# Is it better to dump rider's item out of the car, intead of turn it in to uber/lyft?



## chuck finley (Aug 2, 2017)

I read the story about uber driver got arrested after turned rider's phone to uber.

If this is the case, would it be better for driver just to dump rider's item out of the car (near trash can)? Why would we waste our time to go to uber and then got arrested later?


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

This forum is slowly sinking into the abyss.


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

Coachman said:


> This forum is slowly sinking into the abyss.


It's only as good as it's members


----------



## Ribak (Jun 30, 2017)

chuck finley said:


> I read the story about uber driver got arrested after turned rider's phone to uber.
> 
> If this is the case, would it be better for driver just to dump rider's item out of the car (near trash can)? Why would we waste our time to go to uber and then got arrested later?


Depends on the item. Keep the cash, sell (or take) the drugs and get rid of any traceable items.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Until the Law and the Companies decide that All Bets Are OFF on L&F, I am in favour of what causes the least problem for the driver. I have seen too many drivers get it raw, dry and full of splinters over someone else's carelessness.

If launching it out the 4/44 Air Conditioner makes for the fewest problems for the driver, So Be It.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> Until the Law and the Companies decide that All Bets Are OFF on L&F, I am in favour of what causes the least problem for the driver. I have seen too many drivers get it raw, dry and full of splinters over someone else's carelessness.
> 
> If launching it out the 4/44 Air Conditioner makes for the fewest problems for the driver, So Be It.


Keep in mind it's illegal to launch someone else's property out of your car.


----------



## IERide (Jul 1, 2016)

Demon said:


> ...it's illegal to launch someone else's property out of your car.


1) Source please
2) Who's to say the next pax didnt just pick it up and take the time with them?


----------



## uberisSATAN (Apr 20, 2018)

on x or pool tiers at night yes sky hook it like kareem these poor people exploiting the system and deserve the 1 service for the 1 star prices

during day hours for cash tippers, or on xl, select, or black no return it youll be rewarded and you were legally compensated for your time/labor

if its farther than 1 mile on x or pool yes again $15 not worth the time/travel/risk of life unless you a preteen in the 80s


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

IERide said:


> 1) Source please
> 2) Who's to say the next pax didnt just pick it up and take the time with them?


1. https://www.shouselaw.com/appropriation-lost-property.html
2. With a phone, they can track it, so they know where it is and when it got there.


----------



## uberisSATAN (Apr 20, 2018)

Demon said:


> Keep in mind it's illegal to launch someone else's property out of your car.


lol its illegal to speed bet you do that which one actually costs you more & is more risk to you & paxes life?

possession 9/10ths of the law right lol i kid i kid but its in my ride its my property now no soup for you

i love people who want to pick & choose the laws they violate, if its not murder, rape, pedofilia, kidnapping, assault, robbery do what cha do i litter on occasion this would be one of those occasions... proove it was me and not the next pax or at some other place they were, they cant afford to tip or order a legal tier like xl, select, black doubtful they can afford a lawyer or time to go threw the rigamarole


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

uberisSATAN said:


> lol its illegal to speed bet you do that which one actually costs you more & is more risk to you & paxes life?
> 
> i love people who want to pick & choose the laws they violate, if its not murder, rape, pedofilia, kidnapping, assault, robbery do what cha do i litter on occasion this would be one of those occasions... proove it was me and not the next pax or at some other place they were, they cant afford to tip or order a legal tier like xl, select, black doubtful they can afford a lawyer or time to go threw the rigamarole


LOL! That has nothing to do with anything that we're talking about. With a phone, they will 100% prove it was you because they can trace the phone's location.


----------



## uberisSATAN (Apr 20, 2018)

Demon said:


> LOL! That has nothing to do with anything that we're talking about. With a phone, they will 100% prove it was you because they can trace the phone's location.


 really they gonna subpoena cell phone records & uber who wont give up rapists without a fight & pinpoint the exact gps coordinates link it to your phone & uber account for a phone its not csi in the real world but good luck with that

if its an x rider who didnt tip and i was opted out of pool so never get those, then i never saw it dont know where it is call judge judy p.... lmao


----------



## IERide (Jul 1, 2016)

Demon said:


> 1. https://www.shouselaw.com/appropriation-lost-property.html
> 2. With a phone, they can track it, so they know where it is and when it got there.


Thank you for the source, although I'm not sure it applies to the 90% of drivers here not in California..
And, even if the phone is traceable, who's to say another pax didnt take it and dump in on the ground..

My point is much like uberisSATAN says.. There are many laws we break every day.. and in all the years of ride-share and all the millions of rides given and no doubt hundreds of thousands of lost items tossed out the window, there has been what, ONE prosecution?

So anyway - I know the difference between right and wrong, and if someone leaves something of any value in my car i will take up uber on the $15 delivery fee and return it if I am able to ID the owner.. UNLESS, like already posted, the pax was some kind of an a$$, then I will help Karma do her job..


----------



## 1.5xorbust (Nov 22, 2017)

I never throw out cash unless it’s counterfeit.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

IERide said:


> Thank you for the source, although I'm not sure it applies to the 90% of drivers here not in California..
> And, even if the phone is traceable, who's to say another pax didnt take it and dump in on the ground..
> 
> My point is much like uberisSATAN says.. There are many laws we break every day.. and in all the years of ride-share and all the millions of rides given and no doubts hundreds of thousands of lost items tossed out the window, there has been what, ONE prosecution?
> ...


The other 90% would be covered by their state law which prevents people from stealing things. This isn't a thread about breaking other kinds of laws, this is a thread about returning property that belongs to passengers. For the umpteenth time, phone's a traceable, so if another person put it on the ground it would be known when & where that happened, and if it happened when there wasn't another person in your car, that would also be known. 
Got it, you always do what's right...unless you just don't feel like it.


----------



## CJfrom619 (Apr 27, 2017)

This is a very simple. If it’s something the rider needs (phone, wallet etc) then you attempt to return it to them with very little effort on your part and if you can’t then turn it into greenhub asap. Everything else just keep it yourself or throw away.


----------



## uberisSATAN (Apr 20, 2018)

Demon said:


> The other 90% would be covered by their state law which prevents people from stealing things. This isn't a thread about breaking other kinds of laws, this is a thread about returning property that belongs to passengers. For the umpteenth time, phone's a traceable, so if another person put it on the ground it would be known when & where that happened, and if it happened when there wasn't another person in your car, that would also be known.
> Got it, you always do what's right...unless you just don't feel like it.


always do whats right for ME first, don't give 2 doo doos about theives who dont value theyre own property enough to keep track of it hence LOST if they lucky when it cracks the ground it still works enough for them to track it & spend 20-60+ minutes of their own time, gas,money & locate it before some meth or crack head does & lists it on Craigslist

if you lose something in MY vehicle it is NOT my problem unless it was a tipper, xl, select, or black CUSTOMER, pool & x riders who don't tip & don't go 10+ miles are not customers they are THEIVES i have zero issue stealing from theives or in this case playin kareem abdul jabbar with something they didnt care enough to keep track of just wipe your prints incase mr csi up there becomes reality

i didnt steal anything i found someones LOST junk in my car & disposed of it


----------



## IERide (Jul 1, 2016)

Demon said:


> Got it, you always do what's right...unless you just don't feel like it.


Yup, pretty much.. 
But who is to say what's "right"? Some rule made up and written by humans? Perhaps there is a higher "right" - such as when the entitled POS that left it in the car has been mistreating people it's whole life - or maybe just that day.. Maybe that person is a racist or worse? Maybe then, in the grander scheme of the universe it is RIGHT to toss it out the window?


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

IERide said:


> Yup, pretty much..
> But who is to say what's "right"? Some rule made up and written by humans? Perhaps there is a higher "right" - such as when the entitled POS that left it in the car has been mistreating people it's whole life - or maybe just that day.. Maybe that person is a racist or worse? Maybe then, in the grander scheme of the universe it is RIGHT to toss it out the window?


You seem hellbent on changing the conversation to absolve yourself of your legal responsibility. If that's your logic you can't complain when a pax lies about a driver they don't like because they feel it will balance out the universe.



uberisSATAN said:


> always do whats right for ME first, don't give 2 doo doos about theives who dont value theyre own property enough to keep track of it hence LOST if they lucky when it cracks the ground it still works enough for them to track it & spend 20-60+ minutes of their own time, gas,money & locate it before some meth or crack head does & lists it on Craigslist
> 
> if you lose something in MY vehicle it is NOT my problem unless it was a tipper, xl, select, or black CUSTOMER, pool & x riders who don't tip & don't go 10+ miles are not customers they are THEIVES i have zero issue stealing from theives or in this case playin kareem abdul jabbar with something they didnt care enough to keep track of just wipe your prints incase mr csi up there becomes reality
> 
> i didnt steal anything i found someones LOST junk in my car & disposed of it


Except that legally, it is very much your problem. If you don't like Uber's rates, don't drive for Uber and don't blame the pax for what Uber decided to charge them and you agreed to drive them for.


