax? Hmm. Consider myself warned.

Apples and oranges. Lyft seems quite vulnerable to class action lawsuits for bad faith contracts. That is quite a different exposure.


----------



## ntcindetroit (Mar 23, 2017)

We'd think re-dispatch w/o driver's specific consent is a breach of contract and safety concern. To be re-dispatched twice is even worse.


----------



## AuxCordBoston (Dec 3, 2016)

JimKE said:


> Had a nice-guy lawyer on board on an Uber ride yesterday, and we had an interesting conversation about Lyft. He asked how I liked the two companies, and I told him fine, but both have their pluses and minuses.
> 
> I mentioned Lyft's policy of offering a ride and then taking it away -- which Lyft calls re-dispatch.
> 
> ...


I get the feeling that you have legal training.


----------



## Swerves (Nov 16, 2017)

JimKE said:


> it would be interesting to see how Lyft would react if some lawyer called them on this practice.


Trump's undersecretary for the Transportation department got picked up while he managed Lyft, they have an unbelievable legal team and their lobbyist go deep so when you say "some lawyer" just remember you've got to pay to play.

The problem is the unforeseen consequences of these lawsuits and I'm not even talking about the ones that go anywhere, just the media attention from the filing alone is enough to create changes that don't benefit anybody.

I will not be in line to sue Lyft, yes it does piss me off when I'm OMW to pickup and it re-routes me to a new pickup or just cancels, but the fact is, RIDERS CANCEL ALL THE TIME sometimes just seeing you're still far away and MAYBE if they cancel they'll see an ant closer. Lyft isn't the enemy here, I know that's akin to herecy on this forum and I'll probably get banned for the treasony but I don't live my life searching for the bad guy constantly.


----------



## emmhope (Jul 10, 2017)

Beyond annoying !

It was a 75% pt ride cancelled less than 2 minutes before getting to pax, after having been in terminals traffic for more than 15 minutes.

I called them and demanded a cancellation fee , they said they will add it on as a one time offer

I told them , I'm done with Lyft at sfo but then I get confused how they deactivate us for cancelling rides when they are doing the same thing ?! I didn't want stress the poor support woman with an angry argument cause I'm sure it wasn't her fault.

Lyft needs to reorganize their operations before it's too late, they are sinking way way too low and soon they won't be able to afford a way to win drivers back.



Leo1983 said:


> Lyft and Uber will do what they want without consequences. I'm in Los Angeles and all the people in charge of regulating Lyft or even higher government won't even reply to my requests.
> They're all in the tech companies pockets.
> I guess we didn't learn a lesson with Bernie Madoff. Lyft and Uber are corporate ponzie schemes. I can't wait for all the investors to lose their money.
> I'm going to laugh so hard.


Unfortunately for them they need us ! we are their business and their customers.

Their business model will collapse if they keep that mentality up , No they can't do whatever they want Z


----------



## beezlewaxin (Feb 10, 2015)

When this happens and I dont get another trip right away I have called support by choosing any previous trip in the app, choose Help, choose you were in an accident so that the "Call Me" button appears. Enter your phone # and tap "Call Me".

When they call tell them you have a question about a trip that was just cancelled. They may xfer you to the appropriate dept.

Explain what happened and my experience has been they always offer $5 to me. I tell them I am not calling in to get a cancel fee, but that I am calling in to find out why it was cancelled by Lyft..and to prevent this from happening again. And please send me a ride...now...lol.

The only thing I ever get from these calls is $5. Not worth doing it everytime but sometimes it is worth the effort.


----------



## circle1 (Sep 17, 2016)

LyftinCG said:


> However - using that logic - when DRIVERS cancel (for all of the various reasons stated on these boards) - lyft could maybe claim damages as well....if it works one way....the other must also apply.


Ummmm, Gryft already boots drivers who contact pax/cancel too much . . . NEXT!



Swerves said:


> Trump's undersecretary for the Transportation department got picked up while he managed Lyft, they have an unbelievable legal team and their lobbyist go deep so when you say "some lawyer" just remember you've got to pay to play.
> 
> The problem is the unforeseen consequences of these lawsuits and I'm not even talking about the ones that go anywhere, just the media attention from the filing alone is enough to create changes that don't benefit anybody.
> 
> I will not be in line to sue Lyft, yes it does piss me off when I'm OMW to pickup and it re-routes me to a new pickup or just cancels, but the fact is, RIDERS CANCEL ALL THE TIME sometimes just seeing you're still far away and MAYBE if they cancel they'll see an ant closer. Lyft isn't the enemy here, I know that's akin to herecy on this forum and I'll probably get banned for the treasony but I don't live my life searching for the bad guy constantly.


