# Seeking legal recourse for service animal fraud by PAX resulting in deactivation from Uber



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

I was wrongly deactivated from Uber because a PAX lied and said that I refused a service animal. The PAX never indicated that the dog was anything other than a pet and I didn't want the wet and dirty dog to get into my car. It was raining outside.

The PAX also indicated that it was ok to cancel, anyway.

Later the PAX told Uber I refused a service animal.

I would like to sue the PAX or Uber for service animal fraud and/or wrongful deactivation of my account.

Can anyone share any info or law resources for this?

Complaints from intoxicated passengers and service animal fraud are getting out of hand.

Thx.


----------



## RoWode12 (May 12, 2018)

I mean this in the nicest way possible: 

Is it worth it? Did being an Uber Driver mean that much to you? Can’t you find something more lucrative and fulfilling? 

It definitely sucks to be falsely accused and lied to. But if it were me, I’d be happy for the push in a better direction in life.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

How do you know it wasnt a service animal? Did you ask the 2 questions? Did he fail to answer them according to ADA law? Do you have dash cam with audio of the incident?


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Yes it IS WORTH IT !
Abuse of Driver is Rampant !
Rampant and Escalating !
If we had a Union 
This would be Handled !


----------



## Robkaaa (Nov 25, 2015)

Fk that. Every freaking pet (dog, cat, horse, snake, giraffe, hamster, rat, ants, and even fleas) consider a SERVICE ANIMALS in Uber. The funny thing is that nobody can ask a rider to provide additional evidence of a pet being a service animal.
If I were you, I would find that pax and offered him some cash to settle the matter.


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

steveK2016 said:


> How do you know it wasnt a service animal? Did you ask the 2 questions? Did he fail to answer them according to ADA law? Do you have dash cam with audio of the incident?


They didn't say, and I didn't ask. It would seem to me that it is the riders responsibility to communicate this crucial info. No dash cam. Their word against mine.

The point of all this is that to many drivers, this may be the only source of income that is keeping them financially afloat and the fact that a rider could make someones life miserable so easily with no regard for that person is disgusting. Simply because they want what they want whenever they want it. And especially with no regard for the drivers property.

Its wrong. Plain and simple. And it's BS.

And I didn't mention how many time riders complain because they were intoxicated usually just to get back at drivers who don't act like their personal servants. Passengers lie ALL THE TIME. Not just to me. Uber does NOT defend drivers. What rider ever gets "deactivated"? Especially for being drunk or aggressive or just plain rude? Only the most extreme situations result in PAX deactivation, vs any minor complaint can result in driver deactivation.


----------



## Gtown Driver (Aug 26, 2018)

I like how this person is in a situation where they can't make money for their job anymore and the response is more like "hey my dude at least you out of the slammer, you a free man now."


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

RoWode12 said:


> I mean this in the nicest way possible:
> 
> Is it worth it? Did being an Uber Driver mean that much to you? Can't you find something more lucrative and fulfilling?
> 
> It definitely sucks to be falsely accused and lied to. But if it were me, I'd be happy for the push in a better direction in life.


No, it is not my only option. But what if I wasn't so lucky?

Entitled riders that treat drivers like they are their personal servants shouldn't be allowed to make someones life difficult that is already in a difficult situation. That is the height of arrogance.

If Uber is really for the drivers, they should walk the walk vs just talk the talk.

In addition to just treating people like human beings. Fairly.

Are you some kind of #astroturfer for Uber?


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Events like THIS.

PERSECUTION WITHOUT RECOURSE OR DEFENSE

UBER ASSUMPTION OF GUILT

IS WHY I FOUND SOMETHING ELSE TO DO !
Before it could ever happen to me !


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

rideshare_avl said:


> They didn't say, and I didn't ask. It would seem to me that it is the riders responsibility to communicate this crucial info. No dash cam. Their word against mine.
> 
> The point of all this is that to many drivers, this may be the only source of income that is keeping them financially afloat and the fact that a rider could make someones life miserable so easily with no regard for that person is disgusting. Simply because they want what they want whenever they want it. And especially with no regard for the drivers property.
> 
> ...


They are not obligated to inform anyone that their animal is a service animal. You as a service provider have 2 questions you can ask to verify authenticity.

ADA law has been inconveniencing businesses since 1992. Its not going away and is unlikely to be changed or loosened anytime soon. Theres articles from the first 2 years of ADA that noted that it costs businesses 2 billion dollars. Your inconvenience is minuscule compared to what other businesses have gone through based on ADA law over the last 26 years.

I have over 2000 trips now and I have never been reported for anything that got me deactivated and I drive exclusively late night drunk crowd.

I also have a dash cam for when issues do arise.

If that dog was a legitimate service dog, you have zero ground to stand on. Bring a towel next time and the wet dog will get you a cleanup fee.


----------



## Amsoil Uber Connect (Jan 14, 2015)

For California. PC Code 365.7 See if there is one for your State.

You have an action for cause in small claims court. However you need to know the paxs personal address.

*Code Text*
*Penal Code - PEN*
*PART 1. OF CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS [25 - 680]*
_ ( Part 1 enacted 1872. )_
*TITLE 9. OF CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON INVOLVING SEXUAL ASSAULT, AND CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC DECENCY AND GOOD MORALS [261 - 368.5]*
_ ( Heading of Title 9 amended by Stats. 1982, Ch. 1111, Sec. 2. )_

*CHAPTER 12. Other Injuries to Persons [346 - 367g]*
_ ( Chapter 12 enacted 1872. )_

*365.7. *

(a) Any person who knowingly and fraudulently represents himself or herself, through verbal or written notice, to be the owner or trainer of any canine licensed as, to be qualified as, or identified as, a guide, signal, or service dog, as defined in subdivisions (d), (e), and (f) of Section 365.5 and paragraph (6) of subdivision (b) of Section 54.1 of the Civil Code, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.

(b) As used in this section, "owner" means any person who owns a guide, signal, or service dog, or who is authorized by the owner to use the guide, signal, or service dog.

_(Added by Stats. 1994, Ch. 1257, Sec. 12. Effective January 1, 1995.)_


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

steveK2016 said:


> They are not obligated to inform anyone that their animal is a service animal. You as a service provider have 2 questions you can ask to verify authenticity.
> 
> ADA law has been inconveniencing businesses since 1992. Its not going away and is unlikely to be changed or loosened anytime soon. Theres articles from the first 2 years of ADA that noted that it costs businesses 2 billion dollars. Your inconvenience is minuscule compared to what other businesses have gone through based on ADA law over the last 26 years.
> 
> ...


Uber should state this EMPHATICALLY. Because if what you say is true, you can NEVER refuse a dog. For any reason. OR a miniature donkey. Because of what it MIGHT be.

Absolute BS.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

rideshare_avl said:


> Uber should state this EMPHATICALLY. Because if what you say is true, you can NEVER refuse a dog. For any reason. OR a miniature donkey. Because of what it MIGHT be.
> 
> Absolute BS.


Ive had to agree to service animal policy at least 3 separate times since they settled their lawsuit with the federation of the blind a year or so ago. It is also your responsibility as a self employed contractor to know the law. Ignorance of the law does not exempt you from the law.

You are ultimately responsible for following the law .

This is not Uber policy, this is Federal Law that prevents you from discriminating against those with service animals . disabilities are not always obvious, like being blind.

You can reject a pet, uber has emphasized that you are to ask the two questions. If They fail, you can reject. If you do not have proof of these encounters, then you are not adequately prepared to provide such services.

Theres a user here that has posted 2 videos of him asking the two questions, rejecting the ride, uber deactivated him for 48 hours then he was back on the road once the "investigation" was complete and he was "cleared" of wrong doing. You do not have anything that can clear you. Should have gotten a dash cam. 20/20 hindsight, amiright?

ADA law has established that vehicle transportation can reject miniture horses due to space issues. Dogs are the only service animal ground transportation is required to accomedate. Support animals do not have to be accomedated by ground transportation. Air transport have to take both.


----------



## Amsoil Uber Connect (Jan 14, 2015)

Robkaaa said:


> Fk that. Every freaking pet (dog, cat, horse, snake, giraffe, hamster, rat, ants, and even fleas) consider a SERVICE ANIMALS in Uber. The funny thing is that nobody can ask a rider to provide additional evidence of a pet being a service animal.
> If I were you, I would find that pax and offered him some cash to settle the matter.


F that. Its to late for that now. And thanks for showing everyone where you Ethics and Personal Integrity lies.



rideshare_avl said:


> Because if what you say is true, you can NEVER refuse a dog. For any reason. OR a miniature donkey. Because of what it MIGHT be.
> 
> Absolute BS.


That's how it is. Just do the trip and 1* them.

Goto help and say your rider was rude. And failed the service animal test. I completed the trip anyway. Course its to late for that.


----------



## jgiun1 (Oct 16, 2017)

I swear....some people on this site are nuts....just bring the dog and if it's a mess, claim the cleaning fee. I drove three service dogs and owners were completely blind.

I had my wake up moment when I seen a blind man with a cane walking without a service dog and his face went right into an metal electric box that was too low on a utility pole. 

I mean to sign up to drive then agree to service animals....then decline & leave the person in the rain stranded...you got what you deserved


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

steveK2016 said:


> Ive had to agree to service animal policy at least 3 separate times since they settled their lawsuit with the federation of the blind a year or so ago. It is also your responsibility as a self employed contractor to know the law. Ignorance of the law does not exempt you from the law. This is not Uber policy, this is Federal Law that prevents you from discriminating against those with service animals . disabilities are not always obvious, like being blind.


If we are going with the letter of the law. Sure.

But it is definitely not the spirit of the law.

If I impersonate a police officer, I go to jail.

Allowing basically everyone to impersonate someone with a not-so-obvious disability or completely lie about a service animal without any recourse is complete BS.

There should be an obvious balance between clearly communicating a disability and discriminating behavior.

Personally, I think it is rather obvious.

The law should be challenged. And I am willing.


----------



## RoWode12 (May 12, 2018)

rideshare_avl said:


> No, it is not my only option. But what if I wasn't so lucky?
> 
> Entitled riders that treat drivers like they are their personal servants shouldn't be allowed to make someones life difficult that is already in a difficult situation. That is the height of arrogance.
> 
> ...


I am definitely in no way affiliated with, or supportive of Uber and their shady practices. I just know you have a stressful, uphill battle. I know uber is going to look out for number 1 and deactivate any Driver associated with so much as a whisper of denial of service animals.

Any logical person would ask, "Okay, so where is the proof that this pax had a service animal at all?" Uber? No such logic. "Our decision is final."

Maybe you would have better luck contacting the execs and making a big deal of this on social media. But what are you going to say? What proof are you going to provide?

It sucks. I definitely feel for you. I just know how this all plays out.

Did you have a dash cam? Did you ask the 2 questions? (The ONLY 2 questions anyone is allowed to ask regarding a service animal.)

For everyone's reference:
*1.) Is that animal a service animal necessary for a disability?
2.) what functions/tasks/work is this animal trained to perform?

Also, emotional support animals no longer count. *

Good luck.


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

jgiun1 said:


> I swear....some people on this site are nuts....just bring the dog and if it's a mess, claim the cleaning fee. I drove three service dogs and owners were completely blind.
> 
> I had my wake up moment when I seen a blind man with a cane walking without a service dog and his face went right into an metal electric box that was too low on a utility pole.
> 
> I mean to sign up to drive then agree to service animals....then decline & leave the person in the rain stranded...you got what you deserved


The person was clearly NOT blind and very NOT disabled. Especially in a deluge, which it was not.

Do you really think I am suggesting that someone be abandoned like that?

AND the person said it was TOTALLY OK to cancel.

ONLY after I left the scene, did the rider tell uber it was a service animal.

I wasn't ready for that. Especially only after 1 occurrance.

I have no problem giving rides to legit disabled people and their legit service animals.

In fact, I have. Many times. Even to just pets.

The cleaning fee is also not enough to pay for what the damages to your vehicle cost in reality.

Another Uber #astroturfer



RoWode12 said:


> I am definitely in no way affiliated with, or supportive of Uber and their shady practices. I just know you have a stressful, uphill battle. I know uber is going to look out for number 1 and deactivate any Driver associated with so much as a whisper of denial of service animals.
> 
> Any logical person would ask, "Okay, so where is the proof that this pax had a service animal at all?" Uber? No such logic. "Our decision is final."
> 
> ...


Uber told me that emotional support animals DO count. Period. BTW.

And what proof does the PAX have that they clearly informed me that they had a service animal? Apparently they don't have to. That asinine. Now ANY rider can easily commit fraud with no recourse.

Really?!?



RoWode12 said:


> I am definitely in no way affiliated with, or supportive of Uber and their shady practices. I just know you have a stressful, uphill battle. I know uber is going to look out for number 1 and deactivate any Driver associated with so much as a whisper of denial of service animals.
> 
> Any logical person would ask, "Okay, so where is the proof that this pax had a service animal at all?" Uber? No such logic. "Our decision is final."
> 
> ...


And OH YES, I am going to make a big deal of this on social media.



jgiun1 said:


> I swear....some people on this site are nuts....just bring the dog and if it's a mess, claim the cleaning fee. I drove three service dogs and owners were completely blind.
> 
> I had my wake up moment when I seen a blind man with a cane walking without a service dog and his face went right into an metal electric box that was too low on a utility pole.
> 
> I mean to sign up to drive then agree to service animals....then decline & leave the person in the rain stranded...you got what you deserved


CORRECTION:
"Do you really think I am suggesting that someone be abandoned like that? Especially in a deluge, which it was not. "

"I wasn't ready for that. Especially for a deactivation only after 1 occurrance, that is very grey"



steveK2016 said:


> Ive had to agree to service animal policy at least 3 separate times since they settled their lawsuit with the federation of the blind a year or so ago. It is also your responsibility as a self employed contractor to know the law. Ignorance of the law does not exempt you from the law.
> 
> You are ultimately responsible for following the law .
> 
> ...


The fact that the driver has to go to such expense and aggravation to protect against a law that allows for easy abuse, is a law with poor language that is unbalanced and unfair.

Basically every PAX can now commit fraud without ANY recourse and they know it.

What is "fair" about that?

Nothing.


----------



## Seamus (Jun 21, 2018)

I am sure the law may be different state to state. In NY you may ask if a dog is a service animal but you MAY NOT ask for any proof. Therefore, you might as well treat all dogs like they are service animals. Take the dog. Use a towel or charge a cleanup fee if they make a mess. My advice to anyone is : LEARN TO LOVE DOGS AND DON"T DENY THEM, case closed. You are on the wrong side of history, if you don't want dogs in your car drive UberEats but don't deliver Hot Dogs.


