But first I want to link to a few articles. One is from the The International Association of Transportation Regulators (IATR) and lists some actions being taken against the rogue apps in other parts of the county. The other is an article in the Examiner by an attorney Christopher B. Dolon that was passed onto me by omnivorous reader and ace cab driver David Schneider.
Insurance
Before getting
to their one millions dollar insurance policies
let’s look at what kind of
insurance policies Lyft and Sidecar
advise their drivers
to carry.
“Sidecar requires
community drivers to carry liability insurance coverage as mandated
for all drivers by the state in which they drive. Before
you start ridesharing with us, we will check
to make sure you have valid coverage
as required by your state,
but it’s up to
you to get that insurance
for yourself. No special insurance coverage is usually
needed for carpool/rideshare use of your vehicle, but you should
check your car insurance coverage to ensure
that ridesharing or carpooling is not excluded. Sidecar does have a
Guarantee Program that could cover
you if your insurance is denied or exhausted.”
However, what Sidecar does,
in the words of Kara Cross Chief
Council for the Personal Insurance
Federation of California, (5)
“… is not ridesharing, but instead using a private
passenger vehicle for a livery
service. This is clearly
not covered under a standard
(personal liability) policy;
if an accident occurs, coverage
would not exist.”
In other words, nobody who rides in, or drives, a Lyft or a Sidecar
vehicle is covered
by personal liability insurance. Since few, if any, of these drivers
carry commercial insurance,
drivers and customers
usually are not be insured all.
But what about those million
dollar guarantees? Since the CPUC is hiding
the policies from public view all we can do is speculate.
First a question: If Lyft and Sidecar really gave complete coverage to their drivers, why wouldn’t they show their policies to the public?
Both companies
make conflicting claims about their policies. In it’s terms,
Lyft describes its policy thus:
“So long as Drivers
are in compliance with this Agreement (including but not limited
to the Driver Representations and Warranties provided
below), Lyft procures
insurance that provides
Drivers with excess
automobile liability insurance
up to $1,000,000 per
occurrence. The policy
offers excess liability protection over a Driver's existing insurance while such Driver is transporting Rider(s) on a trip arranged
through the Lyft Platform. The
policy coverage is limited to liability only and does not provide coverage for collision, comprehensive or wear and tear damage
to a Driver's vehicle.”
At the CPUC hearings on ridesharing, on the other hand, Lyft attorney Kristen
Svercheck stated that the policy gave complete coverage
which would make their insurance a fleet policy, not an umbrella.
Sidecar engages in similar double-talk.
$1 Million Insurance
Sidecar provides
drivers with a $1 million
per incident insurance
policy. Every ride is
covered from beginning to end.
What does “beginning to end” mean?
How does the Excess Insurance Policy work?
“Drivers in California now have $1,000,000 of excess liability
coverage per accident
with no deductible. The policy covers all claims relating
to bodily injury or property damage that the driver
is legally responsible for and that is not covered by the driver’s primary insurance policy. Drivers
are covered from the time they accept
a ride and are en route to pick up a passenger
until the passenger is dropped off at his/her
“intended and scheduled” destination.”
It’s not clear whether this is an umbrella or not.
What is the difference? An umbrella policy
covers over and above the amount of the driver’s own insurance. In most cases,
this would mean that the first $30,000
would be covered by the driver’s policy, and anything
over that would be covered
by the excess policy.
Since Lyft and Sidecar
drivers are not actually covered
by the personal liability policies that the NOETS claim is adequate; the drivers are at best carrying a $30,000 deductible. At worst, they have no insurance at all.
I longer doubt the existence of the million-dollar polices. The CPUC says that they
have seen the polices, but they will not say what the coverage is.
Lyft writes:
“As with any personal auto insurance policy, additional insurance terms, limitations, and exclusions apply.”
Without, of course, letting
us know what those exclusions are or where we can find out about them.
Sidecar goes Lyft one better:
“These payments are subject
to certain conditions, limitations and exclusions, the details of which can be found in our Program
Terms, available from Sidecar upon request.”
Is it necessary to point out that there
is no link to the Program Terms?
I wrote to Sidecar
on Facebook yesterday and asked them,
“Can you send me a list of the exclusions and limitations on your million
dollar insurance policy? If you can’t
send them yourself, where can I write to get a list of the limitations
and exclusions to your million
dollar policy?” (6)
Surprisingly, although they immediately erased my questions
from their Facebook thread, they did
write back to me, eliciting the following exchange:
Travis replied:
Hi Edward,
“Thank you for contacting Sidecar
Support. I also see that you have previously inquired about this topic.
Our commercial auto policy is
completely unique and was custom created for our community to protect our
community. (See www.side.cr/safety for details.) The policy covers damage up to
a million dollars per accident (1) where the damage is greater than the limits
of the driver's personal policy or (2) where the driver's personal insurance
denies coverage for the driver's participation in Sidecar.
This is what we share with both
our drivers and the Sidecar ride-sharing community.
Have a nice day.”
Travis
Support Specialist
Sidecar (Side.cr)
"My Ride is Your
Ride"
JUN 14, 2013 | 02:45PM PDT
To SideCar
JUN 15, 2013
Hi Travis,
“In other words, your drivers and
the Sidecar ridesharing community don't get to share the limitations,
exclusions and conditions of your policy either.”
Ed Healy
This is typical of the kind of cat and mouse con games these people
play. They claim to carry insurance and then decline to show the
coverage even to their own drivers.
Let me ask one more time:
Would people that truly
carried the insurance coverage that John Zimmer and Sunil Paul claim they have refuse
to show their polices to the public?
The law suits will start piling up against these companies from their workers and passengers. Probably take about 2 or 3 years to hit critical mass, suspect these type of organizations just declare bankruptcy and rename themselves after the law suits unless regulated.
ReplyDeleteThe law issue will be an interesting one because both the customers and the drivers agreed not to sue when they downloaded the apps - although I doubt that more than a few of them read Lyft and Sidecar's "terms." I would bet that a suit on this fact will be one of the first to be filed.
ReplyDeleteHi Ed,
ReplyDeleteI was just in a Muni bus and there was an advertisement inside the Muni bus promoting sidecar. What in the world is the MTA trying to do to us. The power of money I guess! Also does anyone know why its taking them so long to make that a legal left on Sutter St again. Thank you
That is a amazing! Last I heard Taxi Services was working on a series of Pro-taxi anti Lyft and Sidecar ads for the outside of the taxi. The left hand apparently doesn't know what the right hand is doing.
ReplyDeleteI'll pass the info on.
As for the left turn, Barry Korengold started trying to get that changed the moment it was put up.
Taxi Services gave this reply to my query about the Sidecar ads in the buses.
ReplyDeleteThe First Amendment prevents us from censoring advertising. It’s that simple. See http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Anti-Islam-ads-return-to-10-Muni-buses-4346482.php