# Rules for Uber, Lyft to become law in Colorado



## UberComic (Apr 17, 2014)

Rules for Uber, Lyft to become law in Colorado

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_25800088/rules-uber-lyft-become-law-colorado#ixzz32JIDZb9O


----------



## UberComic (Apr 17, 2014)

I've been to Denver, and have many friends there. It's ideal for rideshare, so I'm sure it's very important to Uber and Lyft.


----------



## franklin (Apr 21, 2014)

*10 New facts for TNC drivers in Colorado*. All citations are from http://www.leg.state.co.us/Clics/CL...66B28FC87257C4300636F6B?Open&file=125_enr.pdf

There are a lot of new costs being added. Will Uber/Lyft/Sidecar just take on these new costs or will they be passed on to drivers like Uber's $520 annual 'Mobile Subscription Fee'?

10. 'Pre-arranged ride' is defined as any accepted ride request from acceptance thru rider exit of vehicle. 40-10.1-602.2

9. TNC must pay *ANNUAL* $111,250 permit fee 40-10.1-606.2

8. TNC must confirm drivers are medically fit to drive 40-10.1-605.d.IV Who will pay for this?

7. Vehicles must display an exterior marking the vehicle as for hire. 40-10.1-605.o

6. Drivers' vehicles must undergo _*yearly*_ inspection 40-10.1-605.g.I Who will pay for this??? Drivers? Let's not forget, most 'inspections' are sales jobs to get you to spend more money at the mechanic's shop. So with a yearly inspection clearance over your head, how do you turn down that unnecessary repair work? How do you pay for it?

5. Drivers must notify vehicle lien holders (car loan) that vehicle will be used for TNC work 40-10.1-605.j.I Unknown impact here when lien holder realizes you got a consumer rate instead of a commercial rate. Better read your car loan docs very carefully.

4. Trip Receipt must include driver's 1st name and phone number 40-10.1-605.c.IV So now riders will forever have your number

3. Drivers restricted to 12 consecutive hours 40-10.1-605.e

2. After Jan 15, 2015 TNC ***or DRIVER* ** must have _*Primary*_ (not contingent) insurrance of $1 mil per occurrence for incidents ivoving drivers in prearranged ride 40-10.1-604.2 This just means insurance has to be in place, not that TNC has to provide it, or pay for it.

1. Prior to Jan 15,TNC ***or DRIVER* ** must provide *Primary* auto policy that recognizes driver is driving for hire vehicle for TNC 40-10.1-604.3.b.I So now you have to **TELL** your insurance company that you are driving for a TNC.


----------



## LookyLou (Apr 28, 2014)

Looks like the party might be over in Colorado.


----------



## UberComic (Apr 17, 2014)

If those were the rules in California, I wouldn't do it.


----------



## franklin (Apr 21, 2014)

Wouldn't surprise me to see these spread


----------



## LookyLou (Apr 28, 2014)

UberComic said:


> If those were the rules in California, I wouldn't do it.


I don't think anyone would want to or be able to do it under the current model if these are the requirements.

That is probably the point. Kill it dead before it gets legs and we get too much backlash from the voting public that likes it.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Hmmm, you'll start seeing legislators getting all hairy-chested and try and outdo each other with onerous rules and regs. 

UBER have Only themselves to blame, just think they could come into a marketplace and totally ignore existing laws without any comeback is naive in the highest degree. 

Just got off the phone to a colleague in Western Australia and he has said how Uber are launching there. They are even more protectionist. With higher car is restricted to charging no less than $65 for a transfer or hourly rate.


----------



## SoCal_Uber (May 2, 2014)

Wow, I'd say CA would probably lose over 75% of the UberX workforce ( including my ass ) if those 
regulations were implemented here.


----------



## centralFLFuber (Nov 21, 2014)

damn the list just keeps getting longer...hey tell fluber they may want to start actually "employing" people and become a transportation company now...

doesnt look like IC and "technology co" is gonna fly anymore 

cant wait to see TK on TVnews dressed in orange in a courtroom somewhere


----------



## duggles (Aug 25, 2014)

franklin said:


> *10 New facts for TNC drivers in Colorado*. All citations are from http://www.leg.state.co.us/Clics/CL...66B28FC87257C4300636F6B?Open&file=125_enr.pdf
> 
> There are a lot of new costs being added. Will Uber/Lyft/Sidecar just take on these new costs or will they be passed on to drivers like Uber's $520 annual 'Mobile Subscription Fee'?
> 
> ...


Colorado driver here. This changes nothing. Calm down. This is effectively how it is already.

9. That's not per person. That's Uber. They make that in a Saturday.

8. Uber has been having drivers do this since July, when it was required. At that time they incentivized getting it down with a $200 bonus. It was a $60 medical checkup done at the local grocery store chains. 
If you drive for Uber in Colorado, you have already done this. Uber no longer reimburses and it's an out-of-pocket, bi-yearly expense.

7. Trade dress. Already implemented for both Lyft & Uber.

6. This has also already been implemented by Uber in July. This was part of the $200 bonus incentive. Get your medical check up and vehicle inspection by Aug 1 and get $200. The med check was $60 and the vehicle inspection was $20. Vehicle inspection must occur yearly.

5. The Uber contract that I read over a year ago stated that I needed to inform my lien holder that I drive for TNC. The is unenforceable, and like the insurance issue in all states, is up to the driver to disclose.

4. I believe that is simply Uber's masked number. And if it's not, so what. Not hard to block a number.

3. Already on the books. Unenforceable by local authorities. Uber chooses not to systematically enforce, and most drivers likely don't reach this number. Plus, they are PUC regulated still and therefore no one audits these records.

2. Uber has claimed to have _*Primary*_ (not contingent) insurrance of $1 mil per occurrence for incidents involving drivers. It's the same insurance they claim to have for you all, except in Colorado they claim it extends to all "on-app" time and does not require a denial of claim by your own insurance.

1. "TNC ***or DRIVER* ** must provide *Primary* auto policy that recognizes driver is driving for hire vehicle for TNC" Again, Uber already does this by claiming their insurance is primary during all "on-app" time. It say "OR DRIVER," not "DRIVER MUST."

In theory, in Colorado, Uber & Lyft are primary in all incidents. In theory, insurance companies should say, anything you do on your TNC time is TNC problems.

Anyone want to call their insurance and ask? I don't. Anyone in Colorado get into a TNC accident and want to share? Doubt it.

Uber has already implemented all of these in Colorado. Lyft, on the other hand, has played it shady. They never required the med check, even though that was required for TNC drivers beginning last August. And their vehicle inspection is done by their driver mentors. That's their certified mechanic. Lyft skirts regs more than Uber.

All in all, nothing has changed. The passages of the law you think CHANGE things, like insurance or inspections or med checks, have already been "officially" implemented by Uber Colorado. Lyft, always questionable. They don't really provide info or do things officially.

All in the game, boys. All in the game. - The Wire


----------

