# Hidden camera report out of Phoenix



## Spike72 (Jan 18, 2017)

What a giant crock. The reporter calls for 4 rides that they don't intend to take, inconveniences the drivers, and ultimately blames drivers for something that is supposed to be the parent's responsibility!

https://www.abc15.com/longform/lyft-uber-car-seat-law


----------



## AzAppDriver (Feb 27, 2017)

Drivers should educate themselves on car seat laws, and cancel these ride requests. I am quick to cancel when pax have children and no car seat.


----------



## Spike72 (Jan 18, 2017)

AzAppDriver said:


> Drivers should educate themselves on car seat laws, and cancel these ride requests. I am quick to cancel when pax have children and no car seat.


But that's just it, the parents should never request a ride in the first place if they don't have the equipment to transport a child. Moreover, why is it ok for them to waste our time and money?


----------



## AzAppDriver (Feb 27, 2017)

You should receive cancellation fee which in many cases you'll make more than taking the ride .


----------



## Chefbumbum (Nov 16, 2017)

How much that biatch was paid to risk her little kid?


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Spike72 said:


> What a giant crock. The reporter calls for 4 rides that they don't intend to take, inconveniences the drivers, and ultimately blames drivers for something that is supposed to be the parent's responsibility!
> 
> https://www.abc15.com/longform/lyft-uber-car-seat-law


When did it become the parent's responsibility in a TNC?


----------



## RynoHawk (Mar 15, 2017)

Spike72 said:


> What a giant crock. The reporter calls for 4 rides that they don't intend to take, inconveniences the drivers, and ultimately blames drivers for something that is supposed to be the parent's responsibility!
> 
> https://www.abc15.com/longform/lyft-uber-car-seat-law


Yes the parents are responsible for providing a car seat for a child. However, the driver is responsible for knowing the law and refusing the ride.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

RynoHawk said:


> Yes the parents are responsible for providing a car seat for a child. However, the driver is responsible for knowing the law and refusing the ride.


Where is that in the TOS?


----------



## RynoHawk (Mar 15, 2017)

Demon said:


> Where is that in the TOS?


It is the law in most states that the driver is responsible and the TOS requires you to follow local laws.

EDIT: It is apparently the responsibility of the "supervising adult" in Florida, but it is the driver's responsibility in Wisconsin and most other states.


----------



## Dropking (Aug 18, 2017)

Spike72 said:


> What a giant crock. The reporter calls for 4 rides that they don't intend to take, inconveniences the drivers, and ultimately blames drivers for something that is supposed to be the parent's responsibility!
> 
> https://www.abc15.com/longform/lyft-uber-car-seat-law


Shining light on this problem will help drivers everywhere. That's how investigative reporting works.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

RynoHawk said:


> It is the law in most states that the driver is responsible and the TOS requires you to follow local laws.
> 
> EDIT: It is apparently the responsibility of the "supervising adult" in Florida, but it is the driver's responsibility in Wisconsin and most other states.


Got it. The driver is responsible, not the parent.


----------



## RynoHawk (Mar 15, 2017)

Demon said:


> Got it. The driver is responsible, not the parent.


The parent is responsible for providing the seat. It does not say in Uber TOS that the driver must provide this. If said parent does not provide a seat, then it's the driver's responsibility to refuse the ride because the driver is the one who will be cited if caught in most places. However, when I looked up Florida law, it says the "Supervising adult" is responsible. Either way, as a driver I would still refuse for the child's sake.


----------



## Spike72 (Jan 18, 2017)

I would argue it's the parent's responsibility to not call for ride.


----------



## Saltyoldman (Oct 18, 2016)

I think your carrying that leopard print bag because you like to skinny jeans


----------



## UBERPROcolorado (Jul 16, 2017)

Spike72 said:


> But that's just it, the parents should never request a ride in the first place if they don't have the equipment to transport a child. Moreover, why is it ok for them to waste our time and money?


We should be paid at least a canx fee if the rider does not have a legal restraint devise.


----------



## SEAL Team 5 (Dec 19, 2015)

Spike72 said:


> and ultimately blames drivers for something that is supposed to be the parent's responsibility!
> 
> https://www.abc15.com/longform/lyft-uber-car-seat-law


Not since 2012 is it ultimately only the parents fault. By law taxi drivers are held liable to make sure that all pax are properly restraint.


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

Spike72 said:


> But that's just it, the parents should never request a ride in the first place if they don't have the equipment to transport a child. Moreover, why is it ok for them to waste our time and money?


That's why you just wait out the 5 minutes and cancel as rider no-show. You earned that $3.75 for your wasted energy and time.

Drivers also miss out on potential REAL trip requests because they accepted a ping from an idiotic parent who is willing to risk their kid's life for the convenience of an Uber ride.

People are freaking crazy.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

UBERPROcolorado said:


> We should be paid at least a canx fee if the rider does not have a legal restraint devise.


Why should the pax pay if the driver chooses not to take them?



RynoHawk said:


> The parent is responsible for providing the seat. It does not say in Uber TOS that the driver must provide this. If said parent does not provide a seat, then it's the driver's responsibility to refuse the ride because the driver is the one who will be cited if caught in most places. However, when I looked up Florida law, it says the "Supervising adult" is responsible. Either way, as a driver I would still refuse for the child's sake.


So that brings us back to where does it say it's up to the parent?



Julescase said:


> That's why you just wait out the 5 minutes and cancel as rider no-show. You earned that $3.75 for your wasted energy and time.
> 
> Drivers also miss out on potential REAL trip requests because they accepted a ping from an idiotic parent who is willing to risk their kid's life for the convenience of an Uber ride.
> 
> People are freaking crazy.


Nothing is stopping the driver from having a car seat.


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

Demon said:


> Why should the pax pay if the driver chooses not to take them?
> 
> So that brings us back to where does it say it's up to the parent?


Oh Jesus here he goes again. Lololol.

Can someone please post a link to the absolutely ridonkulous thread in which Demon went in circles regarding child car seats and how he thinks it's the Uber drivers' responsibility to carry extra seats around in their cars (laughable, I know).

Please don't respond to his comment, you'll only be fueling the fire.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Julescase said:


> Oh Jesus here he goes again. Lololol.
> 
> Can someone please post a link to the absolutely ridonkulous thread in which Demon went in circles regarding child car seats and how he thinks it's the Uber drivers' responsibility to carry extra seats around in their cars (laughable, I know).
> 
> Please don't respond to his comment, you'll only be fueling the fire.


LOL. Please show me where I said it was the driver's responsibility.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Demon said:


> Why should the pax pay if the driver chooses not to take them?


That's why it's called a "Cancellation fee" and not a "fare".



Demon said:


> So that brings us back to where does it say it's up to the parent?
> 
> Nothing is stopping the driver from having a car seat.


Liability issues. Quality of seat, condition of seat, properly installed... If the parents use their own, and install it and restrain the child themselves, we are off the hook, so long as the generalities are observed (proper seat for stated age/height/weight, facing front or back, etc.)

And where would we store the seat, if we're expected to accept luggage and the like? And how many seats should we carry? Both infant AND boosters...

That's why it's up to the parent to know what they need to have for the child/ren travelling with them.

This isn't rocket science here.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Demon said:


> Where is that in the TOS?


Section 9.1

(c) *you will comply with all applicable laws in your performance of this Agreement*, including holding and complying with all permits, licenses, registrations and other governmental authorizations necessary to provide (i) Transportation Services using the Vehicles pursuant to this Agreement, and (ii) passenger transportation service's to third parties in the Territory generally.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

It's BOTH the parents responsibility (to actually have one) AND the drivers responsibility (to ensure the parents have one). Drivers should (and if done properly, do) get a cancellation fee for refusing those rides (and as someone pointed out, as a time/money investment, you come out ahead this way).

That being said, I said this in the other post on this but I'll say it again here. On the off chance that the woman who did refuse happens to be on UP.net (and happens to read this)...

*THANK YOU!!!
*
While I do agree that parents should be providing the seats (clearly), someone has to look out for the kids and if the parents won't, you did. Seriously, thank you!


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

SuzeCB said:


> That's why it's called a "Cancellation fee" and not a "fare".
> 
> Liability issues. Quality of seat, condition of seat, properly installed... If the parents use their own, and install it and restrain the child themselves, we are off the hook, so long as the generalities are observed (proper seat for stated age/height/weight, facing front or back, etc.)
> 
> ...


I agree fully it isn't rocket science. It's very simple, either the TOS says it is the parent's responsibility to provide a car seat or it doesn't. Being that the TOS makes no mention of it, it is not the parent's responsibility to have one.

The cancel fee is for when a pax cancels for some reason. This isn't what we're discussing, in this situation the driver chooses to cancel, so my question stands, why should the passenger be charged for doing everything they should and the driver choosing to cancel the ride?

Even if the pax provides the car seat the driver is still on the hook for making sure it is installed properly.

The driver can choose whatever kind of car seat they want and keep it wherever they want, or the driver can choose not to carry a car seat at all.


----------



## IronMike60 (Sep 8, 2017)

Uber Child Seat is found in the Help section of the passenger app for nyc.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

err.. Am I the only one who knows how to use Google?

https://help.uber.com/h/885faa46-8db2-499f-8616-7a76bfc2c9e6

The google is strong in my family...

Ah IronMike60 posted while I was writing... He knows how to use Google too. 

As to your question about why the pax should be charged, it's because they weren't prepared, same way we charge them if they aren't toes on curb in 5 minutes. Why would the driver have to lose the time/money for the pax not being properly prepared?

I should send this link to that reporter.......


----------



## TheAntMiami (Oct 10, 2016)

AzAppDriver said:


> Drivers should educate themselves on car seat laws, and cancel these ride requests. I am quick to cancel when pax have children and no car seat.


And then the pax complains with a discrimination lawsuit and Uber/Lyft deactivate you. It's a lose/lose situation.



RynoHawk said:


> Yes the parents are responsible for providing a car seat for a child. However, the driver is responsible for knowing the law and refusing the ride.


And what happens when the pax claims discrimination and Uber/Lyft doesn't investigate and there is no dash cam and driver is deactivated????


