# Biggest Up Front Pricing Skims



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

It might be good to have a thread where we can post the biggest Uber up front pricing skims for the reporters who are soon going to be looking to write stories on this. This topic will gain more traction now that Uber is being sued over it, so let's give the reporters some material to work with and some hard, factual numbers for them to publish in order to expose this latest scam from Uber.

I gave a 70 mile ride this morning from SFO airport to Santa Rosa. The pax was charged $134.09 to his Amex card:










But on my fare calculation summary, Uber told me in the Trip Detail that the fare was just $99.30:










Now, the $99.30 does not include the booking fee, the airport fee or the bridge toll. So, to get the whole picture let's look at both versions of the fare from Uber - my driver's version and the pax' version and compare the two:










The fare according to distance and time was $99.30. Add in the toll, the airport fee and the booking fee and the total that should have been charged to the pax was $112.35. But the pax was actually charged $134.09, which means that Uber paid itself an extra $21.74 in" up front pricing bonus". It kept for itself all of that extra revenue from the pax. So, in total, Uber took the $21.74 bonus, the $19.86 Uber fee from the Trip Detail, plus the $1.75 booking fee. This all adds up to a ridiculous total of $43.35 in fees and commissions. They received $43.35; I received $79.44 (net of Uber fee and bridge toll, which I do not get to keep). In other words, they took 35% of the pot and I got just 65%.

If they had paid me my fair share of the revenue they got from the pax (80% of the fare less booking fee) then I would have received $96.83 and they would have kept $25.96. By means of the up front pricing scam they increased their take from $25.96 to $43.35, which is a 67% increase.

When I confronted Uber over this, all I got in reply was a generic pre-written form letter claiming that sometimes their upfront pricing is inaccurate. In that case, they should not do it. Bumping up the fare from $112.35 to $134.09 is a 19% increase. When I responded to them and told them this was unacceptable, they simply sent me the same template response again.

The screenshot below is Google's distance and time estimate for this trip. Note that this estimate is for 70 miles and 80 minutes. This is an extremely accurate estimate; the actual trip distance I drove was 69.44 miles with an actual trip time of 79.28 minutes. Google's estimate of distance was within 0.8% of actual and Google's estimate of trip time was within 0.9%. Less than one percent error. However, Uber "overestimated" the fare and increased it by 19%, charging the pax an extra $22. They try to palm this off by saying, "sometimes our estimates are inaccurate"? No... I'm not buying it. Not from a company that boasts that it is a technology company.










Please post screenshots of other upfront pricing scam jobs so we can shed some light on this. Journos do read this site and take a lot of their material from it for their articles. Pax are being overcharged, we are being underpaid and Uber is laughing at both pax and drivers all the way to the bank. It needs to stop.


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

I'm still not convinced that this is a scam. They are able to price the ride at whatever they want initially, and the rider can agree to the upfront price (or not). Drivers have already agreed to a pricing structure: time + mileage + toll - commision. Whatever is left is kept as profit by uber. 

It's no different than me using a contractor to build a house, and the contractor using subs to do the work. They pay the subs whatever their negotiated rate is. The contractor keeps the difference.

I understand drivers don't like this, as they think they're being taken for a ride, when in fact it's sort of a standard business practice.

With this upfront pricing scheme, the pax typically doesn't care about distance - they care about arrival time as they already know what the cost is. They just want to get there. So if I can take a longer route and arrive within a few minutes of the shortest route, I can capture some of that funny money as well.

As to your last statements, Pax are not being overcharged. They are agreeing to the trip price initially. If they agreed to a $100 trip and uber charged them $120, then yes, they'd be overcharging. This rideshare crap is still considerably cheaper than a taxi. Drivers are not being underpaid - they are being paid based on their contract (which may be poor terms), but there's no scam here.

The issue in my estimation is that Uber changed how it did business (exact pricing vs upfront pricing), and didn't include an adjustment for drivers so they would share in the increase (or decrease) depending on the situation. They didn't communicate the effects of this change to drivers (surprise, uber doesn't care about their 'partners'). The perception now is that drivers are being screwed, that it's a scam, that passengers are overpaying for a ride. That just isn't reality. Uber just discovered a way to make passengers happy (certainty of upfront pricing), and found a new revenue stream that isn't tied to pre-existing contractual obligations, therefore padding their bottom line.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Well said NorCalPhil that's very well said. That's what I've been telling people.

It's unfortunate and I wish it wasn't the case, but this is not unique to Uber. Before, what a pax paid and what a driver got paid looked relatively identical. They changed to the upfront pricing scheme because of complaints and probably a lot of refunds due to drunks not understanding how much a ride would cost with surge multipliers. Now they know exactly what it'll cost up front, no more surprise pricing.

That was the initial intent of the feature, and for that, it has worked. I have less poor ratings and complaints due to pricing as a Surge Driver.

I would rather be also making more if Uber is charging more, but I understand the agreement I made with Uber is that I would get paid on the rate table, not a percentage of what the pax is charged. If I don't like that agreement anymore, I can walk away from it at anytime.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

NorCalPhil said:


> I'm still not convinced that this is a scam. They are able to price the ride at whatever they want initially, and the rider can agree to the upfront price (or not). Drivers have already agreed to a pricing structure: time + mileage + toll - commision. Whatever is left is kept as profit by uber.
> 
> It's no different than me using a contractor to build a house, and the contractor using subs to do the work. They pay the subs whatever their negotiated rate is. The contractor keeps the difference.
> 
> ...


The upfront price skimming is an issue for several reasons.

1) The driver contract states that Uber's cut will be a percentage of the fare plus a booking fee, not whatever the pax agrees to pay minus the driver's pay. They don't change the contract because they want to continue to claim agent status - "all we do is collect fares on behalf of the drivers". They're trying to have their cake and eat it; best of both worlds.

2) You say that pax are not being overcharged. Below is Uber's published rate card from their website for San Francisco:










These are the base, non surge, rates that Uber tells pax they will be charged. However, with the upfront price skims, Uber charges pax base rates of 5, 10, 20% more than the published rates. That's overcharging. If a can of beans costs 99c in a supermarket and the cashier rings it up at $1.49 and you pay that for it, you were still overcharged even if you agreed to pay and then paid the inflated price.

3) Uber's justification for the continual fare (and pay) cuts over the years was that lower fares for pax meant an increased number of rides for us. Now they are reversing the rider fare cuts and increasing fares via up front pricing. If number of rides goes up with lower pax fares, then it goes down with higher pax fares. Uber gets all of the benefit of the higher fares, while we drivers get hit with the consequence of fewer rides. Uber and its drivers are supposed to be partners. What kind of partnership is it when one partner takes all the benefits of a change for itself while the other partners take all the negatives?

4) Uber styles itself as simply an agent, not a transportation provider. To get around labor laws, they claim that they are just a facilitator, a software provider, an agent who collects money for us on our behalf, then takes their percentage, then passes the rest on to us. Clearly, that is now not so.

5) Pax don't care only about time. And Uber didn't "find a way to make passengers happy". I only mention this to pax who have been charged over and above standard rates, but all of the pax whom I have told that they are paying a premium for upfront pricing have been anything but happy about it.



steveK2016 said:


> Well said NorCalPhilthe agreement I made with Uber is that I would get paid on the rate table, not a percentage of what the pax is charged.


