User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567
Results 61 to 68 of 68

Thread: Black Market Ride-Sharing Explodes In Austin After Voters Drive Out Uber And Lyft

  1. #61
    Points: 174,768, Level: 99
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 2,882
    Overall activity: 23.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience Points
    Dr. Who's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    870666
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gallifrey
    Posts
    69,091
    Points
    174,768
    Level
    99
    Thanks Given
    12,827
    Thanked 12,929x in 8,807 Posts
    Mentioned
    206 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Newpublius View Post
    In that case the best argument is uber insurance would still pay and they can try to recoup from owner for letting somebody else use the car.
    Uber's insurance would not still pay. They would flat out deny the claim. Non-owned auto doesn't work that way and apart from the driver not being covered by the contract, there is also the fraud aspect, which is also grounds for denial of the claim.
    In quoting my post, you affirm and agree that you have not been goaded, provoked, emotionally manipulated or otherwise coerced into responding.



    "The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
    Mahatma Gandhi

  2. #62
    Points: 174,768, Level: 99
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 2,882
    Overall activity: 23.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience Points
    Dr. Who's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    870666
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gallifrey
    Posts
    69,091
    Points
    174,768
    Level
    99
    Thanks Given
    12,827
    Thanked 12,929x in 8,807 Posts
    Mentioned
    206 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Newpublius View Post
    As an aside car rental companies did this with rental cars driven by other people than the person rented to
    Except in that case the owner's policy is still in force, regardless of who is driving, unless the vehicle is stolen. Otherwise the liability coverage of the owner's policy still has to respond - there is a statutory requirement, however it might be on a minimum statutory limits basis. The carrier for the excess auto policy provided by the rental car company may have arguments depending on its wording. Most I think would exclude coverage.
    In quoting my post, you affirm and agree that you have not been goaded, provoked, emotionally manipulated or otherwise coerced into responding.



    "The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
    Mahatma Gandhi

  3. #63
    Points: 23,893, Level: 37
    Level completed: 62%, Points required for next Level: 457
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Newpublius's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    39140
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Boynton Beach, FL
    Posts
    7,313
    Points
    23,893
    Level
    37
    Thanks Given
    1,556
    Thanked 4,123x in 2,793 Posts
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Who View Post
    Except in that case the owner's policy is still in force, regardless of who is driving, unless the vehicle is stolen. Otherwise the liability coverage of the owner's policy still has to respond - there is a statutory requirement, however it might be on a minimum statutory limits basis. The carrier for the excess auto policy provided by the rental car company may have arguments depending on its wording. Most I think would exclude coverage.
    The bananas can't argue to the exclusion of the other meaning in the example your describing if the car's insurance can exclude, Uber must accept, likewise if Uber can exclude, the owner's insurance can't exclude. Its one or the other. That's what the uninsured/underinsired people will argue and they will almost assuredly prevail and if not......then they pay as payor of last resort.

  4. #64

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 34,182, Level: 45
    Level completed: 16%, Points required for next Level: 1,268
    Overall activity: 0.3%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Hal Jordan's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    58782
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    9,394
    Points
    34,182
    Level
    45
    Thanks Given
    8,840
    Thanked 6,795x in 4,453 Posts
    Mentioned
    582 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In response to some of the questions raised about Uber (and Lyft, since all of these apply to them as well), as someone who uses Uber, I have some answers. First, all of the cars are tracked through GPS. With the apps, you can see where they are at any given time (it's nice being able to say "It should be turning the corner... now."). As a rider, you are given the name, rating, and picture of the driver as soon as they accept the pickup. It seems to me that fraud would be a bit difficult. They do background checks, not only on the drivers, but the cars as well. It has to be newer than a certain year (I can't remember it off the top of my head, but there are definitely plenty of older cabs out there. Also, if you go off the planned route, Uber will contact the driver. You are also given a description of the vehicle as soon as they agree to the pickup. Also, unless your phone is unlocked, the driver can't get paid if they do something to their fare, as payment is done solely through the app. It raises red flags when the payments aren't made. With a cab, they can take your card off of you, swipe it, and say they dropped you off. When you get down to it, driving a taxi would be more of an enabling factor for a serial killer, even with the fingerprint scans and all, and it's around three times the cost of Uber or Lyft.
    "For all sad words of tongue and pen, The saddest are these, 'It might have been'." John Greenleaf Whittier

    "Our minds control our bodies. Our bodies control our enemies. Our enemies control jack shit by the time we're done with them." Stick