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

Discrimination lawsuits are my thing, on the off chance it actually went to court, they'd lose, quickly, which is why it would almost certainly never make it to court.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Pawtism said:


> err.. Am I the only one who knows how to use Google?
> 
> https://help.uber.com/h/885faa46-8db2-499f-8616-7a76bfc2c9e6
> 
> ...


So I ask again, where did Uber tell the pax they would need a car seat in order to be prepared? It's in the TOS they have to be ready within x number of minutes.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

"We expect riders and drivers to follow local rules and regulations regarding infants and small children."



TheAntMiami said:


> And then the pax complains with a discrimination lawsuit and Uber/Lyft deactivate you. It's a lose/lose situation.
> 
> And what happens when the pax claims discrimination and Uber/Lyft doesn't investigate and there is no dash cam and driver is deactivated????


If you don't have a dashcam, then you're asking for trouble anyway. I'm quick to jump on those without a dash cam. However, in this case even they would likely be safe. Unless the pax outright lied and said they did have a car seat (in which case, you should have had a dash cam).


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Pawtism said:


> "We expect riders and drivers to follow local rules and regulations regarding infants and small children."


That still doesn't answer the question. Almost if not all state laws put the responsibility of the car seat on the driver.


----------



## AzAppDriver (Feb 27, 2017)

TheAntMiami said:


> And then the pax complains with a discrimination lawsuit and Uber/Lyft deactivate you. It's a lose/lose situation


Lawsuit? I would be more worried of the lawsuit you'll face if you take the ride and are in an accident. 

Not worried about deactivation as I have a dash cam and immediately report to U/L.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

Demon said:


> That still doesn't answer the question. Almost if not all state laws put the responsibility of the car seat on the driver.


The law puts the penalty on the driver (which is why you should decline the ride). It's silent on on who has to provide it. Clearly you don't have kids, because anyone who has had to transport kids around with any frequency knows the challenges of making sure there are car seats available, it's always on the parent to check. Your argument is like saying "well where does it say I have to wear my seat belt?" (drivers can be fined for this as well in many states) and again I point to "We expect riders and drivers to follow local rules and regulations". Anyone with children (and most without) know the law, if they don't, they're going to get a $5 education on it.

Oh and upon further research, it appears the rider side of the app does give an option to order an uber with a car seat (which is what they should have selected if they didn't have one).

https://help.uber.com/h/3abcbae1-132b-42a9-8277-0dab00fa3879


----------



## TheAntMiami (Oct 10, 2016)

Demon said:


> That still doesn't answer the question. Almost if not all state laws put the responsibility of the car seat on the driver.


And if a pax claims "Discrimination"; Uber/Lyft would immediately suspend your account, no questions asked. Then again, it's on the drivers to fight back.
It's lose/lose/lose situation!


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Pawtism said:


> The law puts the penalty on the driver (which is why you should decline the ride). It's silent on on who has to provide it. Clearly you don't have kids, because anyone who has had to transport kids around with any frequency knows the challenges of making sure there are car seats available, it's always on the parent to check. Your argument is like saying "well where does it say I have to wear my seat belt?" (drivers can be fined for this as well in many states) and again I point to "We expect riders and drivers to follow local rules and regulations". Anyone with children (and most without) know the law, if they don't, they're going to get a $5 education on it.
> 
> Oh and upon further research, it appears the rider side of the app does give an option to order an uber with a car seat (which is what they should have selected if they didn't have one).
> 
> https://help.uber.com/h/3abcbae1-132b-42a9-8277-0dab00fa3879


A driver shouldn't drive someone without a car seat. My beef is with Uber who does not spell out who is responsible for providing the car seat. Lyft spells it out exactly.

Uber Car Seat is only in 4 cities. That doesn't help the rest of the country. If Uber can provide car seats in 4 cities, why can't it provide car seats in the rest of the country?

Unless Uber spells out to passengers that they are responsible for bringing a car seat the way Lyft does Uber will lose when they try to charge a passenger for not having one.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

I doubt that they would lose when charging for the cancellation. However, I will agree that it certainly wouldn't hurt for them to spell it out like Lyft does. While I can't say they have actually done something wrong (at least not with this, there are plenty of other things hehe), making something clearer wouldn't be a bad thing.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Demon said:


> LOL. Please show me where I said it was the driver's responsibility.


Cracks me up when people from ALL OVER THE COUNTRY start talking about 'the law'.
"The law" is whatever it is WHERE YOU ARE.

The guy from Florida can be right when he's talking to the guy from California, and the gal from Minnesota. They can all be right, and be arguing about being 'right' and they all are.



Pawtism said:


> Discrimination lawsuits are my thing, on the off chance it actually went to court, they'd lose, quickly, which is why it would almost certainly never make it to court.


Discrimination is not illegal, unless it impacts one or more of the protected classes.
Age, national origin, religion, race, gender ... a few others.
It is legal to discriminate against people who are not prepared. Or people who can't pay you.

There was a case in Los Angeles a few years back where a landlord refused to rent to someone because of the renter was a lawyer. The landlord testified that lawyers were ''too troublesome, to litigious''. The complainant lost because the judge found amongst other things, that "occupation is not a protected class."

You can 'discriminate' against someone if they have bad breath (just make sure they not a black, female, gay, Jewish, disabled person with their support ostrich.)


----------



## forqalso (Jun 1, 2015)

What do we do if the pax has a baby and a service animal?


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

forqalso said:


> What do we do if the pax has a baby and a service animal?


Look at the service animal, then the baby ... and ask which is which.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

UberBastid said:


> Cracks me up when people from ALL OVER THE COUNTRY start talking about 'the law'.
> "The law" is whatever it is WHERE YOU ARE.
> 
> The guy from Florida can be right when he's talking to the guy from California, and the gal from Minnesota. They can all be right, and be arguing about being 'right' and they all are.
> ...


With the exception that 'it's legal to discriminate against those "who can't pay you"'(as that is going to open the door to a slew of class arguments), you are absolutely correct. Which is why this (as a discrimination claim) would almost certainly never even make it to court and if it did they'd lose, quickly.

Another example is military (no, I'm not anti military and, in fact, served in the Army myself). That's one of those things people assume is a protected class but isn't.

There was also a landlord who refused to rent to military personnel, but he was consistent on it and gave a slew of reasons, not discrimination from a legal standpoint.

Rude certainly, but not illegal (at least federally, as you pointed out, in some states there may be state laws against it).



forqalso said:


> What do we do if the pax has a baby and a service animal?


You decline based on the lack of a car seat (never even mention the dog), report to uber right away and save your dash cam footage.


----------



## Ride Nights & Weekends (Jan 5, 2018)

Demon said:


> Why should the pax pay if the driver chooses not to take them?
> 
> So that brings us back to where does it say it's up to the parent?
> 
> Nothing is stopping the driver from having a car seat.


Car seat is not a requirement to drive for Uber/Lyft. Be responsible. If you were giving a friend with a kid a ride then would you be expected to provide a carseat?



Demon said:


> I agree fully it isn't rocket science. It's very simple, either the TOS says it is the parent's responsibility to provide a car seat or it doesn't. Being that the TOS makes no mention of it, it is not the parent's responsibility to have one.
> 
> The cancel fee is for when a pax cancels for some reason. This isn't what we're discussing, in this situation the driver chooses to cancel, so my question stands, why should the passenger be charged for doing everything they should and the driver choosing to cancel the ride?
> 
> ...


Youre misguided.

Do you no charge cancel a no show as well?


----------



## Midnight mile (Jan 30, 2018)

Of course a car seat. But letting that kid fry in the desert sun? That’s criminal. Get a frickin hat.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Demon said:


> I agree fully it isn't rocket science. It's very simple, either the TOS says it is the parent's responsibility to provide a car seat or it doesn't. Being that the TOS makes no mention of it, it is not the parent's responsibility to have one.
> 
> The cancel fee is for when a pax cancels for some reason. This isn't what we're discussing, in this situation the driver chooses to cancel, so my question stands, why should the passenger be charged for doing everything they should and the driver choosing to cancel the ride?
> 
> ...


The TOS is not the authority to assign such reponsibility. Your state and local laws do. The TOS states you much abide by such applicable laws .


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

steveK2016 said:


> The TOS is not the authority to assign such reponsibility. Your state and local laws do. The TOS states you much abide by such applicable laws .


And it's already been shown that state law puts that responsibility on the driver.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

Demon said:


> And it's already been shown that state law puts that responsibility on the driver.


As someone pointed out earlier, that depends on the state. Most states put the violation on the driver (and are silent on who is required to provide it), the language of a few states law actually specifies "Parent or Guardian" as being required. In the end though, almost every state puts the fine on the driver (as the driver shouldn't move the vehicle without one), which is why we are allowed to cancel.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Demon said:


> And it's already been shown that state law puts that responsibility on the driver.


Which state? Ya know how many we have?
The Federal Gov't hasn't totally cracked down on states, they still allow them to make their own vehicle codes.
Are you talking about Alaska? Montana?


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

Demon said:


> And it's already been shown that state law puts that responsibility on the driver.


Indiana uses the term "parents and caregivers" for example. In the end though, the fine will always be on the driver. That's because a violation hasn't occurred until the vehicle is moving and the driver is the one moving it.

You're fighting a losing battle. From a legal standpoint, they included in their agreements the language the the users had to "comply with all local laws", and a car seat is a law, thus no car seat, no trip. People are still confusing Uber with cabs. Many states have laws specifically excluding cabs from having to have car seats (since you're too lazy to do you own research, I'll give you the example of NY) while others, even for cabs, still require it (for example CA). Laws change depending where you go, which is why Uber included the "comply with all local laws" part (they couldn't possibly have included every situation). That's cabs though, not Uber. If you happen to be something like an UberTaxi maybe you don't have to worry about it. But the rest of us do.

Bottom line, no car seat, no trip. I will agree with you that they probably should just make a blanket statement like Lyft does. Take that up with Uber though. You go right ahead and take a ticket (or worse) for driving a kiddo with no car seat if you want. I'll give them a $5 education on proper parenting instead.

BTW, if you wanted to make your argument more about how Uber should make a blanket statement like Lyft does, I'd pursue it from the confusion aspect. For example the law in the great State of Texas (which is probably my favorite place in the world and I can't wait to move back there soon), clearly exempts cabs from having car seats, but does that include Uber? The average person looking at the law probably doesn't know how to properly translate "operating a vehicle transporting passengers for hire, excluding third-party transport service providers when transporting clients pursuant to a contract to provide nonemergency Medicaid transportation;".

