Uber Drivers Forum banner
1 - 18 of 210 Posts

· Banned
Joined
·
6,929 Posts
You should be able to deny them for safety issues such as no restraint. No one wants a 40 lb projectile flying into the back of your neck in a accident. I find many people with service dogs as the worst people on this planet. They ruin it for the truly disabled.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
6,929 Posts
What questions can a covered entity's employees ask to determine if a dog is a service animal?

A. In situations where it is not obvious that the dog is a service animal, staff may ask only two specific questions: (1) is the dog a service animal required because of a disability? and (2) what work or task has the dog been trained to perform? Staff are not allowed to request any documentation for the dog, require that the dog demonstrate its task, or inquire about the nature of the person's disability.

http://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.html
So anyone can get away with this if they know what to say? Is there a correct answer for #2?
 

· Banned
Joined
·
6,929 Posts
You should be able to deny them for safety issues such as no restraint. No one wants a 40 lb projectile flying into the back of your neck in a accident. I find many people with service dogs as the worst people on this planet. They ruin it for the truly disabled.
Old but interesting article about unrestrained dogs and safety.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2011/01/dog-car-travel-safety.html

Experts warn about the dangers of driving with unrestrained pets in the car

Man's best friend is not a driver's best friend.

While lawmakers have been banning drivers from texting or using cellphones, many motorists are riding around with another dangerous risk -- their dogs.

Experts say an unrestrained dog -- whether curled up on a lap, hanging out the window or resting its paws on the steering wheel -- can be deadly. Tens of thousands of car accidents are believed caused every year by unrestrained pets, though no one has solid numbers.

"An unrestrained pet can be hugely distracting -- if he is seeking your attention, putting his face right in front of yours, starts chewing up the upholstery or is vomiting because he is carsick," said Katherine Miller, director of applied science and research for the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

The issue is drawing attention in some statehouses. Hawaii is the only state that specifically forbids drivers from operating a vehicle with a pet on their lap. But Oregon lawmakers are considering fining drivers who hold their pets behind the wheel. And some cities are taking action, too.

In 2009, 5,474 people were killed and 448,000 injured in crashes caused by distracted drivers in the United States, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Cellphones were the top distraction -- the cause of 18 percent of the fatalities and 5 percent of the injury crashes. The agency does not track accidents caused by pets, but said they are counted among other distractions such as disruptive passengers, misbehaving children or drivers who attempt to put on makeup or read.

Author Stephen King suffered several broken bones and a collapsed lung in 1999 when he was hit by a driver who claimed he was distracted by his dog.

In a crash, an unrestrained pet can turn into a deadly projectile or get crushed by a driver or passenger who is thrown forward by the collision.

Good pet owners will use a harness or carrier and secure their pets in the middle of the back seat, Miller said. That keeps dogs from getting hurt or bouncing around and hurting others.

"A pet that weighs 50 pounds, in a 35 mph collision, is projected forward like a cannonball with 1,500 pounds of force, and that can cause critical injuries to the folks in the front seat," Miller said.

Restraining a pet also keeps the animal from running off after a crash and possibly getting hit or causing another crash, or from getting in the way of first responders, she said.

Susan Footh, 37, of Whitewood, S.D., said her 12-pound Maltese named Mozart could have been killed twice if he hadn't been wearing a harness.

Footh was on her way to a Christmas gathering when her car veered out of control on ice. She smashed into a highway barrier three times before the vehicle stopped. Presents flew through the car, her coffee splattered all over the back window. But Mozart stayed put.

Then, a few weeks ago, another driver clipped her bumper while trying to pass, sending her first into a spin and then into a ditch.

"Mozart was shaking. I'm sure he was saying, 'Not again,'" Footh said. She was able to put the car into four-wheel-drive and climb out of the ditch.

In Oregon, lawmakers will vote in the next few months on a bill that proposes a $90 fine for people who drive with an animal on their lap.

A similar law made it to the governor's desk in California in 2008, but then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger refused to sign it, saying it was not a high priority.

Bill Pace, the former assemblyman from Visalia who introduced the failed bill, said he frequently sees drivers with "animals up in their face, in their lap and on the steering wheel. ... This is not a rare occurrence."

Some cities have passed laws of their own. In Troy, Mich., a law took effect Jan. 1 that makes it illegal to drive with a pet in your lap.

But Jonathan Adkins, communications director for the Governors Highway Safety Assn., doubts that many states will single out pets.

Elected officials "can't have a law to outlaw every bad driver behavior," he said. "You go after the big ones."

But Adkins said the problem is underreported because the only way to know that a pet was at fault is if the driver says so.

Education about pet restraints will have to come from pet owners, vets, animal-welfare agencies and insurance companies, he added. And that could take years, just as it took a long time to get people to wear seat belts.

For pet owners, Footh said, the answer is easy.

It takes no more than 10 seconds for her to hook Mozart into his $12 harness. He helps by hopping up on the seat and waiting for her to snap it.

"My dog is my baby. I want him to live a long and healthy life," she said. "It's not just about feeding him and loving him. It's about keeping him safe in every way, and that includes when we are in the car."
 

· Banned
Joined
·
6,929 Posts
[USER=47163 said:
LA Dispatcher[/USER], you seem the most judgemental of them all.

LA Dispatcher - how many times have you picked up a pax with a service dog? According to you, if someone has a service dog they are not disabled. Where is your proof?

Yes, unfortunately for you the ADA protects people with disabilities and Will have the correct answer for question #2. Based on this statement I suspect you really don't have any specific experience with someone who needs a service dog but without even knowing us we are the worst people in the world.