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

Seamus said:


> I am sure the law may be different state to state. In NY you may ask if a dog is a service animal but you MAY NOT ask for any proof. Therefore, you might as well treat all dogs like they are service animals. Take the dog. Use a towel or charge a cleanup fee if they make a mess. My advice to anyone is : LEARN TO LOVE DOGS AND DON"T DENY THEM, case closed. You are on the wrong side of history, if you don't want dogs in your car drive UberEats but don't deliver Hot Dogs.


Blindly allowing riders to lie and commit fraud and simply "learn to love dogs" is not a fair or realistic solution. Seriously???

Man, am I glad you are not a judge.

I don't allow food and drink in my car BTW either.

I do love all animals. I am vegan. And a progressive.

AND I have given plenty of rides to PAX that communicate clearly and show respect for my property.

However, disrespect, and damage with improper compensation of a drivers hard-earned property, is as BS as discrimination.



Seamus said:


> I am sure the law may be different state to state. In NY you may ask if a dog is a service animal but you MAY NOT ask for any proof. Therefore, you might as well treat all dogs like they are service animals. Take the dog. Use a towel or charge a cleanup fee if they make a mess. My advice to anyone is : LEARN TO LOVE DOGS AND DON"T DENY THEM, case closed. You are on the wrong side of history, if you don't want dogs in your car drive UberEats but don't deliver Hot Dogs.


And if Uber is so emphatic about following this law to the T, then they should be painfully clear that you MUST have a towel and accept ALL dogs for ANY reason. THAT only takes a sentence.

Most reasonable people would not be aware of the repercussions of this loose-languaged law.


----------



## Seamus (Jun 21, 2018)

rideshare_avl said:


> Blindly allowing riders to lie and commit fraud and simply "learn to love dogs" is not a fair or realistic solution. Seriously???
> 
> Man, am I glad you are not a judge.
> 
> ...


It doesn't matter what _should _be, only what is. In the current environment you aren't winning this one. I'm a practical person and don't waste time on the theoretical.

If you really don't want dogs in your car as you approach the pick up and see they have a dog don't stop and deny, just keep going and cancel the ride. Then tell Uber you had an emergency case of the runs and were about to explode so you had to go find the nearest bathroom. You aren't going to deny a dog and win, case closed.

And honestly, you aren't even in a position to judge if it's legit. There are therapy dogs, how you going to judge that?


----------



## RoWode12 (May 12, 2018)

Are you 100% sure this is the first service animal complaint you’ve had? If so, use Uber’s own policy in your favor. 

According to their terms, you are only deactivated after two reports of failure to accept a service animal.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

rideshare_avl said:


> If we are going with the letter of the law. Sure.
> 
> But it is definitely not the spirit of the law.
> 
> ...


It is against the law to claim a pet as a service animal hut the ADA law was intentionally written to reduce the burden on the disabled. They consider it a burden to require clear communication or to force them to annouce their disability.

Trust me, theyve had 26 years to scrutinize the law. Countless of lawsuits, countless billions of dollars spent fighting it and accomedating it.

If You have a few million dollars that you dont mind losing, youre free to the next challenger of ADA Law. I dont have to be a lawyer to tell you, you will not win. Smarter men with more money than you have fought it, and lost.

Uber drivers are a mere speck of dust in the battle between businesses and ADA.

Theres no real government agency that you can report the crime to and if you call the police, they are likely to blow you off. Theyve got real criminals to deal with. It's unfortunate but this is the current status of America.



rideshare_avl said:


> The person was clearly NOT blind and very NOT disabled. Especially in a deluge, which it was not.
> 
> Do you really think I am suggesting that someone be abandoned like that?
> 
> ...


Not all disabilities are visible. Legitimate service dogs can sense seizures, be used by those with autism and even severe PTSD.

Yes the law was intentionally written to give the animal handler the benefit of the doubt. They wrote the law to provide them with less burden, as they are disabled and have enough other things to be concerned about.

Service providers are intentionally given extra burden. Again, its been fought by smarter and richer men, with more money at stake than you have, and still lost.



rideshare_avl said:


> Blindly allowing riders to lie and commit fraud and simply "learn to love dogs" is not a fair or realistic solution. Seriously???
> 
> Man, am I glad you are not a judge.
> 
> ...


You dont have to take pets or emotional support animals. Rohit may have told you that in an email but that is not official policy. Again, a driver here has video evidence of him asking the two questions, the pax stating it was a support animal, he did not pick them up, he sent Uber an email immediately after the report with video evidence. Pax complained, he was deactivated for 48 hours then reinstated.

The key is if you reject someone like that, always be the first to report. If you didn't, even if the pax seemed "ok with it" then you just pulled a rookie mistake.


----------



## JTTwentySeven (Jul 13, 2017)

Pax lie.
My friend admitted to me that she lies to the drivers and says her dog is a service dog, because she knows she can get away with it.

But let this be a lesson...bring an old blanket and let the doggo in the car! I welcome all dogs and animals.

If you have a support squirrel, welcome! I'm not an airport.


----------



## Gtown Driver (Aug 26, 2018)

Basically if you want your job, put the alligator in the car.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

rideshare_avl said:


> If we are going with the letter of the law. Sure.
> 
> But it is definitely not the spirit of the law.
> 
> ...


It already has been challenged. Many times. The person challenging it always loses. It will also cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not actually going into the Millions. You would have to take it all the way up to the Supreme Court on your own dime. This isn't something that the ACLU will help you out with. They stand on the right of the individuals, not the company, and in this situation you represent a company because you are the business owner providing a service.

On one hand, this is entirely your responsibility. On the other hand, it's not actually your fault, since Uber never actually expressly explains the responsibilities that go along with being an independent contractor. Most of the time when people sign up to drive for Uber or Lyft, they are still in an employee mind set, with the exception of the "my car, my rules" thing.

And yes, your car, your rules, except when you're rules conflicts with federal and state laws and the contract that you signed with Uber.

If you manage to get yourself driving again, do yourself a favor and brush up on your business owner skills. You need to educate yourself on any and all laws that affect what you do, and also really actually read the contract that you sign. If you don't understand any part of it, bring it to someone that you believe will, like an attorney, and have them explain it to you. Be glad you were only retaliated against by Uber. If it was a legitimate service dog, the pax could have sued you and you would have a judgement against you for quite a bit of money.


----------



## Invisible (Jun 15, 2018)

Service dogs that I've seen are normally recognized by a vest. But per the link below, not all animals wear them.

https://www.anythingpawsable.com/how-can-i-tell-if-a-service-animal-is-legitimate/

Too many people have emotional support animals these days, aka as therapy dogs. Remember the peacock someone tried bringing on a flight? The difference between the two is service dogs had specific training, but ES dogs did not. But both are covered by ADA.

I'm sorry this happened to you. And Uber is too quick to deactivate drivers based on the word of a pax. Maybe this is a blessing in disguise. Look at Lyft or Amazon Flex instead.


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

Robkaaa said:


> Fk that. Every freaking pet (dog, cat, horse, snake, giraffe, hamster, rat, ants, and even fleas) consider a SERVICE ANIMALS in Uber. The funny thing is that nobody can ask a rider to provide additional evidence of a pet being a service animal.
> If I were you, I would find that pax and offered him some cash to settle the matter.


How would offering cash to the pax who reported OP to Uber resolve anything? Pax doesn't get to then decide "all is fine" and tell Uber to reactivate OP......

And yes you absolutely CAN ask pax two very specific questions to confirm said animal is a service dog. If OP didn't want the dog in his car and it actually WAS a service dog, then OP broke the law and *should* be deactivated. Unless I understand incorrectly, OP didn't bother asking the questions nor did he/she seem to care that he/she was potentially breaking the law by not allowing the potential service dog to enter the car.

We're missing some pertinent information and without certain details we can't really help.



Invisible said:


> Service dogs that I've seen are normally recognized by a vest. But per the link below, not all animals wear them.
> 
> https://www.anythingpawsable.com/how-can-i-tell-if-a-service-animal-is-legitimate/
> 
> ...


No - a lot of what's written in the above comment is incorrect - service dogs do not usually wear vests. Nor are vests exclusive to service animals. In fact, most service dogs do not wear vests. Anyone can go online and purchase a vest for their dog - no paperwork or referrals are required to buy that stuff.

You're thinking of ESAs - Emotional Support Animals - these are not the same thing as Service Dogs.

Anyone reading this thread who is not 100% clear on the ADA's Service Animal laws should educate themselves ASAP if they want to continue driving for Uber. You're making a smart move by becoming informed. Otherwise, your driving career will be cut extremely short.

Just do yourselves a solid and read the laws, especially pertaining to how rideshare drivers must comply. You'll be glad you did.


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

Sounds like you've already been given plenty of good advice, but what the heck, my pax are taking too long, so I will throw in a few pennies worth of thoughts.



rideshare_avl said:


> Can anyone share any info or law resources for this


Did you opt out of arbitration? If not, then you aren't suing Uber. To sue pax you will need to have Uber subpoenaed for their info.



rideshare_avl said:


> Its wrong. Plain and simple. And it's BS.


Really messed up.



RoWode12 said:


> I am definitely in no way affiliated with, or supportive of Uber and their shady practices


Slimy company, does not really care about driver's no matter how much they tell us we matter.



rideshare_avl said:


> The person was clearly NOT blind and very NOT disabled. Especially in a deluge, which it was not





Seamus said:


> honestly, you aren't even in a position to judge if it's legit





steveK2016 said:


> Not all disabilities are visible.


A person with diabetes or epilepsy could have a legit service dog and any of us might question it because we cannot "see" anything wrong with them. Disabilities come in all shapes and sizes, and so do service animals. And, waaaaaay too many people lie and say they have a service animal. I almost think we need some government regulation or standards to document service animals and provide records, this is abused so much in America. A real shame.

Good luck.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

rideshare_avl said:


> I was wrongly deactivated from Uber because a PAX lied and said that I refused a service animal. The PAX never indicated that the dog was anything other than a pet and I didn't want the wet and dirty dog to get into my car. It was raining outside.
> 
> The PAX also indicated that it was ok to cancel, anyway.
> 
> ...


You didn't ask if it was a service animal? Then I don't see what your complaint is. You have no idea if the pax is lying. If he said sure, cancel, it may be because you're the 4th driver who showed up and he was sick of arguing in the rain. For all you know 3 other drivers got deactivated by him after he told them it was a service animal and they didn't care.

Why would you NOT ask? I'm guessing it's because you didn't want to know. You just didn't want the dog in your car regardless.


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

rideshare_avl said:


> They didn't say, and I didn't ask. It would seem to me that it is the riders responsibility to communicate this crucial info. No dash cam. Their word against mine.
> 
> The point of all this is that to many drivers, this may be the only source of income that is keeping them financially afloat and the fact that a rider could make someones life miserable so easily with no regard for that person is disgusting. Simply because they want what they want whenever they want it. And especially with no regard for the drivers property.
> 
> ...


Hi OP,

I'm not sure how long you've been driving, but there are a few points you brought up in your comments that concern me.

1) get a dash cam. NOW. Don't do a single trip in the future without one. This one issue you're going through alone should be your lesson.

2) read the very clear and informative threads on this site about the service animal laws and the ADA. From your posts, you appear a bit naive regarding disabilities and what they entail. 90% of the time, you as a driver WILL NOT be able to "see" the disability for which a pax may need a service dog. As Mista T masterfully stated, there are numerous disabilities that require service dogs beyond "seeing eye dogs" so if you're expecting every service dog to be a German Shepherd leading a blind pax, you need to get over that assumption immediately.

3) there are 2 specific and legal questions you may ask of a pax when they claim their dog is a service dog. If pax answers "no" to one or both of those questions, the dog isn't a service animal and you're not legally obligated to take the ride. (Just a word of advice, however, for your own sanity and longevity: you should probably just accept all dogs into your car unless they're 100% not service dogs beyond a doubt and they're covered with mud or obviously going to make a huge mess. Trust me, once you get over the dog thing, your life will be easier. The 10-15 dogs I've had in my car for Uber trips have been the best pax ever to ride with me. It's really REALLY not a big deal, and that way you don't have to worry about being deactivated over something like this again.)

Good luck - I hope you get through this and come out the other side a newly educated, ADA/Service Dog expert driver. If you are deactivated for a while, maybe you can use that free time to read up on Uber's laws and regulations; not just service dog-related, but in general. Information is power! You can never have too much knowledge. 



SuzeCB said:


> It already has been challenged. Many times. The person challenging it always loses. It will also cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not actually going into the Millions. You would have to take it all the way up to the Supreme Court on your own dime. This isn't something that the ACLU will help you out with. They stand on the right of the individuals, not the company, and in this situation you represent a company because you are the business owner providing a service.
> 
> On one hand, this is entirely your responsibility. On the other hand, it's not actually your fault, since Uber never actually expressly explains the responsibilities that go along with being an independent contractor. Most of the time when people sign up to drive for Uber or Lyft, they are still in an employee mind set, with the exception of the "my car, my rules" thing.
> 
> ...


+ 1,000,000,000. ^^^ *THIS* ^^^


----------



## Castaneda7189 (Apr 14, 2017)

I’ve accepted ferrets, otters, parrots, dogs and cats. I feel like a modern day Noa’s ark with all these emotional support pets. I don’t mind them even if their wet. Just a simple tap on the snout and they listen. Afterwards take pictures like crazy, and report it “the smell of wet animal is horrendous and now I need to wash the inside of my car. This is my job and I need to give clean rides.” A couple hours later an awesome cleaning fee. Sorry that you got deactivated man. But your best bet is to simply beg like crazy to be activated. I’ve been deactivated by lyft 3X over the past 4 years. Got activated after sending multiple messages. Not sure about Uber though. Good luck my friend.


----------



## FlashedBlaze (Sep 30, 2018)

Three months back, I remember some dude tried to pull off his dog as a service dog. I can't tell you how painfully obvious the "service dog" looked wearing chains (it was a pitbull). This is how the story goes.

After I accepted the request, I got message from the rider that requested the trip if it was okay for him to bring his dog. Pulled over and texted him back replying to him if it is a service dog only, other than that I prohibit any other animals. He replies back that it is indeed a service dog and that he has a vest. As I arrive, I couldn't believe my eyes, the pax was dressed up like a gangster, huge earrings, chains, not to mention, he looked like a crackhead. I couldn't determine any disability at this point, plus his dog was wearing a spikey chain around his collar.