In fact, even being well versed in the law, I could make the argument that an Uber driver is "operating a vehicle transporting passengers for hire" and is not a "third-party transport service providers when transporting clients pursuant to a contract to provide nonemergency Medicaid transportation". While I haven't yet done any research on specific Uber cases (case law) that might have clarified this, even someone in the legal field could translate that as not needing a car seat for an Uber (based on local laws).

So there it gets dicey. Lyft is covered. Their policy makes it clear, no car seat, no ride (I could collect fees on them all day). In Texas, they might be able to get away with not being charged a cancellation fee for not having a car seat with Uber's current policy. If Uber wants to save themselves some headaches based on the potential for confusion, they should probably just make a blanket statement like Lyft.

There you go, I've given you a valid argument, run ye forth and present it to Uber.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Demon said:


> And it's already been shown that state law puts that responsibility on the driver.


Well then your state law puts the responsibility on the driver foe all his pax to be properly restrained, but is he responsible for providing such equipment?

No he is not, not on rideshare

So if parents do not supply, they are not prepared for the ride in the same way as if they weren't toes on curb by 5 minutes after arrival.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

An intelligent parent (there really should be an intelligence test required to become a parent, that would solve so many problems) would solve the whole issue by using something like this.

https://www.buybuybaby.com/store/pr...1YM7hmgtquflylI4ib1zirBIjX1FhmFBoCoSkQAvD_BwE


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

I had a family that brought this

http://www.mifold.com

I was about to tell them no when the mom pulled this from her purse. Its 100% rated as good as any full size booster seat. Instead of traditional boosters that lifts the child up to a safe seat belt height, this lowers the belt down to the same safe height.

Easier for mom's.to have in purse but it is small enough that a dad could put in back pockets of loose fitting dad jeans. Skinny Jean wearing dads may not apply .


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

That's a good one for kids of that age too.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Pawtism said:


> That's a good one for kids of that age too.


Yes any.younger, like those needing full car seats, any reasonable, respectful and most importantly responsible parent would bring the appropriate safety device for their child. Regardless of the law, the parent is ultimately responsible for the safety of their child.


----------



## Tr4vis Ka1anick (Oct 2, 2016)

SuzeCB said:


> And where would we store the seat, if we're expected to accept luggage and the like? And how many seats should we carry? Both infant AND boosters...
> .


Yeah, like when lilCindy had all her luggage and friends. Unless she agreed to sit in the child seat. Which might be appropriate in her case.


----------



## UsedToBeAPartner (Sep 19, 2016)

Demon said:


> When did it become the parent's responsibility in a TNC?


When did it become the responsibility of a parent to take care of their child? Is that really what you are asking?


----------



## somedriverguy (Sep 6, 2016)

Demon said:


> When did it become the parent's responsibility in a TNC?


Of course, everyone *except* the parent is responsible for the child.



TheAntMiami said:


> And then the pax complains with a discrimination lawsuit and Uber/Lyft deactivate you. It's a lose/lose situation.
> 
> And what happens when the pax claims discrimination and Uber/Lyft doesn't investigate and there is no dash cam and driver is deactivated????


Those damn service children!


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

EzPz Fix










Of course NYC pays their drivers better, but pure and simple, just add the option and if there are no cars with 'Car Seat' then parents can wait or go purchases one that they use when Ubering.


----------



## somedriverguy (Sep 6, 2016)

UberLaLa said:


> EzPz Fix
> 
> View attachment 201552
> 
> ...


Its a good thing that UBER allows the drivers to recoup their investment in a car seat at the rate of 0.0/mile and 0.0/per minute. Should only take a few trips to pay for one that way.


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

somedriverguy said:


> Its a good thing that UBER allows the drivers to recoup their investment in a car seat at the rate of 0.0/mile and 0.0/per minute. Should only take a few trips to pay for one that way.


Main point is drivers that do not want to deal with the 'car seat' issue (like myself) are automatically opted out. 



Pawtism said:


> An intelligent parent (there really should be an intelligence test required to become a parent, that would solve so many problems) would solve the whole issue by using something like this.
> 
> https://www.buybuybaby.com/store/pr...1YM7hmgtquflylI4ib1zirBIjX1FhmFBoCoSkQAvD_BwE


Sorry, those dirty-azz wheels not going on my leather seats...okay, I'll put down a towel 

And only $499!


----------



## somedriverguy (Sep 6, 2016)

UberLaLa said:


> Main point is drivers that do not want to deal with the 'car seat' issue (like myself) are automatically opted out.


Meaning no one who needs a car seat ever calls you? Ever? All the pax just up and learned how to read and follow the laws because UBER added an option to the order screen that they regularly ignore and/or purposefully assume doesn't apply to them?

I love you man but this won't solve the problem. It'll just make it more infuriating when you have to waste 15 minutes explaining to king tard she could have just gotten what she wanted with a minimum of effort but instead she chose to waste everyone's time cuz pool is cheaper. (Not that you or I will ever accept a pool but you know what I'm getting at here)


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

somedriverguy said:


> Meaning no one who needs a car seat ever calls you? Ever? All the pax just up and learned how to read and follow the laws because UBER added an option to the order screen that they regularly ignore and/or purposefully assume doesn't apply to them?
> 
> I love you man but this won't solve the problem. It'll just make it more infuriating when you have to waste 15 minutes explaining to king tard she could have just gotten what she wanted with a minimum of effort but instead she chose to waste everyone's time cuz pool is cheaper. (Not that you or I will ever accept a pool but you know what I'm getting at here)


Since Uber introduced WAV, I have not had any Assist Requests. Absolutely, lame pax can/will still order UberX/Poo and expect a car seat or worse, to let their kid ride without, but at least New York Uber is attempting to make things a bit better...


----------



## THE MAN! (Feb 13, 2015)

Story shock & all. So the little pricks a hero now. Uber could do a lot more to lessen the problem but more concern about illegals rights. How did that turn out Uber the illegal in California raping the 4 females? Lucky those weren't my daughters. Or Ole' Travis & Dara would be enjoying there vacation high in the sky!


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

UberLaLa said:


> Main point is drivers that do not want to deal with the 'car seat' issue (like myself) are automatically opted out.
> 
> Sorry, those dirty-azz wheels not going on my leather seats...okay, I'll put down a towel
> 
> And only $499!


There are cheaper ones on Amazon, was just using that as an example. But the price isn't the point, even if they were all $499, then that's how much it would be. You can't put a price on your child's safety. Guess the loser parents will have to buy one less amp (or a bit less dope) instead...

And the stroller part collapses and goes in the trunk..


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Your post is totally out of left field.

No one in this thread has ever made the claim that having a car seat is a requirement for driving with either platform.

I don't charge my friends for rides, and if one didn't have a car seat I certainly wouldn't charge them for the mere act of asking for a ride.



Ride Nights & Weekends said:


> Car seat is not a requirement to drive for Uber/Lyft. Be responsible. If you were giving a friend with a kid a ride then would you be expected to provide a carseat?
> 
> Youre misguided.
> 
> Do you no charge cancel a no show as well?


It's literally not a no show if the customer is toes on the curb with everything they are required to have.



Pawtism said:


> Indiana uses the term "parents and caregivers" for example. In the end though, the fine will always be on the driver. That's because a violation hasn't occurred until the vehicle is moving and the driver is the one moving it.
> 
> You're fighting a losing battle. From a legal standpoint, they included in their agreements the language the the users had to "comply with all local laws", and a car seat is a law, thus no car seat, no trip. People are still confusing Uber with cabs. Many states have laws specifically excluding cabs from having to have car seats (since you're too lazy to do you own research, I'll give you the example of NY) while others, even for cabs, still require it (for example CA). Laws change depending where you go, which is why Uber included the "comply with all local laws" part (they couldn't possibly have included every situation). That's cabs though, not Uber. If you happen to be something like an UberTaxi maybe you don't have to worry about it. But the rest of us do.
> 
> ...


That's a very high level of ascription.

My point isn't that a driver needs to have a car seat, in fact I've already stated they don't. My point is that a "no show" fee on the Uber platform won't hold up because Uber isn't telling the pax they need a car seat.

This is just one of the many reasons I choose not to do business with Uber, so there's no need for me to present anything to them.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

Demon said:


> Your post is totally out of left field.
> 
> No one in this thread has ever made the claim that having a car seat is a requirement for driving with either platform.
> 
> ...


I think you're just trolling now. You purposely sidestepped the point of his/her post. If your friend (or anyone) asked you for a ride you'd expect them to provide the car seat for the kiddos, right? It's really just common sense.

The cancellation fee is for wasting the drivers time, pure and simple. Stop with the trolling. Yes, uber should probably make a blanket statement like Lyft does, but it's sad that they'd even need to.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Pawtism said:


> I think you're just trolling now. You purposely sidestepped the point of his/her post. If your friend (or anyone) asked you for a ride you'd expect them to provide the car seat for the kiddos, right? It's really just common sense.
> 
> The cancellation fee is for wasting the drivers time, pure and simple. Stop with the trolling. Yes, uber should probably make a blanket statement like Lyft does, but it's sad that they'd even need to.


It's not trolling to point out someone is comparing apples to oranges, and I've been crystal clear that any driver should not transport a child without a car seat. It's literally not sidestepping anything when someone asks something that has already been addressed in the thread.

It's you who keeps sidestepping the issue I continually raise. Who is doing the canceling, the driver, or pax? In this case it's the driver, and their time and resources have been wasted by Uber, not the pax, who in this situation has fully completed their end of the TOS. So if the pax has done everything Uber has told them to do, why should the pax be charged a fee?


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

Demon said:


> It's not trolling to point out someone is comparing apples to oranges, and I've been crystal clear that any driver should not transport a child without a car seat. It's literally not sidestepping anything when someone asks something that has already been addressed in the thread.
> 
> It's you who keeps sidestepping the issue I continually raise. Who is doing the canceling, the driver, or pax? In this case it's the driver, and their time and resources have been wasted by Uber, not the pax, who in this situation has fully completed their end of the TOS. So if the pax has done everything Uber has told them to do, why should the pax be charged a fee?