----------



## uberisSATAN (Apr 20, 2018)

Demon said:


> You seem hellbent on changing the conversation to absolve yourself of your legal responsibility. If that's your logic you can't complain when a pax lies about a driver they don't like because they feel it will balance out the universe.
> 
> Except that legally, it is very much your problem. If you don't like Uber's rates, don't drive for Uber and don't blame the pax for what Uber decided to charge them and you agreed to drive them for.


nope not hell bent, not complaing either, just posting facts, i dont care or ever stated anything about the illegality of it, just dont care, everything's illegal in a police state. & people have no issues speeding and that puts lives in more risk then tossing sime slave made junk someone didnt care about in the street....

uber is illegal, the minimum fare is illegal, rides less than 10 miles in x are illegal, pool is illegal, express pool is illegal, calling us "independent contractors" & treating us like employees is illegal, saying tips included for years when they werent is illegal, stating 90K,50K,40K,$40+an hour $30+ an hour,$20+ an hour in recruiter ads when its $3.37 an hour is illegal least now its a side hustle in ads like pushing dime bags & bootlegs, paying 1965-1985 cab rates in 2018 is illegal, ghost riding a whip & murdering homeless people is illegal, sending blank contracts that coerce free labor is illegal, firing drivers who cancel too many coerced labor requests is illegal, predatory pricing is illegal, predatory wages are illegal... i could go on

if they didnt tip on x sorry dont know what your talking about, never saw anything good luck with your search & youre free to call judge judy, complain to uber, lie to uber idgaf i bet i beat them to it lmao imma vet baby 1%er if you scared go to church

worse case scenario ill buy a burner account off tor, or find someone who resembles me in my market & offer them a cut of my $40-75 an hour & be right back at it, i figured the uber ponzi scam out years ago, john gotti & organized crime respect the earners not the 96% who are patsys

drove past 7:30 pm once my first day that was enough to learn not to drive nights ever again, i dont have these issues just stating what i would do if it did arise,not scared of uber, pax, or consequences people going to the airport early in the morning tend not to be cheap lying pos so ill be good

$15 is a joke unless a mile or less away thats what the minimum fare should be & about the price of a pizza delivery sans tip which is much heavier & less valuable an item, just like x & pool rates which i do avoid unless they going to the airport

i dont try to decipher tone fron text either thats what emoticons were invented for & machete don't emoticon

everyone can do what they do, i 1 star the less than 10% of rides i get that go less than 10 miles & request an unmatch 100% of the time for years, unless its a cash tip finding the losers/thiefs phone would be icing on the cake, they wouldn't get it back & there's really nothing they could do about it but go buy another phone 1971 minimum fare just turned into a $80-700 ride woohoo


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

uberisSATAN said:


> nope not hell bent, not complaing either, just posting facts, i dont care or ever stated anything about the illegality of it, just dont care, everything's illegal in a police state. & people have no issues speeding and that puts lives in more risk then tossing sime slave made junk someone didnt care about in the street....
> 
> uber is illegal, the minimum fare is illegal, rides less than 10 miles in x are illegal, pool is illegal, express pool is illegal, calling us "independent contractors" & treating us like employees is illegal, saying tips included for years when they werent is illegal, stating 90K,50K,40K,$40+an hour $30+ an hour,$20+ an hour in recruiter ads when its $3.37 an hour is illegal least now its a side hustle in ads like pushing dime bags & bootlegs, paying 1965-1985 cab rates in 2018 is illegal, ghost riding a whip & murdering homeless people is illegal, sending blank contracts that coerce free labor is illegal, firing drivers who cancel too many coerced labor requests is illegal, predatory pricing is illegal, predatory wages are illegal... i could go on
> 
> ...


That's a lot of complaining for someone who isn't complaining.


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

Ribak said:


> Depends on the item. Keep the cash, sell (or take) the drugs and get rid of any traceable items.


That's like a game of "Kill, Marry, or ****" except for Uber drivers it's "Keep, Take, or "Get rid of"

I love it!


----------



## KD_LA (Aug 16, 2017)

Cableguynoe said:


> It's only as good as it's members


You mean clowns, monkeys, nitpickers, and the opinionated?!


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

Demon said:


> Keep in mind it's illegal to launch someone else's property out of your car.


Lol. Ok bud, I'll keep that in mind.


----------



## uberisSATAN (Apr 20, 2018)

Demon said:


> That's a lot of complaining for someone who isn't complaining.


tone from text
dont try to decipher tone from text
facts are not complaints
here ya go ; )


----------



## KD_LA (Aug 16, 2017)

chuck finley said:


> I read the story about uber driver got arrested after turned rider's phone to uber.
> 
> If this is the case, would it be better for driver just to dump rider's item out of the car (near trash can)? Why would we waste our time to go to uber and then got arrested later?


The situation of that driver was complicated: waited way too long for example.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Demon said:


> Keep in mind it's illegal to launch someone else's property out of your car.


If anything, it might be littering, but, other than that, the more likely case is that it depends on the jurisdiction.

If nothing else, you can wait until your next customer gets out, launch it then and blame it on that customer. You, as the driver, just say that you never saw it.

Another stunt is to turn off the telephone while there is a customer in the car, then launch it wherever. You could say that the customer must have stepped on it when it was on the floor and butt-turned-off the thing and that you never saw it, anyhow.

There are ways around it.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> If anything, it might be littering, but, other than that, the more likely case is that it depends on the jurisdiction.
> 
> If nothing else, you can wait until your next customer gets out, launch it then and blame it on that customer. You, as the driver, just say that you never saw it.
> 
> ...


It's stealing in all states.

So in your first scenario you saw the pax find a phone, roll down your window, throw it out the window and you didn't report it to Uber? That doesn't make you seem suspicious at all.

In your next scenario the pax hands you the phone that they find in the back and that's going to be the story they tell the cops when asked about it, which again makes you look suspicious.

Plus, dashcam.

You really think it's better to get yourself in more trouble than just making one attempt to return to the phone?


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Demon said:


> It's stealing in all states.
> 
> So in your first scenario you saw the pax find a phone, roll down your window, throw it out the window and you didn't report it to Uber? That doesn't make you seem suspicious at all.
> 
> ...


Not necessarily.

I did not mention the subsequent customer's finding the telephone. I did mention launching it when said customer disembarks.

Again, I did not mention the subsequent customer's finding the telephone. I did mention launching it, telling the Authorities that you never saw any telephone and mentioning that you had customers subsequent to the customer who lost the telephone.

Once you notice the telephone on the floor or seat, off goes the dashcam; then pick up the thing.

*WHAT telephone? I ain't seen no telephone? I ain't got no telephone? Ain't no telephone here. Nope, not here.*

As the driver, you always know who had it, because the Authorities or Uber/Lyft eventually will tell you who lost the telephone. Until the Authorities or Uber/Lyft tell you who lost it, the only thing that you say is that you do not see any telephone. Once they tell you (usually you get the drop-offm only) "Oh, yeah, that guy, -eh? I remember him, I got him at Joe's. He seemed OK; no trouble or anything. Yeah, I dropped him at ___________Prospect Street. No, I did not see any telephone. There is no telephone in my car. I did have a couple of customers after him. No; no one mentioned any telephone. I can not help you there. I do not see any telephone here, now."

If, in fact, a subsequent customer does find it, you are, in fact, reamed, and are stuck returning it or dropping it off to the Authorities. If the thing rings and the subsequent passenger answers it, you are TRULY reamed and are stuck returning it or dropping off the thing. Both of the last earn the aforementioned subsequent passengers an Automatic One Star. I got reamed on an incident similar to the last. It took eighteen progressively nastier e-Mails to Rohit to get compensation that approached what it cost me to return the telephone. After that, NEVER again, until Uber and Lyft allow you to negotiate freely with the customer or they pay you better for returning it.

In reality, the best thing to do is give it to the Authorities who issue a receipt for it. The owner can go through the hassle of picking up the thing there.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

chuck finley said:


> I read the story about uber driver got arrested after turned rider's phone to uber.
> 
> If this is the case, would it be better for driver just to dump rider's item out of the car (near trash can)? Why would we waste our time to go to uber and then got arrested later?


What happened to that driver is sheer bad luck, very rare. in my 15 years of being in the transportation business, I've never heard of it happening. Dont' fret it, just turn it in.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

both companies give you $15 for returning so just get that $15


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> Not necessarily.
> 
> I did not mention the subsequent customer's finding the telephone. I did mention launching it when said customer disembarks.
> 
> ...


Yes. Unless you know of a state where there are no laws against stealing. I'm sure you can tell me what state that is.

You seem to not understand the fact that the pax can prove they had the phone when they got in your car, had it for the entire ride, and didn't have it when they exited.

You didn't mention who found the phone, but now you suddenly do, because somehow you're going to find a phone in the back seat while there's a pax back there and you're driving the car. You could find a phone in the front seat during your next ride but the pax is going to see that, and if you throw the phone out the window it can be proven that you & the phone were in the same place at the same time when it was thrown from your car, and it's going to be hard to believe that a pax found a phone, rolled down your window and threw something out of your car and you didn't report anything.

The dashcam was turned off when the phone disappeared from your car?? You might as well sign a confession.

There won't be other passengers, there will just be a specific trip, because they'll know when the phone was launched and who was in your car when it happened. And you saying you don't have the phone, just makes you look worse.

Just drop it at a police station and save yourself the trouble.


----------



## Trump Economics (Jul 29, 2015)

Ribak said:


> Depends on the item. Keep the cash, sell (or take) the drugs and get rid of any traceable items.


Yaaaaaaaasssssss


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Demon said:


> Yes. Unless you know of a state where there are no laws against stealing. I'm sure you can tell me what state that is.
> 
> You seem to not understand the fact that the pax can prove they had the phone when they got in your car, had it for the entire ride, and didn't have it when they exited.
> 
> ...


That _*ain't *_ necessarily "stealing".

The passenger's ability to prove the he had/did not have the item at any time is not necessarily relevant and does not necessarily affect me or any other driver. Further, the passenger can not necessarily prove that he did not have it upon exiting the vehicle. In fact, he can not necessarily prove that he had it when he boarded the vehicle. He might THINK that he had it when he boarded, but he can not necessarily prove that. The passenger might be able to prove when he REALISED that he did not have the telephone. This often happens long after the customer has disembarked. This means that he could have lost it ANYWHERE between the kerb and where he realised the he lost it.

Paragraph Three is devoid of any basis in fact and makes no sense. It is full of disconnected and unrelated statements. In fact, some of the statements are internally disconnected. Please clarify. You were the one who first mentioned who hypothetically found the telephone. I never mentioned who might have found the item nor did I attempt to discuss who might have found the item until you mentioned it.

As we are discussing criminal, not civil, here.....................I do not know from which repressive dictatorship you originally come, but, in the United States of America, despite the efforts of certain elements of our society, it is STILL incumbent on the accuser to prove the accused's guilt. It is not incumbent on the accused to prove his innocence, although certain elements in our society are labouring tirelessly and unstintingly to alter that. I will concede the point that proving one's innocence is a good way to dodge the accusation, but, it is not necessary to do that to dodge the accusation.

You are assuming too much in your penultimate paragraph. You are denying the possibility that a customer leaves something; does not notice it immediately; driver does not notice it; driver picks up other customers; one of them notices the item and pockets it. It happens all the time. Ask me how I know this.

The problem with dropping it at the Metropolitan Police in the Capital of Your Nation is that it no longer issues a receipt for turning in a lost and found. If someone at the police station loses it, of course, there will be a denial that the driver ever handed in the thing. In that case, since the driver did acknowledge handing in the thing, he will be held responsible for it. Fortunately, the Regulatory Office here will accept lost and found from TNC drivers and will issue a receipt.

In order to nail a driver for chucking out the thing, the customer and the Authorities would have to prove that he had noticed the thing and launched it. If the driver will not acknowledge ever having the thing or seeing it, the task becomes more difficult if not impossible. There would have to be some one or some thing that attests to the driver's seeing it, noticing it or having it. Absent that, you have no evidence, you have no prosecution never mind a conviction.

