Lyft, Uber not going anywhere despite fines
Ride-share companies Lyft and Uber said on Tuesday they would continue to operate in Pittsburgh despite big fines sought by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, setting up a legal showdown with the state agency.
The PUC filed legal paperwork last week proposing fining Lyft $130,000 and Uber $95,000 for what the agency calls illegal operations since they started in February and March, respectively. The PUC fined 23 previously cited drivers $1,000 each. The commissioners would have to approve the fines before they are imposed.
The PUC asked PennDOT to revoke the registrations of the drivers who were cited.
Both Lyft and Uber spokespeople said their companies would cover the cost of PUC driver citations — including the $1,000 fines — and would continue to offer rides to passengers in the area. The companies and drivers have 20 days to respond.
“We ... commit to standing strong with drivers and passengers every step of the way, fighting any citations, covering relevant costs and making policy progress,” Lyft spokeswoman Paige Thelan said.
Uber spokesman Taylor Bennett said traditional taxi companies are holding up state approval of ride sharing.
“The PUC's recent enforcement action taken against drivers utilizing Uber's platform is disappointing. We have been working in good faith with the PUC to create a regulatory framework that allows for modern business models like ride sharing,” Bennett said. “Efforts to penalize drivers directly impact their ability to expand economic opportunities, create new jobs and contribute to the economy.”
Cited Lyft and Uber drivers could not be reached or declined to comment. The drivers were cited initially in April when a PUC compliance officer took a variety of rides from between March 31 and April 21, including pickups at the Wyndham Grand, Rivers Casino and Station Square. The citations were summary offenses filed with a magistrate with hearings set in September. The new fines would be civil penalties, PUC spokeswoman Jennifer Kocher said.
Both Lyft and Uber have applications pending with the PUC seeking approval. Several taxi companies from across the state have filed protests against the applications, records show. A date has not been set for a hearing.
“It's unfortunate that this is the approach we have to take in order to ensure the safety of the entire community,” Kocher said. “We have been telling (the companies) what is required to operate within the bounds of the law, but they chose to open and begin business, leaving us no choice but to enforce the law.”
Among the groups who opposed Lyft and Uber applications is the Insurance Federation of Pennsylvania, an industry group. Samuel Marshall, president and CEO, said most individual drivers have policies that exempt coverage if the policyholder is using the vehicle as a taxi. He said Lyft and Uber should make their insurance the primary coverage for drivers.
“It exposes our members to unanticipated, unaccepted and uncompensated liability expenses,” Marshall said. “That's an expense all of our policy holders will have to pay for.”
Bobby Kerlik is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7886 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Security policies limit ‘insider threat’ at airports, TSA says
- SWAT incident in Ross ends peacefully
- Pet chiropractic more popular in Western Pa., but doubts linger
- Pittsburgh police chief finds use-of-force policies ‘quite satisfactory’
- Newsmaker: John Carson
- Police find marijuana grow rooms in Castle Shannon
- Maryland man found with missing Ohio girl in Pittsburgh motel
- Suspect in Glassport man’s shooting death put on house arrest
- Buffalo man killed by truck in the West End Circle wanted ‘a fresh start’
- Attorney wants evidence from South Allegheny teacher’s cellphone thrown out
- Pittsburgh on cusp of leaving fiscal oversight