Fourteen women sued Lyft for allegedly mismanaged reports of sexual assault and rape

by



[ad_1]

The women, each listed anonymously in a complaint filed Wednesday, allege that Lyft "chooses to block" the forces investigating the assaults and that she does not inform the victims of the situation of the victims. drivers charged with sexual assault or rape. They allege that Lyft is negligent in its background checks and fails to protect passengers with additional technology. They claim that Lyft chose to "hide and conceal" the scope of his "sexual predator crisis" on the platform.

The alleged incidents, described in the 40-page lawsuit in the San Francisco Superior Court, occurred between January 2018 and June 2019 and traversed the country from California to North Carolina. Some of the alleged assaults occurred when women used the service the night after drinking, which has already been reported by CNN. The lawsuit alleges that the company is aware that motorists sexually assaulted and raped clients as early as 2015.

One of the drivers accessed her victim's phone after she had raped her and added a $ 25 tip on the ride that ended in assault, according to the lawsuit. In another allegation, a blind woman took a Lyft to the grocery store in the middle of the day; the driver then offered her a free home return that was not ordered via the Lyft app, and forced her to return home to rape her, according to the prosecution.

Many women claim that Lyft was largely insensitive when the incidents were reported to the company. In the case of the blind woman, Lyft would have recalled and sent an email a week after leaving a complaint filed in the application. The police investigation on his case was closed because "they had no evidence that the incident was not consensual," the prosecution said.

Many women say they do not know if the accused drivers would continue to work for Lyft. In a detailed case in the lawsuit, a driver continued to work for the company after the passenger reported a sexual assault to Lyft and the police. A police officer informed the woman that the driver was still working for the company two weeks after the passenger complained of the incident.

The complaint indicated that the driver had been charged with battery and pleaded guilty, but that Lyft had still not confirmed to the woman that he was no longer driving for the company. Lyft confirmed to CNN Business that the pilot was no longer working for her.

In a statement by Mary Winfield, Lyft's trust and safety officer described the allegations as "terrifying".

"As a platform committed to safe transportation, we are setting ourselves higher standards by designing products and policies to ward off bad actors, to make drivers and drivers feel safe, and to react quickly when drivers are safe. An incident occurs and our commitment is stronger, more than ever, as we dedicate more resources to our ongoing efforts to ensure our runners and drivers have the safest possible experience, "Winfield said.

The company has touted recent safety measures, including the provision of sexual harassment prevention training for runners and drivers, but this is not mandatory.

The lawsuit also claims that the company does not proactively report incidents to the police and that "many assault victims have been informed by detectives who handle their case that the team has confidence and security Lyft often does not respond to the detective's requests. "

Lyft's policy states that it only cooperates with the police when it can provide a subpoena or a formal legal order.
In the absence of public data on the number of alleged sexual assaults committed by Uber or Lyft drivers, a survey conducted in 2018 by CNN had revealed that at least 103 male and female drivers Uber and 18 Lyft drivers had been charged with assaulting or sexually assaulting their passengers. since 2014.

"Sexual assault is a horrible crime that has nowhere else," said an Uber spokesman at the time. "Although Uber is not immune to this social problem, we want to be part of the solution to end this violence forever."

Stressed and at risk: inside the Uber Special Investigations Unit & # 39;

A Lyft spokesman then said that he had "worked hard to design policies and features that protect our community," calling security "our top priority".

As a result of CNN's investigation, Uber, followed by Lyft, announced that it would remove a policy that previously forced people accused of sexual assault to arbitration and made them sign non-disclosure agreements. Uber also promised to release a report on security transparency that will highlight the numbers of sexual assaults and other incidents on his platform. Lyft has also announced its intention to disclose a safety report. Neither one nor the other have done it yet.
Since then, Lyft's American activities have only grown, and at times, the company has benefited from Uber's very public struggles for its own reputation. One of the plaintiffs said in the lawsuit that she had taken a Lyft, believing that it was "a safer alternative than Uber". In fact, he faces the same problems in terms of passenger safety. For example, the two companies use the same third-party company to conduct a driver background check, which sometimes proved to be insufficient.

In order to build a robust network to serve customers better, businesses depend on their ability to integrate and retain drivers. The lawsuit against Lyft highlights these conflicting interests, despite claims by both companies that safety is a top priority. "Unfortunately, Lyft's priority is not passenger safety – profits are Lyft's priority," said the prosecution.

In some respects, Lyft is a step behind Uber in updating its security measures. For example, the company announced a continuous driver background check a year after Uber and a stronger verification of identity verification two years after Uber. Lyft also announced in May that it would add an emergency button built into the app "in the coming weeks," a feature available in Uber since last year. The feature has not been fully deployed yet.
Thousands of criminals have been allowed to be Uber drivers. Here's how carpooling companies opposed stricter controls

The lawsuit argues that some new requirements could help better protect passengers, such as video recordings inside the vehicles, prohibiting drivers from turning off the app while on a trip or while driving. send alerts to the driver and the passenger (s) when the trip has skidded.

"Lyft could make simple modifications to their application to protect passengers and eliminate future assaults, but they chose not to do so," said one of the lawyers at the start of the trial, Mike Bomberger, in a statement. "We think Lyft knows how much aggression is happening in their cars and that's why they do not want the Lyft rides to be recorded."

[ad_2]

Source link