Fine except we have eye-witness testimony from drivers who were sitting right next to pax when Gryft texted them saying the driver canceled, and the driver received a text about the same time saying the pax canceled . . .


----------



## Blatherskite (Nov 30, 2016)

Leo1983 said:


> I can't wait for all the investors to lose their money.
> I'm going to laugh so hard.


Me too. They're going to have to invent a new, superlative form of "schadenfreude".


----------



## unPat (Jul 20, 2016)

JimKE said:


> Had a nice-guy lawyer on board on an Uber ride yesterday, and we had an interesting conversation about Lyft. He asked how I liked the two companies, and I told him fine, but both have their pluses and minuses.
> 
> I mentioned Lyft's policy of offering a ride and then taking it away -- which Lyft calls re-dispatch.
> 
> ...


They will cancel the ride when they want and not pay you the cancellation fee. Can you sue them? Maybe.But their programming and algorithm are trade secrets like Coca colas formula. It's likely both Uber/and lyft have $1 billion contingency funds for legal challenges. It will be years and years of costly legal procedure before any lawyer can challenge them.


----------



## DidIDoThat (Jan 9, 2017)

JimKE said:


> He says that *if Lyft arbitrarily cancels the ride* -- for the real or pretext reason of providing better service to the pax -- *they are in breach of contract*. The way he explained it, it makes sense and it would be interesting to see how Lyft would react if some lawyer called them on this practice.


If a lawyer contacts them it will be "no comment".
If someone sue's them, it will be forced to arbitration.
If it goes to arbitration, an NDA will be required and you won't hear the outcome.

If this is ever to go to court, it needs to be done by someone that has opted out of arbitration.

They are in violation of their agreement in many areas, but until someone steps up to force the issues via a lawsuit, nothing is going to happen.


----------



## Certain Judgment (Dec 2, 2016)

JimKE said:


> Had a nice-guy lawyer on board on an Uber ride yesterday, and we had an interesting conversation about Lyft. He asked how I liked the two companies, and I told him fine, but both have their pluses and minuses.
> 
> I mentioned Lyft's policy of offering a ride and then taking it away -- which Lyft calls re-dispatch.
> 
> ...


+1,000,000,000


----------



## LUberUpLyft (Sep 5, 2017)

LyftinCG said:


> However - using that logic - when DRIVERS cancel (for all of the various reasons stated on these boards) - lyft could maybe claim damages as well....if it works one way....the other must also apply.


If drivers cancel too much we get deactivated. That's your damages. Where's their consequence for cancelling rides?


----------



## LyftinCG (Jul 14, 2017)

LUberUpLyft said:


> If drivers cancel too much we get deactivated. That's your damages. Where's their consequence for cancelling rides?


Yes - I guess I wasn't speaking too much in a lawsuit way here - just that those rules could be enforced even more than they are now.

But, point taken.


----------



## LUberUpLyft (Sep 5, 2017)

LyftinCG said:


> Yes - I guess I wasn't speaking too much in a lawsuit way here - just that those rules could be enforced even more than they are now.
> 
> But, point taken.


Uber screwed me like this plenty of times. 4 am and I'm waiting for an airport ride. I get one, on my way to pick him up and they rematch me with someone at McDonalds. McDonalds at 4 am, yup....thats a money maker there


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

unPat said:


> They will cancel the ride when they want and not pay you the cancellation fee. Can you sue them? Maybe.But their programming and algorithm are trade secrets like Coca colas formula. It's likely both Uber/and lyft have $1 billion contingency funds for legal challenges. It will be years and years of costly legal procedure before any lawyer can challenge them.


I'm not interested in suing anybody. Just passing along the info.

If I get mad enough to think about suing them, I'll just delete their app instead.


----------



## JJS (Jan 5, 2016)

Unless you OPTED OUT of arbitration you can not sue LYFT! Read the Terms of Service. This is why I keep telling drivers to utilize the GOVERNMENT! The government can sue! They are not a party to the TOS. On some level, they have an Operating agreement with local and or state government. 

