Yesterday, I got a very enticing email about a deal for $25 off your first two orders (each) from Uber Eats. So I placed an order (which was bungled and missing half the the food and customer service won't help).
This morning, I woke up to this headline: Couple in a severe Uber crash can’t sue because of an Uber Eats order.
an appellate court said that the company’s terms are “valid and enforceable” and that they include an acknowledgement that “disputes concerning auto accidents or personal injuries, will be resolved through binding arbitration ‘and not in a court of law.’”
I seems that Uber's legal team was emboldened by this recent decision and concocted a scheme to get huge numbers of people to agree to these deadly conditions by offering them all two free meals.
Considering that their prices, customer service, and overall user experience are so godawful that this deal is unlikely to attract many long-term customers, the cost-benefit must be coming from somewhere else: if the terms and service prevent just one person from suing them, it could save them tens of millions of dollars. And if enough of the population makes use of this deal, Uber could unlock free-reign of our streets, legally empowered to mow down pedestrians willy-nilly
Posted by Cheesecake_Jonze
2 Comments
That’s not what happened here, though. These people were passengers in an Uber that was tboned because the driver blew a red light.
Uber is saying they have to go to arbitration to get damages due to the t&c users accept based on another service they offer and can’t take it to court, which is bullshit.
Counterpoint (playing Devil’s advocate here):
The US is an extremely litigious nation, and companies would not be able to stay in business if they were subjected to every overly litigious person. This couple appears to be overly litigious because they weren’t comfortable simply suing the driver who has insurance for this very purpose. They opted instead to sue the driver AND Uber.
Insurance companies pay huge amounts for less serious injuries than this which is one reason why insurance rates are so high.
Americans go to Europe, fall in a mall, get free health care, psychological care and compensation, then get mad when they can’t sue for emotional damages.
I completely agree with you that these terms and forced arbitration are wrong. They are more a symptom than the source of issues. Law in the US is something you can exploit if you have the means to do so, and otherwise you are SOL. It’s all about money, and the plaintiffs in lawsuits are only getting a slice of the pie.