With the vehicle remaining locked and my Vantrue N2 Pro dashcam rolling, I rolled down the windows as he wanted to talk to me that he left his "documents and service vest at his mom's house. I told him back that he was trying to pull off a scam, because a true person with a disability would text me and ask me to bring their service dog in the car, and that I am going to cancel this ride. He then blocked my vehicle, angrily asked me how he was going to get his refund, then I said back, "thats your fault and I am holding you accountable. Having a fake service dog is illegal in this state (we have a state statute against fake service dogs and it is a Class C Misdemeanor) and I can call the (town) police department to come here and handle this, and I can share my dashcam footage about what you did and what lead me to believe you are fake in these circumstances.

Needless to say that he did back off and it's been three months since that incident. Didn't have a complaint or anything unusual Uber did to my account.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

FlashedBlaze said:


> Three months back, I remember some dude tried to pull off his dog as a service dog. I can't tell you how painfully obvious the "service dog" looked wearing chains (it was a pitbull). This is how the story goes.
> 
> After I accepted the request, I got message from the rider that requested the trip if it was okay for him to bring his dog. Pulled over and texted him back replying to him if it is a service dog only, other than that I prohibit any other animals. He replies back that it is indeed a service dog and that he has a vest. As I arrive, I couldn't believe my eyes, the pax was dressed up like a gangster, huge earrings, chains, not to mention, he looked like a crackhead. I couldn't determine any disability at this point, plus his dog was wearing a spikey chain around his collar.
> 
> ...


Many mistakea in this incident.

The obvious one is how You handled that initial confrontation. You basically primed him into telling you that it was a service dog.

You ask the first legal question and wait for a reply. Then you ask the second question and wait for a reply. At that point, you can determine if it's a legitimate service dog that you must take, regardless of the appearance of the handler or the animal. There's no law that prohibits a handler from accessorizing his or her service animals collar.

A handler also may not have a visible disability.

Once he failed those two questions, you would never have given him the opportunity to become physical with you.

You also didnt mention sending a report to Uber. That should be the first thing you do as you turn the corner away from the pax.

You simply got lucky. You may not be as lucky next time. Ask the questions, dont prime them.


----------



## mbd (Aug 27, 2018)

rideshare_avl said:


> I was wrongly deactivated from Uber because a PAX lied and said that I refused a service animal. The PAX never indicated that the dog was anything other than a pet and I didn't want the wet and dirty dog to get into my car. It was raining outside.
> 
> The PAX also indicated that it was ok to cancel, anyway.
> 
> ...


Lie back, and make up a good story
And lawsuit should be against the passenger and Luber


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

SuzeCB said:


> It already has been challenged. Many times. The person challenging it always loses. It will also cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not actually going into the Millions. You would have to take it all the way up to the Supreme Court on your own dime. This isn't something that the ACLU will help you out with. They stand on the right of the individuals, not the company, and in this situation you represent a company because you are the business owner providing a service.
> 
> On one hand, this is entirely your responsibility. On the other hand, it's not actually your fault, since Uber never actually expressly explains the responsibilities that go along with being an independent contractor. Most of the time when people sign up to drive for Uber or Lyft, they are still in an employee mind set, with the exception of the "my car, my rules" thing.
> 
> ...


Did you read what I posted? No Suze, the PAX never communicated the dog was a service animal. AND, told me it was ok to cancel.

And lets just be clear here... I am not suggesting in the slightest that you leave a disabled person out in the rain or something like that but come on... Service animal fraud is out of control. Any reasonable person can understand that.

Uber does not emphasize their position on this law that is easily taken advantage of and the situations that may arise out of it. Period.

Uber should have a clear position on what to say to dog owners that what to bring pets or service animals on board, rather that "its federal law and you figure it out".

I read the contract I signed. It said that I can have 2 infractions and I had 1. Also, it doesn't clearly emphasize that a PAX doesn't even have to have any proof that they are what and who they say they are.



steveK2016 said:


> Many mistakea in this incident.
> 
> The obvious one is how You handled that initial confrontation. You basically primed him into telling you that it was a service dog.
> 
> ...


The bottom line is that Uber should have a clear script on how to deal with this situation because of the excess of service animal fraud. Period.



Fuzzyelvis said:


> You didn't ask if it was a service animal? Then I don't see what your complaint is. You have no idea if the pax is lying. If he said sure, cancel, it may be because you're the 4th driver who showed up and he was sick of arguing in the rain. For all you know 3 other drivers got deactivated by him after he told them it was a service animal and they didn't care.
> 
> Why would you NOT ask? I'm guessing it's because you didn't want to know. You just didn't want the dog in your car regardless.


I allow dogs all the time. But, no. In this situation, I did not want a wet and dirty animal in my car not only because it would damage my property, but other riders would have to ride in the wet mess as well.

"If he said sure, cancel, it may be because you're the 4th driver who showed up and he was sick of arguing in the rain." Really ?!? Maybe the PAX just needs to have better communication skills at this point. Like the PAX never has any responsibility to be clear and communicate and the driver has to be perfect at all time??? Really?

If I knew the animal was a service animal of course I would take it. Good grief. The PAX was clearly miffed that I didn't want there dirty wet pet in the vehicle and retaliated in a way they could clearly take advantage. That is why I wasn't notified in the first place.

And judging by the "F_ck You" text repeated all over their T-shirt they were wearing at the time, they have no issues with clarity...



Julescase said:


> Hi OP,
> 
> I'm not sure how long you've been driving, but there are a few points you brought up in your comments that concern me.
> 
> ...


I allow pets all the time. Please READ the whole thread. And maybe Uber and Lyft need to have a clear script that they tell drivers to use regarding this easily manipulated law. The burden of communication should not be totally on the driver. That is asinine. And unreasonable. Respect goes both ways and communication is central to it.


----------



## Juggalo9er (Dec 7, 2017)

Old town in michigan, frankenmuth.....sue happy person went through and threatened to sue every business that was not wheel chair accessible or they could settle for 10k..... almost all of them settled... net profit 190k......



Do not mess with ada


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

I think everyone who jumps into this post needs to READ the whole post AND think just a bit.

I am vegan AND progressive.

I allow pets in my car ALL THE TIME. I also love dogs, cats, etc.

The law regarding service animals is very easily taken advantage of and there is no recourse for service animal fraud. There should be equally stiff penalties for those who lie and take advantage of this law designed to protect ACTUAL persons with disabilities, whome I support.

Mutual respect and communication are not unreasonable expectations. Equally for the PAX AND OP.

Uber should have a clear script for OPs to deal with potential service animals because the potential of fraud is so high. If you don't think riders are taking advantage of this, you are willfully ignorant.

It is also NOT UNREASONABLE for an OP to expect a PAX to respect their property. The compensation for stains or the discomfort of future riders, with possible effect on tips and other PAX perceptions, is unequal with the loss of revenue AND loss of value in property when damage occurs. Even a stain in a seat can result in hundred of dollar in loss of value upon trade-in. And why should all the emphasis be on the OP anyway? PAXs ride at the pleasure of the OP and owner of the vehicle.

FOR EXAMPLE, $300 in compensation for someone projectile vomiting in your car because they are overly intoxicated is not even close to enough considering the time the OP can't use the vehicle for both commercial and private use until it is thoroughly cleaned. Especially if occurs on a Saturday night. And good luck finding a reputable car cleaning service to do this for $300 once the vomit has fermented in your car until Monday morning. Essentially, you might as well had the windshield of your car smashed and PAX should be permanently deactivated for behavior like this. BUT THIS RARELY HAPPENS.

Wet, dirty animals, service animals or not, should be the responsibility of the owner of that animal. Why don't they carry around a blanket or other protection if they know their pet may potentially damage an OPs property in a rainy or muddy situation? Why is the responsibility ALL on the OP? I believe in treating people how you expect to be treated. I would never expect an OP or anyone else to be forced to deal with the consequences of my own decisions or lack there of.

I think MUTUAL respect and reasonable expectations are the solution. That is not discriminatory or unfair.


----------



## touberornottouber (Aug 12, 2016)

I'm thinking maybe the best course of action when someone obviously has a fake service animal might be to just go ahead and take them, record it on the dash cam, then contact Uber/Lyft and tell them the passenger likely has a fake service animal.

If also in a state where having a fake service animal is illegal you might also consider contacting the police and giving them the information you have on it. They just might investigate.

Sure you still have to take them and put up with it but as this happens more and riders get deactivated or face legal problems over lying this should reduce the crap we get from this.


----------



## Ron Jeremy Sez (Jul 9, 2017)

rideshare_avl said:


> I was wrongly deactivated from Uber because a PAX lied and said that I refused a service animal. The PAX never indicated that the dog was anything other than a pet and I didn't want the wet and dirty dog to get into my car. It was raining outside.
> 
> The PAX also indicated that it was ok to cancel, anyway.
> 
> ...


Best Way to deal with animals
1. Accept the fare
2. 1 star the pax when you drop them off
3. Submit for a cleaning fee

Cleaning fee may only be $40 - $60 but it adds up.

I love animal rides!!!


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

rideshare_avl said:


> Did you read what I posted? No Suze, the PAX never communicated the dog was a service animal. AND, told me it was ok to cancel.
> 
> And lets just be clear here... I am not suggesting in the slightest that you leave a disabled person out in the rain or something like that but come on... Service animal fraud is out of control. Any reasonable person can understand that.
> 
> ...


You are an independent contractor, you are responsible for following the law.

But Uber does give You the script, which is verbatim what the law says: https://accessibility.uber.com/service-animal-policy/

You ask the two questions, like weve been saying all day. You failed to read the policy, I received at minimum 3 notifications that I needed to agree to the Uber policy on service animals. I read that link completely, then I did my own independent research.

The burden isnt all on the driver. How much of the $500,000 settlement that Uber paid to the federation of the blind when they sued them for ADA violation did you pay? They dont want to pay a penny more on the topic, you've been warned to agree to the new policy, you didnt bother reading it, understanding it or researching it.

You failed to operate your business and ignorance of the law does not exempt you from the law. Case closed.


----------



## RoWode12 (May 12, 2018)

You keep mentioning a ‘script’. I don’t really understand what you mean. It’s not your job to determine if someone is faking it, and you can’t ask a bunch of questions. You’re running a business: it’s YOUR responsibility to figure it out. 

Basically you pull up, see a dog, and ask if it’s a service animal. If it appears to be particularly burdensome and you’re feeling suspicious, you ask the two questions. 

You can’t ask anything else. You can’t comment on whether or not they LOOK disabled. You can’t ask what disability they have. 

You may very well have turned down a service animal of a pax who was feeling vindictive and wanted to complain. Maybe that’s why they told u to cancel. They were looking for a battle. Maybe they were lying. Either way, you are supposed to be given 2 strikes on this matter.


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

steveK2016 said:


> You are an independent contractor, you are responsible for following the law.
> 
> But Uber does give You the script, which is verbatim what the law says: link
> 
> ...


Lol, AGAIN, you should read both the policy AND what I posted.

I did not KNOWINGLY refuse a rider with a service animal. I expressed to the PAX I would prefer not to let a potentially dirty wet PET in my car. THEY, then indicated it was perfectly ok to cancel. Case closed.

And not ONE mention of a way to dispute/question, or identify service animal fraud in the uber policy.

However, the fact that "A rider will not be charged for the first or second reported mess involving a service animal's bodily fluids. A rider can be charged for the third reported mess involving a service animal's bodily fluids." is a stunningly lopsided and unfair component of this legislation. That speaks volumes about groups way overstepping their rights.

The law should not apply to rideshare drivers because while they are independent contractors, they are not "common" or "typical" businesses like a taxi service or a bus. They are made up of individuals that are often using their one personal vehicle in a mutually beneficial service to the community. Insisting that these individuals allow for animals peeing or pooping in its various forms even once in this context is an utterly unreasonable requirement of this service.

Having said that, the law is the law.

But I have a new life goal now. And I am so NOT kidding. I am really good at branding, design and advertising.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

rideshare_avl said:


> Lol, AGAIN, you should read both the policy AND what I posted.
> 
> I did not KNOWINGLY refuse a rider with a service animal. I expressed to the PAX I would prefer not to let a potentially dirty wet PET in my car. THEY, then indicated it was perfectly ok to cancel. Case closed.
> 
> ...


Pax wont get charged but driver Will still get paid for messes caused by service animals.

Many taxi drivers are also independent contractors just like Uber drivers, some even have an app just like Uber.

Im in corporate brand marketing myself, its a cut throat world that someone with a lack of foresight and poor research initiative such as what youve demonstrated so far may hold you back significantly.

Good luck.


----------



## FlashedBlaze (Sep 30, 2018)

steveK2016 said:


> Many mistakea in this incident.
> 
> The obvious one is how You handled that initial confrontation. You basically primed him into telling you that it was a service dog.
> 
> ...


That was the mistake I made for not asking the two questions as I almost never took service animals in the past (only once). But yeah I did decide to do my research about fraudulent service animals in my state.

I didn't report it to Uber due to the fact that they'll likely suspended or deactivate me, plus, Uber does not really view dashcam video unless it goes viral.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

FlashedBlaze said:


> That was the mistake I made for not asking the two questions as I almost never took service animals in the past (only once). But yeah I did decide to do my research about fraudulent service animals in my state.
> 
> I didn't report it to Uber due to the fact that they'll likely suspended or deactivate me, plus, Uber does not really view dashcam video unless it goes viral.


Good that you recognized that. I would rather Uber deactivaye me for 48 days pending investigation than to be permanently deactivated like the OP.

Next time, when you ask the 2 questions and they fail, report it immediately. Uber tends to believe the first person that reports the incident . the threat of dash cam footage has always expedited all my support claims. I woulnt roll the dice next time as long as you follow the 2 question rule. People can still lie about it, but it weeds out the casuals that think therapy dogs qualify for ADA protection in ground vehicles.


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

steveK2016 said:


> Pax wont get charged but driver Will still get paid for messes caused by service animals.
> 
> Many taxi drivers are also independent contractors just like Uber drivers, some even have an app just like Uber.
> 
> ...


However you want to go back and forth, I believe the service animal legislation is unbalanced and unfair. And I believe how my situation was handled was unfair and unjust. If not by the letter of the law but by the spirit of the law. Especially considering how effortless it is to fraudulently claim your animal is in fact a service animal with no proof or recourse if you are lying.

Quite honestly, never in my wildest dreams would I imagine legislation of this kind in the form that it is. Lesson learned.

And foresight? Yeah. I guess I should expect entitlement and lack of respect for others and their property with laws to support it moving forward. Another lesson learned.

If I don't have any legal recourse, then another lesson learned.

But last time I checked, it's still a democracy at this point, and I can share my disgust with this legislation in very visually inviting ways. Corporate interests haven't bought off absolutely everyone and everything just yet.

Thankfully you are in corporate brand marketing and seem quite beholden to those interests. It appears to be a very good fit for you. And I would expect nothing else from you than how you responded. Franky, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if you were astroturfing for Uber or Lyft on this site and that there are many others doing the same.

