It’s not every day that a sidewalk encounter between a man on a mobility scooter and a delivery robot becomes a global talking point. But that’s exactly what happened in Los Angeles this week, when a video showing a delivery robot repeatedly blocking—and eventually colliding with—Mark Chaney, a man with cerebral palsy, went viral across social media platforms. The incident, which unfolded on September 25, 2025, has since sparked a heated debate about accessibility, safety, and the future of autonomous technology in public spaces.
Mark Chaney, a therapist and disability advocate from West Hollywood, was on his way home when he first noticed something odd about the Serve Robotics delivery cart rolling along the sidewalk ahead of him. According to Chaney, the robot appeared to be moving erratically, swerving and braking in ways that made it difficult for him to pass safely. Sensing trouble, Chaney began recording the encounter on his phone—a decision that would soon thrust both him and the robot into the spotlight.
In the now-viral video, which has racked up more than 20 million views on TikTok and over 650,000 likes on Instagram, the delivery robot can be seen blocking Chaney’s path multiple times. As Chaney attempts to maneuver around the cart, it suddenly cuts him off and brakes sharply, causing his mobility scooter to bump into the machine. At one point, the robot even appears to jolt backward, further complicating the situation. "Navigating the world with a disability or mobility aid is a challenge. Let’s not make it harder," Chaney wrote in the caption accompanying his Instagram post, as reported by KTLA.
The incident quickly ignited a flurry of reactions online. Some viewers found humor in the situation, but many others expressed concern over the apparent lack of awareness displayed by the robot. “Getting brake checked by a delivery robot is crazy,” one TikTok user commented. Another wrote, “Make sure to put in a report. There is a human driver and that is messed up for them to do.” A third observer, reflecting the confusion felt by many, said, “I was laughing until I read the comments saying someone controls those and now I’m angry for you.”
Amid the viral uproar, questions about accountability and safety took center stage. Serve Robotics, the company behind the delivery cart—and a partner of major brands like Uber Eats, 7-Eleven, Nvidia, and Delivery Hero—responded to Chaney via email. The company insisted that the robot did not reverse into Chaney, as some viewers alleged. Instead, Serve Robotics explained that both Chaney and the robot were simultaneously adjusting their paths. “In this case, just as you adjusted your path for the robot, the robot was also trying to adjust its path for you. Ultimately, as you got closer to the robot, it determined that the safest option was to come to a complete stop,” a Serve representative told Chaney, according to KTLA. The company acknowledged the “challenge of predicting someone else’s movements in real time without direct communication.”
Serve Robotics also clarified that while their robots primarily navigate sidewalks autonomously, they are continuously supervised by well-trained remote pilots. The company’s website notes that the robots are equipped with a range of sensors to detect and avoid obstacles. However, in Chaney’s case, the robot seemed to struggle with identifying and clearing a safe path for a person using a mobility aid.
For Chaney, the experience was more than just a viral moment—it was a stark reminder of the everyday challenges faced by people with disabilities. “I am disabled. Getting around presents challenges. Accessibility is important! We need to be sure to take into account mobility devices or disabilities when creating these machines. While these machines are profitable and convenient, they can also pose a challenge to accessibility and safety concerns (in my case, a collision),” Chaney wrote in a statement cited by the Hindustan Times.
Public reaction has been far from unanimous. Some social media users speculated about the robot’s control systems, suggesting that it might be partially automated but also remotely piloted by operators, possibly located overseas. “So I heard that they're only partially automated but mostly remotely piloted by someone in a developing country (most likely Southeast Asia). I'd be curious what a lawyer would say about your right to sue in this scenario, possibly,” one commenter mused. Others lamented what they saw as an inadequate response from Serve Robotics, while a few posited that the robot’s actions might have been an attempt to avoid Chaney, only to inadvertently create a hazard.
The incident has also prompted broader questions about the integration of autonomous delivery robots into urban environments. While these devices promise efficiency and convenience—delivering food and goods across city neighborhoods—they also introduce new complexities, particularly for those who already navigate public spaces with difficulty. As one observer put it, “We will be studying this video as an example of early robo-aggression.”
Serve Robotics’ explanation, that both human and robot were attempting to anticipate each other’s movements without direct communication, underscores a core challenge in the development of autonomous systems. Predicting human behavior in real time is no small feat, especially when the stakes involve physical safety and accessibility. The company’s acknowledgment of the difficulty highlights the ongoing need for refinement and testing, particularly in scenarios involving people with disabilities.
The viral nature of the video has ensured that the conversation extends far beyond Los Angeles. Disability advocates, technologists, and everyday citizens alike are weighing in on how cities and companies should balance the benefits of automation with the imperative to maintain accessible, safe public spaces. For many, the episode serves as a wake-up call—a reminder that technological progress must not come at the expense of inclusivity or safety.
As delivery robots become an increasingly common sight on city sidewalks, incidents like the one involving Mark Chaney are likely to fuel debates about regulation, oversight, and the ethical responsibilities of tech companies. The challenge, as Serve Robotics itself admits, lies in building machines that can coexist harmoniously with all members of the community—including those who rely on mobility aids to get around.
For now, the sidewalk standoff between Mark Chaney and the Serve Robotics delivery cart stands as a vivid example of both the promise and the pitfalls of our automated future. As cities continue to experiment with new forms of urban mobility, the lessons from this viral encounter will no doubt shape the next generation of technology—and the rules that govern it.