Uber Faces Class Action Over Alleged Widespread Driver Sexual Assault
A new complaint says the ride-hailing giant has prioritized profits over rider safety, allowing hundreds of women to become victims of sexual assault, rape and harassment.
November 14, 2017 at 03:32 PM
5 minute read
SAN FRANCISCO — Uber Technologies Inc. on Tuesday was hit with a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of women who have been sexually assaulted or raped by drivers for the ride-hailing giant.
The suit was filed by Wigdor LLP, a New York law firm that has previously represented women who were allegedly victims of sexual violence at the hands of Uber drivers. One such case against the company settled under confidential terms in November 2016.
The new class action seeks to represent what it says are more than 1,000 riders in the United States—mainly women, although the complaint says it includes men as well—who have been raped, sexually assaulted or subjected to gender-based harassment by Uber drivers over the past four years. The named plaintiffs are two women, in Florida and Los Angeles, respectively, who allege they were raped by Uber drivers.
“On notice of the magnitude of the number of passengers who have experienced sexual harassment and gender-based violence, Uber should have made drastic changes to the way that it screens and monitors drivers,” says the complaint, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
“Instead, over the last seven years, Uber has done everything possible to continue using low-cost, woefully inadequate background checks on drivers and has failed to monitor drivers for any violent or inappropriate conduct after they are hired,” it adds.
An Uber spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday.
The lawsuit demands that Uber implement a number of changes to how it vets potential drivers, including in-person interviews and fingerprinting, and require the installation of cameras in driver vehicles. It also seeks damages for the alleged harms the victims have endured, plus punitive damages.
The complaint argues that the victims' claims are not affected by arbitration clauses in Uber's terms of service with riders, because under California Supreme Court decisions, “Uber cannot cause consumers to waive a statutory right to seek public injunctive relief in any forum.”
The case points in part to reports of assault and harassment that have surfaced on Twitter as part of the #MeToo campaign, which emerged in the wake of sexual harassment allegations against Harvey Weinstein and his entertainment company.
One of the tweets cited in the complaint reads: “A few years ago, I was in an Uber arriving at my apartment when the driver made inappropriate comments and grabbed at my crotch. #MeToo.”
SAN FRANCISCO — Uber Technologies Inc. on Tuesday was hit with a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of women who have been sexually assaulted or raped by drivers for the ride-hailing giant.
The suit was filed by
The new class action seeks to represent what it says are more than 1,000 riders in the United States—mainly women, although the complaint says it includes men as well—who have been raped, sexually assaulted or subjected to gender-based harassment by Uber drivers over the past four years. The named plaintiffs are two women, in Florida and Los Angeles, respectively, who allege they were raped by Uber drivers.
“On notice of the magnitude of the number of passengers who have experienced sexual harassment and gender-based violence, Uber should have made drastic changes to the way that it screens and monitors drivers,” says the complaint, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
“Instead, over the last seven years, Uber has done everything possible to continue using low-cost, woefully inadequate background checks on drivers and has failed to monitor drivers for any violent or inappropriate conduct after they are hired,” it adds.
An Uber spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday.
The lawsuit demands that Uber implement a number of changes to how it vets potential drivers, including in-person interviews and fingerprinting, and require the installation of cameras in driver vehicles. It also seeks damages for the alleged harms the victims have endured, plus punitive damages.
The complaint argues that the victims' claims are not affected by arbitration clauses in Uber's terms of service with riders, because under California Supreme Court decisions, “Uber cannot cause consumers to waive a statutory right to seek public injunctive relief in any forum.”
The case points in part to reports of assault and harassment that have surfaced on Twitter as part of the #MeToo campaign, which emerged in the wake of sexual harassment allegations against Harvey Weinstein and his entertainment company.
One of the tweets cited in the complaint reads: “A few years ago, I was in an Uber arriving at my apartment when the driver made inappropriate comments and grabbed at my crotch. #MeToo.”
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 AllNew Class Action Points to Fears Over Privacy, Abortions and Fertility
Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
5 minute readCourt rejects request to sideline San Jose State volleyball player on grounds she’s transgender
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
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