Asking for an inch, and taking a mile or acquiescing to people who do does nothing for equality in any way for anything or anyone.

Good luck and enjoy kissing rings.


----------



## mrpjfresh (Aug 16, 2016)

I see you are a new member here but how long have you been driving for Uber? As Steve says, I have gotten no less than 3 e-mails from Uber this past 16 months _solely_ explaining their service dog policy and their zero tolerance in regards to denying. Yes, you did not _knowingly_ reject a service animal but any driver with a month of experience knows that riders will lie for any number of reasons to get free rides or just out of spite. This is the nature of the beast and being an IC with these callous rideshare companies. I fully expect deactivation as a matter of course for any stupid reason Uber sees fit unfortunately.

I wish you luck in any legal action against the liar but the 2 big hurdles are having no video/audio evidence and you not asking the proper questions (admitted here in black and white). I drive in Asheville as well and sympathize. October is the most lucrative month of the year to drive here so that stings.

For anyone else, just carry a cheap moving blanket in your trunk and throw it down for animals or any other super messy pax. Easy cleanup, protects your property and avoids this accusation. If you are going to reject animals, educate yourself and record everything.



Julescase said:


> Just do yourselves a solid and read the laws, especially pertaining to how rideshare drivers must comply. You'll be glad you did.


Solid advice from the reliable Ms. Case. Nice new picture by the way.


----------



## Robkaaa (Nov 25, 2015)

BTW, if it was your first time incident, Uber my forgive you. My wife has a service dog, and driver declined transportation for her. She wrote message to Uber, and after investigation Uber let driver be on a platform. 
May be it will help you out.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

rideshare_avl said:


> However you want to go back and forth, I believe the service animal legislation is unbalanced and unfair. And I believe how my situation was handled was unfair and unjust. If not by the letter of the law but by the spirit of the law. Especially considering how effortless it is to fraudulently claim your animal is in fact a service animal with no proof or recourse if you are lying.
> 
> Quite honestly, never in my wildest dreams would I imagine legislation of this kind in the form that it is. Lesson learned.
> 
> ...


Again, the ADA of 1992 is a law that has been fought by smarter and richer men than both of us combined. Ive resigned long ago of any reform to it. It was intentionally written so alleviate as much burden from the disabled and place it on the business. Again, billions have been lost over the years in compliance and in fighting it. No one is saying you cant complain or try, feel free.

The ADA is actually opposite of corporate interest. Corporate interest fought it tooth and nail. It has costs businesses a lot of money. This law was made in order to prevent corporate interest from discriminating against the disabled.


----------



## Robkaaa (Nov 25, 2015)

Julescase said:


> How would offering cash to the pax who reported OP to Uber resolve anything? Pax doesn't get to then decide "all is fine" and tell Uber to reactivate OP......


I've never done that before, but in this case it is obvious that cheap pax wanted a cancellation fee refund, so some extra cash could resolve this matter.


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

steveK2016 said:


> Again, the ADA of 1992 is a law that has been fought by smarter and richer men than both of us combined. Ive resigned long ago of any reform to it. It was intentionally written so alleviate as much burden from the disabled and place it on the business. Again, billions have been lost over the years in compliance and in fighting it. No one is saying you cant complain or try, feel free.
> 
> The ADA is actually opposite of corporate interest. Corporate interest fought it tooth and nail. It has costs businesses a lot of money. This law was made in order to prevent corporate interest from discriminating against the disabled.


People with disabilities should be protected.

This legislation WAY oversteps its bounds in the other direction because it enables effortless fraud with no recourse.


----------



## Irishjohn831 (Aug 11, 2017)

You are too late, I just checked ecourts and the dog, Fido Johnson has filed a discrimination suit against you. 

He’s unable to wag his tail as happy as he used to and where he used to dream and simulate running in a happy field it’s now a terrified run from you chasing him in your uber car.


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

mrpjfresh said:


> I see you are a new member here but how long have you been driving for Uber? As Steve says, I have gotten no less than 3 e-mails from Uber this past 16 months _solely_ explaining their service dog policy and their zero tolerance in regards to denying. Yes, you did not _knowingly_ reject a service animal but any driver with a month of experience knows that riders will lie for any number of reasons to get free rides or just out of spite. This is the nature of the beast and being an IC with these callous rideshare companies. I fully expect deactivation as a matter of course for any stupid reason Uber sees fit unfortunately.
> 
> I wish you luck in any legal action against the liar but the 2 big hurdles are having no video/audio evidence and you not asking the proper questions (admitted here in black and white). I drive in Asheville as well and sympathize. October is the most lucrative month of the year to drive here so that stings.
> 
> ...


Thx.

But the level of entitlement and arrogance in AVL is nauseating. My perception of the place and what it turned out to be are such a gigantic let down I can't express it in words because I expected so much more.

People are no less out for themselves than anywhere else, and perhaps more, except for that they have "F_ck" or "Anarchy" written on their t-shirts or have more mandala tattoos...

And since it is a dog-friendly town, everyone knows how to take advantage of the service animal legislation with rideshare.

Sad.

Disappointing.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

rideshare_avl said:


> People with disabilities should be protected.
> 
> This legislation WAY oversteps its bounds in the other direction because it enables effortless fraud with no recourse.


There 26 years of case history for you to go over for your fight against the system. Have fun!


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

Irishjohn831 said:


> You are too late, I just checked ecourts and the dog, Fido Johnson has filed a discrimination suit against you.
> 
> He's unable to wag his tail as happy as he used to and where he used to dream and simulate running in a happy field it's now a terrified run from you chasing him in your uber car.


Lol. Thx for rubbing it in...



steveK2016 said:


> There 26 years of case history for you to go over for your fight against the system. Have fun!


Indeed. But sometimes public opinion/awareness works better than legislation...



Robkaaa said:


> BTW, if it was your first time incident, Uber my forgive you. My wife has a service dog, and driver declined transportation for her. She wrote message to Uber, and after investigation Uber let driver be on a platform.
> May be it will help you out.
> View attachment 266355


Thx Rob.


----------



## Invisible (Jun 15, 2018)

Julescase said:


> No - a lot of what's written in the above comment is incorrect - service dogs do not usually wear vests. Nor are vests exclusive to service animals. In fact, most service dogs do not wear vests. Anyone can go online and purchase a vest for their dog - no paperwork or referrals are required to buy that stuff.
> 
> You're thinking of ESAs - Emotional Support Animals - these are not the same thing as Service Dogs.
> 
> ...


No, I am not wrong. As I noted, service dogs are trained specifically and some do wear vests, special collars, etc. I know someone who has a service dog. Please educate yourself!

Emotional support dogs are just therapy dogs.

https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.html


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

rideshare_avl said:


> I think everyone who jumps into this post needs to READ the whole post AND think just a bit.
> 
> I am vegan AND progressive.
> 
> ...


Your situation does sound like you should not have been deactivated. Unfortunately, you don't have a dash cam to prove what happened. That is your biggest problem right now. It is why Uber is not going to listen to a single word you say. They don't want to go through the expense of Defending themselves against a lawsuit from this person, on the off chance that she is telling the truth and you are not.

Keep trying to get them to see your side. Make sure you get it across to them that if it was indeed a service animal and she thought that that was why you were refusing her, you are very sorry about that and feel quite badly. But that wasn't your intention. And if you had known you would have had her in the car with the dog in a heartbeat. As soon as you were reactivated, do not take a single trip. Plonk out $100 and get yourself a black box dual camera dashboard cam. It clicks in place right over your rear-view mirror and plugged into your car the same way that your phone can. After each shift take the memory card out and upload it to the cloud somewhere.


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

Invisible said:


> No, I am not wrong. As I noted, service dogs are trained specifically and some do wear vests, special collars, etc. I know someone who has a service dog. Please educate yourself!
> 
> Emotional support dogs are just therapy dogs.


Uber's "wonderful" investigative team told me that they consider ESA's the same as a service animal. Try to debate a PAX about that. You'll get sabotaged by the PAX anyway with no help from Uber.



SuzeCB said:


> Your situation does sound like you should not have been deactivated. Unfortunately, you don't have a dash cam to prove what happened. That is your biggest problem right now. It is why Uber is not going to listen to a single word you say. They don't want to go through the expense of Defending themselves against a lawsuit from this person, on the off chance that she is telling the truth and you are not.
> 
> Keep trying to get them to see your side. Make sure you get it across to them that if it was indeed a service animal and she thought that that was why you were refusing her, you are very sorry about that and feel quite badly. But that wasn't your intention. And if you had known you would have had her in the car with the dog in a heartbeat. As soon as you were reactivated, do not take a single trip. Plonk out $100 and get yourself a black box dual camera dashboard cam. It clicks in place right over your rear-view mirror and plugged into your car the same way that your phone can. After each shift take the memory card out and upload it to the cloud somewhere.


The burden of "proof" should be on the accuser. Especially when its just one persons word against another.

And even if it was a legit service animal, how could I refuse a service animal that I didn't know was a service animal??? Seriously?

I did read and understand the guidelines. Nothing was ever communicated to me about the animal or the person having any disability or the animal being a service animal.

Putting it all on the OP as to wether they ask the required 2 questions is an unequal responsibility.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

rideshare_avl said:


> Uber's "wonderful" investigative team told me that they consider ESA's the same as a service animal. Try to debate a PAX about that. You'll get sabotaged by the PAX anyway with no help from Uber.
> 
> The burden of "proof" should be on the accuser. Especially when its just one persons word against another.
> 
> ...


If you want to drive again, you're going to have to go to the Greenlight hub. There's no other way.

An ESA is not an S.A.. unfortunately, you got someone who doesn't understand the difference. You need to find someone who does, and you need to be able to have something ready to go on your phone or print it out in the law that spells out the differences.


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

SuzeCB said:


> If you want to drive again, you're going to have to go to the Greenlight hub. There's no other way.
> 
> An ESA is not an S.A.. unfortunately, you got someone who doesn't understand the difference. You need to find someone who does, and you need to be able to have something ready to go on your phone or print it out in the law that spells out the differences.


Truth be told, Uber has left such a bad taste in my mouth about all of this, I don't really don't want to work with them anymore. I would encourage others to do the same.

In my opinion, their "driver support" is so unadaptable and incompetent and their systems for dealing with this are so inadequate its not worth the hassle.

But, everyone that wants to be a driver should know that.


----------



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

rideshare_avl said:


> Good luck and enjoy kissing rings.


You came on here to share your experience and you were told that you totally mishandled the pickup with the pax, and it was explained how you mishandled it. Nobody here was trying to score points off you that I can see; they were, rather, clinically honest.

You seem to have taken this whole thing in a sub-optimal way. To use the correct technical term, you seem to be quite butthurt. My advice, instead of telling people that they're kissing rings, would be to learn the lessons that can be drawn here:

1) When you are starting a new endeavour in an industry, or even a job, that you are unfamiliar with, familiarise yourself with the rules, regulations, protocols and procedures. Don't go in blind. Do your research.

2) When people give you advice, assess the advisor. Do they have more experience than you in the field? Are they credible? If so, then they probably know more than you do about the subject. It may be in your interests to listen to them and learn from them.

3) Life isn't fair. There is often little point in going on a crusade to complain over and over about how unfair things are, or demanding justice etc etc. Don't fight battles you won't win; instead when you are in a closed, unfair system, learn how to work/game that system. Figuring out how to protect your driver account from malicious pax including service animal fakers is not "kissing rings" - there is no subservience involved; it's just about being smart.


----------



## UBERPROcolorado (Jul 16, 2017)

rideshare_avl said:


> I was wrongly deactivated from Uber because a PAX lied and said that I refused a service animal. The PAX never indicated that the dog was anything other than a pet and I didn't want the wet and dirty dog to get into my car. It was raining outside.
> 
> The PAX also indicated that it was ok to cancel, anyway.
> 
> ...


The answers to pet issues has been addressed over and over in this forum.

Once again!

A driver should NEVER question a rider with a pet. The driver will always loose the battle. Uber does not care if the pet is or is not a service/support animal. So if you reject a pet, your next step is to look for another job.

I drive in a city/state that has more pets than people. Pets on board are a daily routine. So be ready. Here is what you need to have in your car:

1. Two or more blankets. Heavy weave. Large enough to cover your entire back seat. Water resistant is best.
2. A bottle of pet deodorizer spray.(unscented)
3. Dog and cat treats. Use the natural treats that do not have coloring. It can stain a seat. 
4. A car vacuum. 
5. Get out of the car and have rhe rider introduce the pet. That way you have a relationship with rhe pet before they load-up. And SMILE. Riders hate people that hate their baby.

DO NOT even ask if the pet is a service/support animal. You are just asking for problems if you do. Be excited to have a pet on board. Treating a riders pet like gold will normally result in a great tip.

Also be aware that riders with pets are not the only problem for animal-haters. I know several drivers, including myself, that will walk a rider through the complaint process. Weekly I get trips where a rider has a pet and is rejected by the first or second driver to arrive. So if you think a rider is okay with rejecting a pet, the driver that does take the trip may put you out of business.

And just a side note...if a driver is allergic to animal dander there are several OTC pills that will help. As for the "its against my religion"....well welcome to the USA. Time to pick another religion!!


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

I was told I mishandled it by some.

And I totally disagree with you. Life SHOULD be fair. And CAN be fair. That is what laws and democracy are designed to do. It takes people like me or nothing ever changes. Thankfully there were not as many people with your mindset in other situations that were in need of change.

And if "life isn't fair" then there would be no protection for those with disabilities, or any other unfair situation.

As for my comment about kissing rings, you should read the comment that were directed to me.

I also think it is interesting how many "well know users" on this site immediately go to the letter of the law and put down expressing your point of view as "going on a crusade" especially if it involves criticizing the status quo or existing company policy or legislation. It appears to suggest a huge amount of potential astroturfing.

Don't fight battles you won't win? Really? What about doing the right thing and honesty?

And I am not fighting any battles at this point, merely collecting information.

Its not about "winning" or "losing". Its about right and wrong and fairness and equality for ALL.

Even if it begins a discussion that leads to eventual substantive change toward mutual respect and equality, however distant that change may be, is worth it to at least bring it up.

If nothing happens as a result than so be it.

Granular interpretations of legalese are what professional lawyers are paid for to often times take advantage of versus regular common citizens pointing out legit chicanery that in this case, OPs overwhelmingly agree is occurring.

I didn't even get into all the stuff OPs put up with by PAX that take advantage of every situation and treat service workers like crap. And almost always when they are intoxicated with regard to rideshare. No button for that one on the uber app??? No disconnection of service for those PAX?? But drivers are shut down all the time.

People with disabilities clearly need protection. However people taking advantage need to be called out for it. It is rampant in this situation and many others situations regarding ridesharing.

