# Lower ratings for seatbelts



## ubersan (Apr 29, 2016)

Anyone else experience lower ratings after asking all passengers to buckle up? This past week i have purposely made sure to ask everyone to buckle up, since i have been lazy about it, but am a bit paranoid about liability. I dont start the trip until i hear or see all belts buckled, this way i can cancel a trip without getting a 1 star. Case in point, a very portly dude made half arse attempt to buckle up over his substantial belly ro include over his big carryall bag, and gabe up and said he would just hold the belt. I offered to help which he refused, and i suggested the front seat, which he snapped back saying he wasn't foing to sit in front. So, i replied it was DC law and i couldn't continue driving mr daisy (since he refised to ride in front). I am sure i would have gotten a 1 star if i had started the trip then ended it. So good to always wait to start trip after the buckles snap.

Some folks are visibly annoyed by having to buckle up and i can see my rating drop because of it.


----------



## uberz2016 (May 1, 2016)

True, ratings will go bad once you start asking passengers to buckle up ( even requesting them in a pleasing down to earth manner), I have noticed this. Also when you request passengers to stand away from taxi zones and bus stops. I have been writing to uber from the past 15 months and the reply always is "Your overall rating is averaged from all the ratings provided by your riders. Partners are not able to see actual ratings from individual trips, as both driver and rider ratings are anonymous. Of course, we understand that it's impossible to please everyone, and we do take this into account when Partners get the occasional bad rating, so not to worry. If you receive consistently low feedback in a certain area, we'll be sure to contact you to discuss how things can be improve"

And other replies were explaining how rating system works. I think they have templates which they use to make their life easier. I had a drunk passenger who wanted to smoke in my car and told the passenger I got asthma requested him not too, I am sure I would got a 1 star, when I emailed to uber, uber guys told me " thanks for letting us know and ratings are based on average blah blah. It's a their big business talented game.

Now I understand why uber always advertise they need new drivers, because drivers will be kicked out once the reach below 4.5, one of a consumer lawyer told me that uber has to provide transparency in their ratings or negative comments by their passengers. 

But my friend trust me I have written 100 emails regarding these issues but I feel I wasted a lot of time. Uber will eventually go down in six months time.


----------



## galileo5 (Jan 16, 2016)

uberz2016 said:


> Uber will eventually go down in six months time.


Many drivers have been wishing this for a very long time, yet they still stick around.


----------



## ubersan (Apr 29, 2016)

uberz2016 said:


> when I emailed to uber, uber guys told me " thanks for letting us know and ratings are based on average blah blah. It's a their big business talented game.


Yeah, Uber emailed me back after a rider gave me 1 star since I wouldn't wait for her to go shopping for an unspecified amount of time. Uber's response was that rating is average of over 500 trips, but fails to mention that until you get to 500 trips, it is averaged over last x trips. Uber also wrote that no one single trip will significantly impact your overall rating, which is a complete crock.


----------



## uberz2016 (May 1, 2016)

It is a complete bullshit, they are making drivers fools. But their final answer would be if you don't like uber don't work for us.
I pick up people who cannot understand English and don't like any conversation with them and sure they have rated me low. I did 4 trips today and my rating reduced by .07, this is insane . I am looking for an other job until I have to be a slave. **** this shit


----------



## Jufkii (Sep 17, 2015)

ubersan said:


> Anyone else experience lower ratings after asking all passengers to buckle up? This past week i have purposely made sure to ask everyone to buckle up, since i have been lazy about it, but am a bit paranoid about liability. I dont start the trip until i hear or see all belts buckled, this way i can cancel a trip without getting a 1 star. Case in point, a very portly dude made half arse attempt to buckle up over his substantial belly ro include over his big carryall bag, and gabe up and said he would just hold the belt. I offered to help which he refused, and i suggested the front seat, which he snapped back saying he wasn't foing to sit in front. So, i replied it was DC law and i couldn't continue driving mr daisy (since he refised to ride in front). I am sure i would have gotten a 1 star if i had started the trip then ended it. So good to always wait to start trip after the buckles snap.
> 
> Some folks are visibly annoyed by having to buckle up and i can see my rating drop because of it.


