COSTA MESA, CA –  As Uber Technologies pours tens of millions of dollars into pushing a California ballot initiative, one Southern California personal injury attorney is sounding the alarm about what he calls one of the most deceptively named measures in recent memory.

Initiative 25-0022, officially titled the “Protecting Automobile Accident Victims from Attorney Self-Dealing Act,” is scheduled to appear before California voters on November 3, 2026. While its name suggests the measure champions injured consumers, attorney Damoun Yazdi, founding attorney of The Accident Network Law Group, says the opposite is true.

“This initiative is not written to protect victims. It is written to protect Uber,” said attorney Yazdi. “Uber has invested over $32 million to get this on the ballot because the company knows that if it passes, fewer injured people will be able to find lawyers willing to take their cases. That means fewer lawsuits against Uber, less accountability, and less money paid to people they injure.”

What the Initiative Actually Does

Beneath its consumer-friendly title, Initiative 25-0022 contains provisions that critics say systematically disadvantage injured Californians:

• The measure would impose a hard 25 percent cap on attorney contingency fees. That model is what currently makes it possible for injured people with no money to hire experienced lawyers and pay nothing until they win. Reducing the cap to 25 percent makes many cases financially unworkable to pursue, particularly complex injury claims that demand expert witnesses and months of litigation. Attorneys will be forced to turn those clients away.
• Medical expense recovery would be calculated using Medicare, Medi-Cal, and insurance database rates rather than actual treatment costs. Most California providers bill well above those government benchmarks, which leaves injured victims responsible for the difference between what their settlement covers and what their doctors actually charge.
• Referral agreements between attorneys and medical providers would be prohibited outright. Proponents frame this as rooting out conflicts of interest. In practice, those referral networks are what allow uninsured and underinsured patients to get treated after an accident with nothing due upfront. Doctors agree to wait for payment until the case resolves. Without those arrangements, injured people without coverage will find far fewer options for immediate care.

Who Really Wins If This Passes

Yazdi argues the beneficiaries of Initiative 25-0022 are corporate defendants and insurance companies, not accident victims.

“Insurance companies stand to gain enormously from this measure,” said attorney Yazdi. “If victims can’t find attorneys to represent them, or can only recover a fraction of their medical costs, insurance companies pay out less. Period. This is a multi-hundred-million-dollar investment by corporate interests to rig the system against the very people the legal system is designed to protect.”

The Accident Network Law Group represents clients throughout California injured in car accidents, rideshare accidents, motorcycle collisions, pedestrian accidents, and more. The firm operates on a strict contingency fee model, meaning clients pay no fees unless the firm wins their case.

“My job is to level the playing field between an injured person and a powerful insurance company or corporation like Uber,” said attorney Yazdi. “This initiative is designed to tip that scale back in favor of the corporations. I cannot stay silent about that.”

Attorney Yazdi Calls on Californians to Reject the Initiative

Attorney Yazdi is urging fellow Californians to research the initiative beyond its title before the November vote, and to be skeptical of any measure bankrolled overwhelmingly by a single corporation with a direct financial interest in reducing injury payouts.

“When a company like Uber spends $32 million to put something on your ballot, you have to ask yourself: who is this really for?” said attorney Yazdi. “It is not for you. It is for them.”