Here's why a B.C. tribunal said Taskrabbit is not responsible for damage caused by its 'taskers'

A man drills into drywall in this photo. (Image credit: Shutterstock)

Taskrabbit cannot be held responsible for the cost of repairing thousands of dollars worth of damage allegedly caused by one of its "taskers," according to B.C.'s Civil Resolution Tribunal.

Wei-Po Tseng was seeking $5,000 in compensation after he told the tribunal the tasker who helped install an Ikea cabinet drilled into a water pipe, damaging a sprinkler system, drywall and hardwood floors. The decision, posted online Thursday, says Tseng submitted invoices for the repair cost as evidence.

The company argued it could not be held responsible for the damage because it is not an employer.

"Taskrabbit says it operates a web-based communication platform to connect clients seeking short term services with independent contractors," tribunal member Mark Henderson wrote.

In support of this argument, Taskrabbit pointed to an agreement Tseng and anyone else using the platform must enter into before booking a tasker.

"Section 1 of the Terms of Service says that Taskrabbit does not perform tasks and does not employ people to perform tasks," the decision said.

Tseng did not dispute that he agreed to the terms but said he – and other users – have a reasonable belief that Taskrabbit is a service provider.

"Mr. Tseng says that Taskrabbit’s branding, interface and communication with clients may contribute to this perception," the decision continued.

The tribunal found that what Tseng was seeking amounted to a claim that the company was "vicariously liable" for the damages caused by the tasker. Legally, an employer can be held responsible for an employee's actions – but the tribunal ultimately agreed that Taskrabbit is not an employer.

"There is no evidence that Taskrabbit assigns tasks to taskers or that Taskrabbit has any supervisory relationship with the taskers who list their services on the platform," the decision said.

"I find that Taskrabbit is not liable for the tasker’s alleged negligent work."

Tseng's claim was dismissed and he was also ordered to reimburse the company $25 for tribunal fees.