Why should Bird be responsible for anything here though? There's no evidence or claim that there was anything wrong with the scooter that caused the accident...
No one made them do that. They did that because they wanted the right to rent the scooters in the city and the city knew that would come with real problems because shit happens. So Byrd says "Don't worry, we will accept responsibility for any problems."
Well they got the green light and are happy enough to collect the rent, but they tell the user "We accept no responsibility"
Bird isn't technically a party to this case, but it's on the hook for costs and damages via an agreement it has with the City of Los Angeles to indemnify the City. So, ultimately Bird would have to spend money if the indemnification clause it has with the end user is found to be illegal.
