Some of the most well known global good delivery app companies including GrubHub, DoorDash, Postmates and Uber Eats, were taken to court over allegations that the companies were using their dominant position in the restaurant meal deliveries segment to impose fees that are being borne ultimately by consumers because of higher menu prices. The case alleged that the companies have been following this exportation tactic even during the coronavirus pandemic.
The proposed class action, which was filed by three consumers at in Manhattan federal court, have charged the companies of violating the antitrust law of the United States by forcing restaurants to charge equally the delivery customers and dine-in customers while also imposing "exorbitant" fees between 10% and 40% of the revenue to process delivery orders.
This business practice had put the restaurants to make the so called "devil's choice" of charging higher prices from everyone as a pre condition to using the food delivery services of the companies, alleged that consumers who are all from New York.
The law suit alleged that this business strategy made it very hard for the restaurants to keep tables full even before the pandemic caused most of the resutaurants ot go empty and ultimately temporarily shut down to stop the spread of the coronavirus.
"Plaintiffs bring this claim for relief on behalf of all Americans who would still [like] to enjoy a nice dinner out with their family before defendants make that impossible," the complaint said.
No comments were available from Grubhub Inc, whose businesses include Grubhub and Seamless, as well as from Uber Technologies Inc, which owns Uber Eats. No comments on the allegations and the case were available from the other food delivery companies DoorDash and Postmates as well from the lawyers of the plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs have sought triple damages from the court in the law suit which includes damages for overcharging of consumers by the companies since April 14, 2016 for dine-in and delivery customers in the United States in all of the restaurants that had used the delivery apps of the companies
The case is Davitashvili et al v Grubhub Inc et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 20-03000.
(Source:www.todayonline.com)
The proposed class action, which was filed by three consumers at in Manhattan federal court, have charged the companies of violating the antitrust law of the United States by forcing restaurants to charge equally the delivery customers and dine-in customers while also imposing "exorbitant" fees between 10% and 40% of the revenue to process delivery orders.
This business practice had put the restaurants to make the so called "devil's choice" of charging higher prices from everyone as a pre condition to using the food delivery services of the companies, alleged that consumers who are all from New York.
The law suit alleged that this business strategy made it very hard for the restaurants to keep tables full even before the pandemic caused most of the resutaurants ot go empty and ultimately temporarily shut down to stop the spread of the coronavirus.
"Plaintiffs bring this claim for relief on behalf of all Americans who would still [like] to enjoy a nice dinner out with their family before defendants make that impossible," the complaint said.
No comments were available from Grubhub Inc, whose businesses include Grubhub and Seamless, as well as from Uber Technologies Inc, which owns Uber Eats. No comments on the allegations and the case were available from the other food delivery companies DoorDash and Postmates as well from the lawyers of the plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs have sought triple damages from the court in the law suit which includes damages for overcharging of consumers by the companies since April 14, 2016 for dine-in and delivery customers in the United States in all of the restaurants that had used the delivery apps of the companies
The case is Davitashvili et al v Grubhub Inc et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 20-03000.
(Source:www.todayonline.com)
Homepage
Send to a friend
Printable version
Share
