Uber driver takes employer to B.C. tribunal over cracked windshield costs, loses

An Uber driver's vehicle is seen after the company launched service, in Vancouver, Friday, Jan. 24, 2020. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck

An Uber driver whose car suffered accidental damage while on the job was forced to fork out after a B.C. tribunal ruled the ride-sharing company was not responsible for repairs.

Uber driver Junjie Hu took his employer to the Civil Resolution Tribunal, the province’s online tribunal for claims under $5,000, seeking a $1,956.22 reimbursement for repairs he had to pay after his car was damaged during a ride in 2023.

Hu was driving a passenger down a highway on July 15 when he “heard the noise of a rock hitting his windshield and a crack appeared,” the CRT decision, published Jan. 21, reads.

Hu was forced to pay up for the windshield’s replacement after Uber refused to cover the costs, saying that the damage was not covered by the blanket commercial policy it has through ICBC.

According to the decision, Uber said even if its policy did include comprehensive coverage, the windshield damage would still have fallen below the $2,500 deductible.

Tribunal member Maria Montgomery reviewed the insurance certificate and agreed that the policy didn’t include comprehensive damage.

Uber said it was not responsible for the damage under its agreement with Hu, while Hu argued that the ride-sharing company breached its contract by not paying up, the decision reads.

Despite his claim, Hu was unable to provide evidence that “covering windshield damage is part of his agreement with Uber,” said the decision.

The claims against Uber were dismissed by Montgomery after the company provided the drivers’ contract.

The document stated drivers are responsible for “obtaining, operating and maintaining their own vehicle,” and that Uber is not liable for any claim for any “indirect, incidental, or consequential property damage or loss.”

It also said Uber may maintain auto insurance related to driver services, but the company is not required to provide any “specific coverage for loss to drivers or their vehicles” unless required by law, or by addition to the agreement.

Due to Hu’s unsuccessful claim, the driver was not entitled to reimbursement for his tribunal fees and was ordered to pay Uber’s expenses, totaling $25.