An Uber Eats order created a complication
of ConsumerAffairs
John and Georgia McGinty were both seriously injured in a February 2023 auto accident when they were passengers in an Uber that crashed into another car. Their driver was at fault so the McGintys sued the ride-sharing company.
But their lawsuit went nowhere. The New Jersey Court of Appeals rejected the case because Georgia McGinty previously placed an order with Uber Eats and agreed to terms of service that require arbitration rather than lawsuits.
Even though the McGintys argued that it was their daughter who placed the most recent order, using her mothers phone, attorneys for Uber argued that the family had agreed to arbitrate any disputes with the company. A lower court ruled in favor of the McGintys but the appellate court reversed the ruling.
"We hold that the arbitration provision contained in the agreement under review, which Georgia or her minor daughter, while using her cell phone agreed to, is valid and enforceable," the court wrote in its ruling. "We, therefore, reverse the portion of the order denying arbitration of the claims against Uber."
Its happened before
While arbitration clauses have become more common requirements in contracts for cellphones and other services, the linkage to affiliate companies is fairly new.
A recent lawsuit against Disney brought forced arbitration to light when Jeffrey Piccolo's wife died after experiencing an allergic reaction at a Disney World restaurant. He tried to sue Disney, but attorneys for the entertainment giant cited a forced arbitration clause.
Piccolo had not signed a contract with the restaurant but he had agreed to those terms when he subscribed to Disney+ and ESPN+. Attorneys argued that those terms and conditions covered all of Disneys businesses.
In this case, however, Disney relented. It waived its right to forced arbitration and agreed to allow the matter to proceed through the courts.
Some members of Congress want to amend laws to give consumers more rights in these situations. Legislation the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act, H.R. 2953 and S.1376 has been introduced in both houses of Congress.
Photo Credit: Consumer Affairs News Department Images
Posted: 2024-10-03 11:29:22
