Close Menu
    Welt

    Uber-Bestimmungen bedeuten, dass Paar nach „lebensveränderndem“ Unfall nicht klagen kann


    Uber-Bestimmungen bedeuten, dass Paar nach „lebensveränderndem“ Unfall nicht klagen kann

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy9j8ldp0lo

    View 19 Comments

    19 Comments

    1. PigSlam on

      Unless something specifically related to Uber contributed to the accident, it seems like this should be a matter between the passengers and the driver/the driver’s insurance company.

    2. 008Zulu on

      “How would I ever remotely think that my ability to protect my constitutional rights to a trial would be waived by me ordering food?” said Mrs McGinty.

      It *is* America. They made it legal to sign away your rights there.

    4. irredentistdecency on

      Arbitration clauses should only be valid for claims under a certain amount.

    5. fxkatt on

      *Arbitration means the dispute is settled through a third party rather than in court – in this case a lawyer appointed by Uber.*

      “By Uber?” Between the tiny print “terms of use” which no one reads until they’re absolutely forced to by circumstance, and an Uber-appointed arbitrator, this is worse than Kafka.

    6. Sirmalta on

      This kinda seems like bs.

      Taking a ride so you dont have to drive shoulndt be a legal weapon.

      Like, you now the service, you know the risk, shit happens. Unless the driver was breaking the law when the accident happened then I dont see the issue.

      Like, “i dont drive so if I get in a car accident I can sue my uber driver” is a pretty dark world to live in.

    8. letskill on

      Vast majority of countries in the world recognize the clear imbalance of powers in such contracts, and consider arbitration clauses to be unconscionable.

      And also they recognize that you can’t sign away your rights.

      The US does not.

    9. OddBank9124 on

      > The McGintys argue they had not understood they were forfeiting their right to sue the company.

      This is why we need stronger consumer protection laws. All these big mega corps make all these complicated contracts for the end user which no one has the time to read. We need a governing body that signs off on what the contract is, so these companies can’t pull in stupid shit like this.

      Its is just like the South Park episode where Kyle accidentally signed up for the Human Centipad project and gets his mouth stitched to an Asian man’s Anus.

    10. BWWFC on

      FTS.
      cannot sign away your human rights under any circumstances, or this means nothing as a country.

    12. SportyGalLady9 on

      It’s frustrating to see companies like Uber leverage these terms, often hidden in fine print, to sidestep accountabilityy.

    14. wickedsmaht on

      Seems to be some confusion here and the article doesn’t do a good job of explaining it. While an Uber driver has passengers in their vehicle the Uber insurance policy is the primary insurance. These policies carry a minimum of $1m umbrella for any one claim. This means there is one big pot of money that damage and injury claims are paid from for any one incident.

      Uber contracts these policies out to companies like Progressive and Geico to handle. For an incident like this there absolutely would have been an insurance claim opened and from the sounds of the article the McGinty’s have not yet reached a settlement for their injuries. Statutes of Limitations varies state to state but usually you have 2 years from the date of loss to either settle a claim or you have to file suit if you want to continue fighting. The article makes it sound as though the McGinty’s were looking to sue just Uber but thanks to the arbitration clause they cannot, instead they will have to file a suit against the insurance company handling the policy.

    15. hypercomms2001 on

      This is why I never use Uber. They screw their workers, and they screw the people that use their services.

    16. pierrechaquejour on

      I agree it’s insane that stuff like this is enforceable.

      But why are they suing Uber at all? How are they at fault?

    17. Karlzbad on

      You guys are blaming politicians when it’s the Roberts court that’s made arbitration the only fake justice available to plebs.

    18. Ordinary_Scale_5642 on

      Basically, people can’t read contracts, or at minimum skim over them.

      Also, more accident details would be nice.

    19. Dungong on

      How would Uber be responsible? Do they have more money? Probably, but should they be on the hook for this? Unless the app somehow caused the accident then I can’t see why they should be sued. Will the couple get anything suing the driver? Probably not if he was needing drive for Uber to make money

    Leave A Reply