Not quite. The agreement with Uber is that a) the driver will charge the pax set rates per mile and per minute, plus a base in some cities, all multiplied by a surge multiplier when demand is high and b) Uber will take a fee from the amount the driver charges the pax, and it will charge a booking fee directly to the pax.

Clearly, Uber's side of the deal has changed since the driver contracts were agreed to by both sides. Uber no longer simply takes a percentage from the amount that the driver charges the pax plus booking fee. It's now completely different, with Uber making up an arbitrary amount to charge pax and then pocketing the difference between the amount Uber chooses and the amount that the pax would have paid according to the rate card.


> If I don't like that agreement anymore, I can walk away from it at anytime


If that were a legitimate defence of what Uber has been doing, then there would never be any labour disputes of any kind.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

The thing is, if Uber is able to charge surge rates above the base rates on the fly, then upfront pricing is no different then a surge right?

Well, when they present the price to the Rider in the app, this is what it told to explain the pricing.










So there's two ways of being charged. Either your charged what is presented or charged on the rate table.

Show me the exact verbiage in the Driver Contract that states that the pax pays to the rate table. The contract does not say that the driver gets paid a percentage of the pax charge. We've gone over the entire contract on this forum. Feel free to prove me wrong.

The contract makes no mention how much the pax pays, because how much the pax pays has nothing to do with the agreement between Uber and Driver. We agree to be paid by the rate table of our city.

Here's the link to the contract to make it easier on you: https://uber-regulatory-documents.s3.amazonaws.com/country/united_states/p2p/RASIER Technology Services Agreement December 10 2015.pdf

Middlemen often up charge between what they pay and what they charge all the time. That's the basis of being a middleman.


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

elelegido said:


> 1) Uber styles itself as simply a middleman, not a transportation provider. To get around labor laws, they claim that they are just a facilitator, a software provider, an agent who collects money for us on our behalf, then takes their percentage, then passes the rest on to us. Clearly, that is now not so.


It's still that way. They don't provide transportation, just facilitate it. They still collect the money, pay the driver, take their percentage from the fare. They are under no obligation to give anybody anything else. The rider TOS and the driver TOS are different, and in no way are they linked. Your perception of how it should be is not reality.



elelegido said:


> 2) You say that pax are not being overcharged. Below is Uber's published rate card from their website for San Francisco:
> 
> These are the base, non surge, rates that Uber tells pax they will be charged. However, with the upfront price skims, Uber charges pax base rates of 5, 10, 20% more than the published rates. That's overcharging. If a can of beans costs 99c in a supermarket and the cashier rings it up at $1.49 and you pay that for it, you were still overcharged even if you agreed to pay and then paid the inflated price.


Obviously, the rate table still applies. They use it to help determine the upfront cost, but because of uncertainty, they estimate upwards. Notice they don't have a surge table published-they just assumed people understand the concept and can do multiplication (ha!) Are the estimates accurate? No. Have we seen anywhere the estimate was actually lower than the eventual cost? (I haven't). Do I think UBER should consider refunding the extra fare when the ride is completed? Maybe. But they are not obligated to do that. Is their pricing strategy flawed and troubling from a pax/driver perspective? YES - which is one of the reasons I don't use the service as a pax!



elelegido said:


> 3) Uber's justification for the continual fare (and pay) cuts over the years was that lower fares for pax meant an increased number of rides for us. Now they are reversing the rider fare cuts and increasing fares via up front pricing. If number of rides goes up with lower pax fares, then it goes down with higher pax fares. Uber gets all of the benefit of the higher fares, while we drivers get hit with the consequence of fewer rides. Uber and its drivers are supposed to be partners. What kind of partnership is it when one partner takes all the benefits of a change for itself while the other partners take all the negatives?


I don't buy any of their PR/Marketing ploys, and that's all those are. They aren't legally binding in any way. They can try (and fail) to explain away all their predatory behaviors, and I can simply call BS when I see it.



elelegido said:


> 4) The driver contract states that Uber's cut will be a percentage of the fare plus a booking fee, not whatever the pax agrees to pay minus the driver's pay. They don't change the contract because they want to continue to claim middleman status. They're trying to have their cake and eat it; best of both worlds.


Yes, I believe that's all correct. And they like chocolate cake with extra frosting btw. Legally, they are not obligated to pay the driver based on what the passenger agrees to pay. They have to pay based on the calculations in our contracts, and nothing more.



elelegido said:


> 5) Pax don't care only about time. And Uber didn't "find a way to make passengers happy". I only mention this to pax who have been charged over and above standard rates, but all of the pax whom I have told that they are paying a premium for upfront pricing have been anything but happy about it.


Agree, passengers who learn what is going on aren't happy (As a 'partner' why are you telling them?). I don't like paying any markup on products I buy either. Most passengers are oblivious and are fine with the cheap ride they are receiving and happy to know up front what it will cost. Telling them that they could have gotten the ride for $XX cheaper by the old system is great, but you could also tell them the damn ride was more expensive 3 years ago before they started cutting rates. Or how much they are saving by not taking a taxi.

Upfront pricing has, in fact, made the complaining customers (those surprised by the end ride totals) happy. It also benefited the company financially. They fixed the squeaky wheel.

My comment about Pax only caring about 'time' was in context - when they know the price already, and I can get them to the destination in nearly the same amount of time by going an extra 5 or 10 miles, they don't raise a fuss and I get paid more.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

steveK2016 said:


> Show me the exact verbiage in the Driver Contract that states that the pax pays to the rate table. The contract does not say that the driver gets paid a percentage of the pax charge. We've gone over the entire contract on this forum. Feel free to prove me wrong. The contract makes no mention how much the pax pays, because how much the pax pays has nothing to do with the agreement between Uber and Driver. We agree to be paid by the rate table of our city.


Ok, you raise good questions, and I will give you the proof you're looking for, from the driver contract.

First, we need to look at the definition of the word "device" in the contract. This definition is given in sections 1.4 and 1.5:

_1.4
"Company Device" means a mobile device owned or controlled by Company that is provided to you solely for your use of the Driver App to provide Transportation Services. 
1.5
"Device" means a Company Device or Your Device, as the case may be._

So, Device means a mobile phone containing the driver app. Now that we know what Device means, we can then look at what Uber means by the word Fare. The first sentence of section 4.1 defines what the word "fare" means. It says:

_You are entitled to charge a fare for each instance of completed Transportation Services provided to a User that are obtained via the Uber Services ("Fare"), where such Fare is calculated based upon a base fare amount plus distance (as determined by Company using location-based services enabled through the Device) and/or time amounts, as detailed at www.uber.com/cities for the applicable Territory_

You asked, _"Show me the exact verbiage in the Driver Contract that states that the pax pays to the rate table"_. Well, this is the first part of it - how the Fare is calculated. From the above extract, the Fare is calculated based on the rate tables at www.uber.com/cities. We also know that the trip distance is measured "using location based services enables through the Device", i.e. trip data as reported by the driver's mobile phone. Therefore, the Fare is calculated from actual trip distance and time, not from an estimate.

Next, let's look at where the Fare comes from - who pays it and what is Uber's role in the pax:Uber:driver relationship. Section 4.1 goes on to say:

_You: (i) appoint Company as your limited payment collection agent solely for the purpose of accepting the Fare, applicable Tolls and, depending on the region and/or if requested by you, applicable taxes and fees from the User on your behalf via the payment processing functionality facilitated by the Uber Services; and (ii) agree that payment made by User to Company (or to an Affiliate of Company acting as an agent of Company) shall be considered the same as payment made directly by User to you._

So, the only thing that Uber should be doing, as our collection agent, is collect the Fare (which, as we saw above, is defined above as calculated according to rate tables and actual time and distance) from the pax. The User pays the Fare, which is collected by Uber, and as we saw above, the Fare is calculated according to rate tables and actual trip data.