Bail out is what is going on and the new message is evidentry proof that Lyft is canceling rides which as the OP indicated is breach. TOS has not been addressed regarding this issue. 

If that ride request is more the 3-5 minutes away EXPECT a bailout if you are in a saturated market.


----------



## Greenie (Jan 26, 2016)

emmhope said:


> View attachment 179394
> 
> 
> Beyond annoying !
> ...


Could have been worst, last week I got a ping, accepted, arrived, picked up pax, and started the trip. 5 blocks into the route I got exact same message, ride was cancelled by Lyft. Apparently they assigned him a different driver. The other driver charged the pax who is still in my car heading to his destination $5 no-show fee and guess who got screwed in all this?


----------



## Kaleb379 (Feb 3, 2017)

emmhope said:


> View attachment 179394
> 
> 
> Beyond annoying !
> ...


I noticed this last night in Chicago, I got a text saying the ride was cancelled by Lyft. Now today the text is gone and I can not screenshot it.


----------



## DidIDoThat (Jan 9, 2017)

Yep, one way to tell in the past if the passenger actually cancelled was to look at driving history. You would see "Passenger cancelled" for each one the passenger actually cancelled. If Lyft cancelled, there would be no trace of it.


----------



## circle1 (Sep 17, 2016)

unPat said:


> They will cancel the ride when they want and not pay you the cancellation fee. Can you sue them? Maybe.But their programming and algorithm are trade secrets like Coca colas formula. It's likely both Uber/and lyft have $1 billion contingency funds for legal challenges. It will be years and years of costly legal procedure before any lawyer can challenge them.


True, but we're seeing cracks in the facade.


----------



## Avb (Feb 17, 2016)

LyftinCG said:


> However - using that logic - when DRIVERS cancel (for all of the various reasons stated on these boards) - lyft could maybe claim damages as well....if it works one way....the other must also apply.


Lyft and only Lyft is breaching the contract, not the driver. Let me explain why:

A rider has up to 2 minutes to cancel a ride that the driver accepted. The rider has nothing to lose. He or she is not losing time, money or miles. A driver on the other hand has lost 2 minutes of his/her time, is now possibly stuck in traffic (losing more time) and has put unpaid miles on his/her car. Driver is losing money.

If a rider can cancel anytime before 2 minutes for whatever reason, then the driver (contractor) should be able to cancel at least up 2 minutes for whatever the reason is. Be it destination, be it because they just don't feel like driving. The driver is a contractor this gives him/her the power to cancel their trips.

Lyft on the other hand is just a mediator. Lyft is the unbiased operating system that matches drivers wth riders. Just like Craigslist cannot choose which item you can sell. Just like Angie's list can't choose which house you (the contractor) can paint.

Bottom line me as a driver have everything to lose the minute I step in my car. From waiting at a traffic light to waiting in traffic. Time is money and money is being lost. A rider has nothing to lose when he/she requests except the wear and tear on their shoes as they're waiting for another "taxi." When Lyft reroutes my trip Lyft is choosing my trips for me and this choosing how much money I am making. I am no longer a connector I am an employee


----------



## MrMikeNC (Feb 16, 2017)

InertialObserver said:


> Okay, here's my take on it (studied law, not an attorney, not legal advice): There are two contracts in play.
> 
> The contract between the pax and the driver, and the contract between the driver and Lyft.
> (The contract between the pax and Lyft is irrelevant here.)
> ...


Agreed with all of your post, but the bolded is what I immediately concluded on my own when this re-routing nonsense first started happened.

What I imagine happening eventually is this: we all know Lyft will eventually deactivate you for high cancellations. Sooner or later someone will be deactivated for cancellations, and that same someone will turn around and prove 100% of his/her cancellations were re-dispatches and take Lyft to court. All it will take is for this to be put before a judge so that judge can ask Lyft why are you treating contractors like employees?

If Lyft was smart they'd let you cancel re-dispatches without penalty. Or end re-dispatches altogether. But, they're not, so I see the above scenario happening at some point very soon.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

I hate to rain on everyone's parade, but the pax and the driver don't have a contract with each other. The driver has a contract with Lyft and the pax has a contract with Lyft.

Pax tells Lyft: "I need a ride, and will pay our agreed upon rate (presented based on destination)."

