Uber Drivers Forum banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Soooooo much stupid advice about "how to avoid service animals" keeps getting posted up here that I finally felt compelled to get the truth out, so that well-meaning people will not get permanently deactivated for following all this stupid advice. (Kudos goes to @Dropking for dropping the final stupid straw.)

Don't want to read through it all? Here's the short version - Assuming the pax made a valid service animal complaint against you, here's how Uber's investigation will play out:
  • If you admit to knowing they had an animal, you will be permanently deactivated unless you have video evidence to back up your story, showing that their animal was either out of control or the pax was attempting to commit service animal fraud against you.*
  • If you deny that you knew the pax had an animal, you will either be permanently deactivated or hit with a 'plausible' violation, depending upon the GPS evidence and the pax's evidence, including any statements from witnesses.*
Once a 'plausible' violation has been added to your record, Uber won't ever bother reaching out to you again to get your side of the story on any future service dog complaints. If another pax makes what appears to be another valid service dog complaint, then it's game over.

You'll be permanently deactivated, regardless of whether you could have proved yourself innocent. If you actually happen to have good evidence, tough luck, you'll have to go through arbitration to get reactivated.

* Fine print - there are some other dodges, but only in extreme situations, like refusing the ride because the pax wanted to go more than 100 miles and you didn't want to go that far out of your area. These dodges have to be against the pax, not the dog.

- - - - -

The following information comes from Uber's settlement with the American Federation of the Blind, from a few years ago. It applies nationwide.

B0369289-A7D8-4C4B-BCCD-78ABF019F258.jpeg

40A03C35-06E2-4976-B6D6-611B51F1DB64.jpeg

E2925DA6-9BD5-4529-875A-93FD621A102A.jpeg

36A0C938-AA81-495D-9B54-0733259A1DDD.jpeg

F9C75BB0-2C07-4667-BA56-68DD63CF88A8.jpeg

4381BC33-37A3-4D77-A786-A10BFF47B002.jpeg


0E5A46C9-510E-42B4-8BDE-FDED7B56266E.jpeg
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
863 Posts
I hate to say it, but **** the American Federation for the Blind for being so blind to how unfair this agreement is to drivers. This policy needs to change.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,366 Posts
Great info, and so much work for you to provide in such a congenial manner! Thanks!!

However your summary is faulty. The document is about consequences for knowingly refusing to transport a service animal. Doesnt apply to drivebys where you had no place to safely stop and couldnt find the pax. You had no idea there was a service animal.

Even if your summary wasnt misleading, you still get two chances, which is what that driver with severe allergies might consider trying. Prolly better than dying?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
... your summary is faulty. The document is about consequences for knowingly refusing to transport a service animal. Doesnt apply to drivebys where you had no place to safely stop and couldnt find the pax. You had no idea there was a service animal.
LOL If that were true, then "couldn't safely stop" would become the golden excuse that every driver would use to lie their way out of responsibility for canceling on a pax with a service animal.

You need to read it again, more carefully this time, before you once again start spreading even more misinformation that leads to be drivers getting deactivated.

Seriously, pull your ego out of this, and start acting responsibly!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,659 Posts
LOL If that were true, then "couldn't safely stop" would become the golden excuse that every driver would use to lie their way out of responsibility for canceling on a pax with a service animal.

You need to read it again, more carefully this time, before you once again start spreading even more misinformation that leads to be drivers getting deactivated.

Seriously, pull your ego out of this, and start acting responsibly!
I think they need to require riders with service dogs to alert the driver ahead of time so that when the driver stops by and sees pax with dog but no notice was given to driver ahead of time then driver can decline the ride, even if service dog. pax will have to make new request and put in the service dog notice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,366 Posts
LOL If that were true, then "couldn't safely stop" would become the golden excuse that every driver would use to lie their way out of responsibility for canceling on a pax with a service animal.

You need to read it again, more carefully this time, before you once again start spreading even more misinformation that leads to be drivers getting deactivated.

Seriously, pull your ego out of this, and start acting responsibly!
You seem to be wound tightly, cowboy. Drivers do a lot of things that can get them deactivated, from speeding to shuffling to geographical discrimination. You are singularly focused on just on thing, which is just plain weird!

And again, you misrepresented the document. But just for kicks, why dont you post the internal documents that cover complaints of speeding and complaints about refusing to go to Oakland?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,890 Posts
Dude if you want to drive by and reject fine but to tell others too is wrong. Are you going to make up their income if they get deactivated? No so do what you want but don't mislead others.

And dropking ADA is probably the most powerful lobby that can.hurt Uber so they will deactivate you in a second to placate them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 · (Edited)
You seem to be wound tightly, cowboy. Drivers do a lot of things that can get them deactivated, from speeding to shuffling to geographical discrimination. You are singularly focused on just on thing, which is just plain weird!
Driving rideshare isn't easy money anymore. Our earnings have been slashed down to the bone, we're running our cars into the ground, other drivers keep ramming their cars into ours, and we're always at the mercy of getting deactivated - mainly by paxholes making BS complaints about us.