You say above that _"The contract makes no mention how much the pax pays, because how much the pax pays has nothing to do with the agreement between Uber and Driver"_, but you can clearly see here that it does specify what the User pays, right here in the Uber Driver contract. It says that the pax will pay the Fare to Uber, and that the Fare is calculated according to the rate tables and to actual trip distance and time. If the time and distance of a trip are reported by the driver's Device at 10 miles and 10 minutes, and the rate tables are used to calculate that data to produce a Fare of $15.00, then Uber's sole purpose as the driver's agent is to collect the Fare of $15.00, and that the $15.00 collected by Uber from the User on the driver's behalf is the same as that made from the User to the driver - Uber collects the $15.00 and pays me the same $15.00, as if the User had paid me the $15.00 directly. As you can see, it's right there in the contract - it could not be any clearer.

The contract then goes on to state that Uber will pay the Driver the Fare less the Service Fee (commission) and other fees (e.g. booking fee)

So, in summary, the contract explicitly states:

1) The Fare is calculated according to rate tables
2) Uber, as my agent, collects the Fare from the User, who pays the Fare to Uber
3) The Fare collected by Uber is the same as the Fare paid by Uber to me

Clearly, Uber is in breach of contract by:

a) Calculating the Fare charged to the User according to an unidentified methodology and not by the rates on its website. As you posted, Uber now says to the User, _"Your fare will be the price presented before the trip or based on the rates below..."_. That's not what Uber clearly agreed with us in the driver contract.
b) Calculating the Fare charged to the User from an estimate, not according to actual trip data
c) Not paying the driver the same Fare that they collect from the User



> Middlemen often up charge between what they pay and what they charge all the time. That's the basis of being a middleman.


I stand corrected. Agent is the word I should have used, not middleman.



NorCalPhil said:


> It's still that way. They don't provide transportation, just facilitate it. They still collect the money, pay the driver, take their percentage from the fare. They are under no obligation to give anybody anything else. The rider TOS and the driver TOS are different, and in no way are they linked. Your perception of how it should be is not reality.


No, the driver contract explicitly states how the fare paid by the pax is to be calculated - see my post above.



> Agree, passengers who learn what is going on aren't happy (As a 'partner' why are you telling them?).


Because when I ask them to hand me their phones so I can take the photo they ask me why. I suppose I could make up something to get them to hand them over, but it's just easier to tell them the truth.


> Telling them that they could have gotten the ride for $XX cheaper by the old system is great, but you could also tell them the damn ride was more expensive 3 years ago before they started cutting rates. Or how much they are saving by not taking a taxi.


Sometimes I do!


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

elelegido said:


> _*You are entitled to charge a fare* for each instance of completed Transportation Services provided to a User that are obtained via the Uber Services ("Fare"), *where such Fare is calculated based upon a base fare amount plus distance* (as determined by Company using location-based services enabled through the Device) and/or time amounts, as detailed at www.uber.com/cities for the applicable Territory_
> 
> You asked, _"Show me the exact verbiage in the Driver Contract that states that the pax pays to the rate table"_. Well, this is the first part of it - how the Fare is calculated. From the above extract, the Fare is calculated based on the rate tables at www.uber.com/cities. We also know that the trip distance is measured "using location based services enables through the Device", i.e. trip data as reported by the driver's mobile phone. Therefore, the Fare is calculated from actual trip distance and time, not from an estimate.


The fare YOU as the driver are entitled to charge. This section is basically telling you that you are going to earn based on the rate table for your city. That's it. It does not say that the pax is being charged this rate table.



elelegido said:


> Next, let's look at where the Fare comes from - who pays it and what is Uber's role in the pax:Uber:driver relationship. Section 4.1 goes on to say:
> 
> _You: (i) appoint Company as your limited payment collection agent solely for the purpose of accepting the Fare, applicable Tolls and, depending on the region and/or if requested by you, applicable taxes and fees from the User on your behalf via the payment processing functionality facilitated by the Uber Services; and (ii) agree that payment made by User to Company (or to an Affiliate of Company acting as an agent of Company) shall be considered the same as payment made directly by User to you._
> 
> So, the only thing that Uber should be doing, as our collection agent, is collect the Fare (which, as we saw above, is defined above as calculated according to rate tables and actual time and distance) from the pax. The User pays the Fare, which is collected by Uber, and as we saw above, the Fare is calculated according to rate tables and actual trip data.


Where does it say that they are ONLY thing? It says we appointed them as a limited payment collection agent, but it has ZERO verbiage stating that is the only thing they are allowed to do. In fact, the rest of the contract shows that they can and do more then merely payment collection agent. This section merely states that we are appointing them a payment collection agent as they are the ones performing the CC transactions on our behalf.

It's a similar system as Amazon, which my company sells on. Amazon lists the product but they also process the payment. They do both. Likewise, Uber arranged the ride with the passenger, much like a listing on Amazon, then also is the payment collection agent on our behalf. It does not mean that is their sole responsibility nor their sole ability as regard with the pax.



elelegido said:


> You say above that _"The contract makes no mention how much the pax pays, because how much the pax pays has nothing to do with the agreement between Uber and Driver"_, but you can clearly see here that it does specify what the User pays, right here in the Uber Driver contract. It says that the pax will pay the Fare to Uber, and that the Fare is calculated according to the rate tables and to actual trip distance and time. If the time and distance of a trip are reported by the driver's Device at 10 miles and 10 minutes, and the rate tables are used to calculate that data to produce a Fare of $15.00, then Uber's *sole purpose* as the driver's agent is to collect the Fare of $15.00, and that the $15.00 collected by Uber from the User on the driver's behalf is the same as that made from the User to the driver - Uber collects the $15.00 and pays me the same $15.00, as if the User had paid me the $15.00 directly. As you can see, it's right there in the contract - it could not be any clearer.


Please highlight in the contract where it says it's SOLE PURPOSE is as a collections agent? Just because we assign them to be a collection agent doesn't mean that is their SOLE PURPOSE. The appointment as a collection agent is SOLEY for the purpose of processing the payment from the pax, that doesn't mean that is their SOLE PURPOSE... all this means is that they can't do anything as a collection agent outside of collecting

In fact, their MAIN PURPOSE is outlined in the second paragraph of the agreement



> Company, a subsidiary of Uber Technologies, Inc. ("Uber"), provides lead generation to independent providers of rideshare or peer-to-peer (collectively, "P2P") passenger transportation services using the Uber Services (as defined below). The Uber Services enable an authorized transportation provider to seek, receive and fulfill requests for transportation services from an authorized user of Uber's mobile applications. You desire to enter into this Agreement for the purpose of accessing and using the Uber Services.


That is what Uber does. That is their MAIN PURPOSE. We also appoint them as a payment collection agent.

It doesn't say that. It doesn't say what the pax is charged is what is to be given to the driver. All it says in that segment is that anything pays to you, the driver, from Uber is to be considered payment direct from the Pax. That's it. There's no correlation between what that number is.

