Apr 27, 2022 15:00:00

Uber faces a $ 2.36 billion fine sued by Australian regulatory agencies for 'problems showing that it costs money even though there is no cancellation fee'

by

Stock Catalog

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) said on April 26, 2022 that Uber, a ride-sharing service, misunderstood consumers by displaying cancellation fees and fares, and said it was A $ 26 million. Announced that it has agreed with Uber to start litigation proceedings seeking a fine of 10,000 yen).

Uber in court for misleading statements about Uber taxi fares and cancellation fees | ACCC
https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/uber-in-court-for-misleading-statements-about-uber-taxi-fares-and-cancellation-fees

Uber and ACCC reach settlement agreement regarding two historical issues | Uber Newsroom
https://www.uber.com/en-AU/newsroom/accc

Uber cancellation fees misleading, ACCC finds; company faces $ 26m fine
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/uber-faces-26m-fine-for-misleading-customers-over-cancellation-fees-20220426-p5ag6n.html

The following is an example of Uber's misleading display that the ACCC considers problematic. Many Uber services offer no cancellation fee if the driver cancels within 5 minutes of receiving the ride request. However, when the user tries to cancel, Uber displays 'The driver is already heading, so a small fee may be charged', and it seems that some cost will be incurred. The ACCC pointed out that it was giving.

This display started at least in December 2017 and continued until September 2021 when it was revised to clearly state that 'no cancellation fee will be charged'. Regarding this, ACCC Chairman Gina Cass-Gottlieb admits that 'Uber has misunderstood Australian users for years, which means that some users have the right to cancel for free. Despite the fact that it was there, it may have displayed a warning and urged not to cancel the ride. '

Meanwhile, Uber said in a statement on its official website, 'Almost all users chose to cancel the ride, despite the warning at the time of cancellation.' 'ACCC's allegations have been cancelled. It does not mean that the cancellation fee was charged in a situation where the fee should not be applied, 'he explained, and emphasized that the fee charged to the user is not the cancellation fee.

In addition, in the ride-hailing service in some areas, you could choose the 'Uber Premier' option that luxury cars will welcome you, or the 'Uber Taxi' option that arranges ordinary taxis, but of these, the 'Uber Taxi' fare The calculation algorithm always estimated a higher amount than the original charge.

In response to this issue, which lasted from June 2018 to August 2020, Chairman Cass-Gottlieb said, 'Uber has misleaded users by raising the estimated price of the Taxi option, and calculates that estimate. He admits he didn't monitor the accuracy of the algorithm. The misleading display of pricing deprives consumers of the choice of Taxi options and the informed decision of consumers. The price of the most standard option was displayed higher than it actually was, suggesting that it may have been easier to select the higher option.

'Uber has violated Australian Consumer Protection Law by making false or misleading statements in the cancellation fee warning message and taxi option pricing estimates,' ACCC said in collaboration with ACCC. Agreed to seek a fine payment order totaling A $ 26 million from the court. '

Uber also said, 'Uber and the ACCC have reached an agreement and reconciliation on two historical issues. The final resolution of the issues shall be by a federal court decision.' I fully acknowledged the point.