Judge tosses class action suit vs Uber over Logan Airport fee

KevinH

Well-Known Member
http://www.bostonherald.com/busines...ss_action_suit_vs_uber_over_logan_airport_fee

A potential class 
action lawsuit that accused ride-sharing giant Uber of charging riders an unfair fee for airport trips has been tossed by a federal judge who said passengers signed away their right to sue.

“The process through which the plaintiffs established their accounts put them on reasonable notice that their affirmative act of signing up also bound them to Uber’s Agreement,” U.S. District Court Judge Douglas Woodlock wrote in his decision. “Whether or not plaintiffs had actual notice of the terms of the Agreement, all that matters is that plaintiffs had reasonable notice of the terms.”

The suit, which was filed in Suffolk Superior Court in 2014 but was 
later moved to federal court, accuses Uber of applying an $8.75 “Massport surcharge” to all airport rides — a “fictitious” fee, according to attorneys representing the passengers.

Woodlock ruled that the controversy has to be heard in front of an arbitrator 
because the riders accepted Uber’s terms of use, which compels arbitration and says that riders waive “the right to a trial by jury or to participate as a plaintiff or class user in any purported class action” case.

“We have to discuss with our clients to determine whether they think an 
appeal is called for here,” said John Roddy, who represents the potential class of passengers. “We think this is the kind of issue that should be dealt with by the First Circuit Court of 
Appeals, but it’s up to our clients.”

Uber said the decision “affirmed the validity and enforceability of Uber’s Terms of Service, including the arbitration provision.”

Online agreements that deny users the right to sue and compel arbitration have stirred up controversy, and Woodlock acknowledged that they are the “subject of current scholarly disapproval and skeptical investigative journalism.”
 

tohunt4me

Well-Known Member
http://www.bostonherald.com/busines...ss_action_suit_vs_uber_over_logan_airport_fee

A potential class 
action lawsuit that accused ride-sharing giant Uber of charging riders an unfair fee for airport trips has been tossed by a federal judge who said passengers signed away their right to sue.

“The process through which the plaintiffs established their accounts put them on reasonable notice that their affirmative act of signing up also bound them to Uber’s Agreement,” U.S. District Court Judge Douglas Woodlock wrote in his decision. “Whether or not plaintiffs had actual notice of the terms of the Agreement, all that matters is that plaintiffs had reasonable notice of the terms.”

The suit, which was filed in Suffolk Superior Court in 2014 but was 
later moved to federal court, accuses Uber of applying an $8.75 “Massport surcharge” to all airport rides — a “fictitious” fee, according to attorneys representing the passengers.

Woodlock ruled that the controversy has to be heard in front of an arbitrator 
because the riders accepted Uber’s terms of use, which compels arbitration and says that riders waive “the right to a trial by jury or to participate as a plaintiff or class user in any purported class action” case.

“We have to discuss with our clients to determine whether they think an 
appeal is called for here,” said John Roddy, who represents the potential class of passengers. “We think this is the kind of issue that should be dealt with by the First Circuit Court of 
Appeals, but it’s up to our clients.”

Uber said the decision “affirmed the validity and enforceability of Uber’s Terms of Service, including the arbitration provision.”

Online agreements that deny users the right to sue and compel arbitration have stirred up controversy, and Woodlock acknowledged that they are the “subject of current scholarly disapproval and skeptical investigative journalism.”
They will round us up and intern us in prison camps selling our internal organs to highest bidder.

Judge will say we signed our rights away when we signed up for Uber .
. .
 

JHawk

Active Member
What's interesting is this case shows that Uber exhibits a similar level of arrogant disdain towards the RIDERS that it does towards the drivers....and last time I checked, the riders are your customers and source of income?!?!?! I mean protecting yourself is one thing, but hiding behind legal loopholes and creative rider agreements all in the name of the almighty dollar shows how awful and desperate Uber's position has been, even from its inception.
 
Top