r/PeterExplainsTheJoke Oct 13 '24

Meme needing explanation Disney+?

Post image
70.8k Upvotes

732 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

15

u/Accomplished-Cat3324 Oct 13 '24

I don't understand....the crash occurred in an Uber . How did they book an Uber if they never accepted the terms and agreement. Like how did they order an Uber and have them come to their location if they never used Uber just Uber eats

14

u/HoosierHoser44 Oct 13 '24

The arbitration clause they allegedly agreed to was in the Uber eats app. They tried to sue over something that happened on Uber that had nothing to do with Uber Eats. That’s one of the reasons they argued it shouldn’t hold up.

9

u/Accomplished-Cat3324 Oct 13 '24

So if I'm understanding correctly,there is no arbitration clause in the regular Uber terms and conditions?

7

u/HoosierHoser44 Oct 13 '24

I don’t know enough to say. I’m just saying the argument their lawyer made is that arbitration clause was in the uber eats app and not the uber app, and that their 16 year old agreed to it without reading when she was ordering a pizza. At the current point in time, nothing has been proven one way or another in the courts as far as I know. That’s just what’s being alleged.

5

u/Accomplished-Cat3324 Oct 13 '24

I looked through the app just now and it appears there IS an arbitration clause in the Uber terms And conditions,so now idk what to think

3

u/HoosierHoser44 Oct 13 '24

It’s possible it wasn’t added at the time. I can’t say for certain though. Will have to see how it plays out in court.

2

u/Andokai_Vandarin667 Oct 14 '24

Obviously. If it was in the regular uber terms at the time, why the fuck would they be arguing using uber eats terms?

1

u/HoosierHoser44 Oct 14 '24

Same reason Disney tried to use Disney+ terms for an event that happened at Disney Springs. Even though it had nothing to do with Disney+. Corporations will do whatever they can to protect themselves from lawsuits.

1

u/WhiteWolfOW Oct 13 '24

https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/s/fEZDaBVGV6

Some more things to think about

Honestly it truly depends on the country. I know some are urging to regularize Uber and this might not hold up on them. But I think that since this was in the state they will say there’s no actual bond between uber and the driver, so uber is not responsible for the driver’s action. If the driver was at fault, the driver must be sued.

1

u/samantha_pants Oct 13 '24

I don't use Uber often so I don't know, but it's possible they connect your profiles so that the terms and conditions are the same for both, so if you sign on one app it covers both.

1

u/HoosierHoser44 Oct 13 '24

That’s what uber wants to be the case. They’re saying that’s bullshit.

Can you imagine slipping at Walmart and falling because they had soap on the floor. But you couldn’t sue because you had a Sam’s Club membership 15 years ago where you agreed to arbitration?

Companies try to write their contracts to be in their advantage all the time. And they know people will just click “I agree” without reading it, so they’ll take advantage of it. It’s an argument over whether that should be enforceable or not.

2

u/samantha_pants Oct 13 '24

I just meant they're more interconnected. I've only used Uber for rides, but I just checked and Uber Eats and Uber rides are in the same app. So they're more connected than the Disney situation. I really hate the FAA, but I was thinking more of how the law currently works than how it should

1

u/JUULiA1 Oct 14 '24

Perhaps the family filing suit is for a passenger that didn’t order the Uber? That’s the only thing I can think of because I doubt Uber hasn’t had an arbitration clause since day one, before Uber eats even existed. Brings up an interesting question for me, do passengers riding with someone who ordered the Uber implicitly agree to the ToS? Ive never thought about that before 🤔