I am expressing my POV. You are free to disagree or critique what happened. But I totally disagree.


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

Invisible said:


> No, I am not wrong. As I noted, service dogs are trained specifically and some do wear vests, special collars, etc. I know someone who has a service dog. Please educate yourself!
> 
> Emotional support dogs are just therapy dogs.
> 
> https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.html


Actually, I just noticed you're incorrect about another issue. You erroneously stated that both Therapy dogs and Service dogs are covered by the ADA. This is not true across the board. Please educate yourself before giving people false information. I know it's not your intention, but that's the kind of thing that can get another driver deactivated.

And again, service dogs absolutely are NOT required to wear vests. Ever. In fact, when a dog _is_ wearing a vest, it's often an ignorant person trying to make their ESA look like a Service dog.

This is such a simple issue; it's always entertaining to see these threads where drivers argue until they are blue in the face about what they can and cannot do. Just READ THE GD LAW and you're all set. What is there to even argue about? If the federal law states the facts, how do drivers decide that they're going to break that law and then become outraged when they are punished?

I don't get it. But I do enjoy reading the incensed comments of drivers on here who think they can make their own laws or break the current laws with no repercussions. Or when new drivers refuse to become educated on issues regarding rideshare services who then get pissed off when they're deactivated for breaking the rules.

Someone get me some popcorn please!


----------



## UBERPROcolorado (Jul 16, 2017)

rideshare_avl said:


> Then uber should just make a one sentence page that states you can not refuse service to any human or animal for any reason or your account will be disabled.
> 
> And why did you have to insert "animal-haters"? That inserts reverse meaning and suggests anyone who doesn't care for a wet dirty animal in their car because of potential damage is an animal hater even though they have accepted many PAX with animals???
> 
> ...


Leaving the forum will not solve you problem. Pay attention to the seasoned drivers and learn.


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

UBERPROcolorado said:


> Leaving the forum will not solve you problem. Pay attention to the seasoned drivers and learn.


I am tired of repeating myself and I would rather not work with Uber.



Julescase said:


> Actually, I just noticed you're incorrect about another issue. You erroneously stated that both Therapy dogs and Service dogs are covered by the ADA. This is not true across the board. Please educate yourself before giving people false information. I know it's not your intention, but that's the kind of thing that can get another driver deactivated.
> 
> And again, service dogs absolutely are NOT required to wear vests. Ever. In fact, when a dog _is_ wearing a vest, it's often an ignorant person trying to make their ESA look like a Service dog.
> 
> ...


REREAD AGAIN: I stated that an Uber team member told me they considered them the same thing as far as refusing service animals goes.


----------



## UBERPROcolorado (Jul 16, 2017)

rideshare_avl said:


> I was told I mishandled it by some.
> 
> And I totally disagree with you. Life SHOULD be fair. And CAN be fair. That is what laws and democracy are designed to do. It takes people like me or nothing ever changes. Thankfully there were not as many people with your mindset in other situations that were in need of change.
> 
> ...


Why would you want to change things? The pet policy is simple and logical. No changes needed my friend.



rideshare_avl said:


> I am tired of repeating myself and I would rather not work with Uber.
> 
> REREAD AGAIN: I stated that an Uber team member told me they considered them the same thing as far as refusing service animals goes.


A new job may be for the best. You seem to be a problem for riders with pets.


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

UBERPROcolorado said:


> Why would you want to change things? The pet policy is simple and logical. No changes needed my friend.


Because I do not share your POV that service animal fraud is acceptable.

I also don't believe that reasonable accommodations, respect and communication should be the sole responsibility of the OP.



UBERPROcolorado said:


> Why would you want to change things? The pet policy is simple and logical. No changes needed my friend.
> 
> A new job may be for the best. You seem to be a problem for riders with pets.


REREAD: again, you need to go back and read. I love animals and pick them up all the time.

In this ONE case I did I was alarmed that a wet and potentially dirty animal would damage my property. And animal that was NEVER identified as a service animal of any kind.

And again, I do not believe that it should be the sole responsibility of the OP to accommodate every whim of the PAX.

Among other ideas that you probably never read either.

Don't worry, you can tell your buddies at Uber that I will never use their services or work with them every again.

Even if I have to take my own rideshare or cab.


----------



## UBERPROcolorado (Jul 16, 2017)

Chirp....chirp


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

UBERPROcolorado said:


> Chirp....chirp


Read. Read. Think. Think.


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

steveK2016 said:


> They are not obligated to inform anyone that their animal is a service animal. You as a service provider have 2 questions you can ask to verify authenticity.
> 
> ADA law has been inconveniencing businesses since 1992. Its not going away and is unlikely to be changed or loosened anytime soon. Theres articles from the first 2 years of ADA that noted that it costs businesses 2 billion dollars. Your inconvenience is minuscule compared to what other businesses have gone through based on ADA law over the last 26 years.
> 
> ...


"ADA law has been inconveniencing businesses since 1992."

Lolololol!! I had to re-read that a few times to make sure I wasn't imagining it. But seeing who wrote it helped me understand that I read correctly.

Yes, it's _so_ sad that businesses have to be inconvenienced in order to accommodate those born without the ability to walk, or see, or think the way most of us can, or whatever issues those with disabilities are dealing with. What an ass pain, huh?

Steve, I sincerely hope your children or parents or family or friends won't be born with, or develop, any disability that would cause them to "inconvenience" a business they need to visit or use at some point in their lives. It would really suck for a company to be _inconvenienced_ because your family member is disabled.

*****5 million eye rolls right here*****

Seriously, what is wrong with you Steve? Just when I think you might have turned a corner, you write a comment like the one above.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

rideshare_avl said:


> I am tired of repeating myself and *I would rather not work with Uber.*
> 
> REREAD AGAIN: I stated that an Uber team member told me they considered them the same thing as far as refusing service animals goes.


I dont think you have much for options in that regard.

And Again, phone and email support is usually a foreign worker from India or Philippines.

Uber policy reflects ADA law. There is evidence posted by a fellow UPnet poster of a textbook denial of service for a therapy dog and he was reinstated after a 48 hour investigation.

Air transportation must take minuture horses and emotional support animals, including that duck from the news.

Ground transportation is exempt from taking emotional support and minuture horses.


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

rideshare_avl said:


> I was wrongly deactivated from Uber because a PAX lied and said that I refused a service animal. The PAX never indicated that the dog was anything other than a pet and I didn't want the wet and dirty dog to get into my car. It was raining outside.
> 
> The PAX also indicated that it was ok to cancel, anyway.
> 
> ...


Did you ever consider that the pax may have wanted to get their cancellation fee back from Uber (since you couldn't handle having a dog in your car) and in their explanation through the app, they told Uber the truth: that you didn't want their dog in your car. That may have been all that happened - they might not have been being vindictive since you said yourself that they seemed cool. This might not be the pax being evil, but Uber assuming the worst and not thoroughly investigating (which would not be shocking), and Uber deciding the worst.

Just saying, the pax's motivation may not have been to punish you but to simply get a refund because you refused them.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Julescase said:


> "ADA law has been inconveniencing businesses since 1992."
> 
> Lolololol!! I had to re-read that a few times to make sure I wasn't imagining it. But seeing who wrote it helped me understand that I read correctly.
> 
> ...


I'm not saying its wrong. As a libertarian, I always lean towards deregulation and no government interference. I do, however, understand why a law such as ADA is necessary precisely because of people like the OP and others. Discrimation against the disabled is real, but that doesnt change the fact that ADA of 1992 did inconvenience businesses. I understand its a necessary evil due to poor behavior of individuals.

Regardless of how necessary one believes ADA of 1992 is, and I do agree it was necessary, the billions spent by businesses in just the first 2 years of enacting the law was a major inconvenience to business. Just because you feel it was a necessary inconvenience doesnt make it any less of an inconvenience. Many businesses ran out of business for inability to meet compliance. That goes beyond mere inconvenience as well.


----------



## rideshare_avl (Oct 12, 2018)

Julescase said:


> Did you ever consider that the pax may have wanted to get their cancellation fee back from Uber (since you couldn't handle having a dog in your car) and in their explanation through the app, they told Uber the truth: that you didn't want their dog in your car. That may have been all that happened - they might not have been being vindictive since you said yourself that they seemed cool. This might not be the pax being evil, but Uber assuming the worst and not thoroughly investigating (which would not be shocking), and Uber deciding the worst.
> 
> Just saying, the pax's motivation may not have been to punish you but to simply get a refund because you refused them.


That is possible, yes.

But at the expense of toxifying my opportunity? Over a cancellation fee?

I think this kind of illustrates an overall disregard for service workers in my opinion and how we are viewed as expendable.

Many do this to survive a tough situation. Not just to make beer money. PAX have no idea what a OP might be struggling though and there is zero compassion or understanding for that. Ironically this behavior often comes from people that are supposed to be progressive, but when it comes to what they want when they want it, they aren't really. Just spoiled and entitled. And end up just making a tough life even tougher for a stranger that wouldn't cater to their every whim.

When I cancelled it automatically billed them because they took so long to come to the car. I couldn't control that. AND they were busy notifying me I wasn't where I as supposed to be even though it clearly showed on the app that I was exactly at the location that was requested. They were kind of poopy at first so thats why I think it was retaliation ultimately. PAX often hit pick me up at my location and barely look at the app to understand when a driver is arriving of where the driver is and then are upset with the driver...

And You know that makes me think.

OPs can never have a bad day, never avoid a conversation, etc etc or they risk deactivation.

Every whim of the PAX must be catered to lest they get a negative review.

PAX know this and many knowingly take advantage.

And Uber only supports drivers on a cursory level.

Just gross. Gross.


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

rideshare_avl said:


> Did you read what I posted? No Suze, the PAX never communicated the dog was a service animal. AND, told me it was ok to cancel.
> 
> And lets just be clear here... I am not suggesting in the slightest that you leave a disabled person out in the rain or something like that but come on... Service animal fraud is out of control. Any reasonable person can understand that.
> 
> ...


You continue to insist the responsibility is on pax to communicate to the driver that theirs is a service dog. Fact is, if the driver is only willing to accept service animals and needs to glean that information from the pax, it's the driver's responsibility to proactively get the facts. Please re-set your thinking on this issue since it's going to be a problem over and over if you don't. The driver is the one responsible. NOT the pax. Period .

BUT - BUT!! You've repeatedly stated that in this specific case, you didn't care if it was a service dog or not, you simply didn't want the dog in your car and even if it WAS a service dog - it wasn't going to make a mess on your seats. This thinking is against the law. The ADA - the Americans with Disabilities Act - doesn't care if your car gets muddied. It's your responsibility as a business owner to treat the person who is disabled who is going about their day with their aid, which in this case is a dog (but could be a wheelchair or a walking cane or an oxygen tank or anything else that may assist the disabled person get through life) exactly like any other person who does not have an object or animal with them......that is the law.

So, in short, you are admitting you broke the law yet you feel you shouldn't be punished. If that truly _was_ a service dog (and you absolutely cannot know this by just looking at the person), that pax could sue you and would win, no question. You need to understand the facts and laws AND how they apply to Uber drivers if you want to keep driving (if you're reactivated). Uber sends their drivers messages about Service Dogs and the ADA requirements frequently, and this forum contains a lot of great information about the issue - Just do a search. No driver in today's market should be uninformed about this stuff, there's no excuse for it.

You insistence to argue the point only underscores your inability to acknowledge wrongdoing. The disconcerting part is that you're not alone. This thread is the 40th (at least) one where a driver complains about being deactivated after not allowing a dog in their car.



rideshare_avl said:


> I think everyone who jumps into this post needs to READ the whole post AND think just a bit.
> 
> I am vegan AND progressive.
> 
> ...


The driver, as a small business, should always be thinking ahead; consider keeping a towel or old blanket in the trunk for situations like wet pax or wet dogs. In a climate where there's a lot of rain or snow this is especially necessary.

Driving for Uber is kind of a "learn as you drive" venture. You need to make some mistakes in order to do the job well.

But in all areas, the responsibility is on the business owner (the driver) to manage their business. This means thinking ahead, carrying certain items that may be needed for whatever reason, and always following the law.

I've said it hundreds of times before, and I'll say it a 1,000th time: read the UP forum and LEARN. There's a wealth of information here that benefits drivers - it's the drivers' responsibility to do the research.


----------



## kcdrvr15 (Jan 10, 2017)

tohunt4me said:


> Events like THIS.
> 
> PERSECUTION WITHOUT RECOURSE OR DEFENSE
> 
> ...


Hey, same thing happened to me 2 years ago, issue with fake seeing eye dog. Pax not only contacted uber, but contacted the city, regulated industries cleared me of any wrong doing, but never bothered to request reinstatement.


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

Invisible said:


> No, I am not wrong. As I noted, service dogs are trained specifically and some do wear vests, special collars, etc. I know someone who has a service dog. Please educate yourself!
> 
> Emotional support dogs are just therapy dogs.
> 
> https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.html


My point is that there is no law that requires service dogs to wear vests. There is no need for service dogs to wear vests. Or special collars. Most service dogs do not wear vests.

The only dogs I've ever seen wearing vests are ESAs or Therapy Dogs, which (as you stated) are not service dogs.



SuzeCB said:


> Your situation does sound like you should not have been deactivated. Unfortunately, you don't have a dash cam to prove what happened. That is your biggest problem right now. It is why Uber is not going to listen to a single word you say. They don't want to go through the expense of Defending themselves against a lawsuit from this person, on the off chance that she is telling the truth and you are not.
> 
> Keep trying to get them to see your side. Make sure you get it across to them that if it was indeed a service animal and she thought that that was why you were refusing her, you are very sorry about that and feel quite badly. But that wasn't your intention. And if you had known you would have had her in the car with the dog in a heartbeat. As soon as you were reactivated, do not take a single trip. Plonk out $100 and get yourself a black box dual camera dashboard cam. It clicks in place right over your rear-view mirror and plugged into your car the same way that your phone can. After each shift take the memory card out and upload it to the cloud somewhere.


Once again great advice SuzeCB . I'd like to add that I got a great dual dash cam for $52 on Amazon. And there were even _cheaper_ dual dash cams available, but the one I got had really good reviews and for that price I couldn't resist.


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

rideshare_avl said:


> I am tired of repeating myself and I would rather not work with Uber.
> 
> REREAD AGAIN: I stated that an Uber team member told me they considered them the same thing as far as refusing service animals goes.


Lol! I've read the thread. Unfortunately the Uber staff who told you service and emotional support dogs are to be handled the same way were just as misinformed as you appear to be. ESAs and SAs are not the same thing - per the law, and per how Uber tells drivers to handle each.