Asked and answered... Because they weren't prepared. Uber told them they need to know and comply with local laws. In both my and your market those local laws require a car seat (in your market, even for cabs). Therefore they have not done everything uber has told them to do, and are not prepared.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Pawtism said:


> Asked and answered... Because they weren't prepared. Uber told them they need to know and comply with local laws. In both my and your market those local laws require a car seat (in your market, even for cabs). Therefore they have not done anything everything uber has told them to do, and are not prepared.


You literally haven't answered the question. As I've pointed out, several times, on the Uber platform, the pax was fully prepared. You're changing the situation, and then answering a question that I haven't asked. No one is denying that a car seat is required, but as you have stated the law doesn't say who has to provide it.

I imagine when you or anyone checks into a hotel they aren't expected to bring their own smoke detectors and then charged a fee when arriving in the hotel without them.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

Demon said:


> You literally haven't answered the question. As I've pointed out, several times, on the Uber platform, the pax was fully prepared. You're changing the situation, and then answering a question that I haven't asked. No one is denying that a car seat is required, but as you have stated the law doesn't say who has to provide it.
> 
> I imagine when you or anyone checks into a hotel they aren't expected to bring their own smoke detectors and then charged a fee when arriving in the hotel without them.


It is not reasonable to expect an Uber driver or a cab to just happen to have a car seat available. It is reasonable to expect a hotel to have smoke detectors. You're doing what you're accusing me of, changing the situation.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Pawtism said:


> It is not reasonable to expect an Uber driver or a cab to just happen to have a car seat available. It is reasonable to expect a hotel to have smoke detectors. You're doing what you're accusing me of, changing the situation.


What makes it reasonable?
No, I'm not. I presented you with an analogous situation to the one we're discussing.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

No, you’re trying to twist things. Do you honestly believe that all uber drivers should have a car seat available?


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Pawtism said:


> No, you're trying to twist things. Do you honestly believe that all uber drivers should have a car seat available?


I'm not, you're simply sidestepping the question and asking me something I've already answered at least three times.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

no, you’ve said that you don’t believe that drivers should drive kids without a car seat (which we agree on). You haven’t said if drivers should have to provide them. I’ve already agreed that uber should probably make a blanket statement like lyft (and even pointed out how a state like Texas could create confusion). Is that you’re only point? That they should make a blanket statement so it’s clear? Or are you actually saying that the drivers should provide the car seats? You want clarity, let’s clear it up...


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Pawtism said:


> no, you've said that you don't believe that drivers should drive kids without a car seat (which we agree on). You haven't said if drivers should have to provide them. I've already agreed that uber should probably make a blanket statement like lyft (and even pointed out how a state like Texas could create confusion). Is that you're only point? That they should make a blanket statement so it's clear? Or are you actually saying that the drivers should provide the car seats? You want clarity, let's clear it up...


Again, drivers don't have to provide car seats, they can if they want to, but don't have to. Now that that has been cleared up, I'm sure you'll finally answer my question.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

You just answered your own question. It’s not reasonable for a driver to just happen to have a car seat, they simply don’t have to. I don’t have to have a slushee machine in my car either, so expecting me to is unreasonable. I do have to have seatbelts in my car though so it’s reasonable to expect that I will. The hotel does have to have smoke detectors, so it’s reasonable to assume they will.

As a parent, providing for the physical and legal needs of your child are always (morally and legally) the parents responsibility, so it’s reasonable to expect them to provide it. If they fail to, they are not prepared properly and will get a cancellation fee.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Pawtism said:


> You just answered your own question. It's not reasonable for a driver to just happen to have a car seat, they simply don't have to. I don't have to have a slushee machine in my car either, so expecting me to is unreasonable. I do have to have seatbelts in my car though so it's reasonable to expect that I will. The hotel does have to have smoke detectors, so it's reasonable to assume they will.
> 
> As a parent, providing for the physical and legal needs of your child are always (morally and legally) the parents responsibility, so it's reasonable to expect them to provide it. If they fail to, they are not prepared properly and will get a cancellation fee.


You're using ascription again. 
I never said it's unreasonable for a driver to have a car seat, Uber expects some drivers to have a car seat in 4 cities. I said drivers don't have to have a car seat to use the platform. I never said it's unreasonable for them to have it.

Parents don't need car seats in buses, taxis, or trains. So if there's a parent who has traditionally used these forms of transportation and after carefully reading the Uber TOS sees that there is no requirement for a pax to have a car seat, how does that make it reasonable for a pax to have one?

There's also the matter of the question you keep sidestepping is that if an Uber pax has everything they need, why are you suggesting they get hit with a cancel fee?


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

Demon said:


> You're using ascription again.
> I never said it's unreasonable for a driver to have a car seat, Uber expects some drivers to have a car seat in 4 cities. I said drivers don't have to have a car seat to use the platform. I never said it's unreasonable for them to have it.
> 
> Parents don't need car seats in buses, taxis, or trains. So if there's a parent who has traditionally used these forms of transportation and after carefully reading the Uber TOS sees that there is no requirement for a pax to have a car seat, how does that make it reasonable for a pax to have one?
> ...


And you're using a falacy. In many markets (including yours) they are required to have a car seat even for taxis. And in Uber's TOS it does require them to know and comply with local laws (so if they are in a different market, they are supposed to find out what they need). Therefore, again, they do not have everything they need. THAT is why they get the cancel fee.

And you misunderstood me on the unreasonable for a driver to have a car seat part, we seem to agree on that. I would go a step further and say it's therefore reasonable to expect the pax to provide one. I've also agreed with you that uber should probably make a blanket statement as states like Texas could be confusing and even could result in a cancel fee not sticking.

From even your point of view wouldn't uber making a blanket statement like lyft solve the issue?


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Pawtism said:


> And you're using a falacy. In many markets (including yours) they are required to have a car seat even for taxis. And in Uber's TOS it does require them to know and comply with local laws (so if they are in a different market, they are supposed to find out what they need). Therefore, again, they do not have everything they need. THAT is why they get the cancel fee.
> 
> And you misunderstood me on the unreasonable for a driver to have a car seat part, we seem to agree on that. I would go a step further and say it's therefore reasonable to expect the pax to provide one. I've also agreed with you that uber should probably make a blanket statement as states like Texas could be confusing and even could result in a cancel fee not sticking.
> 
> From even your point of view wouldn't uber making a blanket statement like lyft solve the issue?


No fallacy here. In my market Uber provides the car seat, and Mears, a local taxi company states on its website that the parent should provide the car seat.

You continue to want to argue a point of fact. According to Uber's TOS the pax has everything they need. In looking at Lyft's policy and Mears policy it seems that the industry standard is being set as the company letting the parent know if a car seat will be required or not.

You're still using ascription. I've stated that the driver doesn't NEED to have a car seat. I've never said it's unreasonable. I would argue that it's much more reasonable for the driver to carry the car seat than the parent.

My whole point here is that Uber needs to make a clear statement on this so there is no confusion and that both driver & pax know what they are in for. With Uber not having a policy on this it screws over both the driver & the pax.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

I have (and do) agreed the they should just make a blanket statement (like Lyft) that it needs to be provided. While your (nor my) markets currently have a conflict, I did point out a potential one in Texas. It would make things clearer and that is almost always a good thing.

However, that doesn’t mean that, if I were driving in your market and have a pax who chose not to select the Uber car seat option, that I shouldn’t give them a cancel fee. The TOS does say that they need to know and comply with local laws. I’ll admit it’s not terribly clear, but it is there, so in most markets, the cancel would stand up. Furthermore, it’s common sense. As I pointed out, even regular cabs in your market require car seats, and is “local law”. 

It would be better if they just made a blanket statement though. We’ll just have to leave it at agreeing on that at least.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Pawtism said:


> I have (and do) agree the they should just make a blanket statement (like Lyft) that it needs to be provided. While your (nor my) markets currently have a conflict, I did point out a potential one in Texas. It would make things clearer and that is almost always a good thing.
> 
> However, that doesn't mean that, if I were driving in your market and have a pax who chose not to select the Uber car seat option, that I shouldn't give them a cancel fee. The TOS does say that they need to know and comply with local laws. I'll admit it's not terribly clear, but it is there, so in most markets, the cancel would stand up. Furthermore, it's common sense. As I pointed out, even regular cabs in your market require car seats, and is "local law".
> 
> It would be better if they just made a blanket statement though. We'll just have to leave it at agreeing on that at least.


I have no problem issuing a cancel fee if there is a car seat option available and the pax doesn't take it.


----------



## Duber12 (Dec 18, 2015)

AzAppDriver said:


> You should receive cancellation fee which in many cases you'll make more than taking the ride .


However, this type of cancellation should not go against the driver. Unfortunately, it does.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

We can now cancel for no car seat, and so long as we sit for the required 5 minutes, it holds. We get paid. That's it. Same for unaccompanied minor.

This entire thread is now moot.


----------



## Woohaa (Jan 15, 2017)

AzAppDriver said:


> Drivers should educate themselves on car seat laws, and cancel these ride requests. I am quick to cancel when pax have children and no car seat.


Me too. I'm not risking a ticket for some Lyft pax


----------



## RynoHawk (Mar 15, 2017)

This thread is full of "LOL". This issue is very, very, simple.
Driver gets ping. Goes to pick up and finds parent(s) with small child sans appropriate car seat. Driver tells them why he cannot take them and cancels, collects cancel fee. May even CYA and report to Uber. Drives off to find next ride.

Parent(s) not prepared. It's that simple. Uber does not have to spell out the requirements what any reasonable parent should already know. I have not searched, but I have not heard any driver getting in trouble for refusing a ride due to lack of car seat and getting their cancel fee taken away, especially if they reported first.

This is way easier than the service animal issues.


----------



## ShinyAndChrome (Aug 18, 2017)

Demon said:


> When did it become the parent's responsibility in a TNC?


Shouldn't a parent care more about their kid than an uber driver? The report is a bit silly because they could have gotten most uberx to take 5 pax, too. Drivers are not trained, are paid so little that rejecting rides is hard, etc.


----------



## Taxi tony (Oct 10, 2017)

This is exactly what happens when you put weekend warrior drivers behind the wheel of a vehicle for hire. Uber in so rich because their drivers are so broke.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

ShinyAndChrome said:


> Shouldn't a parent care more about their kid than an uber driver? The report is a bit silly because they could have gotten most uberx to take 5 pax, too. Drivers are not trained, are paid so little that rejecting rides is hard, etc.