Pax pays Uber $25. Uber pays you $20. This section merely says that the $20 that Uber gave you is to be considered the same thing as the Pax giving you $20 direct. It doesn't say that Uber has to pay you exactly on what the Pax pays. It doesn't say that and you cannot make assumptions with legal contracts. If it doesn't specifically say it, it doesn't apply.



elelegido said:


> The contract then goes on to state that Uber will pay the Driver the Fare less the Service Fee (commission) and other fees (e.g. booking fee)
> 
> So, in summary, the contract explicitly states:
> 
> ...


Uber never agreed with Driver on how much the Pax pays in the Driver Agreement. Driver only agreed to how much he is entitled to charge for fulfilling the services that Uber requests the driver to fulfill.

This agreement has nothing to do with the Pax Agreement, which is separate. They may define "Fare" differently, I have not analyzed the Pax Agreement as well as I have the Driver Agreement.

But I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree, we won't change each other's minds. I wish I were wrong, I wish they can be sued to pay us more, but the contract is pretty black and white.


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

elelegido said:


> Ok, you raise good questions, and I will give you the proof you're looking for, from the driver contract.
> 
> _You: (i) appoint Company as your limited payment collection agent solely for the purpose of accepting the Fare, applicable Tolls and, depending on the region and/or if requested by you, applicable taxes and fees from the User on your behalf via the payment processing functionality facilitated by the Uber Services; and (ii) agree that payment made by User to Company (or to an Affiliate of Company acting as an agent of Company) shall be considered the same as payment made directly by User to you._
> 
> So, the only thing that Uber *should be doing*, as our collection agent, is collect the Fare (which, as we saw above, is defined above as calculated according to rate tables and actual time and distance) from the pax. The User pays the Fare, which is collected by Uber, and as we saw above, the Fare is calculated according to rate tables and actual trip data.


This is where I'd disagree. While it states that we are appointing Uber to collect payment on our behalf for the items specified, it doesn't say anything about those items being the entirety of the monies collected. In the case of upfront pricing, uber is still collecting the "Fare" for the driver, in its entirety, and charging the commission fee, all based on the rate structure they publish, upon completion of the ride. They are responsible for paying the driver that money. Because they are forecasting the ride total ahead of time, potentially taking a risk that the amount they quote to the pax may not cover the entire fare, in which case they make up the difference out of pocket. They brush this off with "it all evens out in the end" logic which is BS. Now you have pax subsidizing other pax because of correct/incorrect estimations. All of it is BS.

If anything at all comes of the lawsuit, it will be passengers getting some relief. Drivers will continue to see zilch as we are being paid as stipulated in the contract.


----------



## wk1102 (Dec 25, 2015)

NorCalPhil said:


> I'm still not convinced that this is a scam.


What they did is find a loophole. Its shady af, but probay not a scam or illegal and certainly not transparent.


----------



## Lee239 (Mar 24, 2017)

Also the pax probably thinks you are making $120 or at least $100 for the ride when are only making $87 and have dead miles back.

And can they charge the pax a surge rate and tell you there is not surge, and if not why not?


----------



## wk1102 (Dec 25, 2015)

Lee239 said:


> Also the pax probably thinks you are making $120 or at least $100 for the ride when are only making $87 and have dead miles back.


79.50... the tolls don't count


----------



## Lee239 (Mar 24, 2017)

elelegido said:


> It might be good to have a thread where we can post the biggest Uber up front pricing skims for the reporters who are soon going to be looking to write stories on this. This topic will gain more traction now that Uber is being sued over it, so let's give the reporters some material to work with and some hard, factual numbers for them to publish in order to expose this latest scam from Uber.
> 
> I gave a 70 mile ride this morning from SFO airport to Santa Rosa. The pax was charged $134.09 to his Amex card:
> 
> ...


Is that first image a copy of the pax's phone?


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

steveK2016 said:


> Where does it say that they are ONLY thing? It says we appointed them as a limited payment collection agent, but it has ZERO verbiage stating that is the only thing they are allowed to do. In fact, the rest of the contract shows that they can and do more then merely payment collection agent. This section merely states that we are appointing them a payment collection agent as they are the ones performing the CC transactions on our behalf.
> 
> Please highlight in the contract where it says it's SOLE PURPOSE is as a collections agent? Just because we assign them to be a collection agent doesn't mean that is their SOLE PURPOSE. The appointment as a collection agent is SOLEY for the purpose of processing the payment from the pax, that doesn't mean that is their SOLE PURPOSE...


Nobody is saying that their sole purpose is to be a collections agent. That's not what's being said at all. Again, what the contract says is:

_You appoint Company as your limited payment collection agent solely for the purpose of accepting the Fare, applicable Tolls and, depending on the region and/or if requested by you, applicable taxes and fees from the User on your behalf via the payment processing functionality facilitated by the Uber Services_

What this means is that, when Uber acts as my collection agent, its sole purpose as my collection agent is to accept the Fare and tolls, fees etc from the User. It's quite subtle and hard to pick up on, but they're not saying that that's their only purpose; only that the only thing they do_ as my agent_ is collect the Fare and fees etc.

Now, in the contract, the concept of Fare is very strictly defined, and it is defined as only one thing. The Fare is what the User pays Uber, and it is specified that the Fare as being calculated according to the clearly defined rates on their website and actual trip data. It's clearly written in the contract. I don't really know how else to explain it.

Even if you don't agree that the Fare is defined, as Uber says in the contract, as being calculatd from the rates published on their website, then it is crystal clear that the driver contract specifically says that the Fare is to be calculated on _actual trip data_. This means that the Fare can only be calculated once the trip has been finished, not from an estimate before it takes place. This is also written in the contract, and reproduced above. It's in black and white, and irrefutable - no assumptions required.



Lee239 said:


> Is that first image a copy of the pax's phone?


Yes


----------



## Lee239 (Mar 24, 2017)

This is why they won't raise rates, they are already over charging the pax, if they raise them so that the driver gets more they will have to charge that much more. When I drove a taxi the split was them 55% and me 45% of the total fare, the pax paid tolls in both directions, we paid gas, we had flat fares to every destination and the driver and company knew how much each ride cost. we were responsible to collect the fee and 99% was cash, 10 years ago. All we had was a machine to swipe the imprint of the credit card, no debit back then.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

NorCalPhil said:


> This is where I'd disagree. While it states that we are appointing Uber to collect payment on our behalf for the items specified, it doesn't say anything about those items being the entirety of the monies collected. In the case of upfront pricing, uber is still collecting the "Fare" for the driver, in its entirety, and charging the commission fee, all based on the rate structure they publish, upon completion of the ride. They are responsible for paying the driver that money. Because they are forecasting the ride total ahead of time, potentially taking a risk that the amount they quote to the pax may not cover the entire fare, in which case they make up the difference out of pocket. They brush this off with "it all evens out in the end" logic which is BS. Now you have pax subsidizing other pax because of correct/incorrect estimations. All of it is BS.
> 
> If anything at all comes of the lawsuit, it will be passengers getting some relief. Drivers will continue to see zilch as we are being paid as stipulated in the contract.


Here's where the disagreement is. Uber specifies only one "Fare" in the contract, which it says that it collects from the User and pays to the driver, minus fees. In the contact, there is only one Fare, which it specifies in the contract is calculated according to their published rates and actual trip data and is collected from the User. There is no other Fare in the contract.