Lyft tells driver: "I have a pax that needs a ride, will you take him at our agreed upon rates?"

Driver tells Lyft: "I will take him at our agreed upon rates" (or declines, or ignores).

Lyft tells pax: "I'm sending you this driver, here is their name, car description, license plate number, etc, and will charge you our agreed upon rates"

IF something other than the pax getting to their destination happens, then it's between the driver and Lyft, and the pax and Lyft. Which is why sometimes we get cancellation fees (that Lyft is obligated to pay us), but the pax doesn't have to pay it (because they disputed, or Lyft gave them a pass or whatever). It's also why Lyft can do promo rates, free rides (like that march one), ect. If our contract was with the pax directly, if they didn't pay, we wouldn't get paid, and so on.

It's also why, even though everyone cites "but I'm an independent contractor!" you still have to follow lyft's policies (as they are in your contract and your contract is with Lyft, not the pax).


----------



## moJohoJo (Feb 19, 2017)

InertialObserver said:


> Okay, here's my take on it (studied law, not an attorney, not legal advice): There are two contracts in play.
> 
> The contract between the pax and the driver, and the contract between the driver and Lyft.
> (The contract between the pax and Lyft is irrelevant here.)
> ...


YOUR RATING IS TOO LOW ! SLAVE !!! PS - It's bad for the " community " if you don't accept rides two hours away .


----------



## Whistler (Jul 5, 2016)

Damn this is one thing I hate about driving for Lyft. 

If GPS was 100% accurate all the time it would be one thing because it would probably be taking me to the closest rider, but last week I went from Pax A to B to A back to B and ended up taking longer because they were in opposite directions, and I ended up going around the same block twice. Both pax were 5 mins away, but it ended up taking longer........


----------



## circle1 (Sep 17, 2016)

Avb said:


> Lyft and only Lyft is breaching the contract, not the driver. Let me explain why:
> 
> A rider has up to 2 minutes to cancel a ride that the driver accepted. The rider has nothing to lose. He or she is not losing time, money or miles. A driver on the other hand has lost 2 minutes of his/her time, is now possibly stuck in traffic (losing more time) and has put unpaid miles on his/her car. Driver is losing money.
> 
> ...


The phrase, "_Lyft on the other hand is just a mediator. Lyft is the *''*unbiased'' operating system_," the word "unbiased" should be in quote marks!



Pawtism said:


> I hate to rain on everyone's parade, but the pax and the driver don't have a contract with each other. The driver has a contract with Lyft and the pax has a contract with Lyft.
> 
> Pax tells Lyft: "I need a ride, and will pay our agreed upon rate (presented based on destination)."
> 
> ...


Right, but eventually this charade will be unmasked for what it is. Circumvention of employment laws.


----------



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

JimKE said:


> Had a nice-guy lawyer on board on an Uber ride yesterday, and we had an interesting conversation about Lyft. He asked how I liked the two companies, and I told him fine, but both have their pluses and minuses.
> 
> I mentioned Lyft's policy of offering a ride and then taking it away -- which Lyft calls re-dispatch.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure about this. Lyft does pay $5 compensation if they take the ride back after 2 minutes. You have to contact support to get it, but they will do it.

I see this more as a change of terms of business. Lyft's pings are no longer a firm offer of work. Rather, now, they are a just a tentative offer. With each ping, Lyft is saying that if you accept then they will "pencil you in" for the ride, but that if a better driver comes up for them then they will take it from you and reassign it to that driver. As long as both parties, Lyft and the drivers, are clear on how things work now, there isn't an issue. Drivers need to adapt to this change and realise that because they only have each ride on a tentative, contingency basis, they should keep Uber open and if an Uber ride comes up which is better then they should dump the Lyft ride and go and do the Uber job. And, because any ride can be taken away at any time, this should influence the Lyft pings you accept. Accepting any ping that's more than a couple of minutes away and you're really taking a risk and rolling the dice. Much more risk now for no extra benefit.

I personally think that Lyft should go back to the previous setup in which each ride offer was a firm offer of work to the driver - this would also create a corresponding obligation on the drivers to carry out the rides they agreed to do. Right now if Lyft can dump the original driver whenever it wants to reassign a ride then fair's fair; the driver can also dump the ride at any time too. If Lyft took the ride offers to drivers seriously then it would be better for pax, obviously, and drivers and Lyft too.

