Uber rider stuck on I-95 hit with $600 bill | Hacker News Reader

Uber rider stuck on I-95 hit with $600 bill

wtop.com

49 pointsharambae24 comments

Hu, I though the whole advantage of uber was that you knew upfront what the cost was going to be because they pad it a little to cover situations like this. I mean their cut is outrageous for a bunch of PCs and an app otherwise.

Probably 99% of the reason I use uber is the upfront pricing, with taxis I always wonder if the driver is taking a slightly longer route, or whatever just to add a buck or two to the meter. Ex: once when in San Diego I got caught on the bridge near paradise point going north, when I just wanted to get out at the light, but the driver managed to not find a free spot to pull over for the 30 seconds it would have taken me to jump out, so I sat in the car for another 10 mins while he did a u turn (again adding in another mile or so) and then crept through the traffic on the other direction too. The whole "error" cost probably another $10-15. Ended up with something like a $40 fare from the airport.

According to the article they were stuck for 9 hours. Ain't no padding on earth that's going to account for that.

integrated over millions of rides their accounting should indeed account for that?

Yeah sure, $600 are going to break the books at Uber ....

As far as the UX communicates, the Uber price is a quote — that’s what you pay regardless of whether the driver gets there faster or slower than expected. The app never says “traffic eased up! Here’s a $2 refund.”

Yes, it’s clear that they’ve weaseled out of it in the Terms of Service, but if this went to a jury (it won’t) I think they would stick Uber with the bill.

> The app never says “traffic eased up! Here’s a $2 refund.”

I get that all the time in Uruguay, not on the app, but on the e-mail. Quote:

"Good news - you’ve been refunded a portion of your original upfront price on this trip because of a change to the anticipated route. Please see the receipt breakdown for details."

Huh, I haven't used Uber in awhile. Is that new or specific to some geographies?

This is a frustrating situation for each party. Clearly, the move for Uber (PR and goodwill) is to eat the cost and still pay the driver.

I'm curious, would any type of travel insurance cover such an expense?

More than PR and goodwill, I'd say the actual bill is Uber's responsibility as well. The driver and transportation company should be on top of weather and highway safety and be responsible for making the right judgement calls. As a rider who just landed at the airport in an unknown city I shouldn't have to tell Uber whether they should be offering rides under the current conditions or not. They quoted me a ride for $X, and that is what I expect to pay.

My first Uber ever was when I went to San Diego for a tech conference, and the driver revealed he had been in town two days and asked me how to get to my hotel. (Presumably he was driving on someone else's account) He also started asking me about some sketchy ads on Craigslist for things that were illegal in his country (back when CL still allowed those kind of ads)

Needless to say, I've had better luck since then, though I've had more than a few rides where they tried to avoid the toll roads (even though my quoted fare allows for tolls) and it ate up my time.

It used to travel a lot and have had the full range of issues with taxis. In NYC it seemed pretty common for them to try to get you to give them cash for tolls (like at the toll booth, asking you to pay it) which were already added to your fare automatically.

I once had a harrowing experience in a foreign country where I didn't speak the language and my roaming didn't work, where I needed to direct the taxi driver using the gps from my phone's dying battery, since he want off in the completely wrong direction and had no idea about the area I was headed to (and I only was barely aware enough to interpret the minimally-labeled map the gps provides when you don't have data access).

I sort of expect this from Uber, but I actually had this scenario a few years ago in London in a black cab that was clearly borrowed. As you may know, black cab licensing requires passing an infamously grueling test of the entire point to point graph of central London dubbed "The Knowledge" where the examiners call out random trips (by intersection and/or landmark) and the candidate has to recite turn by turn directions between them.

I stepped into a black cab at Hammersmith tube station going to Kew Gardens (look it up, it's about as easy a route as you can get in London) and this 75 year old man slowly reaches over and pulls out a paper map like we used to use in 1985, I shit you not.

> The driver and transportation company should be on top of weather and highway safety and be responsible for making the right judgement calls.

This is absurd and unenforceable. Good luck holding Uber accountable for the weather or whether the highway has potholes.

maybe in general, but for this case specifically there was a national weather service advisory that travel could be dangerous that night (I live in the DMV; there’s currently another advisory for tomorrow night).

I’ve never tried to take an Uber through a storm, does anyone know if they give drivers and prospective riders a warning like “hey did you know your route takes you through a snow storm on the highway”? I think that would be a reasonable expectation, and probably reasonable to expect prospective riders not to book rides through snowstorms…

Many people in DC prior to the pandemic were very hostile online to others who owned cars ritually online. There is particularly one reddit sub-forum for DC that deals with alternate opinions to this ideal rather harshly.

Only now are people beginning to realize that the overconfidence they had in technology and in monopolistically advantageous companies for things (like rideshare services) was misplaced, and soon enough it will be too late to be able to protest this type of case.

We need to protect our rights to own and hold authority over control of our personal property from commercialization now more than ever, because the consequence is falling victim to corporate rules like this, which never work towards a consumer's advantage.

Former Uber and Lyft driver here: Uber is a highly automated company. Lyft is more customer oriented. I've fixed several problems with Lyft as a driver by chatting with a rep and getting customer refunds. I don't recall ever talking to a human with Uber.

Uber and Lyft both have service centers with actual employees in major metro areas for onboarding new drivers. If I had a problem like this, I'd go to the service center and get it straightened it out.

Taxis also charge by the minute in many cities (in the U.S.) to account for traffic delays. In L.A., it's $0.30 for every 37 seconds spent waiting in traffic. (There is no charge for time spent on the move, as that is folded into the distance-based charge.)

EDIT: If the guy had taken a taxi instead of an Uber, they would not have been able to levy additional charges what he paid (which raised his bill from $200 to $600). That's the downside to Uber and Lyft: the price you see in the app is not the final price. In a taxi, it is.

> In a taxi, it is.

In what app? You mean the fixed prices many cities set for airport taxi rides based on zones?

Levying of unlimited additional charges based on fine print seems like a generally unethical practice. But there should be some process for being able to break the contract without unlimited liability on the part of the business either.

What app? In most U.S. cities, taxis use physical hardware meters which are inspected by the city/county/etc. and which post a running total of the charge visible to the passenger from the backseat.

On a related note, having lived in the area, its absolutely mind boggling how many people around DC absolutely have no idea what they are doing when it comes to snow.

It’s so bizarre. It’s the mid-Atlantic. It’s not like snow is rare or anything! There’s skiing and 4000’ peaks nearby!

Usually they pre-treat the highways and roads around the DMV, but it was raining before the snow started so that was not feasible. The temperature also dropped really fast

This wasn't just snow, I-95 was covered in ice.

Big difference between snow and black ice. Even in Canada.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com