You keep arguing with people who are spending their free time attempting to HELP YOU UNDERSTAND how it works. And you keep defending yourself, vacillating between threatening a lawsuit (?!) and claiming you're just stating your opinion and you feel drivers shouldn't have to do what they are in fact responsible for. Other commenters are just explaining the law, pointing out what you did wrong, and suggesting how you might have avoided deactivation.

Best of luck in your future endeavors. I strongly encourage you to read up on how to thrive in world of branding and understanding company culture, and how to function successfully in the working world. If you clap back at your future manager each time they correct you or suggest something to you to in the same way you have clapped back at people on this thread who are trying to help you, your branding career may be shorter than it should be.. There are several websites and blogs that are devoted to the working world and how to fit in and do well in any organization's environment - you should absolutely take advantage of these sites. Don't let your need to always be right overtake your desire to become an amazing branding executive/manager/coordinator.



rideshare_avl said:


> That is possible, yes.
> 
> But at the expense of toxifying my opportunity? Over a cancellation fee?
> 
> ...


I 100% agree with you that Uber too often (aka almost always) sides with the pax regardless of whose fault it was. I personally detest Uber with a passion, and feel most pax suck and many are shady as hell, and pax often know the tricks to get free rides or shirk the responsibility of paying a cleaning fee, or whatever. Pax often get away with much too much, and are always the side Uber believes. Annoying as all get out. But the law is the law. It's not Uber's law, it's a Federal law and a business is a business and must comply with the law.

Also a _teeny_ thing I wanted to clarify (just for future reference) - the term "OP" actually stands for "Original Poster" - that's why people keep calling you the OP. On a comment thread on a website or blog, when there are additional comments made to an original post, commenters will refer to original creator of the post as the "OP".


----------



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

rideshare_avl said:


> I am expressing my POV.


I can see that.


> You are free to disagree or critique what happened.


That is also correct.


> But I totally disagree.


I can see that too. But at the end of the day, you lost your Uber account and can no longer earn money via them. Whereas I, on the other hand refuse all non-service animals and have survived three account suspensions following false complaints by pax that I refused service animals. Why? Because I educated myself on the law and on Uber/Lyft's service animal policy; consequently I know the process involved in proving that I am innocent when accused by pax. I don't get fired by Uber/Lyft and I don't have to buckle and let fake service dogs in my car.

You may self-style as a crusader / social justice warrior / etc, and that's great. And yes, lots of things in life _should be_ that aren't. And that's all well and good, too. However, my point is that, while it's wonderful etc, none of that pays the bills. Whereas knowing how a system works and how to operate intelligently within it means you keep your job _without having to compromise_.

Both companies are extremely shady and are completely ethics-free. To be honest, there is no place in them (as evidenced by your firing) for the "this is outrageous, it shouldn't be this way" type of person. I think you'll be much better off in another work environment which is a little less predatory; a little fairer.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

rideshare_avl said:


> Because I do not share your POV that service animal fraud is acceptable.
> 
> I also don't believe that reasonable accommodations, respect and communication should be the sole responsibility of the OP.
> 
> ...


You keep carrying on about fraud. But you have no idea if fraud was involved in your case. You never asked if it was a service animal. You didn't ask because you knew if the person said yes and was able to answer the 2 questions that you'd have to take them. You didn't want to, regardless. You figured your ignorance would protect you. It doesn't. Many taxi drivers have been in trouble because they saw a dog and kept driving. What you did is no different. If it IS a service dog you're lucky you are not being personally sued by the would be rider.


----------



## Uber7654 (Jun 30, 2016)

steveK2016 said:


> They are not obligated to inform anyone that their animal is a service animal. You as a service provider have 2 questions you can ask to verify authenticity.
> 
> ADA law has been inconveniencing businesses since 1992. Its not going away and is unlikely to be changed or loosened anytime soon. Theres articles from the first 2 years of ADA that noted that it costs businesses 2 billion dollars. Your inconvenience is minuscule compared to what other businesses have gone through based on ADA law over the last 26 years.
> 
> ...


I don't think you can get a cleaning fee from the mess of a service animal. I once asked for cleaning fee of a dog and the rep asked if it was a service animal and if so they are not allowed to charge for cleaning fee.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Uber7654 said:


> I don't think you can get a cleaning fee from the mess of a service animal. I once asked for cleaning fee of a dog and the rep asked if it was a service animal and if so they are not allowed to charge for cleaning fee.


Your rep lied to you. Dont volunteer the information, it was a dog and it made a mess. Service animals can be charged for messes made as long as the equivalent non-service animal would be charged the same.

They just wont charge the handler of legit aervice dogs for the first 2 messes. You had a smart CSR and you didnt push back.


----------



## BurgerTiime (Jun 22, 2015)

The app should alert you the passenger has a service dog and they should be varified. This gives validation to the passenger and avoid the harassment and allows you to prepare the seats if nessesary.
No verification is grounds for deactivating of the passengers account. No verification at green light hub by passenger no transport!
They only have to do this once!
It should be UBER’s responsibility not yours. You should sue on behalf of all drivers nation wide. Start a go-fund-me for a lawyer. I’ll pitch in $10,
Good luck!


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

BurgerTiime said:


> The app should alert you the passenger has a service dog and they should be varified. This gives validation to the passenger and avoid the harassment and allows you to prepare the seats if nessesary.
> No verification is grounds for deactivating of the passengers account. No verification at green light hub by passenger no transport!
> They only have to do this once!
> It should be UBER's responsibility not yours. You should sue on behalf of all drivers nation wide. Start a go-fund-me for a lawyer. I'll pitch in $10,
> Good luck!


It is against the law for Uber to require the disabled to verify their account. There is no verification system, there is no doctors note, there is no certificate, there is no license and thereis no database. All done intentionally. Requiring disabled to register with Uber would violate their privacy as it would de facto create a database of the disabled.

The system you are suggesting to alert drivers will simply allow drivers to avoid the disabled, thus causing them delay that non-disabled pax would not receive. Denial or reduction of quality of service due to disability is precisely why the law exists as written.

You might as well just light that $10 bill on fire, itll be as useful as contributing to that for gofundme.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Uber7654 said:


> I don't think you can get a cleaning fee from the mess of a service animal. I once asked for cleaning fee of a dog and the rep asked if it was a service animal and if so they are not allowed to charge for cleaning fee.


That's not entirely true, firstly. They allow the pax one or two freebies.

Secondly, that's between them and the Pax. Between U/L and you is an entirely different matter. Get your fee.


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

Always ask the two questions if passenger has a dog, before making any further decision. If passenger confirms it is in fact a Service Animal...take it and submit cleaning fee request if it gets car dirty.


----------



## KellyC (May 8, 2017)

_Uber told me that emotional support animals DO count. Period. BTW._

Really? It's not that I doubt you, but the ADA really does NOT apply to "emotional support animals." There have been some recent news stories about airlines that have started refusing to carry "emotional support animals."

If Uber is telling you otherwise, either Uber doesn't know the law, or more likely Uber just doesn't want to deal with a bunch of complaints and disputes over whether an animal is an actual service animal, so they just take the pax's work for it and screw the drivers. Although I would think that by requiring drivers to transport animals that they're not required by law to transport Uber is undercutting its own position that we're independent contractors.

You can try escalating this with Uber, if you haven't already. Good luck.

Editing to respond to this: _The person was clearly NOT blind and very NOT disabled._ It's not always obvious when a person has a disability! For example, someone may have epilepsy or some other condition making them prone to seizures. That is considered a disability under the law. Of course you can't tell from looking at a person whether he or she has epilepsy There are actually dogs that are trained to provide support to people during a seizure, and these are legit service animals.



steveK2016 said:


> Again, the ADA of 1992 is a law that has been fought by smarter and richer men than both of us combined. Ive resigned long ago of any reform to it. It was intentionally written so alleviate as much burden from the disabled and place it on the business. Again, billions have been lost over the years in compliance and in fighting it. No one is saying you cant complain or try, feel free.
> 
> The ADA is actually opposite of corporate interest. Corporate interest fought it tooth and nail. It has costs businesses a lot of money. This law was made in order to prevent corporate interest from discriminating against the disabled.


This is true. Although the U.S. Supreme Court now has a majority of justices who _love_ to serve corporate interests. Perhaps the law, or portions of it, would be vulnerable to new challenges.


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

BurgerTiime said:


> The app should alert you the passenger has a service dog and they should be varified. This gives validation to the passenger and avoid the harassment and allows you to prepare the seats if nessesary.
> No verification is grounds for deactivating of the passengers account. No verification at green light hub by passenger no transport!
> They only have to do this once!
> It should be UBER's responsibility not yours. You should sue on behalf of all drivers nation wide. Start a go-fund-me for a lawyer. I'll pitch in $10,
> Good luck!


steveK2016 already explained but I need to add my 2 cents. What you're suggesting is not only illegal, but you're thinking as if Uber is a driver's employer, which it is not.

Reading your comment underscores the fact that many drivers aren't familiar with the laws or the general idea of "driver as an independent contractor" status. Uber is just a way to connect rides and drivers; they can't create options in their app to skirt ADA laws just so drivers who don't want dogs in their cars never have to deal with trips with dogs that they don't want.

As a business owner, every single driver must accept service dogs. Period. This is the law. It has nothing to do with preference or not wanting fur on the seats. If you drive for Uber, you don't have the option of avoiding service dogs. If drivers don't like that law, they shouldn't be driving. It's very simple.


----------



## RightTurnOnRed (Jun 15, 2018)

rideshare_avl said:


> I was wrongly deactivated from Uber because a PAX lied and said that I refused a service animal. The PAX never indicated that the dog was anything other than a pet and I didn't want the wet and dirty dog to get into my car. It was raining outside.
> 
> The PAX also indicated that it was ok to cancel, anyway.
> 
> ...


You have no dashcam that recorded this alleged incident ? Having a dual mode dashcam is as important as having gas in your vehicle.


----------



## wontgetfooledagain (Jul 3, 2018)

People love to talk about suing someone but they quickly find that it is expensive and near impossible to win against a large company.


----------



## Jagger51 (Apr 13, 2016)

This was an interesting nugget from the Uber Service Animal Policy webpage:

https://accessibility.uber.com/service-animal-policy/

_"A rider will be provided an account credit of $25 for each instance in which a driver-partner's contractual relationship with Uber is terminated as the result of a report that the driver-partner refused to transport the rider because of a service animal."_

Riders are incentivized to have drivers terminated. Wow!


----------



## UberUber81 (Jul 21, 2016)

Once again folks. For the love of god, take the animal and get your fake fur and water spots and submit cleaning fees on the spot. 
I have 4 sets of fake fur in my glove compartment, and I always have water on hand (drinking). 

Every time I see an animal when I pull up I get these $$ in my eyes, it just turned into a $50 to $150 ride. I actively hope people bring animals. It's been very profitable for me. Does uber charge the client? I dunno, I could care less, I'm getting paid.

Always, Always tell them that the urine smell is so strong, that usually nips the fee into a higher category.

Cheers my fellow drivers.


----------



## Cary Grant (Jul 14, 2015)

I've rejected many dozens of pets, fake service animals, therapy dogs, and emotional support animals. I'm batting 1.000 on successful defenses against all false reports.

In almost 14,000 trips, living in the same neighborhood as a large company that employs the blind, I've yet to see the first legitimate service dog. The few fakes I've hauled have been under duress, and I make sure they are never in my queue again, and I always find that I need a cleaning fee. One way, or another. And I always, always, always collect. If you don't know how to do this, pay attention. LEARN.

If you know the law, if you know the questions you can ask, and you video tape the encounter, you will never need a lawyer for this issue, and you will never be waitlisted or deactivated. Very few criminals and malingerers know the law, so the odds of having a faker that knows how to cheat is pretty low. And yet I've still had several sneak in, usually professional liars (lawyers), but they all are, without exception, criminals in the eyes of the law and nature.

Every driver needs to know how to handle this, and Uber/Lyft are not your friend.

Every driver should keep their doors locked and windows only partly rolled down until you recognize your pax. I ask how many is in their party, in case there's a malingerer hiding around the corner or behind the bushes with a dog (or open container of alcohol).

If you see an animal, stop, put the car in park, keep doors locked. The very first thing you do is get your phone and activate your video recorder. Aim it at the pax and their dog. Catching the dog misbehaving helps.

Let me repeat: AIM IT AT THE PAX. WHILE RECORDING. They should know they are being recorded. Don't answer any questions about you filming, either. The best practice is to say almost nothing, except to ask the *two questions*.

Only then do you roll down your windows, confirm the pax name (I ask for FULL NAME for a specific reason), and ask the two questions. If the answer to the first question is ANYTHING other than YES, then you may deny service. ONLY word that matters is YES. Legitimate service animal owners are very well versed in this law, and trained just like their dog to answer these questions using very specific language. Everyone else that tries? *Liars*. And they can't help but expose their fraud.

If they counter with "It's an emotional support animal" or "It's a therapy dog" then repeat this phrase "Therapy animals and emotional support animals are not, repeat, NOT protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act, Title II and Title III, so I'm not going to be able to accomodate you."

This is a FACTUAL STATEMENT. It's not an opinion, there's no interpretation, or debate.

In my state "Furthermore, it's a criminal act in the State of Texas to hold out a pet, therapy dog, or emotional support dog, as an actual trained service animal."

Say this loud enough so that your camera records it. Talk slowly. Enunciate. If you ever have to use this evidence, and that's what it is -- evidence -- you want it to be clear, consise, audible, and easily understood by an 8th grade drop out.

Fraudster pax often argue, but the camera tends to curb the profanity and lies somewhat. Let them spew, keep recording, all they are doing is sinking their own ship with their bovine scat lies.

Also, pay attention to the leash. Do they have one? Is the animal "under control?" Unleashed and out-of-control animals can be denied service, with one exception -- if a leash prevents it from doing it's duty. If the dog jumps onto your door? That's "out of control." If they leave scratches, start gathering evidence to sue the pax. I'm dead servious. Names, addresses, and call the police to report criminal damage to a personal vehicle.

https://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm

If your state, county, or municipality has any statues that make this kind of fraud a crime, you should know it, have a copy handy, and be prepared to cite it when you write up these criminal pax.

My state has two pertinent statutes

*Texas Statutes - Relevant to Uber and Lyft

§ 121.006. Penalties for Improper Use of Assistance Animals

*
*(a) A person who uses a service animal with a harness or leash of the type commonly used by persons with disabilities who use trained animals, in order to represent that his or her animal is a specially trained service animal when training has not in fact been provided, is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction shall be punished by:

(1) a fine of not more than $300; and

(2) 30 hours of community service to be performed for a governmental entity or nonprofit organization that primarily serves persons with visual impairments or other disabilities, or for another entity or organization at the discretion of the court, to be completed in not more than one year.*​*

§ 2402.109. PASSENGER ACTING IN UNLAWFUL, DISORDERLY, OR ENDANGERING MANNER. A driver who has accepted a digitally prearranged ride may refuse to transport a passenger acting in an unlawful, disorderly, or endangering manner.*

Key words are unlawful, disorderly, and endangering. I use them in almost every report, where it fits.

