Slashdot Mirror
Uber Will Pay $20 Million For Exaggerating Drivers' Earnings (engadget.com)
Uber is paying $20 million to settle allegations that it duped people into driving for its ride-hailing service with false promises about how much they would earn and how much they would have to pay to finance a car. From a report: The FTC claimed that Uber was advertising an annual median income of over $90,000 per year for uberX drivers in New York and more than $74,000 for uberX drivers in San Francisco. But, as the commission found out, less than 10 percent of all drivers in those cities actually make that much. The complaint also alleges that Uber was inflating the hourly earnings on job boards like Craigslist. New drivers who financed a new car through Uber's Vehicle Solutions Program found out the company's claims were too good to be true as well. Although Uber told new drivers they would be able to lease a new car for around $119 per week, the actual lease rates never dipped below $200 from late 2013 to April 2015. And, despite its promise of delivering "the best financing options available," it turns out that Uber's rates were actually worse than consumers with similar credit scores could have gotten elsewhere. Adding insult to overpriced injury, Uber tacked on mileage limits to lease agreements that were advertised with unlimited mileage.
How is this not criminal? Why hasn't someone been arrested. Will UBER admit wrong doing?
What I'm now more curious about is the true impact of a $20 million dollar penalty against corporate lying. If it is a mere slap on the wrist financially, then the FTC is doing nothing but encouraging this kind of arrogant fucking behavior by organizations. They are literally perpetuating the concept that it's OK to bullshit and lie about products. If that's the case, you might as well abolish all regulatory agencies.
The impact is becoming far too great to continue to ignore the fact that accountability does not exist within corporations anymore. Neither does ethics. Capitalistic greed has trumped all.
The correct solution would be to apply the fine and terminate any monies owing on existing vehicle financing, as well as possibly refunding monies already paid. After all, those monies and the contract are basically based on fraud and false advertising.
Why should we not be surprised? This is the same company which claims it's a "ride sharing" company, not a taxi company, yet as far as I know, not a single one of their drivers is picking up people who want to go the same direction as the driver.
Instead, the people contact some random Uber driver to pick them up at a specific location then be driven to the location of their choice, all for a fee.
That certainly is an interesting definition of "ride sharing" especially in one of the more recent incidents where an Uber driver drove someone from Virginia to New York and back. I highly doubt the driver was already going that route.
That Uber should now be found guilty of duping people into believing they could make X dollars a year by driving for them (isn't that the way a cab driver works, they drive for a company?), or that Uber was deliberately fudging numbers on the costs involved to lease a vehicle from them shouldn't surprise anyone, especially when this company, despite all the money they're bilking from people, still can't turn a profit.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
This is the first I have heard of the "Uber's Vehicle Solutions Program". I guess they were inspired by "GMAC Financing", the lucrative money-lending division of GM.
So far, they are "not a taxi company". Now I guess they are "not a bank". What's next, "not an arms dealer"?