# San Francisco Investigating Whether Uber, Lyft Are Public Nuisances



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

Technology News | Mon Jun 5, 2017 | 5:01pm EDT
*San Francisco investigating whether Uber, Lyft are public nuisances*

By Heather Somerville | SAN FRANCISCO

San Francisco has issued subpoenas to Uber Technologies Inc [UBER.UL] and Lyft Inc for a broad scope of records on driving and business practices as part of an investigation to determine whether the ride-services companies have become a public nuisance.

City Attorney Dennis Herrera said on Monday he was seeking records to investigate whether Uber and Lyft fail to adequately serve poor neighborhoods and the disabled and whether their drivers create hazards on the road.

Herrera said the subpoenas sought four years of records from the companies, which are based in San Francisco and have an estimated 45,000 total drivers in the city. The sweeping request includes hours and miles logged by drivers, driver incentives, traffic infractions and city zip codes visited by drivers.

"No one disputes the convenience of the ride-hailing industry, but that convenience evaporates when you're stuck in traffic behind a double-parked Uber or Lyft, or when you can't get a ride because the vehicle isn't accessible to someone with a disability or because the algorithm disfavors the neighborhood where you live," Herrera said.

The subpoena sets up San Francisco and Uber for yet another legal battle, as the two are already locked in a fight over the city's demands for drivers' names and addresses. Herrera sued Uber last month to compel the company to comply with the data request, which Uber has said is an invasion of driver privacy.

Investigating whether Uber and Lyft are a public nuisance in the city is an unusual approach for San Francisco. An influx of cars driving for the two companies often clog city streets and block bicycle lanes and double-park while they wait for passengers, according to the city.

Such concerns reflect how large the two companies have grown in their hometown.

A Lyft spokeswoman said that 30 percent of rides in San Francisco take place in underserved neighborhoods, and 20 percent begin or end at a public transit station, underscoring its collaboration with public transit agencies.

"Lyft has always been focused on improving transportation access for people across all cities in which we operate," said spokeswoman Chelsea Harrison.

Uber pointed to a report by the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency which says it has the goal of making ride-sharing one of the "preferred means of travel" by 2018. Spokeswoman Eva Behrend said Uber is "more than happy to work with the city to address congestion," but that the city needs to also look at contributing factors such as construction and population growth.

Herrera added that the "long-distance" Uber and Lyft drivers who travel hours from the Central Valley and small communities elsewhere to find rides in San Francisco are a potential "threat" to public safety. They are on the road for such long shifts that they become drowsy, making the streets unsafe.

Herrera also requested four years' of documents and data submitted by Uber and Lyft to the California Public Utilities Commission, the state agency that regulates ride-services companies and collects much of the data the city is looking for.

The commission did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

(Editing by Jeffrey Benkoe)


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Ca$h4 said:


> Technology News | Mon Jun 5, 2017 | 5:01pm EDT
> *San Francisco investigating whether Uber, Lyft are public nuisances*
> 
> By Heather Somerville | SAN FRANCISCO
> ...


Wow.
SanFrancisco is coming down HARD on rideshare lately !

SanFrancisco wants " BIG BROTHER" GOVERNMENT ?


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

*BIG UGLY UBER --- ABOVE THE LAW -- TOXIC -- SCOFFLAW

San Francisco waking up to fact that unlimited TNC's have negative consequences. Can't even service all populations of city. Only took 8 yearz to get it.*


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Wasteful Government spending !
Fleecing the tax payers in the guise of " "Investigation".

More Government " Busy Work " !


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

As far as the "dangerous driving" goes, that complaint has become legion all across the U.S.A. Uber drivers have replaced cab drivers as the font of those kinds of complaints.

I have been down that road when it comes to the complaints about accessibles and neighbourhoods.

Uber offers both Uber Assist and Uber WAV in the SF Bay Area. As long as it can prove that it is receiving and covering requests, it will survive any regulatory or civil action.

If it can prove that it covers most of the requests that it receives in the so-called "underserved" neighbourhoods (I believe that this is the current fashionable term for it), it will survive any regulatory or civil action.