In this crazy rideshare world, where it seems like everything is stacked against us, the last thing we need is for our own guys to go around spewing stupid sh!t that will end up getting us deactivated.

I admit it - I'm fed up with people like you, who cluelessly go around messing up other people's lives.

And again, you misrepresented the document.
No. I didn't. Some drivers here have the misconception that they can drive by a pax with a dog, not make eye contact, cancel, and not take a chance on getting deactivated (or getting hit with a 'plausible' violation). But they're wrong. Granted, it may lessen the chance because the pax may not realize that the cancel was due to their dog.

But if the pax complains and GPS confirms that the driver got close enough to have possibly seen the dog, then Uber Legal will assume that the driver is lying about "unsafe to stop" or "couldn't find the pax" or whatever BS the driver tries to claim.

In these situations, the driver gets hit with a 'plausible' violation. If it's the driver's first 'plausible' he gets to keep driving. If it's his second, then he's permanently deactivated.

Don't believe me? Then quote the passage from document that gives you your golden excuse. It's not enough to say I misinterpreted it. We are talking about people's livelihoods here, so you quote it.

Put Up or Shut Up
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,366 Posts
Dude if you want to drive by and reject fine but to tell others too is wrong. Are you going to make up their income if they get deactivated? No so do what you want but don't mislead others.

And dropking ADA is probably the most powerful lobby that can.hurt Uber so they will deactivate you in a second to placate them.
It was advice ONLY to the guy with severe allergies, since he doesnt have much of a choice. Not for everyone.

Driving rideshare isn't easy money anymore. Our earnings have been slashed down to the bone, we're running our cars into the ground, other drivers keep ramming their cars into ours, and we're always at the mercy of getting deactivated - mainly by paxholes making BS complaints about us.

In this crazy rideshare world, where it seems like everything is stacked against us, the last thing we need is for our own guys to go around spewing stupid sh!t that will end up getting us deactivated.

I admit it - I'm fed up with people like you, who cluelessly go around messing up other people's lives.

No. I didn't. Some drivers here have the misconception that they can drive by a pax with a dog, not make eye contact, cancel, and not take a chance on getting deactivated (or getting hit with a 'plausible' violation). But they're wrong. Granted, it may lessen the chance because the pax may not realize that the cancel was due to their dog.

But if the pax complains and GPS confirms that the driver got close enough to have possibly seen the dog, then Uber Legal will assume that the driver is lying about "unsafe to stop" or "couldn't find the pax" or whatever BS the driver tries to claim.

In these situations, the driver gets hit with a 'plausible' violation. If it's the driver's first 'plausible' he gets to keep driving. If it's his second, then he's permanently deactivated.

Don't believe me? Then quote the passage from document that gives you your golden excuse. It's not enough to say I misinterpreted it. We are talking about people's livelihoods here, so you quote it.

Put Up or Shut Up
The document is about knowingly refusing to transport service animals, and if they succeed in documenting one plausible case, then you will get another chance as long as you deny everything. It is left unclear exactly what a plausible case is, but it refers to coroborating eyewitnesses or photos as example.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 · (Edited)
The document is about knowingly refusing to transport service animals, and if they succeed in documenting one plausible case, then you will get another chance as long as you deny everything.
Now, this ^^^^^^^^ is a misrepresentation.

Denying everything will not get you another chance if the pax has a movie of you yelling "No dog in my car!"' and then speeding off.:wink:

It is left unclear exactly what a plausible case is, but it refers to coroborating eyewitnesses or photos as example.
And this ^^^^^^^^ is misleading at best

97FDAC0D-7854-4315-BC78-B1B7FBF9F097.jpeg


I think they need to require riders with service dogs to alert the driver ahead of time so that when the driver stops by and sees pax with dog but no notice was given to driver ahead of time then driver can decline the ride, even if service dog. pax will have to make new request and put in the service dog notice.
You bring up a good point.

If a pax ever sends a driver a text saying that they have a service animal with them, do NOT cancel on them. They can use that message against the driver to prove that the driver knowingly canceled on a service animal. Pax's that do this know the rules and know how to get drivers deactivated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,366 Posts
Now, this ^^^^^^^^ is a misrepresentation.

Denying everything will not get you another chance if the pax has a movie of you yelling "No dog in my car!"' and then speeding off.:wink:

And this ^^^^^^^^ is misleading at best

View attachment 385511


You bring up a good point.

If a pax ever sends a driver a text saying that they have a service animal with them, do NOT cancel on them. They can use that message against the driver to prove that the driver knowingly canceled on a service animal. Pax's that do this know the rules and know how to get drivers deactivated.
Again, the advice was for someone who claims to suffer severe allergies from pooches, events which debilitate him for days (or was it weeks?). You have nothing for him except telling him to f--- off and work at McDonalds, which makes you both impractical and immoral, and yet sickeningly legal.