Now, with up front pricing, Uber likes the Fare in the contract when it comes to paying us, but they no longer want to charge the User this Fare, instead they swap it out on the User side for a different fare which is calculated according to an undisclosed methodology and is an estimate, not actual. You think that they should be allowed to swap because the contract does not specifically say they can't charge additional fees direct to the client.

The problem with this is that Uber tells pax that the fare they pay can be the up front price presented before the trip, and they tell us that the fare is according to the rate tables and actual trip data. My argument is that there can only be one fare. The fare is the fare - there can't be one fare that Uber collects from the pax and a different, lower fare that they pay us. The driver contract states what the fare is and how it is calculated and Uber is in breach of that.


----------



## Strange Fruit (Aug 10, 2016)

Uber claims it bases pax fare on the distance & time rates. An estimate based on the estimated time & distance of the trip. A few dollars discrepancy could make that true, but this example isn't that. The middle class drone minds here like siding with power. But it's clearly dishonest, even if they covered it in their contract. What happened to early American values where people weren't so enthusiastic to support fancy lawyer tricks to make obvious dishonesty legal. Section 4.1 in the contract supports Elelegido's claim, and the claim of others, though not completely clearly. But if pax fare, and our "fare" rate is totally unrelated, why does Uber give us a fare, then take 25% of it. Why not instead of $1.15 per mile, minus 25%, they just pay us 86.5 cents a mile (or whatever yr market is)? It's so annoying how everyone on the forum is either "they're scamming us" or "no, it's perfectly legal and nothing is wrong"?

And why even argue with either point made by that sort. People who think like that aren't worth arguing with. Where's Uberdancer with the George Burns quote?

It is simply a good idea to post the examples here. I personally have trouble when I ask people what their fare was. Sometimes they just say "Idk". But other times it seems like they feel uncomfortable disclosing.
Last time I asked, pax fare was within a few cents of the fare calculated from Google maps estimate at the start of the trip. Actually every time I've asked since upfront began (which isn't that many times now cuz of the difficulty) it has been within a dollar of the Google maps estimate mile& minutes, seeming totally legit. However most of my asking was when it was new last year, so Uber may have waited to put the stretch in. But the last time I asked it was last month. But there are these example like above.

I personally prefer the up front cuz nothing else changed for us with the pay, and it allows me to take the longer more money routes with a clear conscience. But they lowered rates (to "get more riders to raise our pay", and promised if our earnings didn't go up they'd adjust, so with this method they are reneging two fold, they raise price on pax so we lose the imaginary benefit of lowered rates, and they didn't adjust as our earnings went down (PDP adjusted, but they took that away). If pax want to pay me more to drive them, I'll give them the most efficient route, but at the price pax pays me for service, they'll have to arrive a few minutes later, if I can squeeze an extra mile out of it. But it's definitely dishonest if the fare rate would have been $112, and they charged $134. Even if there is some sneaky loophole in the contract that overrides the original idea of pax paying a fare plus booking fee, and we get 75% of the fare. After upfront was implemented, they were still showing on the pax app, the city fare rate that they were being charged out of. The up front was supposedly an estimate of price based on that fare rate. Sneaky loopholes may be legal, but that doesn't mean ****ing humans should accept it as ok. But middleclass thinking usually sides with power. They've always been the patsies of the aristocrats, or whatever those people are called in the modern world. Jesus didn't throw a tantrum at the money lenders cuz they were breaking the law. They weren't. They were sleazy though. "Nice" americans these days seem to think if they adopt the sleazy thinking of those with the power & resources, then maybe they'll be allowed in. Or rather, they don't _think_ it, but seem to feel it on a gut level. If it were clearly and plainly legal what they are doing with this up front thing, I doubt there would have been a lawsuit since last year. Cuz what would the suit be based on if it were as clear as the pro-Uber provincial minded posters above claim?
#ihatemyspecies


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Lee239 said:


> This is why they won't raise rates, they are already over charging the pax, if they raise them so that the driver gets more they will have to charge that much more. When I drove a taxi the split was them 55% and me 45% of the total fare, the pax paid tolls in both directions, we paid gas, we had flat fares to every destination and the driver and company knew how much each ride cost. we were responsible to collect the fee and 99% was cash, 10 years ago. All we had was a machine to swipe the imprint of the credit card, no debit back then.


Well... the trip above was 35% Uber and 65% me. And that's with me as a 20 percenter. For a newer driver it would have been 40% Uber and 60% driver. Not far off your taxi split, except the driver share is a share of Uber rates, not taxi rates... and the Uber driver supplies, maintains and insures the car. I wouldn't be surprised if this still isn't enough for them and they move the split closer to 50/50.



Strange Fruit said:


> Uber claims it bases pax fare on the distance & time rates. An estimate based on the estimated time & distance of the trip. A few dollars discrepancy could make that true, but this example isn't that. The middle class drone minds here like siding with power. But it's clearly dishonest, even if they covered it in their contract. What happened to early American values where people weren't so enthusiastic to support fancy lawyer tricks to make obvious dishonesty legal. Section 4.1 in the contract supports Elelegido's claim, and the claim of others, though not completely clearly. But if pax fare, and our "fare" rate is totally unrelated, why does Uber give us a fare, then take 25% of it. Why not instead of $1.15 per mile, minus 25%, they just pay us 86.5 cents a mile (or whatever yr market is)? It's so annoying how everyone on the forum is either "they're scamming us" or "no, it's perfectly legal and nothing is wrong"?
> 
> And why even argue with either point made by that sort. People who think like that aren't worth arguing with. Where's Uberdancer with the George Burns quote?
> 
> ...


Exactly, on many points. There was no excuse for such a large discrepancy. Immediately after the trip I fired up Google Maps and got it to estimate SFO to the dropoff location. The distance predicted by Google was within 0.5 miles and the time estimate was accurate to within 2 minutes (for a 1 hour 20 minute trip). If Google can be this accurate in its estimates, then so can Uber. And if Uber can't then they should use Google.There's simply no excuse to overchare the pax $22.

As above, I don't see any loophole for Uber in the driver contract. They clearly define what Fare is, and there can be only one Fare for each trip. To claim that there can be one fare that Uber charges the pax for a trip and then a different fare to pay us... no, sorry. The Fare is how they defined it and how they would charge it to the pax as per our contract.

I also agree on the fare cuts/fare rise comment. When Uber cuts prices we have to share the rate cut with them, with us paying for 80% or 75% of the fare drop, but when prices go back up with up front pricing, Uber takes 100% of the increase and shares none of it with us.


----------



## Strange Fruit (Aug 10, 2016)

elelegido said:


> Well... the trip above was 35% Uber and 65% me. And that's with me as a 20 percenter. For a newer driver it would have been 40% Uber and 60% driver. Not far off your taxi split, except the driver share is a share of Uber rates, not taxi rates... and the Uber driver supplies, maintains and insures the car. I wouldn't be surprised if this still isn't enough for them and they move the split closer to 50/50.
> 
> Exactly, on many points. There was no excuse for such a large discrepancy. Immediately after the trip I fired up Google Maps and got it to estimate SFO to the dropoff location. The distance predicted by Google was within 0.5 miles and the time estimate was accurate to within 2 minutes (for a 1 hour 20 minute trip). If Google can be this accurate in its estimates, then so can Uber. And if Uber can't then they should use Google.There's simply no excuse to overchare the pax $22.
> 
> ...


