The Justice Department sued Lyft on Nov. 9, alleging that the company’s drivers refuse rides to passengers with service dogs and wheelchairs, the department said in its announcement. The Lyft lawsuit seeks $53 million for riders, a court order and a civil penalty.
The case follows the department’s suit against Uber over the same conduct in September 2025, which sought $125 million. Both rideshare companies are now defendants in the same kind of federal disability case.
What the Lyft Complaint Alleges
The department filed the case in federal court in the Northern District of California under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The complaint alleges that Lyft denies service to hundreds and likely thousands of riders and receives thousands of complaints each year. It names 14 riders, with incidents from 2022 through October 2026.
The complaint describes a deaf-blind teacher who was refused a ride and then charged a “no show” fee, and a guide-dog user refused by three drivers in a row and charged a cancellation fee. It alleges that riders who complained received credits as small as $5 or $10, and that Lyft reverses cancellation fees only after passengers complain. These are allegations, and Lyft has not answered the complaint in court.
The $4 Pet Fee Problem
The complaint draws attention to Lyft’s “Pet” ride option, which carries a $4 fee plus tax that goes to the driver. It alleges that one driver took a rider with a service dog only through Pet rides because Lyft would pay him more to carry pets.
Federal law treats a service dog as a working animal, not a pet. If the complaint’s account holds, Lyft’s own pricing pays drivers extra to treat one as the other, and a driver who follows the law earns $4 less than one who does not.
What Lyft’s Own Policy Says
Lyft’s service animal policy says service animals are always welcome in any Lyft ride. It says the app reminds drivers that refusing riders with service animals is against federal law and Lyft’s policy.
That written policy is Lyft’s strongest point, and the department’s case is that the company does not enforce it. “Individuals with disabilities should be able to rely on rideshare services free of discrimination,” said Jesus Osete, the acting assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division, in the announcement. Craig Missakian, the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of California, said, “We take these allegations of misconduct seriously.” The court has not set a hearing date.
