A woman in California, who suffers from epilepsy, shared a video claiming that a Lyft driver abandoned her after noticing she had a service dog with her.
The woman, identified as Jaime Simpson, an epilepsy advocate, shared a video describing an incident involving a Lyft driver. She said she relies on a service dog to help manage her epilepsy attacks. In the video, she showed that the driver she had booked began driving away after noticing she had a dog with her, even though the animal was wearing a vest identifying it as a service dog.
Simpson said the driver allegedly looked at her, pointed at the dog, and then waved. When she told him that her dog was a service animal, she said his only response was “bye.” She also explained that this was not an isolated incident, claiming that other drivers had canceled on her previously. She added that she was already running late for a job interview because of the repeated cancellations.
“It’s actually really disappointing and frustrating,” she added, noting that her dog’s vest clearly identified it as a service animal trained for seizure support. At the end of the video, she explained that she had to wait for another Lyft driver after the original driver left and canceled the ride.
In her caption, Simpson wrote, “it keeps happening over and over and it’s illegal. It’s also wrong.” According to Lyft’s official policy, drivers are required to accommodate passengers with service animals. The company states, “Both Lyft’s service animal policy and the law requires drivers to accommodate riders with service animals.”
Viewers Sympathize With California Woman Following Lyft Incident
The video sparked reactions online. Many viewers reacted to the incident in California, saying the driver should not have left and emphasizing concerns about service animal rights. One person wrote, “This is so wrong, my dog isn’t a service dog but I always order pet Lyfts,” while another explained, “which is what you’d do because you have a pet. But pet ubers/lifts cost more and the ADA states that a disabled handler legally can’t be charged more because of their sd. They have every right to take a non pet ride. The drivers, pet Lyft/Uber, are required by law to take a SD team.”
More people sympathized with Simpson and others offering a different perspective on the driver’s actions. One person wrote, “That’s insane. I wish I live near by I could have helped you. So sorry you have to go through this.” Another commenter defended the driver’s viewpoint, saying, “As a former Lyft and uber driver, I feel for you, but yea I would cancel on you too if I made it to you and you didn’t tell me you had a dog. You don’t know if your driver maybe has a fear of dogs, could be allergic, or just doesn’t want animals in their car. It’s tricky but try reaching out as soon as u get a driver, and be like ‘hey just so you know I have a service animal, hope it’s ok to have him/her in your car’. Simple.”
The incident left many viewers outraged, with most arguing that the driver should have allowed her and her service dog to proceed with the ride. It also sparked broader discussion about the importance of respecting service animal policies and being more accommodating toward individuals with disabilities.