A driver who p uts minimal thought into the process will be able to avoid any problems. To be sure, if you can get a receipt, turn it in to the Authorities. Absent the receipt, it goes out the window where the driver drops the next customer, All that he need say is that he never saw the thing, He dropped off the customer at [where the owner found it thanks to the built-in LoJack]. The F*ub*a*r* Trip Tracker will prove the time that he picked up the subsequent customer and that he dropped off said customer at [where the owner located his telephone].

"Hmmmmm, I guess that it fell out into the street when that customer got out......................"

"Hmmmmm, perhaps that customer found it and decided that he did not want it and chucked it into that trash can. I do not know, but I never saw the thing........................"

The gutter is probably the safest place, in case the Authorities do get in touch with the subsequent customer. An underneath-the-car hookshot with a convincing clatter on the kerb takes care of that one.



Oscar Levant said:


> What happened to that driver is sheer bad luck, very rare. in my 15 years of being in the transportation business, I've never heard of it happening. Dont' fret it, just turn it in.


I have had to help more than one driver whose good deed did not go unpunished during the time that I was a company official. Things such as this happen all the time. This is why it is better to chuck the thing and say "_*What telephone? I ain't seen no stinkin' telephone*_".



uberdriverfornow said:


> both companies give you $15 for returning so just get that $15


,,,,,,,and when it costs you over one hundred dollars in lost bonuses, trips, and revenue and it drags you away from surge and boost zones, you are supposed to eat that, _*correctamundo*_?

What is funny is listening to people tell you how it is the owner's responsibility and that he should have to suffer the full consequences---until ONE OF THEM leaves something in the car. When one of them does it, he is not satisfied until the driver not only informs him that he is around the corner with the item, but that the driver is going to pay the customer for the "privilege" of returning the lost item.

It costs far too much money to return something that is not my responsibility in the first place. If these customers would understand that they must compensate me fully and adequately, I would return things. As they refuse to do this, on a good day (for them), they can go and get it from the Police, Sheriff's Department or Regulatory Authority. On a bad day? "_*WHAT telephone? I ain't seen no stinkin' telephone.*_"................and _*I gotta' tellya'*_: to-day just _*ain't*_ the customer's day; to-morrow _*ain't lookin' none too good, neither*_.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Another Uber Driver said:


> That _*ain't *_ necessarily "stealing".
> 
> The passenger's ability to prove the he had/did not have the item at any time is not necessarily relevant and does not necessarily affect me or any other driver. Further, the passenger can not necessarily prove that he did not have it upon exiting the vehicle. In fact, he can not necessarily prove that he had it when he boarded the vehicle. He might THINK that he had it when he boarded, but he can not necessarily prove that. The passenger might be able to prove when he REALISED that he did not have the telephone. This often happens long after the customer has disembarked. This means that he could have lost it ANYWHERE between the kerb and where he realised the he lost it.
> 
> ...


If I'm in the area then I try to return it. If not, then I ignore his calls until I'm available and I plan the return around my schedule.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

uberdriverfornow said:


> If I'm in the area then I try to return it.


If you are there and the customer gets hold of you, it does not hurt to return it. I have had that happen more than once and not just on Uber or Lyft. This was before the fifteen dollars. The fifteen dollars is a nice payout if you are there. It is rare that you get a tip on these things, but it has happened.

NEVER has an Uber or Lyft customer given me a tip for returning ANYTHING. Those who have tipped me have been either call or street hail customers in the cab. If you even suggest some compensation, even an in-application tip, the customer can complain to Uber. There used to be check boxes for "My driver demanded cash" or "My driver demanded a tip". Those boxes might still be there, it has been a while since I looked. Uber, of course, is going to believe the customer and de-activate you.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

Demon said:


> 1. https://www.shouselaw.com/appropriation-lost-property.html
> 2. With a phone, they can track it, so they know where it is and when it got there.


Unless it gets cement shoes.,..


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> That _*ain't *_ necessarily "stealing".


 It's literally the definition of stealing. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> The passenger's ability to prove the he had/did not have the item at any time is not necessarily relevant and does not necessarily affect me or any other driver. Further, the passenger can not necessarily prove that he did not have it upon exiting the vehicle. In fact, he can not necessarily prove that he had it when he boarded the vehicle. He might THINK that he had it when he boarded, but he can not necessarily prove that. The passenger might be able to prove when he REALISED that he did not have the telephone. This often happens long after the customer has disembarked. This means that he could have lost it ANYWHERE between the kerb and where he realised the he lost it.


It's 100% provable where the pax left the phone. That's not up for debate. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> Paragraph Three is devoid of any basis in fact and makes no sense. It is full of disconnected and unrelated statements. In fact, some of the statements are internally disconnected. Please clarify. You were the one who first mentioned who hypothetically found the telephone. I never mentioned who might have found the item nor did I attempt to discuss who might have found the item until you mentioned it.


Correct, you quickly moved the goalposts. There are only 2 people who can find the phone, the driver or the pax. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> As we are discussing criminal, not civil, here.....................I do not know from which repressive dictatorship you originally come, but, in the United States of America, despite the efforts of certain elements of our society, it is STILL incumbent on the accuser to prove the accused's guilt. It is not incumbent on the accused to prove his innocence, although certain elements in our society are labouring tirelessly and unstintingly to alter that. I will concede the point that proving one's innocence is a good way to dodge the accusation, but, it is not necessary to do that to dodge the accusation.


Yes, the prosecution will have to prove the accused guilty. Never said otherwise



Another Uber Driver said:


> You are assuming too much in your penultimate paragraph. You are denying the possibility that a customer leaves something; does not notice it immediately; driver does not notice it; driver picks up other customers; one of them notices the item and pockets it. It happens all the time. Ask me how I know this.


Not assuming anything because this has been addressed and speaks to you not understanding how cell phones work. The phone is traceable so if a customer turns the phone off, or removes it from your car, that would be known and it would be known which pax(s) could possibly have the phone. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> The problem with dropping it at the Metropolitan Police in the Capital of Your Nation is that it no longer issues a receipt for turning in a lost and found. If someone at the police station loses it, of course, there will be a denial that the driver ever handed in the thing. In that case, since the driver did acknowledge handing in the thing, he will be held responsible for it. Fortunately, the Regulatory Office here will accept lost and found from TNC drivers and will issue a receipt.


 Problem solved. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> In order to nail a driver for chucking out the thing, the customer and the Authorities would have to prove that he had noticed the thing and launched it. If the driver will not acknowledge ever having the thing or seeing it, the task becomes more difficult if not impossible. There would have to be some one or some thing that attests to the driver's seeing it, noticing it or having it. Absent that, you have no evidence, you have no prosecution never mind a conviction.


 Proving that a driver stole the phone would be easy to do since the phone is traceable. The phone need not be found to convict a driver because we all know that phones don't jump out of cars by themselves. The evidence is that the phone was in the car with the driver and then the phone was thrown out of the car along the same route the car was traveling. The driver in this article was arrested prior to the cops finding the phone. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> A driver who p uts minimal thought into the process will be able to avoid any problems. To be sure, if you can get a receipt, turn it in to the Authorities. Absent the receipt, it goes out the window where the driver drops the next customer, All that he need say is that he never saw the thing, He dropped off the customer at [where the owner found it thanks to the built-in LoJack]. The F*ub*a*r* Trip Tracker will prove the time that he picked up the subsequent customer and that he dropped off said customer at [where the owner located his telephone].


 Which is all the proof that is needed. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> "Hmmmmm, I guess that it fell out into the street when that customer got out......................"
> 
> "Hmmmmm, perhaps that customer found it and decided that he did not want it and chucked it into that trash can. I do not know, but I never saw the thing........................"
> 
> The gutter is probably the safest place, in case the Authorities do get in touch with the subsequent customer. An underneath-the-car hookshot with a convincing clatter on the kerb takes care of that one.


 The evidence will show otherwise.



Another Uber Driver said:


> I have had to help more than one driver whose good deed did not go unpunished during the time that I was a company official. Things such as this happen all the time. This is why it is better to chuck the thing and say "_*What telephone? I ain't seen no stinkin' telephone*_".
> 
> ,,,,,,,and when it costs you over one hundred dollars in lost bonuses, trips, and revenue and it drags you away from surge and boost zones, you are supposed to eat that, _*correctamundo*_?


This is on the driver.Take 30 seconds to check the car before you leave the area.
What is funny is listening to people tell you how it is the owner's responsibility and that he should have to suffer the full consequences---until ONE OF THEM leaves something in the car. When one of them does it, he is not satisfied until the driver not only informs him that he is around the corner with the item, but that the driver is going to pay the customer for the "privilege" of returning the lost item.


Another Uber Driver said:


> It costs far too much money to return something that is not my responsibility in the first place. If these customers would understand that they must compensate me fully and adequately, I would return things. As they refuse to do this, on a good day (for them), they can go and get it from the Police, Sheriff's Department or Regulatory Authority. On a bad day? "_*WHAT telephone? I ain't seen no stinkin' telephone.*_"................and _*I gotta' tellya'*_: to-day just _*ain't*_ the customer's day; to-morrow _*ain't lookin' none too good, neither*_.


The fact of the matter is that legally it is your responsibility to make an attempt to return the item. YOu're welcome to your own opinion, but you're not welcome to your own facts.


----------



## merryon2nd (Aug 31, 2016)

If you don't get in touch with me in 15 minutes after drop off, before I leave the area, you're screwed. Money goes to my car payment, everything else gets a dumpster ride. Unless you harass me, then it goes to the police station in MY town, and you spend some money to play fetch. I don't make enough to play with you and your irresponsible BS. You can call the cops, but there won't be any proof that I ever had the crap to begin with. You were drunk, I was the sober and responsible, and I'm not losing money because you can't keep track of your crap.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

merryon2nd said:


> If you don't get in touch with me in 15 minutes after drop off, before I leave the area, you're screwed. Money goes to my car payment, everything else gets a dumpster ride. Unless you harass me, then it goes to the police station in MY town, and you spend some money to play fetch. I don't make enough to play with you and your irresponsible BS. You can call the cops, but there won't be any proof that I ever had the crap to begin with. You were drunk, I was the sober and responsible, and I'm not losing money because you can't keep track of your crap.


It's a cell phone, so there is proof that you had it. Easier to just drop it at a police station and be done with it.


