"27. In the overwhelming majority of transportations, the upfront price is the amount that a User is ultimately charged for the transportation services by the driver.
28. When a driver accepts a User’s request for transportation, the User’s final destination is populated into the driver’s application and the driver is provided
with navigation instructions directing him or her to the best route to the User’s
destination"
---------
It seems like User sees a price X for a ride and accepts it. The driver might see a price X-y if conditions have changed. Doesn't that imply User agrees to price X and driver to price X-y ? Uber might be able to adjust the price at the end but can they be sued if both party agrees to it before hand?
--------------
"36. Had Plaintiff and the Class known the truth about the Uber Defendants’ deception, they would never have engaged in the transportation or would have
demanded that their compensation be based on the higher fare."
------------
I am curious as to how they reached to a conclusion that Uber was intentionally doing this. Did a bunch of drivers co-ordinate experiments with riders to see if there was price differences? Did they just log out and log back into different accounts to see the price differences?
I am neutral to Uber so I feel its natural to question if Uber is seen as an easy target to go after since they are already in a legal swamp. IANAL so would love to read what people familiar with law have to say.
I feel like the question is, if an Uber driver takes longer to arrive due to unforeseen/unforeseeable circumstances, does Uber pay them more than price X? Or is their comp always capped at X?
If they pay more than X, then what Uber's doing is fair-ish. IMO. If the driver can never earn more than X, then that is a problem.
This seems like a tricky case because if the users and drivers are being completely rational, it's not clear that Uber's deception should have affected their behavior. Sure, the drivers expected to make X% of fares, but realistically they probably estimated what that would come out to be not from looking at customer fare data (in which case the deception would have materially harmed them) but rather by tracking what they or other drivers were actually getting paid.
Still, if the allegations are true, a culture where it is fine to engage in such active deception is not a good sign.
---------
It seems like User sees a price X for a ride and accepts it. The driver might see a price X-y if conditions have changed. Doesn't that imply User agrees to price X and driver to price X-y ? Uber might be able to adjust the price at the end but can they be sued if both party agrees to it before hand?
--------------
"36. Had Plaintiff and the Class known the truth about the Uber Defendants’ deception, they would never have engaged in the transportation or would have demanded that their compensation be based on the higher fare."
------------
I am curious as to how they reached to a conclusion that Uber was intentionally doing this. Did a bunch of drivers co-ordinate experiments with riders to see if there was price differences? Did they just log out and log back into different accounts to see the price differences?
I am neutral to Uber so I feel its natural to question if Uber is seen as an easy target to go after since they are already in a legal swamp. IANAL so would love to read what people familiar with law have to say.