Many drivers dont want dogs in the car in the muddy rain, and yet the law is the law and practicality is practicality. How individual drivers handle that situation is a function of how they balance two different risks.

This is my last comment on your silly crusade, so now you get to go find something else to get your panties in a bunch. 😱
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,058 Posts
Soooooo much stupid advice about "how to avoid service animals" keeps getting posted up here that I finally felt compelled to get the truth out, so that well-meaning people will not get permanently deactivated for following all this stupid advice. (Kudos goes to @Dropking for dropping the final stupid straw.)

Don't want to read through it all? Here's the short version - Assuming the pax made a valid service animal complaint against you, here's how Uber's investigation will play out:
  • If you admit to knowing they had an animal, you will be permanently deactivated unless you have video evidence to back up your story, showing that their animal was either out of control or the pax was attempting to commit service animal fraud against you.*
  • If you deny that you knew the pax had an animal, you will either be permanently deactivated or hit with a 'plausible' violation, depending upon the GPS evidence and the pax's evidence, including any statements from witnesses.*
Once a 'plausible' violation has been added to your record, Uber won't ever bother reaching out to you again to get your side of the story on any future service dog complaints. If another pax makes what appears to be another valid service dog complaint, then it's game over.

You'll be permanently deactivated, regardless of whether you could have proved yourself innocent. If you actually happen to have good evidence, tough luck, you'll have to go through arbitration to get reactivated.

* Fine print - there are some other dodges, but only in extreme situations, like refusing the ride because the pax wanted to go more than 100 miles and you didn't want to go that far out of your area. These dodges have to be against the pax, not the dog.

- - - - -

The following information comes from Uber's settlement with the American Federation of the Blind, from a few years ago. It applies nationwide.

View attachment 385301
View attachment 385302
View attachment 385303
View attachment 385304
View attachment 385305
View attachment 385307

View attachment 385338
If you see them before they see you, either cancel or take the ride, make them put their animal on the floor, then give 1-3 stars so you'll never come in contact with them. A lot of these animals aren't service animals, but we already know Lyft/Uber are only advocates for the #thedollar. Don't waste your energy & give them that upper hand. You can even report bad behavior if you'd like, but don't give these clowns the opportunity to **** with your livelihood.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,113 Posts
If you cannot follow Uber Technologies Terms of Service and California Law regarding those with service animals and disabyou will not be driving for Uber Technologies next year.

No, driving by, where you ignore the person with service animal, is intent.

It is mandatory for pickup and is crime not to do so.

It is the law.

Historically Judges presiding over cases like this, make an example of you.

If people game the system, that is completely another issue. It should be reported to Uber. They will be flagged.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,058 Posts
If you cannot follow Uber Technologies Terms of Service and California Law regarding those with service animals and disabyou will not be driving for Uber Technologies next year.

No, driving by, where you ignore the person with service animal, is intent.

It is mandatory for pickup and is crime not to do so.

It is the law.

Historically Judges presiding over cases like this, make an example of you.

If people game the system, that is completely another issue. It should be reported to Uber. They will be flagged.
Yeah. Like you obey every "law"!or rule they have in place to "control" us. You won't last very long if that is the case, Mr. Perfect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,113 Posts
I have been involved in Uber since the beginning.

DO THE RIGHT THING.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
... either cancel or take the ride ...
As if there are only 2 options... 🤦‍♂ 🤦🏻‍♀ 🤦‍♂ 🤦🏻‍♀

I just don't get it. Why are you, @Dropking @LoLo SF (the driver with the allergies) and almost every other driver on UP sooooo reluctant to ask the scammers the 2 questions?!?!?

By using the two questions, you can cancel on 90% of the scammers (without fear of deactivation or hurting your cancel rate) because very very few of them know how to answer the 2nd question correctly.

You do not have to deal with muddy dogs and possible allergic reactions. It's your car and your life. You have the legal right to protect yourself from the scammers. It's easy to do once you understand how to do it.

It even gives you the option of making the scammers face the consequences of service dog fraud: up to 6 months in jail, up to $1,000 fine, and a misdemeanor on their record.

Check out how Elelegido does it in less than 45 seconds:



Simply roll up on the pax with your doors locked and your window several inches down, and then put your car in park. Pull out your phone, start a video recording, and hold it up them so that they can see they are being filmed. Then ask them the two questions.

Keep repeating the second question until they either answer it correctly or hang themselves with the wrong answer. If the dog is out of control, film that too. Finally, report the pax to Lyft/Uber for service dog fraud and say that you have video (no need to upload it yet).

There are many tips that I and others can provide.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,802 Posts
Has anybody ever driven a Service animal that wasn’t a Guide dog for blind pax? And even those how often ever. I’ve had 2 in 3+ years. Are you really saying u should be allowed to be a gypsee cab but not have to take blind people with their highly trained but usually a bit smelly & moulty dog(s).
We’ve all had a few Support Animal BS’ers try it on and shuffled them, and a few toy dogs sitting in the owners lap, but this all seems a lot of fuss about what’s mostly a non issue.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top