----------



## merryon2nd (Aug 31, 2016)

Naw, I tossed plenty of cells in dumpsters for fun, and get plenty of amusement from it. I didn't see anything. But I had plenty of rides full of people since you. Someone must have seen it, took it, realized they couldn't use it or it was dead, and dumped it at the Rite Aid.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Demon said:


> It's literally the definition of stealing.
> 
> It's 100% provable where the pax left the phone. That's not up for debate.
> 
> ...


It is hardly the definition of "stealing".

It is not always at all provable where the customer left the telephone, or any other article, for that matter. This leaves it open for debate.

Line Three earns you the "HUH?" button. If anyone has moved any goal post, that would be thou.

You were the one who stated that a turned off dashcam is tantamount to a confession. Such a statement implies that a turned off dashcam is sufficient evidence to convict. A turned off dashcam proves that the dashcam was turned off. It proves nothing else. INNN-sufficient evidence to convict. In fact, no prosecutor will take a case based solely on a turned off dashcam.

In truth, articles CAN fall out of cars by themselves. I have seen it happen. Article is wedged between seat and door. Door opens, article falls into gutter. I have noticed it, but not everyone always does. A customer can slide across a seat, not see an article, knock it off the seat and into the gutter and never see it. People do not look out for other cars, trucks or bicycles when they open doors. They are not going to look out for a small article on the seat. It CAN happen.

Not all telephones are traceable. I have three and a tablet. The tablet IS traceable, the telephones are not.

HUH?

There will be no "evidence" to show anything.

It is on the owner of the property, not the driver. The owner is responsible for his property.

It is the responsibility of anyone BUT me to return that item. As for your last sentence: take your own advice.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

merryon2nd said:


> Naw, I tossed plenty of cells in dumpsters for fun, and get plenty of amusement from it. I didn't see anything. But I had plenty of rides full of people since you. Someone must have seen it, took it, realized they couldn't use it or it was dead, and dumped it at the Rite Aid.


So you didn't read the article about the driver who got arrested for not returning a cell phone months after it happened? Again, the phone is traceable so it can be proven you were the last to have it.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

SurgeMasterMN said:


> Unless it gets cement shoes.,..


I thought that was why we carry foil. To wrap found phones in until we determine whether or not to find them.


----------



## merryon2nd (Aug 31, 2016)

I read it. I just don't give a rat's behind. If there were more rides AFTER theirs, I clearly was NOT the last person closest to the phone, regardless of whether it was in my car or not. There are always riders after them. Its not my fault those riders decided they wanted a brand new iPhone.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Demon said:


> It's literally the definition of stealing.
> 
> It's 100% provable where the pax left the phone. That's not up for debate.
> 
> ...


I forgot my umbrella at Costco a while back. Asked about it at my next visit. It was not in their "lost and found" (aka managers office).

Why didn't they make an attempt to return it? They have footage of me leaving it in the cart, footage of me checking out etc. They know who I am and my address. They know more about me than I do any pax.

I should file a police report because they made no "attempt" to return it.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> It is hardly the definition of "stealing".


 So you still don't like facts. The definition of stealing is depriving someone of their property. This isn't up for debate, it's the definition of stealing. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> It is not always at all provable where the customer left the telephone, or any other article, for that matter. This leaves it open for debate.


 No debate here, the phone is traceable so there's no question about if it was inside your car or not. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> Line Three earns you the "HUH?" button. If anyone has moved any goal post, that would be thou.


 Nope, you rolled the goalposts back pretty quick. Again, only a driver or a pax can find the phone. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> You were the one who stated that a turned off dashcam is tantamount to a confession. Such a statement implies that a turned off dashcam is sufficient evidence to convict. A turned off dashcam proves that the dashcam was turned off. It proves nothing else. INNN-sufficient evidence to convict. In fact, no prosecutor will take a case based solely on a turned off dashcam.


 That's not all the evidence they'll have. They'll know exactly when the phone was turned off, or when the phone was thrown from your car. If that time matches up exactly when you turned your dashcam off, that would look really bad for a driver. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> In truth, articles CAN fall out of cars by themselves. I have seen it happen. Article is wedged between seat and door. Door opens, article falls into gutter. I have noticed it, but not everyone always does. A customer can slide across a seat, not see an article, knock it off the seat and into the gutter and never see it. People do not look out for other cars, trucks or bicycles when they open doors. They are not going to look out for a small article on the seat. It CAN happen.


 Certainly not denying that, but that's been addressed, the phone is traceable, so if it falls out of the car, it can be proven where it falls out. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> Not all telephones are traceable. I have three and a tablet. The tablet IS traceable, the telephones are not.


 This speaks to my earlier claim that you don't know how cell phones work. If a cell phone is connected to a carrier its' traceable, that's how Uber knows what route you took to get from A to B, they're simply tracking where your phone is. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> HUH?


 Not surprising.


Another Uber Driver said:


> There will be no "evidence" to show anything.


 Again , as a point of fact, the phone is traceable and there will be evidence to show where the phone is and when it was there. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> It is on the owner of the property, not the driver. The owner is responsible for his property.
> 
> It is the responsibility of anyone BUT me to return that item. As for your last sentence: take your own advice.


Again, as a point of fact, it is legally your responsibility to make an attempt to return the phone.

Facts are facts, whether you like them or not.



Fuzzyelvis said:


> I forgot my umbrella at Costco a while back. Asked about it at my next visit. It was not in their "lost and found" (aka managers office).
> 
> Why didn't they make an attempt to return it? They have footage of me leaving it in the cart, footage of me checking out etc. They know who I am and my address. They know more about me than I do any pax.
> 
> I should file a police report because they made no "attempt" to return it.


Go for it, let me know how that turns out.



merryon2nd said:


> I read it. I just don't give a rat's behind. If there were more rides AFTER theirs, I clearly was NOT the last person closest to the phone, regardless of whether it was in my car or not. There are always riders after them. Its not my fault those riders decided they wanted a brand new iPhone.


Again, it can be proven where the phone was and where you were. If you were at the dumpster where the phone was found and the pax wasn't, you had it last.


----------



## merryon2nd (Aug 31, 2016)

You clearly think I would be dumb enough to make it obvious. That I would run a GPS system, and drive my pathfinder while I did the dumping. Dear lord, you have NO imagination.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

merryon2nd said:


> You clearly think I would be dumb enough to make it obvious. That I would run a GPS system, and drive my pathfinder while I did the dumping. Dear lord, you have NO imagination.


Well turning off your GPS at the same time the phone goes missing would probably be worse. You'd be literally eliminating any alibi you had, and I mean who just randomly turns off their phone's GPS??


----------



## merryon2nd (Aug 31, 2016)

People who like to save data who don't have a mobile hotspot? People going through the Pinies on their way back from Somers Point (there is NO service back there).


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

merryon2nd said:


> People who like to save data who don't have a mobile hotspot? People going through the Pinies on their way back from Somers Point (there is NO service back there).


So the phone was in your car before you went into the Pine Barrens but not in your car when you left the Pines? Seems legit.


----------



## merryon2nd (Aug 31, 2016)

No no. The trick is to go into a non-service area. Then wait for a ping when you're back in a service area. Pick up pax, get to new destination, ask to toss tin foil in dumpster/trash can (make it look like a half sandwich), deed done. It can still track the phone if you do it just right, and it covers you from looking like the bad guy. There are other parties that can be guilty.


----------



## Koolbreze (Feb 13, 2017)

Another Uber Driver said:


> Until the Law and the Companies decide that All Bets Are OFF on L&F, I am in favour of what causes the least problem for the driver. I have seen too many drivers get it raw, dry and full of splinters over someone else's carelessness.
> 
> If launching it out the 4/44 Air Conditioner makes for the fewest problems for the driver, So Be It.





Another Uber Driver said:


> Until the Law and the Companies decide that All Bets Are OFF on L&F, I am in favour of what causes the least problem for the driver. I have seen too many drivers get it raw, dry and full of splinters over someone else's carelessness.
> 
> If launching it out the 4/44 Air Conditioner makes for the fewest problems for the driver, So Be It.


I can't beleive a moderator has this point of view.



uberisSATAN said:


> really they gonna subpoena cell phone records & uber who wont give up rapists without a fight & pinpoint the exact gps coordinates link it to your phone & uber account for a phone its not csi in the real world but good luck with that
> 
> if its an x rider who didnt tip and i was opted out of pool so never get those, then i never saw it dont know where it is call judge judy p.... lmao


You can't opt out of pool


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Koolbreze said:


> I can't beleive a moderator has this point of view.
> 
> You can't opt out of pool


Agree about the moderator. It speaks volumes about drivers and how there needs to be more stringent background checks.


----------



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

Fuzzyelvis said:


> I thought that was why we carry foil. To wrap found phones in until we determine whether or not to find them.


Your missing a vital step,

you need to wrap it in plastic first to insure that there is no metal on metal connection, otherwise the metal will become an antenna instead of a faraday cage.

I have a prepper one i made out of a surplus ammo crate.

Google Ammo can faraday cage.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Koolbreze said:


> I can't beleive a moderator has this point of view.
> 
> You can't opt out of pool


Believe it.

You can not opt out of it, but you do not have to accept it, either.



Demon said:


> Agree about the moderator. It speaks volumes about drivers and how there needs to be more stringent background checks.


I passed an FBI fingerprint and background check. How much more "stringent" do you _*need*_?



Demon said:


> So you still don't like facts. The definition of stealing is depriving someone of their property. This isn't up for debate, it's the definition of stealing.Facts are facts, whether you like them or not.


You keep making up things and calling them "facts". That is detrimental to what little validity any of your "arguments" might have. You have appointed yourself the referee and keep awarding yourself points. Ask me why I am not surprised.

In order to lay criminal liability on the driver, the prosecutors would have to prove that he did something. They can not always do that. There are ways around it, If a human being invented it, a human being can foil it. In this case, it is easy to foil it. The under the car hookshot where a subsequent passenger disembarks is illustrative of that. If we assume, _*arguendo*_ that this is a telephone that can be tracked, what will be proved is that the telephone:

A. Was in the car when Customer A disembarked.
B. Was in the car when driver picked up Customer B.
C. Was out of the car when Customer B disembarked.

It will NOT be proved:

A. How the telephone got from the car to the gutter.
B. Who put the telephone into the gutter from the car.

In order to hold someone criminally liable, you must prove at least one of the above. Yes, you can interview Customer B and he can state that he did not see a telephone. The driver can state the same. How do you prove that one or the other is not telling the truth? How do you prove that one or the other IS telling the truth? You do not. No prosecutor is going to take that case.

No; not my property, NOT my responsibility.....................your property is your own responsibility...............................