The few Ive had to ask to buckle up have all been the college student crowd thus far. Ive figured these non tipping brats are going to ding my ratings regardless of what I do anyway. So just ask em to buckle,deal with the inevitable ratings drop,and move on


----------



## uberz2016 (May 1, 2016)

I am with uber from 1.5 years and now a passenger complaints uber dangerous driving and it's showing on my profile, when asked at uber office.. Tom dick and Harry advised me don't worry about it.. LOL. He just could not have an answer. I just smiled and left the place and never would visit again. What a shame, and all the customers think uber is the best and they look after their drivers, this is slavery into next level .. Bullshit business model will not stay for long. Wait untill lyft and other services coming up in July.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

ubersan said:


> Anyone else experience lower ratings after asking all passengers to buckle up? This past week i have purposely made sure to ask everyone to buckle up, since i have been lazy about it, but am a bit paranoid about liability. I dont start the trip until i hear or see all belts buckled, this way i can cancel a trip without getting a 1 star. Case in point, a very portly dude made half arse attempt to buckle up over his substantial belly ro include over his big carryall bag, and gabe up and said he would just hold the belt. I offered to help which he refused, and i suggested the front seat, which he snapped back saying he wasn't foing to sit in front. So, i replied it was DC law and i couldn't continue driving mr daisy (since he refised to ride in front). I am sure i would have gotten a 1 star if i had started the trip then ended it. So good to always wait to start trip after the buckles snap.
> 
> Some folks are visibly annoyed by having to buckle up and i can see my rating drop because of it.


In America,in my state ( Louisiana) the individual is ticketed,not the driver.so I let them decide.
But
It can be unsafe.
I had a taxi fly through a stop sign right in front of me.I saw him out of corner of my eye,had to apply full force braking.
Had 4 young ladies as passengers.
Could see out of corner of my right eye. 3 in back seat flying forward !
Had to adjust my braking and steering so they would not be injured.
Had they been wearing seat belts,they would have stayed put.

In the event of an impact, you can not regulate deacceleration.I knew someone killed in a front seat by a flying passenger in the back.snapped their neck.


----------



## ubersan (Apr 29, 2016)

tohunt4me said:


> In America,in my state ( Louisiana) the individual is ticketed,not the driver.so I let them decide.
> But
> It can be unsafe.
> I had a taxi fly through a stop sign right in front of me.I saw him out of corner of my eye,had to apply full force braking.


Since i am in dc metro you dont know which tri-state you are going to drive through, so belts are mandatory to comply with most restrictive laws, since driver can get fined with points for passengers not buckling up. Since i do not start until after everyone buckles up, i do not know destination; however, my main concern is regardless of who gets fined, the driver will always be liable for injuries incurred in an accident, even no fault, if driver does not ensure everyone wears seatbelts. In suing prone US of A, i am not willing to take liability risk, because uber only covers $1m total and your personal only covers $300k unless you also have separate umbrella. If you have 4 pax guaranteed $1.3m ain't gonna cover you. So i don't start any trip until everyone buckles up. I guess i will have to live will lower ratings from pax who hate wearing them.


----------



## ubersan (Apr 29, 2016)

In fact i probably should get some of those buckle up stickers to cover my buttocks.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Nanny-ER-uh-_*SEAT*_ belt laws in the Washington Metropolitan Area:

District of Columbia-Primary. This means that you can be pulled over and issued a summons for not wearing your revenu-ER-uh-_*SEAT*_ belt. As is typical in jurisdictions run by what runs D.C., the government expects you to do its job for it and act as if you were Law Enforcement. Thus, the driver is held responsible for his passengers. If any passenger is not wearing his Nanny-ER-uh-_*SEAT*_ belt, the driver receives the summons and *POINTS*. Only the District of Columbia and New York assign points.

State of Maryland-Primary. Again, you can be pulled over simply for not using your seat belt. Driver and all passengers must use seat belts. If the passenger is over sixteen, he is responsible. If under sixteen, the driver is responsible. You can not carry more passengers than those for which you have seat belts available. If that happens, the Police issue a summons for overloading.

Commonwealth of Virginia-Secondary. This means that the Police must stop you for something else, first. In Virginia, as in many secondary states, the Police will stop you for, say, blowing a *STOP* sign, and, "cut you a break, but I gotta' get ya' for SOMETHING", so the Police issue you a summons for no seat belt. If the passenger is over sixteen, he is responsible. If under sixteen, the driver is responsible.

In the cab, I do not care, as D.C. Law presumes that a Public Vehicle for Hire is under the _*direction*_ of the passenger, thus the passenger is responsible for himself. In addition, between 1800 and 0600. if a cab driver is hauling a passenger or pulling to the kerb to pick up a passenger, he is exempt from using his seat belt. The passenger, however, must use his at all times. Thus, if the Police stop a cab, it is possible that the driver could not be using his seat belt and avoid a summons while the passenger could not be using his and receive one. As I am against seat belt laws, I do not compel a cab passenger to buckle his. _*Remember, this paragraph applies to *__*TAXICABS*_ _*ONLY*_. It does NOT apply to TNC vehicles.