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hal Jordan For This Useful Post:

    Chris (03-29-2017),Peter1469 (03-30-2017)

  6. #65

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 34,182, Level: 45
    Level completed: 16%, Points required for next Level: 1,268
    Overall activity: 0.3%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Hal Jordan's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    58782
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    9,394
    Points
    34,182
    Level
    45
    Thanks Given
    8,840
    Thanked 6,795x in 4,453 Posts
    Mentioned
    582 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Common View Post
    Give that a look http://valleywag.gawker.com/uber-dri...cks-1596982249

    Taxi drivers have to be licensed and they are finger printed and give background checks. If the article I posted is true its quite easy to get around it with uber.
    A lot of policies change over three years. This is one of them. While it may have been possible to share an account at one point, it no longer is.
    "For all sad words of tongue and pen, The saddest are these, 'It might have been'." John Greenleaf Whittier

    "Our minds control our bodies. Our bodies control our enemies. Our enemies control jack shit by the time we're done with them." Stick

  7. #66
    Points: 174,768, Level: 99
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 2,882
    Overall activity: 23.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience Points
    Dr. Who's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    870666
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gallifrey
    Posts
    69,091
    Points
    174,768
    Level
    99
    Thanks Given
    12,827
    Thanked 12,929x in 8,807 Posts
    Mentioned
    206 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Newpublius View Post
    The bananas can't argue to the exclusion of the other meaning in the example your describing if the car's insurance can exclude, Uber must accept, likewise if Uber can exclude, the owner's insurance can't exclude. Its one or the other. That's what the uninsured/underinsired people will argue and they will almost assuredly prevail and if not......then they pay as payor of last resort.
    I think that the Fund will have to pay. Minimally neither policy is required to provide coverage for fraud which alone is enough to void coverage, absent the policy exclusions. Uber initially didn't provide any coverage at all, but after a few accidents where insurers denied coverage on the basis of driving for hire, they were forced to, otherwise no municipality would have allowed Uber to legally operate. Insurers don't provide insurance for a pig in a poke. Non-owned auto coverage is quite specific as to what it does and does not cover and if push comes to shove, the carriers would litigate for years before allowing their coverage to be broadened for social justice reasons.
    In quoting my post, you affirm and agree that you have not been goaded, provoked, emotionally manipulated or otherwise coerced into responding.



    "The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
    Mahatma Gandhi

  8. #67
    Points: 23,893, Level: 37
    Level completed: 62%, Points required for next Level: 457
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Newpublius's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    39140
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Boynton Beach, FL
    Posts
    7,313
    Points
    23,893
    Level
    37
    Thanks Given
    1,556
    Thanked 4,123x in 2,793 Posts
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Who View Post
    I think that the Fund will have to pay. Minimally neither policy is required to provide coverage for fraud which alone is enough to void coverage, absent the policy exclusions. Uber initially didn't provide any coverage at all, but after a few accidents where insurers denied coverage on the basis of driving for hire, they were forced to, otherwise no municipality would have allowed Uber to legally operate. Insurers don't provide insurance for a pig in a poke. Non-owned auto coverage is quite specific as to what it does and does not cover and if push comes to shove, the carriers would litigate for years before allowing their coverage to be broadened for social justice reasons.
    Insurers simply have to price in, actuarially, the risk of loaning a car to somebody. The law of large numbers applies there.

  9. #68
    Points: 174,768, Level: 99
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 2,882
    Overall activity: 23.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience Points
    Dr. Who's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    870666
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gallifrey
    Posts
    69,091
    Points
    174,768
    Level
    99
    Thanks Given
    12,827
    Thanked 12,929x in 8,807 Posts
    Mentioned
    206 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Newpublius View Post
    Insurers simply have to price in, actuarially, the risk of loaning a car to somebody. The law of large numbers applies there.
    Insurers were not initially lining up to provide coverage. It's only because the wordings are tight and municipalities are allowing it, that they are even offering coverage. Furthermore non-owned auto doesn't cover the vehicle, just the driver. It's really a vicarious liability coverage. You are only vicariously liable for someone who has a legal connection to the organization that you insure.

    In the context of Uber, loaning the vehicle to be used as a taxi under the ride-share driver's name is perpetrating a fraud. That person has not been vetted and may not be qualified. There is no master/servant connection.
    In quoting my post, you affirm and agree that you have not been goaded, provoked, emotionally manipulated or otherwise coerced into responding.



    "The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
    Mahatma Gandhi

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts