Atlanta cabbies slap Uber with class-action lawsuit

• Joeff Davis/CL File
• Don’t mess with the yellow van

Some Atlanta taxi drivers are taking Uber — and the tech company’s drivers — to Fulton County Superior Court over allegedly skirting the city’s codes regulating pay-for-hire vehicles.

A lawsuit filed this week — apparently the first legal challenge in Atlanta by the taxi industry against the car service — alleges Uber and its drivers “have tortuously and intentionally interfered with the Taxicab drivers’ and Medallion owners’ business relationships.”

Bill Pannell, the attorney representing the taxi drivers, says in a statement that those relationships include “customers, medallion purchasers, the City of Atlanta and other governmental regulatory bodies resulting in monetary damages.”

The taxi medallions the lawsuit references are known in Atlanta as Certificates of Public Necessity and Convenience, or CPNCs. It’s essentially a license to operate a taxi purchased from the city or another medallion owner. There are a limited number of medallions, which in the past could make them very valuable. Some have been sold for more than $80,000 — a far cry from New York, where the licenses have sold for as high as $1 million.

The lawsuit, which was first reported by the Daily Report’s Greg Land, alleges that Uber — and UberX, the company’s service that connects everyday drivers using their personal vehicles with passengers — “operate illegally by charging fares based on measured time and distance exactly like a licensed and fully insured Taxicab.” In addition to costing drivers fares, the lawsuit claims that Uber has diminished the value of the medallions and rental fees taxi drivers pay CPNC owners. We’ve pasted the complaint after the jump for your reading pleasure.

Uber and its competitor Lyft have gobbled up sizable chunks of the taxi business in Atlanta since arriving several years ago, causing heartburn among the companies that have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on medallions to operate legally, in addition to following regulations. That’s on top of some companies maintaining vehicles.

During this year’s legislative session, lobbyists for the taxi and limo industries battled with handshake artists representing Uber and Lyft over legislation by state Rep. Alan Powell, R-Hartwell, that would have required the car services to undergo some form of background check. Powell was ultimately unable to pass his proposal but did manage to convince lawmakers to create a study committee to examine the issue. According to its legislative web page, the group has not yet met. (“Probably about when we have the first cool weather we’ll call those meetings and hear what some of those folks have to say,” Powell said in a voicemail.) If the committee comes up with any recommendations, it will issue a report no later than Dec. 31.

Considering the lawsuit, some taxi drivers apparently want something to potentially happen sooner. Or have a back-up plan with legal teeth should lawmakers don’t crack down on Uber or pass other measures when the legislative session begins in January.

The plaintiffs, all of which drive Atlanta taxis, are asking for punitive damages against Uber for “consciously ignoring their legal rights and the laws and regulations for taxicabs” in Atlanta. In addition, according to the lawsuit:

“Plaintiffs seek injunctive and declaratory relief; disgorgement of all fares charged by UBER and its drivers for fares originating in the City of Atlanta and charged based on measured mileage, distance and time; other damages against Uber including loss in value and rental values of CPNCs as allowed by law; and, attorneys’ fees and expenses.”

In other words, they want Uber to stop doing business if drivers don’t own or lease medallions. And they want the tech company to pay back earned revenue, Pannell says.

And the interesting twist to the lawsuit - the plaintiffs claim that drivers who have picked up passengers through Uber since the summer of 2012, when the lawsuit says the company started operating in Atlanta, should also be considered defendants.

An Uber spokesman said the company had yet to review the complaint but promised to fight it.

“While it would be premature to comment on litigation we haven’t reviewed, Uber will vigorously defend the rights of riders and drivers to choice and competition,” Taylor Bennett, an Uber spokesman.

? ? ?
Lawsuit by Atlanta taxi drivers against Uber by thomaswheatley