No one has said anything about who cares more for the kid, the answer is obviously the parent. This is yet another reason why people should NOT do business with Uber.



RynoHawk said:


> This thread is full of "LOL". This issue is very, very, simple.
> Driver gets ping. Goes to pick up and finds parent(s) with small child sans appropriate car seat. Driver tells them why he cannot take them and cancels, collects cancel fee. May even CYA and report to Uber. Drives off to find next ride.
> 
> Parent(s) not prepared. It's that simple. Uber does not have to spell out the requirements what any reasonable parent should already know. I have not searched, but I have not heard any driver getting in trouble for refusing a ride due to lack of car seat and getting their cancel fee taken away, especially if they reported first.
> ...


Reports the parent for what exactly?
I've asked several times on this thread, collects a cancel fee why?


----------



## ImSkittles (Jan 6, 2018)

Demon said:


> No one has said anything about who cares more for the kid, the answer is obviously the parent. This is yet another reason why people should NOT do business with Uber.
> 
> Reports the parent for what exactly?
> I've asked several times on this thread, collects a cancel fee why?


You have been told already . the cancel fee is because the pax wasn't prepared and that wastes the drivers time. Car seats are NOT a "standard" feature of an UberX car!

The smoke detector example was just silly because that would be a "standard" feature for ALL hotels . A roll away cot would have been a better example and guess what... The lower end hotels won't always (if ever) have a cot available!!!

Uber X cars are BASIC low end rides. You can't expect a car seat. BTW, how MANY car seats do you think a driver should carry around? Do you realize there are different types of car seats for the different ages of children? Plus a parent could have their 2 WEEK old baby plus a 2 year old and a 6 year old! Where does your stupidity stop? Where is the Uber X driver supposed to store all those car seats plus have trunk space for a couple pieces of luggage for airport runs?

Parents need to use their brain or maybe they shouldn't be breeding. The law dictates that a car seat is required for children... if you aren't prepared to follow the law then don't expect your bargain basement driver to pay for (or lose money for) your stupidity.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

UberBeamer said:


> Infants and toddlers are an easy call, but what about kids that are straddling that finer line around 8 years old and 4'9". Are we supposed to carry around a tape measure and measure their height ourselves? Oh sorry lady, your kid is 4'8 1/2" too bad.


I ask the pax how old the kid is, and get both the question and answer on my dashcam. Boom! Covered!


----------



## dctcmn (Sep 21, 2017)

UberBeamer said:


> Infants and toddlers are an easy call, but what about kids that are straddling that finer line around 8 years old and 4'9". Are we supposed to carry around a tape measure and measure their height ourselves? Oh sorry lady, your kid is 4'8 1/2" too bad.


This is exactly what I do and I don't see why it's unreasonable. The driver is the final gate keeper for the TOS.


----------



## jazzapt (May 16, 2016)

I always laugh when I read that a rider thinks an Uber drive should provide a car seat. What they don’t understand is that riders try to get children of all ages (including babies) into our cars. And depending on that age, local laws require a specific type of car seat. So are we to carry all different types of seats (including a base for infant carriers)? Where do these fit?

I am reminded of a rider who a few weeks ago started a thread where she thinks she is entitled to the whole trunk of her Uber to fit the luggage for her and her 3 friends. We can’t win. Are we supposed to provide a space for luggage, or fill our trunks with car seats?


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

ImSkittles said:


> You have been told already . the cancel fee is because the pax wasn't prepared and that wastes the drivers time. Car seats are NOT a "standard" feature of an UberX car!
> 
> The smoke detector example was just silly because that would be a "standard" feature for ALL hotels . A roll away cot would have been a better example and guess what... The lower end hotels won't always (if ever) have a cot available!!!
> 
> ...


I'm rolling my eyes pretty hard at your post.

It's been proven that the pax is 100% ready to go per Uber's TOS. If the pax is ready to go within the time limit, they've got everything they need. So, that's not on the pax. You can type it a 1,000 times but you'll still be 100% in the wrong on that.

The smoke detector is a valid example, your example of the cot is not because hotels include that in the price.

It is entirely up to the driver to decide how many car seats they want, or if they want to have no car seats at all.

You don't have anything to offer to the conversations except name calling because you have not researched this. I suggest researching the topic and coming back when you're more informed.



jazzapt said:


> I always laugh when I read that a rider thinks an Uber drive should provide a car seat. What they don't understand is that riders try to get children of all ages (including babies) into our cars. And depending on that age, local laws require a specific type of car seat. So are we to carry all different types of seats (including a base for infant carriers)? Where do these fit?
> 
> I am reminded of a rider who a few weeks ago started a thread where she thinks she is entitled to the whole trunk of her Uber to fit the luggage for her and her 3 friends. We can't win. Are we supposed to provide a space for luggage, or fill our trunks with car seats?


She did raise a valid point. When a pax hires a car, do they get use of the trunk?


----------



## RynoHawk (Mar 15, 2017)

Demon said:


> The smoke detector is a valid example, your example of the cot is not because hotels include that in the price.


Smoke detectors are required by law to be installed in just about every hotel in the country, so not a valid argument as the hotel is bound by law to provide. Many hotels (if not most) will charge extra for an additional rollaway bed or cot in the room (if space permits).

Small children are required by law to be in car seats, however nowhere does it say that a driver must provide a car seat when a parent requests an Uber or calls a cab. If a parent does not have a car seat, then I am cancelling to avoid breaking the law and I'm charging a fee because the parent should know better or be prepared.

When something is not written in stone, a court or an arbitrator will make a decision on what would be reasonable to presume in such a case. In this case, it would be reasonable to presume that a parent is responsible to bring their own car seat if they have a small child or baby with them as a standard rideshare car may not have one as neither Uber nor Lyft specifically state or advertise that drivers *will* provide a car seat. Now if they start a service such as UberTyke that caters specifically to parents with small children, that would maybe be a presumption that the car will have a car seat available, but again only if they advertise it.


----------



## ImSkittles (Jan 6, 2018)

Demon said:


> It's been proven that the pax is 100% ready to go per Uber's TOS. If the pax is ready to go within the time limit, they've got everything they need. So, that's not on the pax. You can type it a 1,000 times but you'll still be 100% in the wrong on that.


LMAO at your statement of the pax being 100% ready to go. If they are 100% ready to go then why aren't they leaving? Apparently you are the only one who can't understand where the responsibility ultimately falls.

If a pax approaches the Uber car that he ordered and he's butt ass naked, is it the responsibility of the driver to dress the pax?

A child riding in a car without a car seat is illegal with UberX and it's the parents responsibility to know that. It's also illegal to be naked in public and it's the pax's responsibility to know that. The driver would get in trouble with either scenario if a cop pulled him over.

So I guess your next stupid scenario will involve a naked pax (with toes on the curb and ready to go) because Uber doesn't specifically address the rules of attire in their TOS.


----------



## dctcmn (Sep 21, 2017)

Demon said:


> She did raise a valid point. When a pax hires a car, do they get use of the trunk?


UberX does not require any trunk space to be available for passenger use.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

dctcmn said:


> UberX does not require any trunk space to be available for passenger use.


Cite?


----------



## dctcmn (Sep 21, 2017)

Demon said:


> Cite?


https://help.uber.com/h/2ddf30ca-64bd-4143-9ef2-e3bc6b929948

All vehicles operating on the Uber platform must meet the following requirements:

- Your Vehicle must have 4 doors and be able to transport a minimum of 4 passengers
- Your vehicle must be 15 model years old or newer. If the vehicle is older than 10 model years it cannot have more than 150,000 miles on it. (This requirement varies by market.)
- Your vehicle cannot be salvaged, reconstructed, or rebuilt. Rental vehicles are not allowed on the Uber platform.
- Your vehicle cannot have any cosmetic damage, missing pieces, commercial branding or taxi paint jobs.


----------



## jazzapt (May 16, 2016)

Demon said:


> She did raise a valid point. When a pax hires a car, do they get use of the trunk?


There is nothing in Uber's TOS that guarantees a rider space in the trunk. The only guarantee is a place to put your fanny. That said, as drivers, we know we could be subject to airport trips, so it is probably a wise idea to keep the trunk as free as possible when logged in (therefore loading it with car seats is not the best idea).


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

dctcmn said:


> https://help.uber.com/h/2ddf30ca-64bd-4143-9ef2-e3bc6b929948
> 
> All vehicles operating on the Uber platform must meet the following requirements:
> 
> ...


Doesn't say anything about the trunk.



jazzapt said:


> There is nothing in Uber's TOS that guarantees a rider space in the trunk. The only guarantee is a place to put your fanny. That said, as drivers, we know we could be subject to airport trips, so it is probably a wise idea to keep the trunk as free as possible when logged in (therefore loading it with car seats is not the best idea).


That's exactly my point, there's nothing in the TOS about trunk space which was why Cindy's point is valid.


----------



## ImSkittles (Jan 6, 2018)

Demon said:


> Doesn't say anything about the trunk.
> 
> That's exactly my point, there's nothing in the TOS about trunk space which was why Cindy's point is valid.


Are you really this ignorant?

While riding in an Uber X car&#8230; Do riders have the right to use the glove box as they see fit? Do riders have the right to use the center console as they see fit? Do riders have the right to fiddle with the controls in the car? Do riders have the right to eat and drink anything they want? Do riders have the right to bring a roadkill skunk into the car with them?

The TOS does not address these subjects so by your logic or should I say, your lack of logic, all of these things would be perfectly acceptable for a rider to expect.

I honestly believe that you created the lilCindy account. Do you think these arguments make you look smart? Well, I hate to break it to you but you're looking about as dumb as a bag of hammers right now.


----------



## dctcmn (Sep 21, 2017)

Demon said:


> Doesn't say anything about the trunk.
> 
> That's exactly my point, there's nothing in the TOS about trunk space which was why Cindy's point is valid.


If it is not addressed in the contract, it is not guaranteed. Four seatbelts and four doors is guaranteed. Trunk space is not.


