Slashdot reader Charlotte Web quotes SiliconValley.com: Bay Area ride-hailing giant Lyft is accused in a series of new lawsuits of failing to protect female passengers from rape by drivers. One plaintiff claims she was 15 when her driver raped her and then forced her to take an anti-pregnancy pill. The December legal actions are part of a “mass tort” lawsuit initiated in August 2019 by 20 women alleging sexual assault by Lyft drivers. Several dozen women joined the case soon after, and lawyers for the plaintiffs plan to add hundreds more alleged victims. A trial is scheduled for January 2022… The suits also allege that Lyft “does not cooperate with police when a driver commits an illegal sexual attack on its passengers,” requiring that “extensive standards be met” before it will consider police requests for information, and only releasing information in response to a subpoena…
Lyft could, the suits allege, ensure that video is taken and saved of all rides, and the firm could track drivers if they leave their cars for any reason other than to provide temporary help to a passenger, and it could set up a system in which passengers must confirm their intention to significantly change routes or destinations. Lyft said it has developed in-app features allowing riders to share their location with family and friends, and to quickly and easily obtain emergency help from a security firm that can alert police upon a passenger’s request.
The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages, including punitive damages.
The firm’s rival, Uber, has also faced a torrent of allegations that it doesn’t protect female passengers from sexual assault. After admitting last year that thousands of sexual assaults were reported during rides, Uber was fined $59 million this December for allegedly defying demands by California regulators for details about the reported attacks and its responses to them. Uber in response noted that its publicly issued safety report that acknowledged the sexual assaults was an industry first, and the San Francisco company described regulators’ efforts to obtain details as a violation of victims’ privacy.
of this story at Slashdot.
Source:: Slashdot