The one road down which I have not been is the business of people who drive to San Francisco from Southern California. If anything is instructive, in the Capital of Your Nation, if you are going to drive TNC, the vehicle must have licence plates from the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Virginia or the State of Maryland. The same goes for the driver's licence. This does not stop people from driving to the Capital of Your Nation from Bristol, Virginia or Cumberland, Maryland. Further, only the District has this requirement. The bordering states do not. In addition, in order to obtain a hack licence in the District of Columbia, you must live in the Washington Metropolitan Area.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Another Uber Driver said:


> As far as the "dangerous driving" goes, that complaint has become legion all across the U.S.A. Uber drivers have replaced cab drivers as the font of those kinds of complaints.
> 
> I have been down that road when it comes to the complaints about accessibles and neighbourhoods.
> 
> ...


Isnt the action of restricting work and workers to origin from a specific geo area the EXACT SAME AS BUILDING A BORDER WALL ?
Against Americans ?
( the EXACT SAME TYPE OF THING THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA PAYS ERIC HOLDERS LAW FIRM $26,000.00 a month to combat.SUCH HYPOCRITS !)( conflict of interest since Uber has retained Eric Holder also)

San Francisco is diving into a Constitutional can of worms.

Invest in time shares near the Supreme Court.

SanFrancisco govt. Will need a few units for a long time . . .

Meanwhile , a post office box and a SanFrancisco business license makes any " independent Uber Driver" local on paper.

They are spending money chasing vapors they will never grasp.

Stupid people should not be reelected.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

tohunt4me said:


> Invest in time shares near the Supreme Court.


_*Ain't none there in which to invest*_. Trust me, I live here and have worked that neighbourhood for years. I suppose that I could buy a few houses and advertise them on Air B'nB. In fact, you have several municipalities and the District Government who are now getting complaints from various civic associations about people's doing just that. My Council Member has introduced legislation to the D.C. City Council to regulate this. If Air B'n'B takes a page from Uber's playbook, as soon as it pays off said Council Member, the legislation will vanish quietly.


----------



## SEAL Team 5 (Dec 19, 2015)

Uber X drivers should be proud of themselves. They are now classified in the same category as the homeless, a nuisance.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

San Franciso just wants to get the info from uber to see if they are serving poor areas or driving 16 hours a day 7 days a week...

You know like the info they can get from the cab companies at their whim or else.


----------



## SEAL Team 5 (Dec 19, 2015)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> San Franciso just wants to get the info from uber to see if they are serving poor areas or driving 16 hours a day 7 days a week...
> 
> You know like the info they can get from the cab companies at their whim or else.


With Uber embezzling tax revenue in NYC then there is no way in the hell that they'll forward the correct info about their drivers.


----------



## 7Miles (Dec 17, 2014)

In this case I want Herrera's proof of residency and legal status in the United States.

I am an immigrant so I can make those jokes all day long. I paid $750 to become citizen. I wanna see if Mrs Herrera did. I write Mrs. Herrera because he is from SF and who the hell knows...


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

SEAL Team 5 said:


> With Uber embezzling tax revenue in NYC then there is no way in the hell that they'll forward the correct info about their drivers.


I thought they were using tax havens in europe ?


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Uber has no obligation to service the hood, unlike cab companies which can lose their privilege license for underserving neighborhoods equally.

American cities now know they really fracked up letting "private Enterprise" take up where cab companies, operated more like public utilities, left off.

Too little too late- and San Francisco has a lot to be ashamed for, they were the gateway to this Free Enterprise nightmare. I'm sure San Fran is more concerned about all the weekday homeless drivers being a parking and traffic nuisance than bad drivers.


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

Can't they just say SLUMS? What's with all the fancy talk.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

If San fran gives them the boot, this ride sharing nightmare is coming to an end.

This should be the writing on the wall that it doesn't work.


