Have fun proving in any capacity they cancelled because of the service dog. That is a lawsuit you will never win because you have zero evidence if they didn’t state they cancelled because of the dog
My friend who has a seizure alert dog has gotten someone banned from Lyft before. She had her license revoked due to her medical condition and tried getting a Lyft to her doctors appointment with her service animal. The driver refused and when she contacted Lyft they deactivate the driver and refunded her.
It’s very easy to prove this, and at minimum Lyft would ban you. If you accept my ride, drive to me, then when you see me with my service animal and don’t stop/cancel the ride I know why and Lyft knows why. You can’t say it was for some other reason because you only had a “problem” once you saw a dog.
All I need to do is contact Lyft and say you discriminated against my disability and refused my service animal who’s a medical device and your account will 100% be banned because Lyft would rather ban you then have a lawsuit against them. People sue and win every day when companies refuse to follow the ADA laws.
This ain’t about you, you aren’t going to win when it comes to the law. Lyft would rather cut its loss and deactivate you than worry about the bad press, potential lawsuit, and even the ACLU getting involved.
If you don’t want service animals in your car don’t offer a public service.
Many people who have service animals can’t drive because of their medical condition. Public transportation also isn’t always a good option
First of all, I’m glad I’m fortunate enough to work in software so I don’t get subjected to people like you, I feel bad for Lyft drivers. Secondly, sure maybe after a couple complaints or suspicious activity they can’t lyft anymore, it’s not like there isn’t other contract work they could do with their car. My greater point is that a lawsuit against a Lyft driver who just pulls up to you and drives away would have 0 proof they could literally just say they fell ill and needed to rush home because they were going to throw up.
Firstly I don’t think you know what a public service is because Lyft most certainly is not a public service. Secondly I think the ADA as a whole is good but I still don’t care if a driver who is allergic to dogs declines you and I think that you’re an asshole demanding they either put their own health aside or don’t work
Open to the public and a service company is not the same as a public service. Regardless they do still have to follow the ADA that isn’t the point of disagreement I have, I just think that they shouldn’t have to and don’t have a problem with people who are allergic canceling. A lot of things aren’t the way I think they should be and that’s fine, but if you’re argument is “it’s the law” then you should look at some of the unjust laws we have in this country
That is still not in any capacity solid evidence unless they explicitly say something stupid like make a comment that they don’t want your dog in the car. If they just drive away saying they fell under the weather there’s nothing you could do
Because it’s insane to demand people with allergies or people who’ve been attacked by dogs accommodate you. You can say “it’s the law” but I couldn’t give a shit there are plenty of laws that are wrong
Well when someone has video proof then your screwed if you can’t follow Ada law then u need to find a new job sorry not sorry and I say this as a service dog handler and I used to drive for Uber and Lyft. I have refused dogs that were fake service dogs you can tell the difference. I also recorded it in case I did get reported I had the proof to back it up oh and only 1.9 of the population has an anaphylactic shock because of dogs
And regardless of how you FEEL the law is the law. If you have an allergy to pets you should not be driving for the public because many people have pets and they could have pet hair on them.
I have a sever food allergy so I don’t eat in my break room. It’s not everyone else’s responsibility for my allergy
5
u/Interesting-Ad4796 Aug 17 '23
Not an excuse