US government sues Uber, alleging discrimination against disabled passengers | Uber
The US government filed a lawsuit against Uber on Thursday and accused the driving sharing company of violating federal laws by discriminating against disabled passengers.
In a complaint filed at the San Francisco Federal Court, the US Department of Justice said that Uber drivers refused to serve disabled riders, including routine service animals or selected wheelchairs.
The department also said that Uber and his drivers demand illegal cleaning fees for service animals and cancellation fees to the rejected rider.
It is also claimed that some drivers also insult and insult people with disabilities, or reject reasonable demands such as allowing them to sit on the front seat of the passengers.
The Ministry of Justice said that “Uber’s discriminatory behavior causes significant economic, emotional and physical damage to disabled individuals” and violated the disabled Americans.
Uber said in a statement that he did not agree with the allegations and was determined to expand access and improve the experience of disabled drivers.
Uber also said that the riders who use guide dogs or require further assistance deserve a safe, respectful and hospitable experience in Uber.
The complaint claims that Uber had ill -treated 17 people.
A Uber driver looked at his wheelchair and said, “Is this coming?” After asking, New York Bronx includes JE, a seven -year -old amputee from New York.
Another, Jason Ludwig, a Gulf War veteran with a service dog, was allegedly traveling from Newport News to Norfolk Airport in Virginia, missed his flight, and had to take it to Massachusetts Yarmouth Port for 16 hours.
A third rider, New Jersey, Jeff Clark from Laurel Mountain, said he was blind and used a guide dog and had four drivers in Philadelphia in a 17 -minute time.
The case requires a precautionary measure that prevents more island violations. In addition, UBER’s practices and training, money damages and civilian fines seek upgrades.
A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice did not immediately have an additional interpretation.