I'm not suggesting anyone else do this, but if you are verbally agile, and know how to lawfully argue/debate, you can have some fun at the expense of fraudster pax who are almost always full of hot air until you stick them with the sharp sword of truth.

I have had a couple of pax threaten me with a false report. I keep filming, and read them the law. Then I tell them I'm dialing 911 and I'm going to swear out a criminal complaint against them for violating these two laws, and with the evidence I gather, I will initiate a civil tort immediately for the recovery of any and all monetary losses, including my attorney's fees for his services. This can easily be a six-figure claim. Do you want to dance?

I've literally seen people turn ghost white. They cancel and eat the fee, too. Most of the time, they just turn and walk away. They know they are beaten.

I have family members who are disabled. I work with a paraplegic every day. I have literally no sympathy for malingerers and frauds, and have no problems with making their lives a living hell, if they want to play.

To be safe and secure, you need to know this area of the law better than Rohit.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

wontgetfooledagain said:


> People love to talk about suing someone but they quickly find that it is expensive and near impossible to win against a large company.


The pax isn't a large company, and there's no arbitration clause involved. You sue the PAX, not Uber.

And to keep your litigation costs down, you do the legwork (discovery gathering) and sue in Small Claims. Much less expensive, although you won't get as much money. Or maybe more, since a lawyer won't be taking a cut.


----------



## Danny3xd (Nov 7, 2016)

RoWode12 said:


> Are you 100% sure this is the first service animal complaint you've had? If so, use Uber's own policy in your favor.
> 
> According to their terms, you are only deactivated after two reports of failure to accept a service animal.


Good one Ro.



Gtown Driver said:


> Basically if you want your job, put the alligator in the car.


LoL, ayup



The Gift of Fish said:


> You came on here to share your experience and you were told that you totally mishandled the pickup with the pax, and it was explained how you mishandled it. Nobody here was trying to score points off you that I can see; they were, rather, clinically honest.
> 
> You seem to have taken this whole thing in a sub-optimal way. To use the correct technical term, you seem to be quite butthurt. My advice, instead of telling people that they're kissing rings, would be to learn the lessons that can be drawn here:
> 
> ...


Thats just good advice for a.. just about anything.

"Do yer homework"



rideshare_avl said:


> I was told I mishandled it by some.
> 
> And I totally disagree with you. Life SHOULD be fair. And CAN be fair. That is what laws and democracy are designed to do. It takes people like me or nothing ever changes. Thankfully there were not as many people with your mindset in other situations that were in need of change.
> 
> ...


Forgive me here. But folks have really taken the time to offer some good advise. Nope, life is not always fair. Thinking we are right, don't mean a thing in lost battles. Democracy is whats best for the most. Uber was really upfront and repeatedly stated, "Take the damn dawg"

Tilting at windmills gets ya no where. Sun Tzu in the art of war 5,000 B.C.; "pick your battles" Ya lost this one.

Fair? It's up front and plainly stated all over Uber, and Lyft for that matter. Take the damn dawg. That's part of the job. We volunteered our car and are using it as a trade tool.

Yea, I know. 5 pages later and your still saying "but...."

That's the job you, me & all of us signed up for and agreed to perform. That's the bottom line. Adults, when unable to accept the terms of an agreement, don't agree to do the task.

I know, "but.....


----------



## wontgetfooledagain (Jul 3, 2018)

SuzeCB said:


> The pax isn't a large company, and there's no arbitration clause involved. You sue the PAX, not Uber.
> 
> And to keep your litigation costs down, you do the legwork (discovery gathering) and sue in Small Claims. Much less expensive, although you won't get as much money. Or maybe more, since a lawyer won't be taking a cut.


A ridiculous waste of time.


----------



## Scott Singley (Sep 15, 2018)

People are so insensitive on here when drivers get punished by customers using Uber policy against good drivers Why so much HATE? 

#Me Too, Three, Four, One hundred plus


----------



## Trebor (Apr 22, 2015)

tohunt4me said:


> Yes it IS WORTH IT !
> Abuse of Driver is Rampant !
> Rampant and Escalating !
> If we had a Union
> This would be Handled !


Yea, but drivers don't understand "A well coordinated strike even of just a few days could force Uber to raise their prices and Lyft will follow", Instead, after they work for pennies, and when their car inevitably breaks down, they simply go get a rental for $200+ a week because "it makes more sense since I don't have to worry about mechanical issues". Idiots - If Uber paid enough, maintenance wouldn't of been an issue in the first place.

So what makes you think a union can be thrown together?


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

wontgetfooledagain said:


> A ridiculous waste of time.


How so? There's another driver on here that says he's done it a few times and won. Bet those pax learned lessons. And it doesn't take all that long, considering you can end up with a judgement of a few $1000 (depending on what you're suing for). And, if you win, in addition to your judgement award, you also get your litigation costs back.


----------



## Trebor (Apr 22, 2015)

Anyhow, I have no problem with dogs. Service or not I could care less, so long as they don't make a mess, that's all I care about. In fact, I have told riders in the past just to say its a emotional support dog to the next driver. 



SuzeCB said:


> How so? There's another driver on here that says he's done it a few times and won. Bet those pax learned lessons. And it doesn't take all that long, considering you can end up with a judgement of a few $1000 (depending on what you're suing for). And, if you win, in addition to your judgement award, you also get your litigation costs back.


Umm.. another driver says? Keyword here is "says". If there is no proof, it didn't happen. Judgements are public record, so he can easily provide you the case number, at least a name and what court.

The other red flag is "a few times" 4 years and running, I have not had a single false allegation against me. Sure, some riders do make false allegations but it is pretty rare. For someone to have this happen to them enough that they were able to successfully sue for "a few times" is next to impossible.

Please don't believe everything you read on the internet.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Trebor said:


> Anyhow, I have no problem with dogs. Service or not I could care less, so long as they don't make a mess, that's all I care about. In fact, I have told riders in the past just to say its a emotional support dog to the next driver.
> 
> Umm.. another driver says? Keyword here is "says". If there is no proof, it didn't happen. Judgements are public record, so he can easily provide you the case number, at least a name and what court.
> 
> ...


Eh. Depends on the market and the pax demographic being carted around.

Still in all, if someone lies about you and it costs you money, they CAN be held liable for your loss, and, potentially, a punitive amount as well. You just have to know what you're doing, and evaluate the evidence you collect with a critical eye.

And I wouldn't expect anyone on here to freely share their identity--something that would have to be done with your "put up or shut up" expectation would demand. Uber can deactivate any driver, at any time, without giving any reason by simply giving 7 days notice.


----------



## Trebor (Apr 22, 2015)

SuzeCB said:


> Eh. Depends on the market and the pax demographic being carted around.
> 
> Still in all, if someone lies about you and it costs you money, they CAN be held liable for your loss, and, potentially, a punitive amount as well. You just have to know what you're doing, and evaluate the evidence you collect with a critical eye.
> 
> And I wouldn't expect anyone on here to freely share their identity--something that would have to be done with your "put up or shut up" expectation would demand. Uber can deactivate any driver, at any time, without giving any reason by simply giving 7 days notice.


7 day notice? Where did you get that from? Someone else online?


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Trebor said:


> 7 day notice? Where did you get that from? Someone else online?


Nope. The contract. Paragraph 12.2.a.

*12.2 Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement: (a) without cause at any time upon seven (7) days prior written notice to the other party; * (b) immediately, without notice, for the 
other party's material breach of this Agreement; or (c) immediately, without notice, in the event 
of the insolvency or bankruptcy of the other party, or upon the other party's filing or submission 
of request for suspension of payment (or similar action or event) against the terminating party. 
In addition, Company may terminate this Agreement or deactivate your Driver ID immediately, 
without notice, with respect to you in the event you no longer qualify, under applicable law or 
the standards and policies of Company and its Affiliates, to provide Transportation Services or to 
operate the Vehicle, or as otherwise set forth in this Agreement.


----------



## Trebor (Apr 22, 2015)

SuzeCB said:


> Nope. The contract. Paragraph 12.2.a.
> 
> *12.2 Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement: (a) without cause at any time upon seven (7) days prior written notice to the other party; * (b) immediately, without notice, for the
> other party's material breach of this Agreement; or (c) immediately, without notice, in the event
> ...


Umm, did you read the last sentence? 
"In addition, Company may terminate this Agreement or deactivate your Driver ID immediately,
without notice, with respect to you in the event you no longer qualify, under applicable law or
the standards and policies of Company and its Affiliates, to provide Transportation Services or to
operate the Vehicle, or as otherwise set forth in this Agreement."


----------



## Danny3xd (Nov 7, 2016)

Trebor. You asked where she got the 7 days thing from.



SuzeCB said:


> Nope. The contract. Paragraph 12.2.a.
> 
> *12.2 Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement: (a) without cause at any time upon seven (7) days prior written notice to the other party; * (b) immediately, without notice, for the
> other party's material breach of this Agreement; or (c) immediately, without notice, in the event
> ...


Thanx Suze. It's been a while since I've read (and re-read) that. Been meaning to read it again after my last bout with a report from a pax.

LoL, not that it helps. The contract is what it is and got no chance and am at their whim.

I've been involved with 4 small claims cases. Not fun but you are right. So much easier than when it gets to higher courts. Then it is just who has the most money and can just bury the other guy. Right or wrong, the golden rule applies. The one with the most gold wins.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

I think the OP has finally given up and left the building. OMG, lets keep whining about what's fair, shall we? 

I am too old to tilt at every windmill I see, 8K rides, 2 bonafide service animals, 4 pets that pax called and asked me if it was Ok (answer. yes as long as kept on floor or lap), 0 problems.

The law is the law, good or flawed, accept it, change it or do something else. 

Uber is not something you can rely on, they do not have your back and at any given time you could be deactivated, this is the reality, fair or not.


----------



## Danny3xd (Nov 7, 2016)

RESPECT the ATHROLTOUL! 

LoL, that cracks me up. When losing a fight with Carol or winning one. One of us often use that as a last and futile defense.

"Screw you guys, I'm going 'ome"
(do that one after long uberings)


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Trebor said:


> Umm, did you read the last sentence?
> "In addition, Company may terminate this Agreement or deactivate your Driver ID immediately,
> without notice, with respect to you in the event you no longer qualify, under applicable law or
> the standards and policies of Company and its Affiliates, to provide Transportation Services or to
> operate the Vehicle, or as otherwise set forth in this Agreement."


"In addition"....

The section lays out the reasons they may terminate you, AND that they can terminate you for NO reason, so long as they give 7 days notice. Any deactivation for cause can be done immediately.


----------



## Trebor (Apr 22, 2015)

Danny3xd said:


> Trebor. You asked where she got the 7 days thing from.
> 
> Thanx Suze. It's been a while since I've read (and re-read) that. Been meaning to read it again after my last bout with a report from a pax.
> 
> ...


Yes, I did ask that, and she responded, but thats only if we want to terminate the agreement, because Uber goes on to say In addition.. than basically says we can terminate you whenever we want for whatever reason. Her initial argument was they are forced to give us a 7 day notice.


----------



## Danny3xd (Nov 7, 2016)

SuzeCB said:


> "In addition"....
> 
> The section lays out the reasons they may terminate you, AND that they can terminate you for NO reason, so long as they give 7 days notice. Any deactivation for cause can be done immediately.


Thanks Suze. LoL, I'm still scured if'n they decide at 3rd report. But some how comforting..........


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Trebor said:


> Umm, did you read the last sentence?
> "In addition, Company may terminate this Agreement or deactivate your Driver ID immediately,
> without notice, with respect to you in the event you no longer qualify, under applicable law or
> the standards and policies of Company and its Affiliates, to provide Transportation Services or to
> operate the Vehicle, or as otherwise set forth in this Agreement."


Immediate deactivation is if You no longer qualify. 7 days notice is if you still qualify but for whatever reason, they decide to deactivate you.


----------



## Bpr2 (Feb 21, 2017)

Trebor said:


> Anyhow, I have no problem with dogs. Service or not I could care less, so long as they don't make a mess, that's all I care about. In fact, I have told riders in the past just to say its a emotional support dog to the next driver.
> 
> Umm.. another driver says? Keyword here is "says". If there is no proof, it didn't happen. Judgements are public record, so he can easily provide you the case number, at least a name and what court.
> 
> ...


Lol. Emotional support animals aren't seen as support animals by the ADA and can be denied for the reason. Of not being a true SA by knowledgeable drivers.


----------



## Danny3xd (Nov 7, 2016)

Don't tell my squirrel.

He works for peanuts, ta- da-dump.

I'll get my coat


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

Jagger51 said:


> This was an interesting nugget from the Uber Service Animal Policy webpage:
> 
> https://accessibility.uber.com/service-animal-policy/
> 
> ...


Well, to put it in literal terms, Uber is giving riders with disabilities (who were illegally refused rides by drivers because of their necessary and ADA-recognized service animals) the ability to report being discriminated against by a driver who broke the law......

As all drivers know by now, it's Uber's policy to deactivate drivers who break the law and discriminate against riders with disabilities.

Simple solution? Always accept Service dogs into your car. Then you'll never have to worry about being deactivated for not accepting a service animal.

I'm curious as to why drivers continue to act surprised.........


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Julescase said:


> Well, to put it in literal terms, Uber is giving riders with disabilities (who were illegally refused rides by drivers because of their necessary and ADA-recognized service animals) the ability to report being discriminated against by a driver who broke the law......
> 
> As all drivers know by now, it's Uber's policy to deactivate drivers who break the law and discriminate against riders with disabilities.
> 
> ...


For the same reason places don't comply with the ADA... it costs extra money to pay for both blue paint and white paint for the parking lot. And those blue wheelchair access aisles alongside handicapped parking spaces mean a whole 'nuther parking space is lost if they actually make it the full 5' wide! And wider doors and more room in bathrooms so a wheelchair can maneuver in there takes up soooooo much room that could be used for other stuff! And they didn't have enough time to make the necessary changes! It's only been a little more than 25 years! They should have been given 50, or even 75! Be reasonable, already!


----------



## Jagger51 (Apr 13, 2016)

Julescase said:


> Well, to put it in literal terms, Uber is giving riders with disabilities (who were illegally refused rides by drivers because of their necessary and ADA-recognized service animals) *the ability to report* being discriminated against by a driver who broke the law......