Ever met a phooey service dog owner? What did they do to you to trample over your rights?
Stop being so disingenuous, I already answered your question on another thread about this topic. Let me give you my reply again. "I said most not all. I don't have a problem with people who are truly disabled riding in my vehicle with their dog. Many take advantage of the system because no one will question them. There is nothing wrong with having legitimate concerns of fraud. You know very well that these shenanigans occur frequently and drivers or riders shouldn't have to put up with these frauds." Like I said before, many of these "service dog" owners are the worst people on this planet. Sometimes it seems like they're part of a cult.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
6,929 Posts
Local law, not federal. And when federal law overrode those local laws plenty of white business owners were not happy and used the argument that it was THEIR business and they didn't have to serve "********" if they didn't want to. Only the law forcing them to is what changed things.

Anyway, the point is that it doesn't matter if you're an employee or the owner, you can't (legally) discriminate because the pax has a service animal.
I agree, they were horrible people. But it doesn't change the fact that they have the right to free speech and freedom of association. No one wants to discriminate against a service animal, they just want to verify that the animal is a legitimate service animal. There is a fine line on this issue for me. I just want more clarity on this issue, instead of submitting to a entitled narcissist.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
6,929 Posts
What does that have to do with who they allow in their business? They are free to say they don't want to serve certain groups, so long as they do it.

What is not horrible about discriminating against those who need a service animal so they can do the things most people take for granted?
It is horrible if they are legitimate service dog owners, but drivers are not allowed to ask questions to verify. I still don't think the law should punish bigots just because someone gets offended.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
6,929 Posts
LA Dispatcher - how many times have you picked up a pax with a service dog? According to you, if someone has a service dog they are not disabled. Where is your proof?
I keep going in circles with you. I had already replied to you that I don't have a problem with people who are truly disabled.
https://uberpeople.net/threads/drive...llows-discrimination-against-you.75725/page-4
I know this issue is very important to you, but I will not tolerate people who abuse the system. I'm going to need a service animal myself after debating with you. I might go with a comfort cobra since no one is allowed to ask questions. Don't take it too personal, I'm just hoping for a little more transparency on this issue so people won't take advantage.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
6,929 Posts
At least there looking into it in Colorado.;)

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...do-is-cracking-down-on-service-dog-fraud.html

Even the Trumps are in on the trend.

Ivana Trump allegedly flashed a therapy animal card when toting her miniature Yorkie into Manhattan's high-end Altesi Ristorante in June 2014, sparking complaints from other diners.


"Lunch was ruined because Ivana Trump sat next to us with her dog which she even let climb to the table. I told her no dogs allowed but she lied that hers was a service dog," reads a review on the restaurant's Google review page, discovered by the New Yorker's Patricia Marx.

When Marx called the restaurant, owner Paolo Alavian said he was obligated to allow support animals. "She walked into the restaurant and she showed the emotional-support card," Alavian told her. "Basically, people with the card are allowed to bring their dogs into the restaurant. This is the law."

But it isn't the law in New York or in Colorado, despite popular belief.

"As far as the ADA is concerned, the law is not for emotional support animals," a representative at the Denver Office of Disability Rights told the Daily Beast. "They have to perform a function like open doors to be considered a service animal."
 

· Banned
Joined
·
6,929 Posts
We are not going in circles, you're just circumventing the questions i asked you.
  1. How many times have you personally experienced someone abusing the system?
  2. How were you harmed or your rights trampled on?
  3. What evidence do you have to support your conclusion that most not all people with service dogs are frauds?
I'm going to suggest your answers to all three questions is NONE. But still you feel the need to judge people with service dogs since based on your conclusion most of them are frauds and worth human beings to breath air on this planet. What type of transparency do you require? Do you want us all to sew in a patch on all our clothes issued by the govt so everyone knows we are disabled, and different than everyone else. I seem to remember reading in history that was done once before. Didn't cause any discrimination or anything. Just ended up killing millions of Jews.
1. All the time in Los Angeles. I'm even disgusted that it's being done by some people I know personally.
2. I never said I was harmed, but some drivers have their reasons and that shouldn't be discounted. I have no problem with dogs.
3. It depends on your definition of a service dog.
People should be able to decide who gets to ride in their own vehicle. They shouldn't have to accommodate dogs that may be a safety hazard or cause damage to your vehicle. Many people feel entitled and have no respect for others property. I'm sure this won't be the last we hear about this issue since drivers will not have a choice. We already have one driver on this thread who had his vehicle damaged by a dog recently and it won't be the last. You're being absurd with your reference to the millions of innocent people who were murdered.
Why don't you answer these questions.
1. Do you believe that fraud does not exist with service animals?
2. Should drivers not ask any questions and risk their vehicles being damaged?
3. Should any type of restraint be required for any animal entering your vehicle since it can create a safety hazard?
 

· Banned
Joined
·
6,929 Posts
Being in the restaurant business this has is always been a issue, and I have gone farther then the 2 allowable questions on a chronic offender... I got sued but won. Besides the 2 questions mentioned you can legally ask, if the response is anything about the animal being a therapy animal it IS NOT a service animal. The fakes with the online certifications and vests hide behind "therapy animal". These are not part of the federally mandated service animal exemption. If they want to fight with you about it my response is "falsely claiming you have a service animal is a FEDERAL OFFENCE, and therapy animals are not legally service animals nor granted access." As mentioned before if a service animal is not perfectly obedient it can be banned, This includes, not immediately following any command, barking, growling, ect., a true service animal will sit by its owners side, and will not move or make a sound until told to do so. In a car the animal MUST lay on the floor in the back, use this as a test. If it doesn't do that properly, service animal or not, you found your legal reason to kick them out.
Finally someone with some clarity on this issue. I will keep all this in mind when the situation arises again. Good thing for the dashcam.
 
1 - 18 of 210 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top