Uber Wants Text Message Spam Class Action Tossed

Facing a potential text message lawsuit, Uber is seeking to dismiss a proposed class action from claimants alleging that the company sent them text message spam.

Uber is being accused of violating of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), with the company arguing to a California federal judge that the recipients had consented to receiving the text messages and did not properly request that the messages stop.

The ride sharing giant states that it is entitled to summary judgment on the text message spam allegations. These claims come from a group of prospective Uber drivers who agree that they did provide their cellphone numbers to the company but did not give the company the okay to send unsolicited text messages.

According to the text message lawsuit, the messages continued despite the recipients asking them to stop, following the provided instructions. The claimants state that they continued to text the word “stop” to opt out of the text message spam, but complain that they still received the messages.

The plaintiffs named in this text message lawsuit: Justine B., Jonathan G., James L., and Jennifer R., are leading a potential class action text message lawsuit for the unsolicited text messages.

Uber is also facing a second potential TCPA class action suit from Sandeep P., who claims that he never gave the company his cell phone, and had started receiving text message spam from Uber urging him to sign up as a driver.

Overview of TCPA Allegations

Uber argues that the text messages sent to Sandeep were merely notifications that stated a friend of his had entered his cell phone number to be a potential driver. Additionally, Uber states that they did not use an automated dialing system to send Sandeep the unsolicited text messages.

By stating that they did not send Sandeep these messages or use an automated dialing system, Uber states that they did not violate the TCPA. The potential class action text message lawsuit lodged by Justine and his co-plaintiffs was submitted in December 2014, and had partially survived a dismissal motion by Uber sometime in early 2015.

U.S. District Judge John S. Tigar had found that Uber’s text messages were not spam, but stated the company had not proven the recipients gave their consent for the messages. After which Uber asked the court to pause the litigation on the ground of the Federal Communications Communications was having their TCPA policy contested by the D.C. Circuit.

Judge Tigar had struck down this motion in January 2016, stating that the FCC’s decision would take too long to wait for.

Uber had tried to file another motion against the text message lawsuit attempting to win it, arguing that the FCC and other courts had consistently decided that providing a phone number to a third party counts as prior consent before receiving text messages. With the exception of Sandeep, the claimants had given prior consent to Uber sending the text messages, the company argued.

In addition, Uber argued that the claimants did not submit proper commands to unsubscribe from the company by texting words other than “stop.” The claimants still claim that Uber violated the TCPA by sending them the text message spam, and are still pursing legal action.

This text message lawsuit is James L. et al., v. Uber Technologies Inc., Case No. 3:14-cv-05678, in the U.S. District Court of Northern California.

Join a Free TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you were contacted on your cell phone by a company via an unsolicited text message (text spam) or prerecorded voice message (robocall), you may be eligible for compensation under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Get a Free Case Evaluation Now