The "the ability to report" is not the issue. What is concerning is that riders receive compensation for drivers terminated as a result. Something inherently wrong with getting compensated to get someone else "fired", no matter the circumstances.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Ok, first thing you need to do is to file for unemployment insurance benefits. Even 'though they call us IC's we always win UI benefits.

Then you would basically sue a "John Doe" and you would serve a subpoena to Uber's registered agent for service of process for all records of the pax. It's likely they won't comply so you would need to file a motion to compel of some sort to get a court order for them to produce it. They may even file a motion to quash the subpoena. In theory this is what you would do but you will likely need an attorney to do it. You would basically get the info of the pax, then file an amended complaint with their name and then serve them.

The problem is that the ADA itself needs a lawsuit to force the Supreme Court to fine tune that law to not allow abuse as this.

As it stands now any tom, dick, and harry, can call their dog a service dog.


----------



## Immoralized (Nov 7, 2017)

This is really easy to resolve and get reactivated... All you got to do is walk into a local police station and get them to request information from Uber about the trip and that they would like to press charges against the rider on concerns that rider maybe breaking the law by pretending to have a service animal and that you have grave concerns that the rider is not disabled..

That is all you got to do. That the link below in requesting rider details. All the police officer have to do is type a small email and give reason that is legal for requesting rider details and Uber will happily give the details over to the police for them to investigate. You have to beg and plea the nice police officer to do anything for you. They got way better things to do than chase up this small fry. "like eating donuts." 

https://www.uber.com/legal/data-requests/guidelines-for-law-enforcement-united-states/en-US/

"
*Form of Request*
Authorized law enforcement using an official government domain may create an account and submit legal process to Uber through the Law Enforcement Portal at https://lert.uber.com. We accept courtesy copies through the Law Enforcement Portal as a convenience, but reserve all rights and objections, such as for lack of jurisdiction or improper service.

Law enforcement should include in their request:


Clear grounds for the legal basis for the request;
Detailed specifics on the information sought. We will be unable to process overly broad or vague requests that do not identify the information sought with particularity; and
The name of the issuing authority, badge/ID number of the responsible agent or officer, an email address from a law-enforcement domain, and a direct contact number for the responsible agent or officer."

If the rider confirms that in fact all legit it is game over for you. However if Police talks to rider and fesses up to not been disabled or requiring any kind of animal assistant whatsoever. You can use that to get activated again on Uber within 72 hours. Crying about what happens and what is fair or what isn't fair isn't going to do anything for you.

Actually getting off the computer and doing something instead of talking about doing something is going to get you results. No courts needed nothing. The rider will bulk and fess up to the police when they pull that rider in for questioning. In which case it be up to you to press charges or not. Either way you get reactivated until the next time you get deactivated again. Might be next week for the same incident who knows? 

You don't even need a dash cam what wrong with taking your phone out and recording the rider while you talk and questioning the rider? Just make the rider aware that is a public area and you are allowed to be recording in a public space. This would of save you a lot of drama. Welcome to the real world though. It a good experience for you and many more harsher experience than this will hit you in life.

My 2cents? I really don't think anything hospitality or people industry related jobs is for you though. In the service industry it about providing services above and beyond  If you had did that. You be happily driving right now with ur $80 cleaning fee for the dog.


----------



## Brian Rasmussen (Feb 14, 2017)

Actually support animals are not covered. Under the law.. I would have let them in and if there was any mess nail with cleaning fee...


----------



## wontgetfooledagain (Jul 3, 2018)

SuzeCB said:


> How so? There's another driver on here that says he's done it a few times and won. Bet those pax learned lessons. And it doesn't take all that long, considering you can end up with a judgement of a few $1000 (depending on what you're suing for). And, if you win, in addition to your judgement award, you also get your litigation costs back.


You are incredibly naive.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

wontgetfooledagain said:


> You are incredibly naive.


Bwahahahahaha!

Okay.


----------



## Danny3xd (Nov 7, 2016)

Suze, that's a well known troll. Mommy issues apparent.

----------------------------------------------------------------

When I got this beater Prius just for this and my courier biz. It has a really nice upholstery in the back that looked like no one had ever sat in it. I got an $18 seat cover just 'cause it was so purty. My car is a tool for work and normally don't care. But as it was so pristine, seemed like it was worth it. Dog hair shakes out and heck, vomit could be de-chunked before using my mini-wet/dry 12V vac. $8 at Walgreen's.

If you actually like your car, these things are great to have. If you just use it as a tool, they get you back on the road quicker. And the vac comes in handy when sitting waiting for a ping to spruce up. Big time worth the $ and I am sure have already paid for them selves. Only other thing I would suggest is a first-aid kit. Think it gets tips, too? As in passengers thinking, your thinking. (LoL in my case)


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Danny3xd said:


> Suze, that's a well known troll. Mommy issues apparent.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ...


There's this stuff you can buy, too, that will "freeze" vomit, gum, etc., to make it easier to just scrape up off upholstery or carpet. Lightning1181 has the name of it, if you're interested. Probably a good idea for rideshare drivers, parents, grandparents that take the grandkids for the day to stuff them full of junk food, or people with friends that like to party, sometimes to excess.


----------



## Danny3xd (Nov 7, 2016)

Wonder if that's Co2 like fire extinguishers. We used to put cans of beer on the deck and take the extinguisher wide nozzle, placing it over the beer and one quick shot would chill it.

LOL, and fail all future safety inspections.


----------



## Immoralized (Nov 7, 2017)

OP last reply was on Sunday. I highly doubt his going to reply again.


----------



## Danny3xd (Nov 7, 2016)

Yea. But the thread got fun.

Abandoned threads are like abandoned factories. Ya can make a mess and no one tells at you. LoL

Wut?


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

Jagger51 said:


> The "the ability to report" is not the issue. What is concerning is that riders receive compensation for drivers terminated as a result. Something inherently wrong with getting compensated to get someone else "fired", no matter the circumstances.


You appear to be forgetting the main variable here: the driver being reported has broken the law, and absolutely should be punished.

If a driver doesn't want any problems with pax who have service dogs, all they need to do is obey the law and accept the service dog into their car. Then, voila! no deactivation or problems.

These aren't innocent drivers who have done nothing wrong; they've broken laws and should definitely be held accountable for their actions.

You need to remember the root of why they're dealing with negative consequences - the reason behind it.


----------



## Danny3xd (Nov 7, 2016)

That's just crazy talk Jules! All this taking personal responsibility. Crazy, crazy I tells ya!

LoL

But it is an unintended consequence to reward negative comments with freebies. Said 2 "seemingly impaired(s)" boy.

Speaking of that. Does anyone know for a fact that Uber gives freebies to disgruntled passengers? I just searched and there is nothing I can find


----------



## Immoralized (Nov 7, 2017)

Danny3xd said:


> That's just crazy talk Jules! All this taking personal responsibility. Crazy, crazy I tells ya!
> 
> LoL
> 
> ...


From riders i speak to and all have said it is easier than taking candy off a baby to claim refunds off Uber. Uber would rather keep them as a rider and pay them out of pocket then upset them.


----------



## Bpr2 (Feb 21, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> For the same reason places don't comply with the ADA... it costs extra money to pay for both blue paint and white paint for the parking lot. And those blue wheelchair access aisles alongside handicapped parking spaces mean a whole 'nuther parking space is lost if they actually make it the full 5' wide! And wider doors and more room in bathrooms so a wheelchair can maneuver in there takes up soooooo much room that could be used for other stuff! And they didn't have enough time to make the necessary changes! It's only been a little more than 25 years! They should have been given 50, or even 75! Be reasonable, already!


Don't forget about the pipe wraps under the sinks.


----------



## Jagger51 (Apr 13, 2016)

Julescase said:


> You appear to be forgetting the main variable here: the driver being reported has broken the law, and absolutely should be punished.


You are failing to recognize the potential for fraudulent claims, where no actual laws are broken. This is why incentivizing riders to get drivers "fired" is a concern.


----------



## Slim Pete (Nov 21, 2014)

Just go, find that Pax where he lives, and apologize sincerely, tell him you lost your job because of it, offer him some cash and asked him to contact Uber. 

Some excuse can always be given, he can say that the animal belongs to a friend who was taking the ride with him and the friend later confessed it wasn't a service animal, so many excuses. 

Of course it is critical to secretly record the conversation that you have the pax, otherwise the pax could later call the cops and claim that you threatened to kill him, just to get compensation for pain and suffering from Uber or for their two minutes of fame on TV.

And then next time, just take each and every animal. Get a car vacuum from Amazon, doesn't even cost 20 bucks, and before you clean up the dog's mess, take pictures, and you'll get easily a $20 cleaning fee from Uber. I have received the cleaning fee of that amount simply for empty water bottle and the chip packets left in the car which took literally less than 5 Seconds to clean up.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Jagger51 said:


> You are failing to recognize the potential for fraudulent claims, where no actual laws are broken. This is why incentivizing riders to get drivers "fired" is a concern.


That's the problem exactly. Uber offers a reward to pax. It's smaller mist of the time, but jumps in value if it results in the driver being deactivated. This is almost guaranteed with a more serious complaint.

The goal becomes to put the driver out of a job to get a reward.

This reward is also what makes it easier to get a settlement or judgement if you sue the pax for a false claim... it provides a clear motive for lying about you.

Of course, if the pax comes to court and prices the dog really is a service animal as defined by law, you're screwed.


----------



## Lee239 (Mar 24, 2017)

RoWode12 said:


> I mean this in the nicest way possible:
> 
> Is it worth it? Did being an Uber Driver mean that much to you? Can't you find something more lucrative and fulfilling?
> 
> It definitely sucks to be falsely accused and lied to. But if it were me, I'd be happy for the push in a better direction in life.


Exactly does he really want to fight to get a job back where a customer can lie and get your fired and you have no way to defend yourself.


----------



## Danny3xd (Nov 7, 2016)

Man, if he had just taken the dam dawg, But after not getting the intent of so many emails and texts. Kinda think it woulda just been some other injustice that got him DA'ed.

Never had a problem with any dogs. Hasn't been that many times but really was non-issues each time. The one animal hair problem I did have was on a woman's coat. Minus the critter. I didn't notice and it got all over the next riders cloths. That was annoying.


----------



## melusine3 (Jun 20, 2016)

rideshare_avl said:


> I was wrongly deactivated from Uber because a PAX lied and said that I refused a service animal. The PAX never indicated that the dog was anything other than a pet and I didn't want the wet and dirty dog to get into my car. It was raining outside.
> 
> The PAX also indicated that it was ok to cancel, anyway.
> 
> ...


Look into security guard work. They're desperate for people, start out at $11 per hour (which is more than I made driving Sluber. Check into Securitas.


----------



## HRD2UBER (Aug 26, 2016)

steveK2016 said:


> How do you know it wasnt a service animal? Did you ask the 2 questions? Did he fail to answer them according to ADA law? Do you have dash cam with audio of the incident?


That's why I got a dash cam


----------



## Bears Fan (Oct 28, 2018)

rideshare_avl said:


> I was wrongly deactivated from Uber because a PAX lied and said that I refused a service animal. The PAX never indicated that the dog was anything other than a pet and I didn't want the wet and dirty dog to get into my car. It was raining outside.
> 
> The PAX also indicated that it was ok to cancel, anyway.
> 
> ...


I've never rejected a pax because they have a pet. In fact, I'll ask friendly questions about the pet to make the rider feel more comfortable transporting it. Rejecting a pet will for sure may get a retaliatory complaint. It isn't worth it. Just let the pet ride in your car. If it makes a mess, take a pic and clean it up. Yes, I bring cleaning materials with me. I recently had to clean up some vomit late night and I still needed 3 rides for my quest. But the pax gave me a $105 cash tip. I gave him 5 stars and moved on to the next pax. You refuse a rider with a pet you take the risk of getting deactivated. And now your looking to answers about suing. Was it worth it?


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

Slim Pete said:


> Just go, find that Pax where he lives, and apologize sincerely, tell him you lost your job because of it, offer him some cash and asked him to contact Uber.
> 
> Some excuse can always be given, he can say that the animal belongs to a friend who was taking the ride with him and the friend later confessed it wasn't a service animal, so many excuses.
> 
> ...


What!? No - definitely do not give money to pax who got you deactivated !! Lololol that's the opposite of how to proceed.



Bears Fan said:


> I've never rejected a pax because they have a pet. In fact, I'll ask friendly questions about the pet to make the rider feel more comfortable transporting it. Rejecting a pet will for sure may get a retaliatory complaint. It isn't worth it. Just let the pet ride in your car. If it makes a mess, take a pic and clean it up. Yes, I bring cleaning materials with me. I recently had to clean up some vomit late night and I still needed 3 rides for my quest. But the pax gave me a $105 cash tip. I gave him 5 stars and moved on to the next pax. You refuse a rider with a pet you take the risk of getting deactivated. And now your looking to answers about suing. Was it worth it?


Agreed- it's just so much simpler to accept the dog. I feel like so many drivers go into a tizzy and spiral downward to a vortex of deactivated indignation, when simply having a dog in their car for <20 minutes would have avoided the entire problem.

I understand wanting to stick to your guns, but is that _really_ the hill you want to die on?


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

So, how is this law suit going? I haven't been online in a while and just wanted to check in on your deactivation lawsuit for not accepting the service animal (which, as you now know, is against the law).

What's the 411 on this sitch?


----------



## EphLux (Aug 10, 2018)

TAKE ALL animals if you want this gig. Have two interior dash cams running at all times. In busy markets, you can gross $1700 a week driving Uber. Try making that with a CDL 18 wheeler and being able to sleep in your own bed 7 nights a week and buy fresh food for your body and exercise 5 days a week. (Its possible, but it will take you at least 1 year, likely two or more). If that is not reason enough to Cover Your Ass, I dont know what is.


----------



## Uberlife2 (Sep 20, 2016)

RoWode12 said:


> I mean this in the nicest way possible:
> 
> Is it worth it? Did being an Uber Driver mean that much to you? Can't you find something more lucrative and fulfilling?
> 
> It definitely sucks to be falsely accused and lied to. But if it were me, I'd be happy for the push in a better direction in life.


Dude don't talk like a moron. I'm tired of morons like you. Why are you still on the ****ing platform. Get the **** off. Give some useful advice or shut the **** up.


----------



## Juggalo9er (Dec 7, 2017)

rideshare_avl said:


> Blindly allowing riders to lie and commit fraud and simply "learn to love dogs" is not a fair or realistic solution. Seriously???
> 
> Man, am I glad you are not a judge.
> 
> ...


Apparently it's not very loose language...
Refuse to....to accommodate a disability, get sued.... it's fairly clear


----------