Careful with that method of asking. They may end up saying something to Uber about getting their fare reduced, cuz they believe you and wonder where they're refund is, then Uber support bots just reduce your pay out or even refund the whole thing to pax, cuz you know how support is. And if you are actually reporting these to Uber, what are you doing? You think support cares? Have you dealt with those peopel/bots/whatever they are?
I will use the "I want to see if yr overcharged" when I ask people what they paid for the trip. It almost always seems troublesome to them when I simply ask "what did they charge you for this trip" with what I think is a tone of curiosity (I'm kinda Aspergy, so maybe my tone of curiosity doesn't sound that way, but it definitely creates tension sometimes).


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Strange Fruit said:


> Careful with that method of asking. They may end up saying something to Uber about getting their fare reduced, cuz they believe you and wonder where they're refund is, then Uber support bots just reduce your pay out or even refund the whole thing to pax, cuz you know how support is. And if you are actually reporting these to Uber, what are you doing? You think support cares? Have you dealt with those peopel/bots/whatever they are?
> I will use the "I want to see if yr overcharged" when I ask people what they paid for the trip. It almost always seems troublesome to them when I simply ask "what did they charge you for this trip" with what I think is a tone of curiosity (I'm kinda Aspergy, so maybe my tone of curiosity doesn't sound that way, but it definitely creates tension sometimes).


I've only ever had one fare adjustment on Uber. It was a couple of years ago where I did take a wrong turn close to the dropoff. I think the guy managed to save 40 cents off his fare, lol. I did not dispute it 

Before this I'd only demanded the full fare once as a result of the up front pricing scam. That time Uber inflated the fare by 15% but on a shorter trip - the fare should have been $53.38 but they charged the pax $61.05. More importantly, they boosted their take by over 50% from $12 to $19. Uber really fought to not pay me my share of the extra 7 bucks they bilked from the pax but eventually they did.

Anyway, just make it sound like you're looking out for the pax when you ask them. If they say "don't know" then say, "I'd really appreciate it if you could look at your app and tell me what the price is; it's on trips like this that Uber has been known to overcharge customers and I'd like to make sure that's not happening to you" etc. I've never had pushback from pax over it. In fact, the guy this morning tipped me $20 as he got out of the car.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

You know what the beautiful thing about all this is, it's in court. A federal suit was filed in Feb. for exactly this thing. So, we will get an answer to this dispute if we are patient enough to wait for the wheels of justice and contrary to some people's assertions, it's by no means a cut and dry issue. If this ever makes it past discovery you might see some eye opening things in their charges to customers vs. payments to drivers. There have been plenty of allegations here.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Disgusted Driver said:


> You know what the beautiful thing about all this is, it's in court. A federal suit was filed in Feb. for exactly this thing. So, we will get an answer to this dispute if we are patient enough to wait for the wheels of justice and contrary to some people's assertions, it's by no means a cut and dry issue. If this ever makes it past discovery you might see some eye opening things in their charges to customers vs. payments to drivers. There have been plenty of allegations here.


True, it's in court; also true is that whatever verdict that comes out of it may be a "just" verdict, or it may be a "we the jury find the defendant OJ Simpson not guilty" type verdict. It all depends how a judge or a jury happen to feel on the day; whom they want to favour and whom they want to punish.


----------



## Jagent (Jan 29, 2017)

Just more confirmation of what is already known. Uber is a trashy company. No class whatsoever.


----------



## Lee239 (Mar 24, 2017)

elelegido said:


> Well... the trip above was 35% Uber and 65% me. And that's with me as a 20 percenter. For a newer driver it would have been 40% Uber and 60% driver. Not far off your taxi split, except the driver share is a share of Uber rates, not taxi rates... and the Uber driver supplies, maintains and insures the car. I wouldn't be surprised if this still isn't enough for them and they move the split closer to 50/50.
> 
> .


but it was the car service's car so no car expenses besides gas.

They should give the rider an estimate of the lowest possible and highest possible plus time for a traffic jam charge. and then charge them and calculate the fare at the end and if they want more money they can raise fares and we all make more.

they are stealing from the customers and the pax.

Uber lists it's prices per mile and minute but does not tell the pax they charge the highest possible fare based on detour or different rout taken. I think they want us to use Uber nav to go different longer routes.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Lee239 said:


> but it was the car service's car so no car expenses besides gas.
> 
> They should give the rider an estimate of the lowest possible and highest possible plus time for a traffic jam charge. and then charge them and calculate the fare at the end and if they want more money they can raise fares and we all make more.
> 
> ...


That would make sense. Give pax the worst case scenario and put a hold on the pax' credit card for the full amount at the beginning of the ride as they do now. Tell them that they may have to pay this maximum, but also give them the low estimate (Google Maps or similar) and tell them that the ride may be as little as that. Then instead of charging top whack as they do now, no matter what, they charge according to actual distance and time, which will be somewhere between Google Maps and Uber's worst case estimate. Brilliant!

I think a lot of the up front fare bilking relies on new drivers not knowing what fares should be for a given ride. I've been doing this a while and I knew pretty instantly how much the fare for this ride should have been. When the pax asked me, I said $105, which was close to the actual $112 it turned out to be. I told the pax that he'd been overcharged around $25 to be conservative; the actual overcharge was just under $22.


----------



## bobby747 (Dec 29, 2015)

well 8000 uber x trips kinda sucks to see this in person. i dont need the tech spec's u posted but that is nice of you. a while back a lady went to king of prussia pa fron train station..she says how come est so high..
i say no surge, i do est on cust app. $46....i finish ride i get paid on $33....
must be the worst company i ever worked for in all my years. always looking to screw drivers....


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

It looks like they're not paying out now when they get a driver complaint. They haven't budged on sharing the excess they overcharged the pax, so I'll give up. I'll just get the money out of them another way and send in some more fake Lyft pay statements for $10 each the next time they ask.


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

elelegido said:


> I'll just get the money out of them another way and send in some more fake Lyft pay statements for $10 each the next time they ask.


I do find it ironic that you're in here complaining about a possible scam, then in the same post owning up to actually pulling one off yourself.


----------



## Atom guy (Jul 27, 2016)

NorCalPhil said:


> I'm still not convinced that this is a scam. They are able to price the ride at whatever they want initially, and the rider can agree to the upfront price (or not). Drivers have already agreed to a pricing structure: time + mileage + toll - commision. Whatever is left is kept as profit by uber.
> 
> It's no different than me using a contractor to build a house, and the contractor using subs to do the work. They pay the subs whatever their negotiated rate is. The contractor keeps the difference.
> 
> ...


The "skim" is that passengers are expecting the upfront price to be an honest estimate of the miles and minutes a trip takes, not an inflated price that enriches Uber but screws the passenger.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

NorCalPhil said:


> I do find it ironic that you're in here complaining about a possible scam, then in the same post owning up to actually pulling one off yourself.


Not a scam; I'll just be taking what they owe me. Anyway, pot/kettle - it's no different from you saying:


> So if I can take a longer route and arrive within a few minutes of the shortest route, I can capture some of that funny money as well.


You "capture" your share of the up front pricing skim from Uber your way, I'll get the same money out of them with mine.