Uber very quickly canned their experiment into ride swaps. I hope Lyft does too but it seems that, at the moment, Lyft does have its head firmly wedged up its own ass.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Avb said:


> Lyft and only Lyft is breaching the contract, not the driver. Let me explain why:
> 
> A rider has up to 2 minutes to cancel a ride that the driver accepted. The rider has nothing to lose. He or she is not losing time, money or miles. A driver on the other hand has lost 2 minutes of his/her time, is now possibly stuck in traffic (losing more time) and has put unpaid miles on his/her car. Driver is losing money.
> 
> ...


Well said


----------



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

The Gift of Fish said:


> Lyft does pay $5 compensation if they take the ride back after 2 minutes. You have to contact support to get it, but they will do it.


Happened to me. I contacted support, "hey where's my cancel fee?". "We don't pay cancel fees when Lyft redispatches a ride." I pitched a fit and the rep told me, "I'll get you the fee via a bonus this one time, but we won't do it again." I said, "well ya say that... but if it happens again, I'll call again and raise hell until I get my $5." This policy is such a screw job!


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

circle1 said:


> The phrase, "_Lyft on the other hand is just a mediator. Lyft is the *''*unbiased'' operating system_," the word "unbiased" should be in quote marks!
> 
> Right, but eventually this charade will be unmasked for what it is. Circumvention of employment laws.


Well, all independent contractor situations are effectively circumvention of employment laws really. Even independent contractors that wind up hiring their own employees (case in point, every company that outsources it's phone lines, often to other countries), are a circumvention of the hassles. They don't want to deal with the hassles of employing all those phone operators, so they get an independent contract to handle the phones. If they want to hire people, whatever, as long as the calls are answered. Why hire people if you can get other companies (aka divers, you're a company, specifically a sole proprietorship) to do the same job for you, and not have to deal with all the employment stuff.

Aside from minimum wage and taxes, there are also the other factors, such as, let's say a driver (employee vs independent contractor) actually was severely allergic to service dogs (medical documentation and all). As an employee, they'd have to do ADA accommodations for them, and because they couldn't drive (because of the potential for exposure to service dogs), they'd be required to give them another position where they wouldn't come in contact. As an independent contractor, they can tell them tough, you're not eligible to drive, and that's that. That's only a very small and rare example. I'm sure you could find an HR forum that would give a much better scope of all the problems employees bring. So if you can get by with independent contractors, why wouldn't you? That's basically Uber/Lyft's position (and it's kinda understandable, even if it does suck from our point of view.

In theory, you could hire a driver, have them run your car (assuming they could pass the background checks and such) on whatever schedule you wished, and still subcontract out to Uber/Lyft (but then, of course, you'd be responsible for whatever he did, just as any employer is). Now, minimum wage laws would get you (because you'd have to pay them minimum wage, even if you weren't getting it from Lyft/Uber), so of course no one does, but you could.


----------



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

kc ub'ing! said:


> Happened to me. I contacted support, "hey where's my cancel fee?". "We don't pay cancel fees when Lyft redispatches a ride." I pitched a fit and the rep told me, "I'll get you the fee via a bonus this one time, but we won't do it again." I said, "well ya say that... but if it happens again, I'll call again and raise hell until I get my $5." This policy is such a screw job!


Well, their policies do change week to week. I haven't called in for an unpaid cancelled-by-Lyft in a while, mainly because I now limit myself to Lyft rides that are just a couple of minutes away.


----------



## socallaoc (Dec 23, 2017)

Picked up a couple tonight on Lyft while DFing my way home. Usually I stick to uber but I’d already used both DFs so I got stuck using lyft. They start up typical convo: how long have you been driving, which do you like better, etc. my response: Uber treats drivers better (relatively speaking), probably because they’ve been slapped into shape with all the negative press, court decision, etc over the past few years.

Woman goes “oh?” And throws the sarcastic “what’s one thing you’d tell lyft to change if they were here right now?” First thing out of my mouth was this redispatch crap, how lyft will cancel the ride even though I’m a few minutes away, how it wastes my time, gas, and is potentially a major opportunity cost. Her boyfriend/hubby goes “oh yea, I’ve had that happen to me! Notification I have a new driver. So annoying!”

She didn’t say anything else for the rest of the (short, non PT, in the pouring rain) ride. Guess I popped her lyft bubble.


----------

