Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 1 (1 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   2 comments

Exclusive to OpEdNews:
General News

Will Consumers Sue California over Uninsured Pseudo-Taxis?

By       Message Anthony Kalamar     Permalink
      (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H4 6/14/14

Author 87755
- Advertisement -

For the last year or so, one of the tech world's most entertaining sideshows has been the hearings held by the California Public Utilities Commission over how to regulate taxi-like "ridesharing" or "transportation network carrier" companies such as Uber, Lyft, and Sidecar. The process took a dramatic turn this week when the Commission issued a proposed ruling which included an admission that, by allowing these services to operate, the PUC has placed consumers in danger.

The statement follows an overview of objections to the PUC's past rulings made by the insurance industry. Insurers, represented by the Personal Insurance Federation of California (PIFC), told the PUC back in January of 2013 that "ridesharing" vehicles are providing a "livery service" and so would not be covered under the standard insurance policies held by private drivers. To quote the Proposed Decision:

From flickr.com/photos/53326337@N00/8522963280/
(image by quinn.anya)   DMCA

"We are left, then, with the probability that subscribing TNC passengers will be riding with TNC drivers that carry personal automobile insurance coverage that is inapplicable." (Page 16 of Proposed Decision.)

Instead of immediately addressing this insurance gap, however, the PUC has proposed a continuation of the decision-making process, with expanded insurance requirements to be considered in the coming months. The question thus arises -- what about right now? The state PUC appears to be willingly and knowingly failing to protect consumers of these services. If a TNC vehicle causes an accident today -- and the driver's insurance is denied -- the State could be on the hook. In fact, this bald admission of irresponsible governance means California has been wantonly failing to protect consumers and the public from since first allowing these under-insured services to operate back in early 2013.

- Advertisement -

Will consumer watchdogs step in? The California PUC's coddling of companies like Uber and Lyft is only the latest example of government bodies getting overly cozy with the industries they are meant to be regulating. It is time that regulators remembered that it is consumers, not corporations, they are charged with protecting.

- Advertisement -

 

View Ratings | Rate It

Anthony Kalamar is an independent scholar and writer on environmental and technology issues.

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon


Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Sharewashing is the New Greenwashing

Will "Ridesharing" Kill Ridesharing?

Share like a Sherpa: Class Inequality in the "Sharing" Economy

Uber is Only a Mechanical Turk

Google Is Building A Zombie

Will Consumers Sue California over Uninsured Pseudo-Taxis?