I have tried to use "find my phone" on the telephones that I have and it does not work. It does work on the tablet, though.



merryon2nd said:


> You clearly think I would be dumb enough to make it obvious. That I would run a GPS system, and drive my pathfinder while I did the dumping. Dear lord, you have NO imagination.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Demon said:


> So you still don't like facts. The definition of stealing is depriving someone of their property. This isn't up for debate, it's the definition of stealing.


The keyword word in your definition is deprive which means to remove or withhold something from the enjoyment or possession. The negligent action of the passenger is what causes them to not have what ever item they have lost, not the actions of the driver. Therefore no theft has occurred.

This is also from uber's help page.
Drivers are independent contractors. Neither Uber nor drivers are responsible for the items left in a vehicle after a trip ends. We're here to help, but cannot guarantee that a driver has your item or can immediately deliver it to you.

I personally wouldn't throw a phone out the window. I don't like littering. The first trash can I see however.


----------



## comitatus1 (Mar 22, 2018)

Demon said:


> 1. https://www.shouselaw.com/appropriation-lost-property.html
> 2. With a phone, they can track it, so they know where it is and when it got there.


Not if you crush it into little pieces first.

I didn't use to get out of my car to help men put in/take out their luggage but now I do...just to make sure nothing bad goes into my car stays in my car. Of course, doing for the women is natural for me...but in the end it's the same underlying reason.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Another Uber Driver said:


> Not necessarily.
> 
> I did not mention the subsequent customer's finding the telephone. I did mention launching it when said customer disembarks.
> 
> ...


Reports to find to Uber first, though, and after you get your receipt from the police, send a copy of it to Uber proving that this is what you've done, and asking them to contact the Rider and let them know where they can pick it up. Also mention that you will be expecting your $15 returned item fee. Wait 30 days. At the end of 30 days check back with the police department and see if the phone was picked up. If it was, get proof that it was. If there is no proof, pick up your phone. It is now yours. Be sure to get the documentation explaining how it came to be yours.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Demon said:


> So you didn't read the article about the driver who got arrested for not returning a cell phone months after it happened? Again, the phone is traceable so it can be proven you were the last to have it.


The driver was arrested, but the charges were dropped as it did not rise to the legal definition of theft. The driver probably also has a case if they wanted to sue the police department for violation of civil rights. Especially considering that the passengers, when they sign their contract with Uber, agree that any lost items are their own fault, and not the fault or responsibility of the driver or Uber.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> I passed an FBI fingerprint and background check. How much more "stringent" do you _*need*_?


 Not for UBer or Lyft you didn't.



Another Uber Driver said:


> You keep making up things and calling them "facts". That is detrimental to what little validity any of your "arguments" might have. You have appointed yourself the referee and keep awarding yourself points. Ask me why I am not surprised.


 Except that I'm not making anything up, because I don't need to, you seem to fail to understand the term "literally facts", it means what I'm saying can be proven to be true. Then you attack my validity when you're here in the post openly admitting to stealing things from other people, how you'd lie about stealing, and encouraging others to do the same. Again, my argument is based on facts, I understand that you don't like the facts I'm basing my argument on, but that doesn't mean they aren't true. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> In order to lay criminal liability on the driver, the prosecutors would have to prove that he did something. They can not always do that. There are ways around it, If a human being invented it, a human being can foil it. In this case, it is easy to foil it. The under the car hookshot where a subsequent passenger disembarks is illustrative of that. If we assume, _*arguendo*_ that this is a telephone that can be tracked, what will be proved is that the telephone:
> 
> A. Was in the car when Customer A disembarked.
> B. Was in the car when driver picked up Customer B.
> ...


It gets proven by the fact that the phone is trackable. If the phone is with the pax, that can be proven, and that isn't the type of scenario we're discussing. We're discussing what happens when the phone is left in the drivers car and the driver is aware of it. You're proposing that there would be some logical reason that a pax would see a phone and either, 
A. Roll down the driver's car window and throw it out of the car and the driver not report it.
B. The pax would take the phone and drop it outside of the car.

And there's no logical reason for either of those to happen. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> In order to hold someone criminally liable, you must prove at least one of the above. Yes, you can interview Customer B and he can state that he did not see a telephone. The driver can state the same. How do you prove that one or the other is not telling the truth? How do you prove that one or the other IS telling the truth? You do not. No prosecutor is going to take that case.


That's simply wrong. Prosecution could show that the driver had a motive for removing the phone from the car, and that motive would be that they wouldn't have to do their job and would be attempting to escape their responsibility in returning it to the owner. You don't seem to understand how our legal system works. The majority of convictions are made on circumstantial evidence.

Which brings up my original point which you really don't want to address, is all that worth it, when all that needs to be done is dropping the phone off at a local PD station. Even if it doesn't get to a stage where a driver is charged, it wouldn't be worth it to have to deal with the cops or get arrested. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> No; not my property, NOT my responsibility.....................your property is your own responsibility...............................


Again, legally it is your responsibility to make an attempt to return it. You typing in caps doesn't change facts, or change that you agreed to do it when you signed up as a driver.



Another Uber Driver said:


> I have tried to use "find my phone" on the telephones that I have and it does not work. It does work on the tablet, though.


 You still don't understand how GPS works.



SuzeCB said:


> The driver was arrested, but the charges were dropped as it did not rise to the legal definition of theft. The driver probably also has a case if they wanted to sue the police department for violation of civil rights. Especially considering that the passengers, when they sign their contract with Uber, agree that any lost items are their own fault, and not the fault or responsibility of the driver or Uber.


The driver has zero case, the cops had a warrant. Drivers are legally obligated to make an attempt to return lost property.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Demon said:


> The driver has zero case, the cops had a warrant. Drivers are legally obligated to make an attempt to return lost property.


Not entirely true. There's that whole contract thing, if Uber was the sort of company to actually back their driver's.

A _reasonable_ attempt has to be made. Reasonable is when everyone involved does what they are supposed to do. Driver does NOT have to lose money in the process, and, in fact, should be compensated for the effort (the $15). Rider is supposed to contact Uber and have them contact the driver. This wasn't done. That is why the prosecutor dropped the charges and expressed sympathy for what the Rider and police had done. They did NOT have a warrant. To arrest him for what they did, they should have had a reason to believe he had taken the phone intentionally. They didn't. They jumped the gun big-time.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

SuzeCB said:


> Not entirely true. There's that whole contract thing, if Uber was the sort of company to actually back their driver's.
> 
> A _reasonable_ attempt has to be made. Reasonable is when everyone involved does what they are supposed to do. Driver does NOT have to lose money in the process, and, in fact, should be compensated for the effort (the $15). Rider is supposed to contact Uber and have them contact the driver. This wasn't done. That is why the prosecutor dropped the charges and expressed sympathy for what the Rider and police had done. They did NOT have a warrant. To arrest him for what they did, they should have had a reason to believe he had taken the phone intentionally. They didn't. They jumped the gun big-time.


They absolutely had a warrant. They would not have been able to arrest the driver otherwise.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Demon said:


> They absolutely had a warrant. They would not have been able to arrest the driver otherwise.


They could with probable cause upon investigation. They claimed PC. They had neither. That's the point.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

SuzeCB said:


> They could with probable cause upon investigation. They claimed PC. They had neither. That's the point.


You don't have a point because you're wrong. They had probable cause to do what exactly?
She got pulled over and they found she had a warrant out so they arrested her.


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Demon said:


> Not for UBer or Lyft you didn't.
> 
> Except that I'm not making anything up, because I don't need to, you seem to fail to understand the term "literally facts", it means what I'm saying can be proven to be true. Then you attack my validity when you're here in the post openly admitting to stealing things from other people, how you'd lie about stealing, and encouraging others to do the same. Again, my argument is based on facts, I understand that you don't like the facts I'm basing my argument on, but that doesn't mean they aren't true.
> 
> ...


Where in the terms of service does it state that it's the job of the driver to return items? Short answer it doesn't.

It is not Uber's or the driver's job/responsibility to return lost items. It says as much in the uber's community guidelines.

I'm wondering if the driver that got arrested has a legal case against the passenger for filing a false report or the police for being negligent.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Demon said:


> You don't have a point because you're wrong. They had probable cause to do what exactly?
> She got pulled over and they found she had a warrant out so they arrested her.


We may well be discussing two different drivers... which one was the OP referring to? LMAO


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Demon said:


> Not for UBer or Lyft you didn't.
> 
> Except that I'm not making anything up, because I don't need to, you seem to fail to understand the term "literally facts", it means what I'm saying can be proven to be true.
> 
> ...


*

You have failed to prove the first of what you allege to be "facts".

I stated that I understood whence the drivers comes who chucks the telephone out the window. I have proposed several hypothetical scenarios that the driver could advance to get any blame off him. Your "facts" assume that the driver admits to having or seeing the telephone. If the driver does that, then he does not chuck the thing, unless he wants problems. "What telephone" should have been the hint that the driver does not admit to having the telephone or seeing it. And yes, I understand that the driver in Georgia admitted to having/seeing the telephone. Perhaps you missed those points.

I am posting nothing encouraging anyone to "steal" or "lie about stealing" . You are arguing as if you have proved your assertions on "stealing", when, in fact, you have failed to do that. You are presuming to define certain actions, real or hypothetical, in this discussion. You then wonder why I state that you have appointed yourself the referee. It is an old rhetorical trick; perhaps you did not expect that I could see right through it? I am not even encouraging people to chuck telephones. I did state that I understand why they would do it.

FIFY

It is convenient how you left out:

Customer would keep the telephone.

Customer would not see the telephone and accidentally knock it into the gutter.

Of course you left out those; they conflict with your presumptions, dictates and attempts to control the direction of this discussion. Those are more old rhetorical tricks. I see through those, as well.

"Logical reason" or not, it is possible that what you cite could happen or what you left out could happen. If you do not think that these customers do inexplicable things, you are not reading most of the posts to these Boards (I will pass over the possibility that you jes' ain't drivin' none too much.). In my time out there, I have seen far more and far more ridiculous and inexplicable things from customers. NOTHING would surprise me; not any more.

You have it backwards: it is simply CORRECT. You can show all of the motive that you will, you must prove that the driver had the telephone or took it, this of course, assumes, for the sake of argument, some of your "points". In reality, you have failed to establish that it IS "stealing". You might be able to prove that it was in his car, but you could not prove that he was aware of its presence or that he did anything with it. No evidence; no prosecutor is going to pursue that case. You are the one who fails to understand how our legal system works. Prove I did it, or I walk. Simple.