On TNC vehicles, for purposes of the seat belt law, the D.C Police will treat them as private vehicles. This means that if you passenger is not using his seat belt and you are, you WILL receive a summons, STILL. The way that I handle it in the UberX car is to explain to the customer that D.C. Law holds me responsible, and, as I have no need to fork over fifty bananas nor suffer two points on my licence, I must ask them to put on the seat belt. If they grumble, I have no problem complaining about the Nanny State and micromanaging of peoples' lives; it comes naturally. That usually gets them to do it and preserve your rating.

In Maryland, I do not care what they do. If the Police stop me, the customer who does not use his seat belt will receive a summons. Taxicab drivers do have an exemption, but it is not blanket and I am not sure what it is. The Police will treat a TNC vehicle as a private vehicle, though. The only time that I have been aware of any primary enforcement campaign in Maryland was shortly after the Legislature passed the primary law. It was in Mont_*commie*_ry County. *WHAT* a *surprise!* Rumour has it that when he was made aware of what Monkey County was up to, then-Governour Ehrlich directed Local Constabularies and the State Police not to enforce the law primarily, only secondarily. If, in fact, Ehrlich did issue that order, I would have expected that Mr. Owe'Malady would have rescinded it, but, funny, even during his eight years, I never saw the law enforced primarily, in Maryland.

Virginia's law is secondary and the passenger is responsible for himself, so I do not care what they do.

If the customer is going from the suburbs to the City, I will tell him up front that he can do what he likes with his seat belt until we cross into the City. At that point, I tell him that the Law holds me responsible and blah, blah, blah, so I will have to ask him to use the seat belt once we get to the City.

If anyone balks, he can get out.


----------



## ubersan (Apr 29, 2016)

^Again, it is not just who can get a ticket, fine, and points, but ultimate liability. Even though cabbies might be exempt on the seatbelt of passengers, they still won't be exempt for liability in a lawsuit. Ultimately it comes down to the suing nanny state of the US of A, and the associated liability.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

ubersan said:


> Even though cabbies might be exempt on the seatbelt of passengers, they still won't be exempt for liability in a lawsuit.


The only time that would apply is if the driver were at-fault in a collision. Few lawyers will sue for anything beyond policy limits. It is too much work for them. The last thing that these TV lawyers want to do is work.


----------



## wk1102 (Dec 25, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> Nanny-ER-uh-_*SEAT*_ belt laws in the Washington Metropolitan Area:
> 
> District of Columbia-Primary. This means that you can be pulled over and issued a summons for not wearing your revenu-ER-uh-_*SEAT*_ belt. As is typical in jurisdictions run by what runs D.C., the government expects you to do its job for it and act as if you were Law Enforcement. Thus, the driver is held responsible for his passengers. If any passenger is not wearing his Nanny-ER-uh-_*SEAT*_ belt, the driver receives the summons and *POINTS*. Only the District of Columbia and New York assign points.
> 
> ...


Why is a cab driver exempt from wearing a seat belt between 6pm and 6am?


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

wk1102 said:


> Why is a cab driver exempt from wearing a seat belt between 6pm and 6am?


In case some thug tries something, the driver has a chance to escape. It was funny, but the City Council was debating the matter and taking testimony. It was right about the time that the first security cameras were showing up in cabs in the suburbs, so there was some controversy about that. The _*Washington Post*_ published a story about them. Accompanying the story was a photograph of two thugs' robbing a cab driver. We showed that photograph to the City Council and pointed out to them that the cab driver was _*SECURELY*_ _*TRAPPED*_ in his seat belt. At that point, a certain Nanny Stater Extraordinaire Councilman asked how was a driver going to escape since one thug had a gun at the driver's head and the other a knife at his gut. I asked said Councilman if here were familiar with Pascal's wager argument. He replied that he seemed to remember something about it. I told him that here was a corollary: If that driver sits there and either thug #1 starts stabbing or thug #2 pulls the trigger, I can guarantee you that the driver will die. If, however, the driver can move, there is a chance, even if it is small, that thug #2 might miss or thug #1 could not do as much damage. I then asked the Councilman that if he had only two chances, None or Slim, which one would he take?

The City Council gave us something. We wanted a round-the-clock exemption at all times. It gave use 1800-0600 and only if we were hauling a passenger or pulling to the kerb to pick up one.


----------



## zandor (Mar 6, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> The only time that would apply is if the driver were at-fault in a collision. Few lawyers will sue for anything beyond policy limits. It is too much work for them. The last thing that these TV lawyers want to do is work.