----------



## Taxi tony (Oct 10, 2017)

That contract is about 150 pages long and at the end it clearly says this can be changed at any time. I'm sure somewhere in there they're going to have something to make them not liable, you can believe that.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

dctcmn said:


> If it is not addressed in the contract, it is not guaranteed. Four seatbelts and four doors is guaranteed. Trunk space is not.


By that logic there is nothing about car doors, headlights or wheels in the contract.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Demon said:


> By that logic there is nothing about car doors, headlights or wheels in the contract.





Demon said:


> By that logic there is nothing about car doors, headlights or wheels in the contract.


No stupido. Doors, headlights and wheels have safety and legal requirements mandated by law in order to pass inspections, hence no need to be redundant and mention them in the TOS.
I'll explain slowly:
I can be ticketed for operating an unsafe vehicle if any of the items you mentioned is missing. 
Uber's TOS prohibits using a damaged car ( dented doors, broken or inoperable head lights, flat tires etc) for ride share.
There's no law or any part of Uber'sTOS mandating the availability of trunk space for use by a rider. The only space you are guaranteed is that for your dumbass.

Please take a class I'm logic, stupido.
Your counter argument is weak.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Bro Olomide said:


> No stupido. Doors, headlights and wheels have safety and legal requirements mandated by law in order to pass inspections, hence no need to be redundant and mention them in the TOS.
> Please take a class I'm logic, stupido.
> Your counter argument is dumb.


Go back and read the post, it wasn't my logic, but it's good to know "you are logic".



ImSkittles said:


> Are you really this ignorant?
> 
> While riding in an Uber X car&#8230; Do riders have the right to use the glove box as they see fit? Do riders have the right to use the center console as they see fit? Do riders have the right to fiddle with the controls in the car? Do riders have the right to eat and drink anything they want? Do riders have the right to bring a roadkill skunk into the car with them?
> 
> ...


If the only thing you can muster in defense is name calling and comparing apples & oranges you would have been better off not posting.

We're not talking about the glove compartment, radio or center console, we're talking about the trunk, which is an industry standard.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Demon said:


> Go back and read the post, it wasn't my logic, but it's good to know "you are logic".
> 
> If the only thing you can muster in defense is name calling and comparing apples & oranges you would have been better off not posting.
> 
> We're not talking about the glove compartment, radio or center console, we're talking about the trunk, which is an industry standard.


Industry standard as per???? Trunk is available at the drivers discretion. I hate to break it to you, but one of the options available on the driver app's cancel screen is "rider had too much luggage." Canceling after 5 minutes and selecting that option has always earned me cancellation fees. Even "always bend over backwards for cheap riders at the driver's expense Uber," saw fit to make that concession to drivers. 
Wonder why?


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

RynoHawk said:


> The parent is responsible for providing the seat. It does not say in Uber TOS that the driver must provide this. If said parent does not provide a seat, then it's the driver's responsibility to refuse the ride because the driver is the one who will be cited if caught in most places. However, when I looked up Florida law, it says the "Supervising adult" is responsible. Either way, as a driver I would still refuse for the child's sake.


This only applies to vehicle for hire.
Since Uber succeeded in getting us our own special regulations we are Not vehicles for hire.

As such, in Florida the Uber Driver will be sited.

Anyone that doubts this read the law that went into effect July 1st.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Bro Olomide said:


> Industry standard as per???? Trunk is available at the drivers discretion. I hate to break it to you, but one of the options available on the driver app's cancel screen is "rider had too much luggage." Canceling after 5 minutes and selecting that option has always earned me cancellation fees. Even "always bend over backwards for cheap riders at the driver's expense Uber," saw fit to make that concession to drivers.
> Wonder why?


As per the industry.


----------



## dctcmn (Sep 21, 2017)

Demon said:


> By that logic there is nothing about car doors, headlights or wheels in the contract.


Actually the TOS specifically calls for four doors and also mandates each vehicle passing a vehicle inspection by an ASE certified mechanic (in my state). In that inspection, they check for things like functioning headlights and wheels. They do not measure for trunk volume in that inspection.


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

Demon said:


> I agree fully it isn't rocket science. It's very simple, either the TOS says it is the parent's responsibility to provide a car seat or it doesn't. Being that the TOS makes no mention of it, it is not the parent's responsibility to have one.
> 
> The cancel fee is for when a pax cancels for some reason. This isn't what we're discussing, in this situation the driver chooses to cancel, so my question stands, why should the passenger be charged for doing everything they should and the driver choosing to cancel the ride?
> 
> ...


Florida, specifically, puts the requ


Demon said:


> I agree fully it isn't rocket science. It's very simple, either the TOS says it is the parent's responsibility to provide a car seat or it doesn't. Being that the TOS makes no mention of it, it is not the parent's responsibility to have one.
> 
> The cancel fee is for when a pax cancels for some reason. This isn't what we're discussing, in this situation the driver chooses to cancel, so my question stands, why should the passenger be charged for doing everything they should and the driver choosing to cancel the ride?
> 
> ...


Cancel fee applies to ANY of the valid cancellation options Other Than "Do Not Charge".
Unaccompanied Minor. There is an option for that. Text the rider account that they are in violation of Ubers Terms of Service regarding unaccompanied minors. Inform them you will be notifying Uber Support of the attempted violation.
By then, either the rider will cancel (and you get your fee) or the 5 minutes will have expired and you Will receive your fee.

Same for Too Much Luggage and No Child Seat.

There is a reason these have been added to the list of reasons for cancellation.

The fact that the driver is facing citations if they allow a rider to break the law does not remove the requirement to have the car seat from the parent. It simply means the driver has to know the law and follow it.

Parents have the child, not the driver. So, no, I will Not carry every car seat variation for the maximum 3 children a single adult rider could have with them.

Because, not only can you be cited for them not being in a car seat...you can also be cited for them being in the WRONG car seat for the child's age/size.



Demon said:


> It's not trolling to point out someone is comparing apples to oranges, and I've been crystal clear that any driver should not transport a child without a car seat. It's literally not sidestepping anything when someone asks something that has already been addressed in the thread.
> 
> It's you who keeps sidestepping the issue I continually raise. Who is doing the canceling, the driver, or pax? In this case it's the driver, and their time and resources have been wasted by Uber, not the pax, who in this situation has fully completed their end of the TOS. So if the pax has done everything Uber has told them to do, why should the pax be charged a fee?


Uber requires, in the rider TOS that all local laws are yo be followed.
So, no open containers by passengers where that is illegal.
No illegal drugs possession or use, where illegal.
No putting a child in danger by not having YOUR child's car seat as required by law.

And, jist to make sure you get this straight.
All of the valid cancellation reasons that don't specify "Do Not Charge" receive a cancellation fee .


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Demon said:


> As per the industry.





Demon said:


> As per the industry.


Show it in writing where it specifically applies to the rideshare industry.
While you're at it, please don't conflate your entitled expectations with industry standards, numbnuts.


----------



## ImSkittles (Jan 6, 2018)

Demon said:


> We're not talking about the glove compartment, radio or center console, we're talking about the trunk, which is an industry standard.


I'm sorry that you cannot see your own flaws in the ridiculous things that you have said. First, you want a driver to carry all the car seats available for all of the different ages of children in the trunk! Second, you want all the trunk space available for the people going to the airport!

Maybe you need to stop, take a deep breath, and rethink how impossible your so called logic could possibly work out.

It's not rocket science, this is something an eight-year-old could see. The passenger with the children is responsible for his or her own children. If they are not prepared to take their children on a ride in an UberX then the driver has every right to charge them for a cancellation fee, for the simple reason that the (wannabe) passenger wasted the drivers time.


----------



## sellkatsell44 (Oct 25, 2015)

There’s reasoning with stupid.

There’s no reasoning with stubborn and stupid.

I just don’t do the latter.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

dctcmn said:


> Actually the TOS specifically calls for four doors and also mandates each vehicle passing a vehicle inspection by an ASE certified mechanic (in my state). In that inspection, they check for things like functioning headlights and wheels. They do not measure for trunk volume in that inspection.


That's super, but does nothing to address the lack of the TOS addressing the industry standard.



ImSkittles said:


> I'm sorry that you cannot see your own flaws in the ridiculous things that you have said. First, you want a driver to carry all the car seats available for all of the different ages of children in the trunk! Second, you want all the trunk space available for the people going to the airport!
> 
> Maybe you need to stop, take a deep breath, and rethink how impossible your so called logic could possibly work out.
> 
> It's not rocket science, this is something an eight-year-old could see. The passenger with the children is responsible for his or her own children. If they are not prepared to take their children on a ride in an UberX then the driver has every right to charge them for a cancellation fee, for the simple reason that the (wannabe) passenger wasted the drivers time.


Now you're resorting to ascription.

This is very simple, if Uber doesn't tell the parent to bring the car seat, and Uber does in fact charge for car seats, why should the parent pay when the TOS doesn't tell them to bring a car seat?
A business can't charge someone for something they didn't agree to pay for. It really is that simple. This is something drivers need to address with Uber as it puts both the driver & pax in a bad situation.



Bro Olomide said:


> Show it in writing where it specifically applies to the rideshare industry.
> While you're at it, please don't conflate your entitled expectations with industry standards, numbnuts.


More name calling because you can't address the facts. An industry standard isn't in writing, it's something that so many similar businesses have done it's what customers come to expect.



sellkatsell44 said:


> There's reasoning with stupid.
> 
> There's no reasoning with stubborn and stupid.
> 
> I just don't do the latter.


I guess I have more time and patience on my hands so I don't mind trying to get them to see logic.


----------



## sellkatsell44 (Oct 25, 2015)

Demon said:


> That's super, but does nothing to address the lack of the TOS addressing the industry standard.
> 
> Now you're resorting to ascription.
> 
> ...


Actually I was referring to you if you are the one going on and on about how the drivers should have a car seat handy for parents that have kids under a certain age and/or height with them when requesting Uber.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

sellkatsell44 said:


> Actually I was referring to you if you are the one going on and on about how the drivers should have a car seat handy for parents that have kids under a certain age and/or height with them when requesting Uber.


Nope. I've never said that. This is why I encourage reading the thread.