----------



## day tripper yeah... (Dec 21, 2015)

Ca$h4 said:


> Technology News | Mon Jun 5, 2017 | 5:01pm EDT
> *San Francisco investigating whether Uber, Lyft are public nuisances*
> 
> By Heather Somerville | SAN FRANCISCO
> ...


45,000 drivers?.......My God!


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

day tripper yeah... said:


> 45,000 drivers?.......My God!


45,000 drivers on the books, 5,000 that have picked someone up in the last month...

Gotta take that 95% turnover into account.


----------



## Buckiemohawk (Jun 23, 2015)

Most of them don't even live in San Francisco. They drive up there because it's "busy". So you have at 5,000 saturate the market with two to three on a corner even more. Then they don't even know where they are going because they don't live in the city or certain's rules for the city. This is the beginning of the end.


----------



## Cynergie (Apr 10, 2017)

"...City Attorney Dennis Herrera said on Monday he was seeking records to investigate whether Uber and Lyft fail to adequately serve poor neighborhoods and the disabled and whether their drivers create hazards on the road...."

Oh lordy. This is the one time I will ever be in 100% agreement with Travis, Logan and Johnny. Let's examine each of these potential future catastrophes for the driver ICs now shall we?

*"...fail to adequately serve poor neighborhoods..."*

lmao. Just when I thought the expansion of fake surges in Oakland and San Jose areas weren't enough with them trying to woo the snobby college kids and market the brand to recent HS grads. Stand by for a significant area extension in 2.0x surges in Mission and Dogpatch areas of the city. Regardless of what time of day or night it happens to be. Or how ill mannered the pax you're picking up in these hoods happen to be...

*"...[fail to adequately serve] the disabled..."*

just like the legally binding wording in the service pet policy, brace yourselves for an even more vauge, official medical policy which mandates drivers to assist senior citizens and/or invalids in wheelchairs, with walkers, crutches, canes etc. in and out of driver vehicles. There has to be at least one ambulance chasing law firm which has read this article and laughing their @$$es off. Because they're insightful enough to see the $$$$ writing on the wall from all the potential fallout that could arise from Uber/Lyft policy changes to accommodate disabled riders. Just like how Uber makes it mandatory for all its drivers to accept pets whom riders claim are service animals. And will immediately deactivate any rider who fails to transport such pax --- regardless of how squirelly such a pax claim happens to be. Just think of all the potential medical lawsuits that would surely arise from Uber/Lyft mandating such driver-rider interaction....

*"...and whether their drivers create hazards on the road..."*

If you haven't yet gotten your TNC permits from the city of SF, now is a good time to take care of this. For I see a holy crusade on the horizon from the parking meter maid Nazi brigade and/or the police. Uber/Lyft drivers have been given a huge break with the way we've been allowed to parallel park and stand/wait before driveways, red/yellow parking meters, while impeding the flow of traffic. But IMO, this part of the article makes it sound as though all of this is about to change. If this becomes a reality, then Amazon flex & prime deliveries will be ancient history during work day hours. And quite possibly the 3pm - 7pm delivery blocks as well, depending on how vigilant the city wants to be based on the outcome of this investigation. Because the last time I checked, no rideshare driver received a special permit from Uber or Lyft to perform such commercial deliveries to city businesses and residences during business hours....

adding:

Last week, I witnessed just how vicious the parking Nazi meter maids have increasingly become. Incident was a couple blocks just after crossing over Market St on Pine St. I was legally parked at a parking meter on Pine St coming to the end of a 5 min break at the start of rush hour. A Lyft driver in a Burlingame Hertz rental pulled into an empty parking space across from me on the other side of the street. Unfortunately, he had just pulled into a yellow parking meter space which -- given the time of day -- was an automatic tow away vehicle jail bait zone. At first, I thought he was waiting on a pax. But the 5 min wait period as any SF driver knows, is bad enough at any time of the work day. And pure suicide during height rush hour, especially on a busy one way parking lot the likes of Pine St. But at least you're waiting on pax while you're in the car. However this wasn't the case since these rules of driving engagement didn't appear to apply to this driver (whom I increasingly suspect was a new driver).

Driver jumped out his car and appeared to be preoccupied with getting a quick snack from a grocery store some 2 doors down the side walk. Despite the fact this action didn't stall the flow of traffic on the road, it unfortunately triggered the wrath of an irate meter maid Nazi (who was just behind the car that had paused in traffic immediately beside the driver's car). The Meter maid Nazi drove around his car rental and stopped immediately before it. Which served to block the driver in given the slow moving traffic on the right. And while the poor bastard was oblivious to what was transpiring with his rental on the street, the meter maid called up a tow truck. Which managed to somehow magically apparate two blocks down the street despite the traffic.

That parking Nazi somehow got that tow truck parked directly before the car, with the towing guy in process of hooking up the vehicle --- when the driver came flying out of the store. All this craziness happening in less than 5 mins of the driver getting out his car. SMH.

At that point, my meter ran out and I wisely decided to abdicate the scene. I was in process of driving off and left him arguing with the meter maid and towing guy from the side walk. Best case and with luck, he'd get stuck with paying half the fine. Worst case is a $400+ towing fee + ticket. And 100% loss of income until he got it back. And a possible deactivation from Lyft once they learned of it.

Poor bastard. As much as I pitied him, I lacked the desire to be the next victim on this vindictive meter maid Nazi fecal matter list. Decided to avoid the vicinity of Market st for the rest of that day. It seemed the meter maid Nazis were trying to meet their monthly ticket quotas that day.



Buckiemohawk said:


> Most of them don't even live in San Francisco. They drive up there because it's "busy". So you have at 5,000 saturate the market with two to three on a corner even more. Then they don't even know where they are going because they don't live in the city or certain's rules for the city. This is the beginning of the end.


Says the Subject Matter Expert back seat driver who is conveniently located in Orlando FL. 



Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> If San fran gives them the boot, this ride sharing nightmare is coming to an end.
> 
> This should be the writing on the wall that it doesn't work.


You obviously didn't get the memo about how the SF cabbie industry shot itself in the foot and caused rideshares to exist in the first place. All because of their incompetence and operational inefficiencies as an industry. And a complete monopoly of SF city streets which made commute pricing an unrealistic commodity for SF commuters to find reasonable. As an SF driver, I can tell you that this isn't going to happen any time soon. Too many six fig IT techies, government bureaucrats and wealthy business ppl need a quick convenient way to get to work. The only phenomenon that would end rideshare driver jobs tomorrow is the driverless smart car. But fear not, Travis, Johnny and Logan are already feverishly working on that......

What you apparently don't realize --- being a driver in the very flat state of FL -- is that topography controls the commute distance and time pax are willing and/or physically able to travel here in SF. You could literally live 2 to 3 blocks from your work place, a bar, friend/relative's house, local entertainment center etc. And that 2 to 3 blocks would take you 5 to 10 mins to walk in a city area like West Palm Beach. But this effort would literally take you 45 mins to 1 hr in SF due to having to climb Mt. Fuji, Mt Kilimanjaro, the Alps and Colorado Rockies between your house and the same destination point.

And that's before you factor in the 50 degree plus street grades the likes of Lombard Street since --as you may not have been cognizant-- are prolific throughout the city. Or any traffic at height of rush hour......

Sooo......

No. Rideshares are not going away any time soon

Yes. Ignorance is truly bliss. LMFAO.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Lol


----------



## RideshareSpectrum (May 12, 2017)

7Miles said:


> In this case I want Herrera's proof of residency and legal status in the United States.
> 
> I am an immigrant so I can make those jokes all day long. I paid $750 to become citizen. I wanna see if Mrs Herrera did. I write Mrs. Herrera because he is from SF and who the hell knows...


Don't know where you live and am just curious and not trying to offend with the question... did you register your business with the SF tax collector to drive for hire there?


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

*Uber, Lyft cars have heavy impact on SF streets, study finds*

http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Uber-Lyft-cars-have-heavy-impact-on-SF-streets-11214835.php


----------