----------



## charmer37 (Nov 18, 2016)

elelegido said:


> Well... the trip above was 35% Uber and 65% me. And that's with me as a 20 percenter. For a newer driver it would have been 40% Uber and 60% driver. Not far off your taxi split, except the driver share is a share of Uber rates, not taxi rates... and the Uber driver supplies, maintains and insures the car. I wouldn't be surprised if this still isn't enough for them and they move the split closer to 50/50.
> 
> Exactly, on many points. There was no excuse for such a large discrepancy. Immediately after the trip I fired up Google Maps and got it to estimate SFO to the dropoff location. The distance predicted by Google was within 0.5 miles and the time estimate was accurate to within 2 minutes (for a 1 hour 20 minute trip). If Google can be this accurate in its estimates, then so can Uber. And if Uber can't then they should use Google.There's simply no excuse to overchare the pax $22.
> 
> ...


 Some passengers are cool and don't mind sharing what they pay for their ride at least the people I pick up, My take is drivers provide more and uber commission need to be much lower, Know what uber takes from drivers they still are losing a lot of money every year.


----------



## Doowop (Jul 10, 2016)

Doesn't it just make you effin sick that you've got to constantly check that the people who pay you your hard earned money, are not cheating you for reimbursement of tolls that you paid for, earned cancellation fees for uber pax who refused to show after ordering a ride, short change you for mileage travelled, and on and on and on.


----------



## charmer37 (Nov 18, 2016)

Uber is ripping everybody off, The only thing I do is drive only when it's heavily surging to make money from this gig.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Tonight's skim - an extra 50 cents on a min fare shortie. Uber took $7.25 from the pax; they paid me $4.oo and kept $3.25 (55% me, 45% Uber). Min fare here is $6.75 but they bumped the fare up 50 cents for no reason.

This is the way it's going to be now; we can forget about a pay rise; Uber's already taking theirs.


----------



## Flacco (Apr 23, 2016)

NorCalPhil said:


> I'm still not convinced that this is a scam. They are able to price the ride at whatever they want initially, and the rider can agree to the upfront price (or not). Drivers have already agreed to a pricing structure: time + mileage + toll - commision. Whatever is left is kept as profit by uber.
> 
> It's no different than me using a contractor to build a house, and the contractor using subs to do the work. They pay the subs whatever their negotiated rate is. The contractor keeps the difference.
> 
> ...


I'm not an Attorney but have filed quite a few lawsuits as I hate cheats. There may, or may not, be grounds here for yet another lawsuit against Uber for Unjust Enrichment, Fraud, whatever.

Let the Attorneys who will sue Uber figure out what the grounds are. If the Pax are being over charged all the time, something does not pass the smell test. Typical for Uber.


----------



## Flacco (Apr 23, 2016)

elelegido said:


> It might be good to have a thread where we can post the biggest Uber up front pricing skims for the reporters who are soon going to be looking to write stories on this. This topic will gain more traction now that Uber is being sued over it, so let's give the reporters some material to work with and some hard, factual numbers for them to publish in order to expose this latest scam from Uber.
> 
> I gave a 70 mile ride this morning from SFO airport to Santa Rosa. The pax was charged $134.09 to his Amex card:
> 
> ...


Forward this and keep in touch with the following Attorney. If she will not take the case, she might know someone that will.

*Uber Lawsuit Information*
uberlawsuit.com/
Uber drivers have filed a class action lawsuit claiming they have been .... Attorney Shannon Liss-Riordanand her firm have represented thousands of tipped ...


----------



## Flacco (Apr 23, 2016)

Disgusted Driver said:


> You know what the beautiful thing about all this is, it's in court. A federal suit was filed in Feb. for exactly this thing. So, we will get an answer to this dispute if we are patient enough to wait for the wheels of justice and contrary to some people's assertions, it's by no means a cut and dry issue. If this ever makes it past discovery you might see some eye opening things in their charges to customers vs. payments to drivers. There have been plenty of allegations here.


Can you provide the link or case number or something more related to this case?

Thanks


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Flacco said:


> Forward this and keep in touch with the following Attorney. If she will not take the case, she might know someone that will.
> 
> *Uber Lawsuit Information*
> uberlawsuit.com/
> Uber drivers have filed a class action lawsuit claiming they have been .... Attorney Shannon Liss-Riordanand her firm have represented thousands of tipped ...


Liss Riordan is only in this for the money - ostensibly she represents drivers but in reality she only represents Shannon Liss Riordan. She tried to sell drivers down the river by leaping at the $100m offered by Uber to end the class action but even the judge rejected the proposed deal, saying that it was unfair to the drivers. Now, when the judge steps in to say that the deal offered to you which was rubber stamped by your own lawyer is unfair, then something's clearly wrong. Liss Riordan is most likely on a 30% plus contingency agreement, which meant that she would have netted upwards of a cool 30 million dollars from the deal. Not bad at all for a couple of years' work.

So, no; as far as drivers fighting Uber and looking for help goes, Liss Riordan is unfortunately a waste of space.



Flacco said:


> I'm not an Attorney but have filed quite a few lawsuits as I hate cheats. There may, or may not, be grounds here for yet another lawsuit against Uber for Unjust Enrichment, Fraud, whatever.
> 
> Let the Attorneys who will sue Uber figure out what the grounds are. If the Pax are being over charged all the time, something does not pass the smell test. Typical for Uber.


I don't think Uber is committing fraud here. It's more a case of unfair business practices and misrepresentation.


----------



## Jermin8r89 (Mar 10, 2016)

Uber needs to simply be audited



steveK2016 said:


> The fare YOU as the driver are entitled to charge. This section is basically telling you that you are going to earn based on the rate table for your city. That's it. It does not say that the pax is being charged this rate table.
> 
> Where does it say that they are ONLY thing? It says we appointed them as a limited payment collection agent, but it has ZERO verbiage stating that is the only thing they are allowed to do. In fact, the rest of the contract shows that they can and do more then merely payment collection agent. This section merely states that we are appointing them a payment collection agent as they are the ones performing the CC transactions on our behalf.
> 
> ...


Why you defending this company? You have been threw this forum enough to know all "up front" is not upfront. When you look at the agreement they tell you their numbers. You know once you get driveing its usaully never their numbers. 
I think theirs a human element playing in part as ive calculated them takeing more then 25%. Do a round trip. Go the sameway. I notice its never the same.

Oh yea theres also the rate adjustment if you made too much. A customer takes a ride and complains they take 25% away from that surge or no surge.

Uber does what they want when they want. Uber is cityhall you cant fight them unless you a pax. They right what they want how they want when they want.

Steve if you defending this company then you part of the problem too. We need people to stick up against companies like this and appreciate the little people also.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Jermin8r89 said:


> Uber needs to simply be audited
> 
> Why you defending this company? You have been threw this forum enough to know all "up front" is not upfront. When you look at the agreement they tell you their numbers. You know once you get driveing its usaully never their numbers.
> I think theirs a human element playing in part as ive calculated them takeing more then 25%. Do a round trip. Go the sameway. I notice its never the same.
> ...


To be fair to Steve, I think that he and others do not understand the driver contract, specifically the fact that Uber agreed with us to a) calculate the fare according to its published rate tables, b) to deduct the (20%, 25% etc) commission and perhaps most importantly, c) to calculate the fare after the trip is over using the actual distance and time.

If the contract did not specify any of this then Uber would be free to charge whatever they like (with no explanation/breakdown as to what the fare is comprised of) as they now do with upfront pricing. The problem is that the contract does indeed specify all of this, and there is no mention in it of charging one fare to the pax and paying a separate, lower fare to the drivers.


