Proceed With Caution: How E-Scooter Companies Can Protect Riders and Themselves
Waivers do not make companies bullet-proof. ... Louisiana and Virginia have refused to enforce such waivers due to public policy considerations, stating that e-Scooter users cannot sign away their rights with the push of a button.
July 11, 2019 at 12:03 PM
7 minute read
Pay-per-minute e-scooters are now available on almost every street corner in every major city. Major e-scooter companies, like Bird and Lime, claim there have been over 120 million e-scooter rides in the U.S. in just over a year. As these e-scooters and vehicle sharing services become more popular, questions remain as to how companies can protect their riders and limit their own liability. Below are some best practices companies and manufacturers should follow to avoid this developing area of litigation.
Encourage Safe e-Scooter Use
Most scooter sharing companies are making safety their “top priority.” Many e-scooter manufacturers are constantly updating safety features so that they are easier and more secure to use. A few months ago, Lime released an upgraded model with extra back breaks and bigger wheels that “improve stability by increasing the scooter's grip on the road.” Additionally, Lime's newest e-scooters now have LED screens that detect and alert riders when they are riding on sidewalks or when the riders improperly park the e-scooter. Other companies and manufacturers should be in tune with how their products are used and should strive to produce a safe and cost-effective product for their users.
In addition to building safer e-scooters, companies are encouraging safe practices while riding. For example, major companies instruct riders to avoid alcohol or one-handed driving. Most e-scooter companies provide educational videos, instructional pages and in-app messages to ensure riders know and abide by applicable rules. Riders are advised to operate scooters on the road in bike lanes as opposed to sidewalks and advised to wear helmets during operation. Recognizing that most riders do not have helmets, some e-scooter companies mail free helmets upon request or provide free helmets at disbursement locations throughout the city.
Finally, companies should consider interacting with the public to encourage best practices. For example, Bird launched a global safety advisory committee focusing on both rider and pedestrian safety. Companies like Lime and CitiBike have made efforts to emphasize safety as well.
Just last month, Bird announced plans to visit over 100 cities this summer along with road safety experts to showcase the safe road fundamentals for non-car users. At these events, Bird has promised to distribute free helmets, tutorials of local rules and best parking practices. Similarly, Lime provides tips to car drivers on how to be more aware of all road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and e-scooter riders.
Adopt Specific Contract Provisions
One of the strongest ways that vehicle-sharing companies can limit their liability is to include specific contractual provisions in their “terms of service.” E-scooter users are generally required to sign liability releases, class action waivers, assumption-of-risk waivers and arbitration clauses when renting such equipment. However, waivers do not make companies bullet-proof. Each jurisdiction has its own legal framework for determining the enforceability of these waivers. For example, the states of Louisiana and Virginia have refused to enforce such waivers due to public policy considerations, stating that e-scooter users cannot sign away their rights with the push of a button. See La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 2004 (1985); Hiett v. Lake Barcroft Community Assoc., 418 S.E.2d 894, 895–96 (Va. 1992). Other states, like California, Florida and New Jersey, will not enforce liability waivers in favor of a commercial entity that fails to comply with any safety regulation associated with the activity. Cal. Civ. Code §1668 (West 2018); Torres v. Offshore Professional Tour, Inc., 629 So. 2d. 192, 194 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993); Stelluti v. Casapenn Enters., LLC, 203 N.J. 286, 304 (N.J. 2010). In Georgia, attorneys have argued that courts should find these waivers unenforceable against public policy because they force people to give up rights to vital public transportation services and access to public rights of way. Georgia courts have yet to rule on these issues.
Engage with Local and State Governments
Companies should also become involved with local and state Department of Transportation officials to increase road safety and move cities away from being car centric. According to several studies, there is a correlation between the quantity of e-scooter injuries and the friendliness of a city towards non-car road users. Accordingly, many Georgia e-scooter companies have taken steps to increase road safety for their users. For example, Bird actively donates to cities to create protected bike lanes to increase both sidewalk and e-scooter safety.
Companies should also consider partnering with local governments to create specific e-scooter parking. To minimize accidents, some e-scooter companies, such as Bird, are rolling out designated e-scooter parking. For several years, other micro-mobility vehicle sharing companies, such as e-bikes, have obtained designated parking spaces, but e-scooters do not yet have these in most major cities. While part of an e-scooter's appeal is being able to access them anywhere, designated parking would decrease the risk of third-party injuries that can occur while tripping or crashing into e-scooters strewn on sidewalks (or often, in the street).
While there are obviously instances in which litigation is advisable or unavoidable, if companies follow these basic tips, they may have a better chance at preventing and resolving disputes.
My e-Scooting Experience
While writing this article, I decided to try an e-scooter for the first time. After downloading the app, I quickly found an e-scooter outside my building. I was surprised by the number of screens I had to go through before I could actually ride the scooter. For example, after accepting the terms and conditions, the app provided interactive and step-by-step infographics on how to safely use the scooter. The handlebar also had a sticker reminding users to wear a helmet and not to ride on the sidewalk. It took me just a few minutes to get the hang of riding the scooter. To start the scooter, I had to kick off three times and then push the throttle button, which only works if the scooter is already moving. When I ended my ride a few minutes later, the app required me to take a photograph of the parked scooter to ensure it was in an area that would not impede a public right of way.
In sum, I was ultimately surprised by how many safety features the e-scooter had, both in the virtual app and in its physical design. While e-scooter companies and manufacturers continue to strive to improve the safety of these devices, users must not forget that they, too, have a duty to exercise ordinary care during operation. Both are required, if Atlantans want continued access to e-scooters.
Brannon Arnold is an Atlanta-based partner at Weinberg Wheeler Hudgins Gunn & Dial. She focuses her practice on civil litigation with an emphasis on product liability, catastrophic injury and professional liability.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
3 minute read'A Fierce Battle of Expert Witnesses' Expected in Cybersecurity Spat
Former UPS Workers Lodge Discrimination Suit for 'Systemic Racial Bias' in Workplace Culture
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250