A couple was unable to sue Uber after a serious crash because they overlooked the terms of service from their Uber Eats order.
A couple became victims of an Uber car crash
John and Georgia McGinty, a couple from New Jersey, faced a terrible situation after being involved in a serious car accident while riding in an Uber.
In March 2022, their Uber driver ran a red light, leading to a severe crash with another vehicle.
The accident caused significant injuries to both John and Georgia.
Georgia suffered fractures in her spine and ribs, while John had a fractured sternum and wrist injuries.
Couple can’t sue as they overlooked the terms of service
The couple wanted to sue Uber for the physical, psychological, and financial damages they experienced because of the crash.
However, they discovered that they could not go to court due to an arbitration clause they had agreed to in the terms of service for Uber Eats.
This clause meant they had waived their rights to a trial and had to settle any disputes outside of court.
When users accept the terms of service on the apps, they often agree to arbitration clauses without realizing it.
This means that if a problem arises, they cannot take the company to court.
Instead, they must resolve issues through arbitration, which is a process where a neutral third party decides the outcome.
In this case, the McGintys argued that they were unaware of the arbitration clause.
They claimed that their minor daughter had used Georgia’s phone to place Uber Eats orders, and they did not understand that it would impact their ability to sue Uber.
Court ruling sparks frustration for injured couple against Uber
Initially, a court sided with the couple in November 2023. However, after Uber appealed the decision, the court ruled against the McGintys.
The couple expressed their frustration with the court’s ruling.
They believed it was unfair that a large company like Uber could escape lawsuits due to complicated legal language in its user agreement.
They stressed their status as injured consumers and asserted their right to pursue justice in court.
“We are horrified at what the court’s decision suggests.
A large corporation like Uber can avoid lawsuits in court from injured consumers due to contractual language in their user agreement.
This language is often hidden in dozen-page-long user agreements related to services that are not connected to the injuries,” the McGintys said.
The McGintys’ attorney, Mike Shapiro, indicated that they were likely to petition the state’s supreme court regarding the decision.
They believe it is important to challenge the ruling.
Uber’ spokesperson broke silence on the matter
A spokesperson responded to the situation by stating that the McGintys had agreed to Uber’s terms of use multiple times.
“Our Terms of Use are clear that these types of claims should be resolved in arbitration,” they said in a statement.
“It’s important to display that the court concluded the plaintiff herself, not her daughter, agreed to Uber’s Terms of Use on multiple occasions,” the spokesperson added.
The company indicated that the court determined Georgia herself had accepted the terms, including the arbitration agreement.
This ruling meant that the couple had to follow the terms, regardless of how they placed their orders.