It's not that it's too much work, it's that it doesn't pay. If the defendant has enough money they will go after them. If the other party doesn't have enough money there is no reason to bother. Slap someone a typical person with a $100k judgment and they just declare bankruptcy and don't pay. Doing extra work to get nothing isn't worth it. Now if the client is paying the lawyer by the hour or whatever rather than paying a contingent fee the lawyer will do it, but any remotely decent lawyer will advise their client that they will just spend more to get nothing if the defendant doesn't have the money. The defendant doesn't even have to be completely broke. Bankruptcy laws protect some assets, homes being the big one.


----------



## ubersan (Apr 29, 2016)

Another Uber Driver said:


> The only time that would apply is if the driver were at-fault in a collision. Few lawyers will sue for anything beyond policy limits. It is too much work for them. The last thing that these TV lawyers want to do is work.


I disagree completely that it would only apply in an at-fault collision. Liability is liability, and if a seatbelt could have prevented injury, loss of limb or life, then the lawyers and nanny state will go after you civilly and/or criminally; moreover, if you are the driver and you are responsible for people wearing their seatbelts as a TNC driver or otherwise, you immediately have liability regardless of if you are at-fault in an accident.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

ubersan said:


> Liability is liability, if you are the driver and you are responsible for people wearing their seatbelts as a TNC driver or otherwise, you immediately have liability regardless of if you are at-fault in an accident.


There are several arguments against your points.

While your purpose in stating "liability is liability" is not quite clear. if you are referring to Common Carrier strict liability, it does not always apply in the case of taxicabs and limousines. The courts have not always held taxicabs and limousines to strict liability, as they have held bus companies, railroads and airlines.

Consider that the District of Columbia laws do not hold taxicab drivers responsible for their passengers' using a seat belt. The law specifically states that the reason for the taxicab exception is that the taxicab, a _*Public Vehicle for Hire*_, is presumed to be under the _*direction*_ of the passenger. To be sure, the TNC vehicle is a _*Private*_ _*Vehicle for Hire*_. In fact, in some jurisdictions, the Laws, Rules and Regulations and Ordinances specifically define it thus. Be that as it may, it is not difficult to argue that even a PRIVATE Vehicle for Hire is under the DIRECTION of the passenger. Add to that an adult's being responsible for himself. The leap is not difficult, especially for a hip defence lawyer. While the Police may treat the TNC vehicle as a private vehicle for purposes of enforcement, the courts may not see it that way for purposes of liability, especially in a jurisdiction that has secondary enforcement of seat belt laws.

Consider, as well, the case of opening a vehicle door into traffic. If a passenger does it, neither the driver nor vehicle owner is held responsible, except, in some cases, if a minor child does it. If an adult passenger opens a vehicle door into traffic, the _*adult passenger*_ is held responsible, _*NOT*_ the driver. In the case of an adult passenger and a seat belt, the liability is similar. The adult passenger is responsible for himself.

In many states, each adult passenger is held responsible for complying with the seat belt laws. In states that do hold the driver responsible, the odds are not bad that a judge would dismiss any legal fiction holding a driver responsible in questions of liability, particullarly in the case of a passenger in a TNC vehicle's attempting to hold his driver responsible for his injuries in a no-fault collision where said passenger's injuries were due in whole or in part to said passenger's failure to use his seat belt.


----------



## uberz2016 (May 1, 2016)

Thank god for sydney drivers , finally we for go catch. Interesting i met a uber driver who is kicked oit of uber system just because his rating was 4.4 and because of uber maps showing wrong directions into one way streets and people not wearing sealtbelts issues. I advised him to see a lawyer but he is not capable to paying higher fees. Tomorrow he will join gocatch and also rtams nsw has suggested him to see a lawyer immediatedly. I wish some fund raising to meet his expenses would help these sort of cases. Uber has been making profits by ditching drivers and now nsw fair trading system is reviewing his case according to him. God save him and uber make profits with their intellignet and ruthless business practices. 
**** uber and their employees


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

ubersan said:


> ^Again, it is not just who can get a ticket, fine, and points, but ultimate liability. Even though cabbies might be exempt on the seatbelt of passengers, they still won't be exempt for liability in a lawsuit. Ultimately it comes down to the suing nanny state of the US of A, and the associated liability.


Louisiana did not have a back seat seatbelt law untill 2007.
Govt. Required airbags that kill people and are being recalled in large numbers were supposed to end passive restraint systems.( that's what they told us when they sold the idea) now sticker and repair prices have been driven up by thousands.


----------