The driver in Georgia did get arrested. One reason that she had the problem that she did was that she turned in the thing to an entity that did not render unto her a receipt. In fact, neither Uber nor Lyft give receipts. (The Metropolitan Police, here, used to, but no longer). You do not turn in anything without getting a receipt for it.

You fail to understand that the person responsible for property is the OWNER of that property. I am not responsible for someone else's property. The property was not bailed unto me, so I have no responsibility under bailment, even.

If you consider that I worked on getting GPS/computer/satellite/digital call assignment systems put into two cab companies in the Capital of Your Nation, I would suspect that I DO, in fact, "understand how a GPS works" (and how it often does NOT work).

FIFY

I never agreed to return anything when I signed up as a driver. Perhaps in your market, that was required, but it was not in mine.

FIFY



SuzeCB said:



They could with probable cause upon investigation. They claimed PC. They had neither. That's the point.

Click to expand...

You seem to forget that when the poster that you quoted tells you that something is a "fact", it must be so. He has no obligation to prove it; he typed it, so it must be a "fact".

Too bad for him that no one else subscribes to that, -eh?*


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

nomad_driver said:


> Where in the terms of service does it state that it's the job of the driver to return items? Short answer it doesn't.
> 
> It is not Uber's or the driver's job/responsibility to return lost items. It says as much in the uber's community guidelines.
> 
> I'm wondering if the driver that got arrested has a legal case against the passenger for filing a false report or the police for being negligent.


The part where the driver agrees to follow laws.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Demon said:


> Keep in mind it's illegal to launch someone else's property out of your car.


Not if you pitch it in the trash


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> *
> You have failed to prove the first of what you allege to be "facts".
> 
> I stated that I understood whence the drivers comes who chucks the telephone out the window. I have proposed several hypothetical scenarios that the driver could advance to get any blame off him. Your "facts" assume that the driver admits to having or seeing the telephone. If the driver does that, then he does not chuck the thing, unless he wants problems. "What telephone" should have been the hint that the driver does not admit to having the telephone or seeing it. And yes, I understand that the driver in Georgia admitted to having/seeing the telephone. Perhaps you missed those points.
> ...


Seriously, how far would you like to move the goal posts?

You're suddenly claiming that I never backed up my facts when in fact you never asked for a cite, or did some of your own homework and researched it yourself?

Or when I asked you to back up your claim by naming states where stealing is legal and you quickly changed the subject?

Another good try.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

nomad_driver said:


> Where in the terms of service does it state that it's the job of the driver to return items? Short answer it doesn't.


Even if it does not say it, it must say it, because the poster that you quoted stated that it does. You seem to forget that anything that the poster that you quoted states is a "fact" must be a "fact".


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Demon said:


> The part where the driver agrees to follow laws.


Which law is that? Is it a state or federal? Please provide a link.

And the passenger gives up those legal protections when they agree to the terms of service. That little box you check that says you read and agree.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Demon said:


> Seriously, how far would you like to move the goal posts?
> 
> You're suddenly claiming that I never backed up my facts when in fact you never asked for a cite, or did some of your own homework and researched it yourself?
> 
> ...


If anyone is "moving goal posts", that would be you. In fact, as you have appointed yourself the referee, you presume to move them anywhere and any time that you see fit so that you can award yourself another point.

It is not incumbent on me to ask for anything. You are the one calling it "stealing". You are the one who tells me that I am responsible for someone else's property. You are the one who tells me that I have all of these obligations. Prove your assertions. The problem is that you can not.

I never stated that stealing is legal anywhere. I have informed you once that I see through your rhetorical stunt of "arguing" as if you have established your definitions of terms when, in fact, you have failed to do that.

If I called the quoted post (or any one of your posts, for that matter) a "poor try", it would be out of kindness.

Once more, you fail, and fail miserably. You are pointing the finger. Prove your accusations. The reason that you have not tried is that even YOU know that you can not.

Poor try.


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Demon said:


> Seriously, how far would you like to move the goal posts?
> 
> You're suddenly claiming that I never backed up my facts when in fact you never asked for a cite, or did some of your own homework and researched it yourself?
> 
> ...


I don't think stealing means what you think it means.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Demon said:


> Yes. Unless you know of a state where there are no laws against stealing. I'm sure you can tell me what state that is.
> 
> You seem to not understand the fact that the pax can prove they had the phone when they got in your car, had it for the entire ride, and didn't have it when they exited.
> 
> ...


A pax losing their phone doesn't constitute theft



Demon said:


> So you still don't like facts. The definition of stealing is depriving someone of their property. This isn't up for debate, it's the definition of stealing.
> No debate here, the phone is traceable so there's no question about if it was inside your car or not.
> Nope, you rolled the goalposts back pretty quick. Again, only a driver or a pax can find the phone.
> That's not all the evidence they'll have. They'll know exactly when the phone was turned off, or when the phone was thrown from your car. If that time matches up exactly when you turned your dashcam off, that would look really bad for a driver.
> ...


They deprived themself of their property.


----------



## hanging in there (Oct 1, 2014)

chuck finley said:


> I read the story about uber driver got arrested after turned rider's phone to uber.
> 
> If this is the case, would it be better for driver just to dump rider's item out of the car (near trash can)? Why would we waste our time to go to uber and then got arrested later?


In that particular case the fact that she eventually returned the phone wasn't the cause of her problems with getting arrested etc., it was because she didn't return it soon enough. The story is really weird to me because I would think that before filing a police report the pax would put in a request for Uber to notify the driver about the missing phone.

All legal and technical issues in this thread aside, I just can't help feeling a little sad that not one post mentions anything about having a little human compassion, a little consideration for the pain the pax may be suffering, financially and otherwise, over the loss of his or her phone. I know, I know, compassion doesn't pay the bills.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

hanging in there said:


> All legal and technical issues in this thread aside, I just can't help feeling a little sad that not one post mentions anything about having a little human compassion, a little consideration for the pain the pax may be suffering, financially and otherwise, over the loss of his or her phone.


Both the customers and Uber/Lyft get what they give.

These customers show no "compassion" for the time, trouble and financial penalties that the driver pays when he returns something to the customer. When a customer burns a driver over that once or twice, the driver ceases to care.

For a long time, not only was there no compensation from Uber/Lyft on this, if you even mentioned the possibility of compensation to the passenger, both Uber and Lyft would de-activate you. Uber now renders unto you fifteen dollars, but, that does not always cover your time, trouble and lost revenue.

Both Uber and Lyft have an anti-driver policy on lost articles. If you will not return the lost article immediately, the customer complains and Uber/Lyft take the customer's part, despite the disclaimer on lost articles. Further, neither Uber nor Lyft issue a receipt if you hand in the article at their offices. If someone at the offices loses or takes the article, there will be a denial that the driver turned in the article. The driver then faces sanctions.

Lost article policies have favoured the careless for years. That never should have happened. I am not responsible for someone else's property unless it is bailed unto me. There is no bailment in the case of my transporting someone who is accompanying his articles. There is no bailment if he leaves them in my car without my knowledge, permission or acceptance (at the time that he leaves them). In order for there to be any bailment, he must inform me that he is leaving his articles and I must accept them. In the case of a lost article, there is neither.

This is why I understand why some people chuck lost articles. People expect anyone but themselves to pay for their mistakes. I have enough problem paying for my own mistakes, why should I be compelled to pay for anyone else's?


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Demon said:


> Not for UBer or Lyft you didn't.


The purpose for which I passed it matters not. _*That*_ I passed it, does. So, please inform me, how much more stringent a background check do you need?

................and you accuse me of "moving the goal posts"...........................


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> The purpose for which I passed it matters not. _*That*_ I passed it, does. So, please inform me, how much more stringent a background check do you need?
> 
> ................and you accuse me of "moving the goal posts"...........................


I accuse you of it because you moved the goal posts, we already discussed that. Uber & Lyft don't require a fingerprint background check run through an FBI database, so that would be a more stringent background check for drivers to pass. And you're the one here telling everyone how you've stolen other people's property and if you're ever called on it would lie about it.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Demon said:


> *1.*I accuse you of it because you moved the goal posts, we already discussed that.
> 
> *2. *Uber & Lyft don't require a fingerprint background check run through an FBI database, so that would be a more stringent background check for drivers to pass.
> 
> *3. *And you're the one here telling everyone how you've stolen other people's property and if you're ever called on it would lie about it.


1. We have discussed it, you failed to prove it, the accusation is invalid.

2. Relevance? HUH?

3. I never stated that I stole anything. That is putting words onto my keyboard. ................."moving the goal posts"?.......................

You "mov[ed] the goal posts" because you assumed that I was stating that I passed the FBI check for the purposes of driving Uber or Lyft.

Once more, you fail to substantiate your "points".


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> 1. We have discussed it, you failed to prove it, the accusation is invalid.
> 
> 2. Relevance? HUH?
> 
> ...


We already proved you moved the goal posts, feel free to go back and you'll see where I quoted it.
You haven't thrown a pax's phone out of your car? You've certainly said you would steal a pax's phone and then would lie about it. That's not me putting words anywhere.
I don't move goal posts and haven't here. Go back and read my post where I clearly stated "drivers". Good try.
99.9% of your argument is coming out of butt hurt.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Demon said:


> you're the one here telling everyone how *you've stolen other people's property* and if you're ever called on it would lie about it.


 (emphasis added)



Demon said:


> We already proved you moved the goal posts, feel free to go back and you'll see where I quoted it.
> You haven't thrown a pax's phone out of your car? You've certainly said you would steal a pax's phone and then would lie about it. That's not me putting words anywhere.
> I don't move goal posts and haven't here. Go back and read my post where I clearly stated "drivers". Good try.
> 99.9% of your argument is coming out of butt hurt.


You have not proved anything in any of your posts.

Above is what you typed. Pay special attention to the emphasised part. You accused me specifically of stating that I stole someone's property. Wouldda' couldda; shouldda' is irrelevant. You accused me of stating that I did it. That is a false accusation. I never stated that I stole anything. That is putting words onto my keyboard. I will pass over your presuming to define something as "stealing" despite your failure to substantiate it.

................and finally, you resort to namecalling. You DO understand that he who resorts to namecalling admits by default that his "arguments" are totally devoid of substance. Your arguments have had that "distinction" since you first replied to me.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> (emphasis added)
> 
> You have not proved anything in any of your posts.
> 
> ...


You relying on butthurt, your ignorance and making things up doesn't change anything, you were wrong, and continue to be. I haven't called you names, you're really trying hard to change the topic of this conversation.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Why is this still going on?


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

SuzeCB said:


> Why is this still going on?


Some people can't handle being butt hurt, he's one of them.


