FDA Formaldehyde Ban Delayed: A Critical Moment for Beauty Industry Safety
January 9, 2026
In October 2025, Uber filed a California ballot initiative that could dramatically strip away accident victims’ rights. Marketed as a way for victims to keep 75% of their recovery, this proposed constitutional amendment is actually a power play by Uber to tilt the legal system in its favor. If passed, it would cap the fees accident victims can pay their lawyers and severely limit compensation for medical bills. That means people injured in any motor vehicle accident – not just Uber rides – could be left to battle insurance companies on their own, without full legal representation or reimbursement. Meanwhile, Uber and other corporate defendants would face no new limits. It’s a one-sided law that boosts corporate profits by denying victims fair justice.
Key Provisions of Uber’s Initiative & Impact on Victims
|
Provision |
Impact on Injured Victims |
|
25% Cap on Victims’ Attorney Fees |
Lawyers become unaffordable for victims. Limiting contingency fees to 25% means few attorneys could afford to take injury cases. In many claims, case costs and medical liens alone would exceed that cap, leaving no room to pay a lawyer. Victims would struggle to find representation. |
|
Caps on Medical Payouts |
Victims left with medical debt. For unpaid or future treatment, recoveries would be tied to Medicare/Medi-Cal rates (often far below actual bills). Even after winning, victims could still owe large balances for care, with excess costs shifted to patients or taxpayers. |
|
Tougher Proof for Medical Bills |
Harder to get medical costs paid. Victims would have to meet a high ‘clear and convincing’ evidence standard to recover certain medical expenses. This stricter proof requirement makes it easier for insurers to deny legitimate claims for needed treatment. |
|
Bans on Attorney-Doctor Liens |
Less access to care after crashes. The initiative would prohibit common arrangements where doctors treat injured patients on a lien (awaiting payment from a settlement). Without these, many victims might not get medical care upfront, especially if they lack health insurance or savings. |
Why This Hurts Victims – And Helps Uber: Despite Uber’s PR spin, this initiative’s real effects are deeply harmful to those it claims to protect.
- Victims could be left without legal help. With fees capped at 25%, many lawyers couldn’t take on accident cases. Personal injury attorneys only get paid if they win and must cover upfront costs. Under this cap, a case with moderate damages or substantial medical bills wouldn’t generate enough fees to make it viable for an attorney. As a result, many injured people—no matter how serious their injuries—would struggle to find a lawyer to represent them. Without a lawyer, getting a fair settlement is extremely unlikely.
- The deck would be stacked for Uber and insurers. Notably, the 75% rule doesn’t limit what Uber or its insurer can spend on defense lawyers. In a lawsuit, Uber could hire an army of high-priced attorneys, while the victim might have none. This one-sided setup would tilt the courtroom even further in favor of corporations. Uber isn’t trying to help victims save money — the company is trying to save money for itself by weakening those who might sue.
- Unpaid medical bills would fall on victims or taxpayers. The initiative’s limits on medical compensation mean injured people might not recover enough to pay their doctors. Imagine owing $100,000 for accident surgery but only being allowed to claim $60,000 — who pays the rest? Either the victim does (wiping out the “75%” they kept), or public programs like Medicaid have to step in. Either way, the at-fault company avoids paying full costs, shifting the burden to victims and society.
Part of a Bigger Agenda: Uber’s plan mirrors a broader corporate tort reform push. In states like Florida (2023) and Texas (2025), business-backed laws have tried to limit lawsuit damages and attorney fees. They’re sold as targeting “frivolous” suits or lowering costs, but studies show they rarely reduce insurance premiums. Instead, they mainly protect companies’ bottom lines. Uber itself has a history of pushing special laws (e.g. California’s Prop 22 in 2020 to avoid labor rules). Now it wants to rewrite injury law to its advantage.
Stand Up for Your Rights – We Can Help
Uber’s initiative is a stark example of corporate overreach – using money and misinformation to try and strip away the rights of those hurt in accidents. Don’t let them take away your access to justice. If you or a family member has been injured in an accident involving a rideshare company like Uber or Lyft, it’s crucial to know your rights and get experienced legal help. Brayton Purcell LLP is committed to standing up for injured passengers, drivers, and pedestrians against powerful companies.
Contact Brayton Purcell LLP today for a free consultation. Our legal team has the experience to take on rideshare giants and insurance companies, and we fight to ensure victims receive the full compensation and representation they deserve. Don’t face Uber or Lyft alone – let us help you hold them accountable and protect your rights.