----------



## sellkatsell44 (Oct 25, 2015)

jazzapt said:


> I always laugh when I read that a rider thinks an Uber drive should provide a car seat. What they don't understand is that riders try to get children of all ages (including babies) into our cars. And depending on that age, local laws require a specific type of car seat. So are we to carry all different types of seats (including a base for infant carriers)? Where do these fit?
> 
> I am reminded of a rider who a few weeks ago started a thread where she thinks she is entitled to the whole trunk of her Uber to fit the luggage for her and her 3 friends. We can't win. Are we supposed to provide a space for luggage, or fill our trunks with car seats?





Demon said:


> I'm rolling my eyes pretty hard at your post.
> 
> It's been proven that the pax is 100% ready to go per Uber's TOS. If the pax is ready to go within the time limit, they've got everything they need. So, that's not on the pax. You can type it a 1,000 times but you'll still be 100% in the wrong on that.
> 
> ...





Demon said:


> Nope. I've never said that. This is why I encourage reading the thread.


The fact that you say lilcindy has a valid point (not surprised given your prior posts) is enough but okay, there are posts above where there's the arguement of what the passenger is paying for versus what the driver is suppose to provide. Both examples of car seat and trunk space is brought up...so folks may have gotten the hairs crossed but at the end of the day you're confusing.

"It is entirely up to the driver to decide how many car seats they want, or if they want to have no car seats at all.

You don't have anything to offer to the conversations except name calling because you have not researched this. I suggest researching the topic and coming back when you're more informed.

She did raise a valid point. When a pax hires a car, do they get use of the trunk?"

So do they?

Get the use of the trunk?

And is that the same as having a car seat? Do taxi drivers have car seats? Not in my experience. I've taken taxis, multiple times and multiple counties and often when I'm traveling so almost always my carryon goes into their trunk. I see no car seats.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

sellkatsell44 said:


> The fact that you say lilcindy has a valid point (not surprised given your prior posts) is enough but okay, there are posts above where there's the arguement of what the passenger is paying for versus what the driver is suppose to provide. Both examples of car seat and trunk space is brought up...so folks may have gotten the hairs crossed but at the end of the day you're confusing.
> 
> "It is entirely up to the driver to decide how many car seats they want, or if they want to have no car seats at all.
> 
> ...


That's pretty much my point. You were able to put your luggage in the trunk, because that's the industry standard when hiring a car. Taxi's don't need car seats, because it's not someone's personal vehicle, when driving for Uber the driver is using a personal vehicle.


----------



## sellkatsell44 (Oct 25, 2015)

Demon said:


> That's pretty much my point. You were able to put your luggage in the trunk, because that's the industry standard when hiring a car. Taxi's don't need car seats, because it's not someone's personal vehicle, when driving for Uber the driver is using a personal vehicle.


Lol

So taxis don't need a car seat because it's not a personal vehicle but because Uber is a driver using a personal vehicle than that means they should have a car seat?

And somehow they're both in the same industry, so it's an "industry standard" to be able to put luggage in the trunk, when hiring a car.

So both should have luggage space but only the PERSONAL CAR should have car seats, not the taxi.

Just saying this blows my mind, your logic....

For the record, I rarely take Uber to the airport because I usually use taxis...I know using Uber is someone's personal car so all I expect is a car seat. Not space for my luggage or car seat for my nephew. That's why I'm paying a slightly lower rate. But that's just my type of common sense.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

I think what he's trying to ultimately say is that Uber should include the requirement for the parents to provide the car seat directly in the TOS (something like what Lyft already does). 

While I agree with that (they should just outright say it, just because), that doesn't change the fact that the parents are going to get hit with the cancellation fee for not being prepared in the mean time.

Plus, he should probably just say "well Uber should just make that part of the TOS so there is no confusion", and leave it at that.


----------



## dctcmn (Sep 21, 2017)

Demon said:


> That's super, but does nothing to address the lack of the TOS addressing the industry standard.


Why should the TOS address "the industry standard"? The agreed-to contract between Uber and the customer and Uber and the vendor control each transaction.

That contract, agreed to by all parties, specifically mentions a minimum number of car doors & seat belts (but nothing about trunk space), as well as passing a vehicle inspection (which includes functioning wheels and headlights, but nothing about trunk space).


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Pawtism said:


> I think what he's trying to ultimately say is that Uber should include the requirement for the parents to provide the car seat directly in the TOS (something like what Lyft already does).
> 
> While I agree with that (they should just outright say it, just because), that doesn't change the fact that the parents are going to get hit with the cancellation fee for not being prepared in the mean time.
> 
> Plus, he should probably just say "well Uber should just make that part of the TOS so there is no confusion", and leave it at that.


I've literally said that quite a few times.


----------



## ImSkittles (Jan 6, 2018)

Demon said:


> I agree fully it isn't rocket science. It's very simple, either the TOS says it is the parent's responsibility to provide a car seat or it doesn't. Being that the TOS makes no mention of it, it is not the parent's responsibility to have one.


Let's try this a new way so that maybe you'll be able to see why people think you're so stupid. I'm going to use your exact phrasing for a different scenario.

"I agree fully it isn't rocket science. It's very simple, either the TOS says it's the passengers responsibility to have clothing on or it doesn't. Being that the TOS makes no mention of it, it's not the passengers responsibility to have clothing on."

^^^That is why you sound stupid^^^

Please try to think things through before making such a fool of yourself.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

Demon said:


> I've literally said that quite a few times.


Yes but then you say other stuff too (instead of leaving it at that)...

"That is why you fail." - Yoda


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

ImSkittles said:


> Let's try this a new way so that maybe you'll be able to see why people think you're so stupid. I'm going to use your exact phrasing for a different scenario.
> 
> "I agree fully it isn't rocket science. It's very simple, either the TOS says it's the passengers responsibility to have clothing on or it doesn't. Being that the TOS makes no mention of it, it's not the passengers responsibility to have clothing on."
> 
> ...


Another fail.

All you've got is name calling and changing the topic. There are laws about nudity.


----------



## ImSkittles (Jan 6, 2018)

Demon said:


> Another fail.
> 
> All you've got is name calling and changing the topic. There are laws about nudity.


Just like there are laws about children being in car seats. Once again I see you haven't thought things through before posting. It shouldn't be as difficult as you're making it. Just try thinking once... maybe you'll like it.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

ImSkittles said:


> Just like there are laws about children being in car seats. Once again I see you haven't thought things through before posting. It shouldn't be as difficult as you're making it. Just try thinking once... maybe you'll like it.


A parent can be out in public with no car seat, they can't be out with no clothes. You seem to have missed that point.


----------



## ImSkittles (Jan 6, 2018)

Demon said:


> A parent can be out in public with no car seat, they can't be out with no clothes. You seem to have missed that point.


Nudist colonies... Please think before you post...


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

ImSkittles said:


> Nudist colonies... Please think before you post...


Nudist colonies aren't out in public, they are private property.


----------



## ImSkittles (Jan 6, 2018)

Demon said:


> Nudist colonies aren't out in public, they are private property.


So? What's your point?

My point is it's not the drivers responsibility to dress the passenger AND the TOS mentions NOTHING about having clothes on.

Are you aware that the law states that little children have to be in car seats when riding in an Uber car? The law also states that people need clothing on while in public. Neither clothing nor car seats are the drivers responsibility to provide. Try thinking before you post 

Uber TOS says that local laws are to be followed.


----------



## MoreTips (Feb 13, 2017)

When a person decides to become a parent it is also then their responsibility to have a car seat available if they plan on putting said kid in a car. It's called being a responsible adult. Enough said.


----------



## ImSkittles (Jan 6, 2018)

Demon said:


> I've literally said that quite a few times.


Yet Pawtism gave you these two links from Uber, but you still think it needs to be repeated over and over again by Uber in a bunch of different areas. Please try to think before you post. 

https://help.uber.com/h/3abcbae1-132b-42a9-8277-0dab00fa3879

https://help.uber.com/h/885faa46-8db2-499f-8616-7a76bfc2c9e6


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

ImSkittles said:


> Yet Pawtism gave you these two links from Uber, but you still think it needs to be repeated over and over again by Uber in a bunch of different areas. Please try to think before you post.
> 
> https://help.uber.com/h/3abcbae1-132b-42a9-8277-0dab00fa3879
> 
> https://help.uber.com/h/885faa46-8db2-499f-8616-7a76bfc2c9e6


Both of these links prove me right.

The first says Uber will provide the car seat & the 2nd says it is up to the driver to cancel. You should have read them before posting.


----------



## ImSkittles (Jan 6, 2018)

Demon said:


> Both of these links prove me right.
> 
> The first says Uber will provide the car seat & the 2nd says it is up to the driver to cancel. You should have read them before posting.


Wow you are THICK!

READ the links again because you really are proving to be a fool.

Uber CHARGES $10 for a specific sized car seat. NOT a choice of several different sized car seats. Important point being that Uber CHARGES A FEE for the car seat. Did you read where the passenger has to order the Uber car with the car seat specifically? CAN you even read?

Of course the passenger can cancel if they feel the car seat isn't proper/safe for their child's specific age/weight. What's wrong with you?

You look like such a fool. 

It is up to the passenger to order the proper car for their situation. If they are too stupid to do that, they get charged a cancellation fee for wasting the drivers time and gas.

I see that you are refusing to think before you post.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Demon said:


> Both of these links prove me right.
> 
> The first says Uber will provide the car seat & the 2nd says it is up to the driver to cancel. You should have read them before posting.





ImSkittles said:


> Wow you are THICK!
> 
> READ the links again because you really are proving to be a fool.
> 
> ...


You beat me to it. He is either stupid or just an annoying troll.


----------



## ImSkittles (Jan 6, 2018)

Bro Olomide said:


> You beat me to it. He is either stupid or just an annoying troll.


 Yep! I totally agree with you. Did you read his post where HE says he can be told 1000 times and it won't make any difference? LMAO, that's the sign of a true fool.


----------



## melusine3 (Jun 20, 2016)

AzAppDriver said:


> Drivers should educate themselves on car seat laws, and cancel these ride requests. I am quick to cancel when pax have children and no car seat.


I have had a mother report me to Uber for being racist when I refused her childseatlessness. She of course argued with me, other drivers do it etc,. Another time, Lyft rider and child no child seat again with the argument and then insisted that I cancel because she didn't want a fee - I tried, but true to Lyft app, it hung up/lost signal/whatever. I drove off and parked so I could properly cancel. Now upon looking back, I should have insisted that SHE cancel, because it was her bad call. I was deactivated a couple of days while I fought the racist charge, so I just drove Uber. Now, when I see families without proper seating, I don't even go there, just cancel and drive on because I don't want to deal with the discussions turned argument.