----------



## merryon2nd (Aug 31, 2016)

Topic of this convo hasn't changed at all. Us telling you that we're not responsible for careless drunks further than getting them home in one piece. You telling us that our purpose in life is to babysit said drunk and that we're legally responsible for their inability to behave like actual humans and keep control of their possessions.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Demon said:


> You relying on butthurt, your ignorance





Demon said:


> Some people can't handle being butt hurt, he's one of them.


Once more, your own words convict you. The words that you posted, and, that I quoted constitute namecalling. You have called me two names: "butthurt" and "ignorant".

I could make yet another comment based on your feeble "arguments" and your own words convicting you, but the banner beneath my ID does not permit it.


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

Whatever is convenient for you. 

Obviously you'll keep the cash, don't take cellphones to your house, other items can be returned for a $15 fee IF it's not too far out of your way. 

"No, I checked my vehicle inside and out, couldn't find your $600 jacket" should suffice in many cases.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

SuzeCB said:


> Why is this still going on?


.............because he has attempted to dictate the rulebook, appointed himself the referee and declared himself the winner. I will not buy any of it and he is not going to stop until I do.

I guess that means that he is not going to stop.............................................................


----------



## merryon2nd (Aug 31, 2016)

Honestly, it's because people like Demon believe that their word is law, and that the only reality is theirs. And that BUGS people who follow actual reality. So we bite back by nature.


----------



## Just Another Uber Drive (Jul 15, 2015)

Julescase said:


> That's like a game of "Kill, Marry, or &%[email protected]!*" except for Uber drivers it's "Keep, Take, or "Get rid of"
> 
> I love it!


Interesting game. Turns out for many people all three slots usually end up being a first spouse.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Another Uber Driver said:


> Once more, your own words convict you. The words that you posted, and, that I quoted constitute namecalling. You have called me two names: "butthurt" and "ignorant".
> 
> I could make yet another comment based on your feeble "arguments" and your own words convicting you, but the banner beneath my ID does not permit it.


You're just wrong again. I didn't call you any names in the posts you quoted or in any other posts. You can't make any other arguments, because you'd be wrong then too.

Butthurt isn't a name. it's a feeling. It would be the equivalent of saying you're embarrassed or sad, that's not name calling, and I didn't call you ignorant and the post you quoted proves it.

You're desperate to change the topic and try to save some face.



merryon2nd said:


> Honestly, it's because people like Demon believe that their word is law, and that the only reality is theirs. And that BUGS people who follow actual reality. So we bite back by nature.


I'll totally bite on this, name one thing that I've said that isn't real. I look forward to your response.


----------



## merryon2nd (Aug 31, 2016)

It's not an individual set of words, but the idea set. It's not realistic for us to be perfect, angelic babysitters and still turn a profit. This makes your way impractical, and unrealistic to our functionality. I may have worded what I said before oddly, but the basic premise still stands. Realistically, we can't hold customers little hands and baby them and still make this work for us. 9/10 of our day would literally by returning little preciouses to entitled little millenials that have no sense of responsibility or reality. This is why, per Uber itself, like all professions that provide a service, tells customers to bring things into our cars at their own risks. Like car washes and shops, that is quite literally in the disclaimer of the customer sign up. If people are too self important to read the contract of use while signing up for a service that allows them to be the ultimate in lazy, that's not my bloody problem and they can dig the trash, dumpster dive, or see the cops for their crap that obviously never meant anything to them because they failed to keep hold of it.


----------



## Freddie Blimeau (Oct 10, 2016)

Demon said:


> You're just wrong again.
> 
> You're desperate to try to save some face
> 
> , name one thing that I've said that isn't real. .


Dude, you haven't said one thing that IS real. She's got you there. You're the one who needs to save face. Between those 2 & some of the other people in this thread, face it, dude, you've been PWND.

Give up before they decide to rent you out.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Demon said:


> I didn't call you any names in the posts you quoted or in any other posts.
> 
> You can't make any other arguments, because you'd be wrong then too.
> 
> ...


"Butthurt" is derogatory, therefore it is namecalling. "Butthurt" is not on the same level as "embarrassed" or "sad". I can tell you that you are embarrassing yourself every time that you post to this topic and it is neither derogatory nor namecalling. If I were to tell you that your posts reflect your being "butthurt", that would be derogatory hence namecalling. (and while on the subject, you are embarrassing yourself every time that you _*do*_ post to this topic. You might want to follow that troll's advice.)

When you tell me that I am "relying on my ignorance", that is alleging that I am ignorant. That is derogatory, therefore namecalling. Perhaps you can deny your written words among the crowd with which you move, I do not know. I do know that you can not get away with that here.

You take the same tack with the "arguments" that you are "advancing". You make these statements, fail to substantiate them, then post as if these unsubstantiated statements were accepted as fact by all concerned. The only one who has accepted any of them as "fact" is you. Everyone else who has replied either has not commented on them one way or the other or has rejected them. Still, you fail to substantiate them. People on these boards are not going to accept your unsubstantiated statements simply because you make them or act as if they were "fact".

You have failed to substantiate ANY of your statements. You deny the words that you posted; words that anyone who reads the post can see. If there is anyone who is trying to "save face" here, that would be you. I have not lost any "face", therefore I need not save any nor even "try". Your "arguments" have failed and continue to fail. Every post that you have put to this topic is unsubstantiated; therefore a failure.

As for your question to merryon2nd , the troll has answered it, _*infra*_. \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/



Freddie Blimeau said:


> Dude, you haven't said one thing that IS real. She's got you there.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

merryon2nd said:


> It's not an individual set of words, but the idea set. It's not realistic for us to be perfect, angelic babysitters and still turn a profit. This makes your way impractical, and unrealistic to our functionality. I may have worded what I said before oddly, but the basic premise still stands. Realistically, we can't hold customers little hands and baby them and still make this work for us. 9/10 of our day would literally by returning little preciouses to entitled little millenials that have no sense of responsibility or reality. This is why, per Uber itself, like all professions that provide a service, tells customers to bring things into our cars at their own risks. Like car washes and shops, that is quite literally in the disclaimer of the customer sign up. If people are too self important to read the contract of use while signing up for a service that allows them to be the ultimate in lazy, that's not my bloody problem and they can dig the trash, dumpster dive, or see the cops for their crap that obviously never meant anything to them because they failed to keep hold of it.


Ok, so now we can have a conversation.

I'm going to agree with you 100% that Uber sees to it that drivers are paid slave wages, which is one of thousands of reasons why no one should be driving for Uber. Uber is like a casino, sure, a driver may hit it big one night or maybe even one week, but in the long run, Uber is winning out at a driver's expense. So it's not a very solid argument that a driver doesn't want to make an attempt to return a lost item because they might lose money doing so.

No one is asking you to babysit passengers. If someone leaves something in your car, you have to make an attempt to return it, that's not babysitting, and pretty much every business in the hospitality industry accepts this as part of doing business. The contract also says drivers will follow all laws, that means making an attempt to return a lost item.

My best advice to everyone on this board is not to drive for Uber. Now if someone really wants to drive for Uber my next piece of advice would be to spend 20 seconds checking where the passenger sat for lost items before you leave the drop off area.



Another Uber Driver said:


> "Butthurt" is derogatory, therefore it is namecalling.


 It's not derogatory.


Another Uber Driver said:


> "Butthurt" is not on the same level as "embarrassed" or "sad".


 Cite?


Another Uber Driver said:


> I can tell you that you are embarrassing yourself every time that you post to this topic and it is neither derogatory nor namecalling. If I were to tell you that your posts reflect your being "butthurt", that would be derogatory hence namecalling. (and while on the subject, you are embarrassing yourself every time that you _*do*_ post to this topic. You might want to follow that troll's advice.)


At this point you're doing all the trolling. You doing anything you can to change the topic.


Another Uber Driver said:


> When you tell me that I am "relying on my ignorance", that is alleging that I am ignorant. That is derogatory, therefore namecalling. Perhaps you can deny your written words among the crowd with which you move, I do not know. I do know that you can not get away with that here.


That's not namecalling either. Everyone has some ignorance, I'm ignorant about the rules of cricket, you're ignorant about how cell phones work, how Uber works, and what the law is. That's not namecalling, that's me pointing out you don't know about something. 


Another Uber Driver said:


> You take the same tack with the "arguments" that you are "advancing". You make these statements, fail to substantiate them, then post as if these unsubstantiated statements were accepted as fact by all concerned. The only one who has accepted any of them as "fact" is you. Everyone else who has replied either has not commented on them one way or the other or has rejected them. Still, you fail to substantiate them. People on these boards are not going to accept your unsubstantiated statements simply because you make them or act as if they were "fact".


So what is it exactly that you would like me to prove that you can't look up yourself. You claimed that depriving someone of their property wasn't really stealing, when in fact it is. If you need me to provide you a cite on what stealing is, please don't be afraid to ask.



Another Uber Driver said:


> You have failed to substantiate ANY of your statements. You deny the words that you posted; words that anyone who reads the post can see. If there is anyone who is trying to "save face" here, that would be you. I have not lost any "face", therefore I need not save any nor even "try". Your "arguments" have failed and continue to fail. Every post that you have put to this topic is unsubstantiated; therefore a failure.


Did you ask me for any proof? I asked you for proof and you ran away from the question. At some point you can't keep relying on your ignorance. I haven't denied anything that I've written. What you're trying to do is assign a meaning to what I've written that doesn't hold up.

I'll ask again because you keep trying to change the topic to other things. Is it really worth the possibility of having to deal with the police over an item left in your car, or is it just easier to make an attempt to get it back to its owner?


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Demon said:


> It's not derogatory.
> 
> Cite?
> 
> ...


It is derogatory.

HUH?

More namecalling. "Troll" is calling names. Yes, I did call that guy a "troll", but I know him from the Washington Boards. He shows up every once in a while to troll, but his trolling is mostly harmless. He crosses another poster or Moderator every once in a while. I am not the only one who has called him a "troll".

I am not changing any topic.

The way in which you are using it is derogatory. "Ignorance" and its various forms have a negative and neutral connotation. The negative is the way in which it usually is taken. The tone of your posts casts a negative shadow on it, hence its being taken as derogatory; therefore namecalling. in addition, you have now posted false statements: I am "ignorant" about how "cell phones" work,; I am "ignorant" about how Uber works and I am "ignorant" about the law. Those are false statements and you have absolutely no basis for making them. By default, that casts a negative light on "ignorant", hence it becomes namecalling.

You have made several statements, none of which you have substantiated. You simply presume to dictate and everyone is supposed to bow to it. I know the type.

