Two California district attorneys filed a civil suit Tuesday against Uber, the most popular ride-hailing service in the country, charging that the company misled consumers about the methods it uses to screen its drivers.
The suit, filed by the district attorneys of San Francisco and Los Angeles Counties, says Uber mischaracterizes the extent to which it vets its drivers, and demands that the start-up immediately cease “violating California law.”
Uber, which allows customers to hail a private car using a smartphone app, generally recruits nonprofessional drivers for its low-cost UberX service. To bring these new drivers onto its platform, Uber uses an outside private firm to screen prospective candidates.
Uber characterizes the practice as “industry-leading” on its website but San Francisco and Los Angeles officials say this is not the case.
Questions of Responsibility at Uber
In January, The New York Times interviewed Uber’s C.E.O., Travis Kalanick, about the ride-sharing company’s business practices, including liability in accidents.
By Sean Patrick Farrell on Publish Date January 26, 2014. Photo by Jack Atley for The New York Times.“Uber does not go above and beyond local requirements in every city in which it operates,” George Gascón, the district attorney of San Francisco, said at a news conference on Tuesday.
In the screening process, Uber and Lyft, another ride-hailing service, do not require drivers to submit their fingerprints for a background check, which the California officials say is the most comprehensive form of driver screening methodology.
“You are not using an industry-leading background process if you are not fingerprinting your drivers,” Mr. Gascón said.
Eva Behrend, a spokeswoman for Uber, said in a statement that the company had met with the district attorneys and would continue discussions with them regarding their concerns.
“Californians and California lawmakers all agree — Uber is an integral, safe and established part of the transportation ecosystem in the Golden State,” Ms. Behrend said.
The suit comes at an inopportune time for Uber, which has been under fire for its driver screening procedures. On Monday, the service was banned in the Delhi region of India after an Uber driver was accused of raping one of his passengers. The Indian authorities said the driver had not undergone a proper background check.
Uber also faces stiff opposition from other local governments. This week, just days after Uber first launched its service in Portland, Ore., the city sued the company for operating an “illegal, unregulated transportation service.” On Tuesday, government officials in Spain and Thailand ordered Uber to halt its operations in the two countries.
The suit against Uber included a litany of other charges, including illegally operating at airports without authorization and charging customers fees while “falsely [telling] customers that part of that money was paying for an ‘industry-leading’ background check process.”
Lyft, Uber’s largest American competitor, was also named in a separate civil suit on Tuesday. However, the company settled with the two counties for $500,000 combined, Mr. Gascón said.
“After months of productive conversations, Lyft has entered into an agreement with district attorneys of San Francisco and Los Angeles that demonstrates our shared commitments to consumers and innovation,” a Lyft spokeswoman said in a statement.