Spike72 said:


> But that's just it, the parents should never request a ride in the first place if they don't have the equipment to transport a child. Moreover, why is it ok for them to waste our time and money?


Uber/Lyft don't care because there will ALWAYS be a newbie who doesn't know better and will take these rides, so ... revenue for them and loss of income for the new driver, because these rides ALWAYS are short.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

melusine3 said:


> Uber/Lyft don't care because there will ALWAYS be a newbie who doesn't know better and will take these rides, so ... revenue for them and loss of income for the new driver, because these rides ALWAYS are short.


Not to mention when you get in an accident with the now injured, unsecured kiddo, Uber/Lyft's insurance can wash their hands clean of you saying that you were required to follow all local laws and you failed to do so, so it's entirely on you.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

ImSkittles said:


> Wow you are THICK!
> 
> READ the links again because you really are proving to be a fool.
> 
> ...


I've read the links, you haven't. All you've been doing is trolling and name calling and proving me right. If Uber is charging for the car seat as you claim, please explain why the customer should bring one.

Please educate yourself on this topic and read the links.


----------



## ImSkittles (Jan 6, 2018)

Demon said:


> I've read the links, you haven't. All you've been doing is trolling and name calling and proving me right. If Uber is charging for the car seat as you claim, please explain why the customer should bring one.
> 
> Please educate yourself on this topic and read the links.


You can go back to masterbating in your mommy's basement troll. 

I've grown tired of your stupidity.


----------



## phillipzx3 (May 26, 2015)

Demon said:


> Where is that in the TOS?


It's THE LAW! As the operator of your vehicle, YOU are the PIC. It is your responsibility as "pilot in command" to make sure your passengers are safe.

Welcome to the world of taxi driving.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

ImSkittles said:


> You can go back to masterbating in your mommy's basement troll.
> 
> I've grown tired of your stupidity.


You're just tired that you're trolling as been exposed. You've done nothing but call names and turn tail and run when facts are presented.


----------



## RynoHawk (Mar 15, 2017)

Now they did it in my area...

I-Team: Uber, Lyft drivers at times willing to overlook child car seat law

http://www.wsmv.com/story/37571472/...-times-willing-to-overlook-child-car-seat-law

(Via WSMV)


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

RynoHawk said:


> Now they did it in my area...
> 
> I-Team: Uber, Lyft drivers at times willing to overlook child car seat law
> 
> ...


Did they actually send out a reminder in the area to drivers like it says in the article, or did uber/ Lyft lie to the reporter (like I'd be shocked hehe)?


----------



## RynoHawk (Mar 15, 2017)

Pawtism said:


> Did they actually send out a reminder in the area to drivers like it says in the article, or did uber/ Lyft lie to the reporter (like I'd be shocked hehe)?


Nothing that I have seen.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

RynoHawk said:


> Nothing that I have seen.


Figures, lying bastids hehe. You should contact that reporter and tell 'em that they lied to him. Maybe he'll crawl up Uber's arse a bit about it.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Pawtism said:


> Figures, lying bastids hehe. You should contact that reporter and tell 'em that they lied to him. Maybe he'll crawl up Uber's arse a bit about it.


LoLoL
A reporter? Do some investigating and tell the truth about the evil doings of a multi billion dollar company?
I guess it could happen.


----------



## Pawtism (Aug 22, 2017)

UberBastid said:


> LoLoL
> A reporter? Do some investigating and tell the truth about the evil doings of a multi billion dollar company?
> I guess it could happen.


Hey, I can dream!


----------



## Ohioref63 (Mar 27, 2018)

Julescase said:


> Oh Jesus here he goes again. Lololol.
> 
> Can someone please post a link to the absolutely ridonkulous thread in which Demon went in circles regarding child car seats and how he thinks it's the Uber drivers' responsibility to carry extra seats around in their cars (laughable, I know).
> 
> Please don't respond to his comment, you'll only be fueling the fire.


It's called a moral responsibility, as well as a legal responsibility for the child's welfare. I had the same situation, a foreign woman pinged for a ride, texted me before I arrived saying she does not have a car seat. I arrived two minutes later, explained to her the state law (AZ), and called a cab service that had child restraint car seats. Yes, all the while I was charging her wait time. Then I cancelled so I at least got the cancellation charge. It would have been a nice fare but not workw the guilt God forbid something happened.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Ohioref63 said:


> It's called a moral responsibility, as well as a legal responsibility for the child's welfare. I had the same situation, a foreign woman pinged for a ride, texted me before I arrived saying she does not have a car seat. I arrived two minutes later, explained to her the state law (AZ), and called a cab service that had child restraint car seats. Yes, all the while I was charging her wait time. Then I cancelled so I at least got the cancellation charge. It would have been a nice fare but not workw the guilt God forbid something happened.


Why would you charge her if you declined the ride?


----------



## somedriverguy (Sep 6, 2016)

Demon said:


> Why would you charge her if you declined the ride?


Because we do this for money and she still wasted his time? Ignorance of the TOS is not freedom from cancel fees in my book.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

somedriverguy said:


> Because we do this for money and she still wasted his time? Ignorance of the TOS is not freedom from cancel fees in my book.


As a point of fact his time was not wasted. The pax was toes to the curb and ready to pay. In this case it's the driver who is ignorant of TOS.


----------



## somedriverguy (Sep 6, 2016)

Demon said:


> As a point of fact his time was not wasted. The pax was toes to the curb and ready to pay. In this case it's the driver who is ignorant of TOS.


Well then he should have let her in the car and given her a ride but made her leve her child behind. Anything else you would like to add, genius?


----------



## Ohioref63 (Mar 27, 2018)

Demon said:


> As a point of fact his time was not wasted. The pax was toes to the curb and ready to pay. In this case it's the driver who is ignorant of TOS.


Im aware of TOS, I didn't decline the ride, I cancelled after a five minute wait. I drive 7 minutes to get there, in a surge pick up location, then it took another 15 minutes to understand and communicate with her broken English, and then call a cab company myself to ensure she and her 5 yr old weren't stranded at 7:30 at night


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Ohioref63 said:


> Im aware of TOS, I didn't decline the ride, I cancelled after a five minute wait. I drive 7 minutes to get there, in a surge pick up location, then it took another 15 minutes to understand and communicate with her broken English, and then call a cab company myself to ensure she and her 5 yr old weren't stranded at 7:30 at night


That's a decline. You chose not to take the ride.


----------



## dctcmn (Sep 21, 2017)

Demon said:


> That's a decline. You chose not to take the ride.


There was no passenger present that was willing and/or able to comply with the TOS. Just like an unaccompanied minor. We can only give rides within the scope of the TOS.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

dctcmn said:


> There was no passenger present that was willing and/or able to comply with the TOS. Just like an unaccompanied minor. We can only give rides within the scope of the TOS.


As a point of fact the customer was following all of Uber's TOS. The driver simply chose not to take them.


----------



## melusine3 (Jun 20, 2016)

MoreTips said:


> When a person decides to become a parent it is also then their responsibility to have a car seat available if they plan on putting said kid in a car. It's called being a responsible adult. Enough said.


They don't want to haul it around when they go shopping or out to eat. They rely upon finding ignorant Uber/Lyft drivers that will drive them around at will. It's not that hard to find, considering the enormous turnover both companies enjoy.


----------



## Ohioref63 (Mar 27, 2018)

Demon said:


> That's a decline. You chose not to take the ride.


"Decline" in the context of the app means not accepting the original request. What a grammar Nazi ...


----------



## dctcmn (Sep 21, 2017)

Demon said:


> As a point of fact the customer was following all of Uber's TOS. The driver simply chose not to take them.


The pax informed the driver that that they had a child, but not the required car seat and still requested the ride. They are in violation of the TOS at the point of request by entering into an agreement that requires the driver to break state and/or local law.


----------



## Ubering around (Oct 15, 2017)

Demon said:


> Got it. The driver is responsible, not the parent.


Is it that you Mr Lets blame the driver
I highly doubt you even a driver


----------



## jazzapt (May 16, 2016)

It is not worth arguing. Here is why. The crux of Demon’s argument is:


· “There is nothing in the TOS the specifically indicates that parents should provide car seats. So why should they be forced to pay a fee when the driver decides not to take them?”


Here is the mindset of someone that makes that argument:


· They couldn’t care less that a pax is expecting the driver to put their livelihood at risk by giving their kid a ride without a car seat

· They couldn’t care less that a pax is expecting the driver to possibly break the law by giving their kid a ride without a car seat

· And they really couldn’t care less that this is not a very high paying gig. And that taking time to drive to and wait for a pax that is expecting the driver to break the law and risk their livelihood costs the driver a considerable amount of money (in wasted miles, time, gas, and lost revenue).

· To them, if the driver does not want to accept the risk of breaking the law and to their livelihood, they are not entitled to even the pitifully small amount a driver would get from a cancellation fee that would help make up for the loss taken.


Someone like this cares little for the plight of the rideshare driver, so it’s not worth even trying to reason.


----------



## dctcmn (Sep 21, 2017)

jazzapt said:


> It is not worth arguing. Here is why. The crux of Demon's argument is:
> 
> · "There is nothing in the TOS the specifically indicates that parents should provide car seats. So why should they be forced to pay a fee when the driver decides not to take them?"
> 
> ...


I agree completely, but I'm not arguing with him to change his mind, I'm arguing so that other readers of this thread or new drivers don't think that our silence is an endorsement of his idiotic position.

His car, his rules, his consequences, his funeral.


----------



## jazzapt (May 16, 2016)

Based upon what has been written in the previous 8 pages, I am not overly concerned that other readers/new drivers would agree with him. I think the correct point has been made over and over by others.

He does have one point though. This could be easily resolved by Uber. In a perfect world, they would not only put specific language in the TOS indicating parents should be prepared to provide the proper car seat that state/local laws require, there would also be an automatic cancellation fee that would be charged if pax did not provide. No need to wait 5 minutes. The same should apply to minors trying to ride unaccompanied. 

Will never happen though….


----------