You have not asked me for proof for anything, with the exception of statements that I never made.

You have denied calling me names, when, in fact, you have. You have denied that you accused me of advising people to steal, when I never advised anyone to steal. I will start with that.

HUH?

I am not changing any topic. If anyone is trying to change the topic, it is thou.

I am not responsible for getting something back to its owner. I am not responsible for someone else's property unless there is bailment. There is no bailment, here. The owner is responsible for his property, not I; with the exception of bailment. Even then, there are cases where the owner is still responsible for his property. That is irrelevant, though, as there is no bailment in question, here.


----------



## merryon2nd (Aug 31, 2016)

Demon said:


> No one is asking you to babysit passengers. If someone leaves something in your car, you have to make an attempt to return it, that's not babysitting, and pretty much every business in the hospitality industry accepts this as part of doing business. The contract also says drivers will follow all laws, that means making an attempt to return a lost item.


This is actually one of the reasons that I don't drive the drunk crowd much, if at all. As customers leave my car, I turn around, tell them to check the car and their belongings, look with them, confirm, and then leave. Two separate parties have now swept the car for articles that were not mine. Could we have missed something? Of course. But they got their chance to check. And if they rushed out without doing so, YUP, I wash my hands of it.
Like I said, sometimes I come off as a bit rough. But I give everyone an opportunity to double check. I'm not unjust or unfair. If they choose NOT to, nothing I can do about it, but they just basically told me to go screw myself, and were unjust and unfair to me and my time.
As for not babysitting. Do you realize, at all, what the bar closing shift looks like? From our end? Not even CLOSING, but early evening in resort towns. I stopped driving this shift all together because of the last time I did. Someone literally carried a gentleman out, laid him out on my backseat, and then strolled back into the bar. Being an non-a$$hole, naturally I took him to the address, parked at Montego Bay, took his key out of his pocket, drug him to the elevator, stumbled with him through the halls, and laid him on a bed. I locked him in, and called it a night. I then went back to Firehouse Tavern and gave the guy an a$$ reaming I doubt he'll forget despite his drunken state. How anyone can let someone they supposedly care about drink themselves into such a state, and then leave them alone with a stranger HOPING that they didn't mug/rape/beat/drug or leave them somewhere besides the destination, is beyond my level of comprehension.
Could I have cancelled, and left the guy on the sidewalk. Sure, I could have. But then I would have been concerned about leaving him there without a way home. I'm sure someone would have eventually picked him up. Another Uber Driver, a Cab, a Cop, maybe even his friends the next morning. But how long would he be there? Would he catch a cold? Too many variables to worry about. It was better at that point to take him. Did I check for his valuables afterward? Yeah, I did. Did I have to? No. I would appreciate you not judging my character because of my show of agitation on this forum.
I understand that things happen. I allot a time to prevent that. The problem comes when people are too self important to take that opportunity. When drinking becomes more important to you than having your license, not freezing, or making sure you have your lifeline, its THEM that has the issue. Not me.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

merryon2nd said:


> . Someone literally carried a gentleman out, laid him out on my backseat, and then strolled back into the bar. I'm sure someone would have eventually picked him up. *Another Uber Driver*


 (emphasis added)

I would not have picked him up. In the cab business, we call those "dumping jobs". Usually it is a hotel doorman, desk clerk, restaurant enployee or hospital employee who wants to get rid of a "problem". What they do is dump their "problem" on a cab driver (or, in the cited case, an Uber driver). As a driver, I learned VERY quickly not to haul these jobs, regulatory consequences be damned. In the case of the drunk, the cab driver is not required to haul him, but, often the aforementioned establishments used to dump street people on cab drivers (and dump them on Uber drivers).

If the street person would simply go to where the establishment paid the driver to take him and get out of the car, it would not be a problem. What happens is that the street person decides that he will not get out there, or, while en route, decides that he does not want to go there. Even if you take the precaution of advising the street person before you move a wheel that you are being paid to take him to ________________ and that you will take him to ________________ and he will get out, that means nothing, STILL, he will tell you en route that he does not want to go to ____________ but wants to go somewhere else. Of course, once you are on your way to "somewhere else", he suddenly decides that he wants to go to "another place". You can not get them out of the car and, they have no money to pay you once whatever the hotel gave you runs its course.......but, I stray.

You are fortunate that you did not suffer any punishment for your good deed. Ask me how I know that drivers have gotten into trouble for dragging a drunk into his residence and putting him to bed. Further, you are fortunate that the drunk did not ralph in your car. The possibility of a ralph, alone, always has been enough to keep me from hauling someone who is blind drunk. It is one reason that I always have approached a gin mill at night with doors locked, be it in the UberX car or the cab. If someone needs too much help, he does not ride. He can ralph in some illegal's car or in some ant's car (depending on what I am driving that night. For purposes of clarification, in this context, "illegal" describes a taxicab being driven by someone who does hot have a hack licence).

If I see that someone is being carried to the car, the doors stay locked, I pull off, around the corner and do the Shirlington Shuffle. If I am driving the cab, I simply leave. I tend to avoid the clubs and gin mills at night, anyhow. I stay in the residential areas near those strips, thus, I tend to get residential calls or pings, where it is less likely (though not impossible) that you will get someone who is blind drunk. The Capital of Your Nation seems to be laid out in that manner. You do have the club strips on the main streets, but people do live around the corner from these establishments. There are some clubs in the warehouse districts, but, those districts are disappearing here.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Someone who is that drunk, where they are passed out, or even half passed out, is suffering from alcohol poisoning. The first stage of alcohol poisoning is usually puking, but any number of things can interfere with nausea, causing the person to skip right to the next level if they continue drinking. At this point, I don't want this person in my car. I don't want that level of responsibility for a stranger. They can die in your car.

Never touch a Pax past shaking hands. You can be accused of any number of things. Never go through their clothing. You can be accused of having robbed them. Never go into their house. Anything can happen to you, or you can be accused of anything.

Why would you even allow the other person to put that person in your car? They didn't need an Uber, they needed an ambulance, or a police car.

You can say it was your good heart and your sense of responsibility that made you take that person home, but in reality it was an extreme show of irresponsibility. You are not equipped, unless you are a doctor, nurse, or on-duty EMT with full accompaniment of tools to do the job, to deal with this situation.

Just because something is a common occurrence doesn't mean it is safe. Anything could have happened, and it would have been your fault because you accepted him in your car. The moment you did that there was a duty of care.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

SuzeCB said:


> They didn't need an Uber, they needed an ambulance, or a police car.


*^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^*

The po-po and the EMTs are trained to deal with drunks. The average limousine, cab or TNC driver _*ain't*_. Leave those matters to those trained to deal with them.

On these dumping jobs, many of these places (or even the do-gooders who will try to pay for the transportation of the drunks or street people), will tell you that they are not calling the police or the ambulance because they do not want this person "to have any problems"..........................funny, they do not seem to care if a driver has problems.......................................


----------



## merryon2nd (Aug 31, 2016)

I was pretty young in my uber career at that point. Believe me, I'm now perfectly well aware of how that COULD have gone. And it's part of the reason I experimented to find a better time frame that works and haven't driven the drunk crowd in some time. Hind sight 50/50 I would never take that risk again. But back then I was still somewhat a bleeding heart. To this day however, I still do not understand how people can treat one another like THAT. With friends like that, who needs enemies. I knew what was up with this guy, because as a 2nd Streeter, I've seen guys in way worse shape by far still on the dance floor dancing. He just needed to sleep it off. And NO, just because I understood what was happening, does NOT give me a pass for my stupidity in this situation. Lol  I much more enjoy driving as a jaded wench taking no crap from anyone, than as who I used to be in this gig.
Not saying I would leave the guy, even though I certainly wouldn't drive him again. I would take him a block, turn the corner onto Arctic, park and call and wait for the cops. Id take him the block to avoid his friend from pulling him out and dropping him on somewhere else is all. But, clearly, the drunk tank is a much better place for people like this than the back of an uber or cab. I still am a bit of a bleeding heart after all. Lol


----------



## Ms.Doe (Apr 15, 2016)

Coachman said:


> This forum is slowly sinking into the abyss.


At least the humor is in effect! Laughing my a$$ off!



Cableguynoe said:


> It's only as good as it's members


 2 THUMBS UP!



Demon said:


> Keep in mind it's illegal to launch someone else's property out of your car.


CTFU!



IERide said:


> Thank you for the source, although I'm not sure it applies to the 90% of drivers here not in California..
> And, even if the phone is traceable, who's to say another pax didnt take it and dump in on the ground..
> 
> My point is much like uberisSATAN says.. There are many laws we break every day.. and in all the years of ride-share and all the millions of rides given and no doubt hundreds of thousands of lost items tossed out the window, there has been what, ONE prosecution?
> ...


RIGHT?!



Demon said:


> The other 90% would be covered by their state law which prevents people from stealing things. This isn't a thread about breaking other kinds of laws, this is a thread about returning property that belongs to passengers. For the umpteenth time, phone's a traceable, so if another person put it on the ground it would be known when & where that happened, and if it happened when there wasn't another person in your car, that would also be known.
> Got it, you always do what's right...unless you just don't feel like it.


Not if you turn your phone off!



Another Uber Driver said:


> Not necessarily.
> 
> I did not mention the subsequent customer's finding the telephone. I did mention launching it when said customer disembarks.
> 
> ...


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

It 


SuzeCB said:


> Someone who is that drunk, where they are passed out, or even half passed out, is suffering from alcohol poisoning. The first stage of alcohol poisoning is usually puking, but any number of things can interfere with nausea, causing the person to skip right to the next level if they continue drinking. At this point, I don't want this person in my car. I don't want that level of responsibility for a stranger. They can die in your car.
> 
> Never touch a Pax past shaking hands. You can be accused of any number of things. Never go through their clothing. You can be accused of having robbed them. Never go into their house. Anything can happen to you, or you can be accused of anything.
> 
> ...


 It Does Happen !


----------



## MarkR (Jul 26, 2015)

Demon said:


> Keep in mind it's illegal to launch someone else's property out of your car.


Right! it is. Bring it into a Starbucks and leave it in the restroom when you leave. Let someone else worry about it. wear gloves


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

MarkR said:


> Right! it is. Bring it into a Starbucks and leave it in the restroom when you leave. Let someone else worry about it. wear gloves


That's also illegal.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Demon said:


> That's also illegal.


Hence, the gloves.

Could always just look up a random address in India or the Phillipines and mail it there...

But only if you can't get your $15.


----------