----------



## Arb Watson (Apr 6, 2017)

Does Uber have an audit department?


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

wk1102 said:


> What they did is find a loophole. Its shady af, but probay not a scam or illegal and certainly not transparent.


You are most likely correct insofar as what they are doing with up front pricing is not illegal. However, they are scamming drivers through being in breach of contract, which is a civil matter. The contract says that they will act for us as our agent, collect the fares for us based on the methodology they specify in the contract, and then deduct their agreed commission from those fares. They have now unilaterally altered the fare calculation methodology (we don't even know what the methodology is now) and are taking more commission than stated in the contract.


----------



## Jermin8r89 (Mar 10, 2016)

elelegido said:


> You are most likely correct insofar as what they are doing with up front pricing is not illegal. However, they are scamming drivers through being in breach of contract, which is a civil matter. The contract says that they will act for us as our agent, collect the fares for us based on the methodology they specify in the contract, and then deduct their agreed commission from those fares. They have now unilaterally altered the fare calculation methodology (we don't even know what the methodology is now) and are taking more commission than stated in the contract.


By accessing or using the Services, you confirm your agreement to be bound by these Terms. If you do not agree to these Terms, you may not access or use the Services. These Terms expressly supersede prior agreements or arrangements with you. Uber may immediately terminate these Terms or any Services with respect to you, or generally cease offering or deny access to the Services or any portion thereof, at any time for any reason.

Supplemental terms may apply to certain Services, such as policies for a particular event, program, activity or promotion, and such supplemental terms will be disclosed to you in separate region-specific disclosures (e.g., a particular city webpage on Uber.com) or in connection with the applicable Service(s). Supplemental terms are in addition to, and shall be deemed a part of, the Terms for the purposes of the applicable Service(s). Supplemental terms shall prevail over these Terms in the event of a conflict with respect to the applicable Services.

Uber may amend the Terms from time to time. Amendments will be effective upon Uber's posting of such updated Terms at this location or in the amended policies or supplemental terms on the applicable Service(s). Your continued access or use of the Services after such posting confirms your consent to be bound by the Terms, as amended. If Uber changes these Terms after the date you first agreed to the Terms (or to any subsequent changes to these Terms), you may reject any such change by providing Uber written notice of such rejection within 30 days of the date such change became effective, as indicated in the "Effective" date above. This written notice must be provided either (a) by mail or hand delivery to our registered agent for service of process, c/o Uber USA, LLC (the name and current contact information for the registered agent in each state are available online here), or (b) by email from the email address associated with your Account to: [email protected]. In order to be effective, the notice must include your full name and clearly indicate your intent to reject changes to these Terms. By rejecting changes, you are agreeing that you will continue to be bound by the provisions of these Terms as of the date you first agreed to the Terms (or to any subsequent changes to these Terms

This right here pretty much says they can do what ever


Jermin8r89 said:


> By accessing or using the Services, you confirm your agreement to be bound by these Terms. If you do not agree to these Terms, you may not access or use the Services. These Terms expressly supersede prior agreements or arrangements with you. Uber may immediately terminate these Terms or any Services with respect to you, or generally cease offering or deny access to the Services or any portion thereof, at any time for any reason.
> 
> Supplemental terms may apply to certain Services, such as policies for a particular event, program, activity or promotion, and such supplemental terms will be disclosed to you in separate region-specific disclosures (e.g., a particular city webpage on Uber.com) or in connection with the applicable Service(s). Supplemental terms are in addition to, and shall be deemed a part of, the Terms for the purposes of the applicable Service(s). Supplemental terms shall prevail over these Terms in the event of a conflict with respect to the applicable Services.
> 
> Uber may amend the Terms from time to time. Amendments will be effective upon Uber's posting of such updated Terms at this location or in the amended policies or supplemental terms on the applicable Service(s). Your continued access or use of the Services after such posting confirms your consent to be bound by the Terms, as amended. If Uber changes these Terms after the date you first agreed to the Terms (or to any subsequent changes to these Terms), you may reject any such change by providing Uber written notice of such rejection within 30 days of the date such change became effective, as indicated in the "Effective" date above. This written notice must be provided either (a) by mail or hand delivery to our registered agent for service of process, c/o Uber USA, LLC (the name and current contact information for the registered agent in each state are available online here), or (b) by email from the email address associated with your Account to: [email protected]. In order to be effective, the notice must include your full name and clearly indicate your intent to reject changes to these Terms. By rejecting changes, you are agreeing that you will continue to be bound by the provisions of these Terms as of the date you first agreed to the Terms (or to any subsequent changes to these Terms


----------



## UbingInLA (Jun 24, 2015)

elelegido you have obviously researched this well, and you're extremely articulate - you also share the opinion of 99.9% of the Uber drivers out there. Is it possible that you can submit an article somewhere for publication in the mainstream media?

Apparently Uber needs more bad press, since they're back on their feet after the #DeleteUber debacle, the departure of Jeff Jones and other execs, etc. Price gouging and deceptively skimming profits is as slimy as it gets.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

Flacco said:


> Can you provide the link or case number or something more related to this case?
> 
> Thanks


Here's the original article I saw, I think there's a link to the filing:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...nt-paying-the-full-80-of-a-fare-that-im-owed/


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

UbingInLA said:


> elelegido you have obviously researched this well, and you're extremely articulate - you also share the opinion of 99.9% of the Uber drivers out there. Is it possible that you can submit an article somewhere for publication in the mainstream media?
> 
> Apparently Uber needs more bad press, since they're back on their feet after the #DeleteUber debacle, the departure of Jeff Jones and other execs, etc. Price gouging and deceptively skimming profits is as slimy as it gets.


I am sure the media will pick up on this particular issue at some point. I think that if/when they do, they'll write about it with their own slant and possibly give a more balanced perspective. Not that I'm anti-Uber or anything  but there is potentially another side to this - if up front pricing ever underestimates the fare. I don't see that happening too often though.


----------



## Jesusdrivesuber (Jan 5, 2017)

You forgot to add the 2 dollar base fare, hehe.

Also...

They hide trip data, they aren't being transparent with the driver, that's breach of contract as by their contract.



> Changes to Fare Calculation. Company reserves the right to change the Fare Calculation at any time in Company's discretion based upon local market factors, and Company will provide you with notice in the event of changes to the base fare, per mile, and/or per minute amounts that would result in a change in the recommended Fare. Continued use of the Uber Services after any such change in the Fare Calculation shall constitute your consent to such change.


The upfront is based on an overestimation of the trip (I mean it obviously has a line of reasoning), information withheld by Uber.

That alone gets them ****ed in court and I'm pretty sure that's what the lawyer is doing this very moment.

My question is... if they have booking fees why couldn't they just create another fee for themselves? There's gotta be something impeding them from doing that, but what? This is why they went for upfront to give themselves a little raise.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Jermin8r89 said:


> Uber may amend the Terms from time to time. Amendments will be effective upon Uber's posting of such updated Terms at this location or in the amended policies or supplemental terms on the applicable Service(s).
> 
> This right here pretty much says they can do what ever


They could change the terms related to how they charge pax / pay us to reflect the changes involved with up front pricing, however they have not done that. The old contract with the previous fare calculation and commission terms are still in effect.

It's very unlikely that they will make that change to the contracts - doing so would mean that their whole argument for their being simply a collection agent for the drivers would be blown clear out of the water. Their status would undeniably change from drivers' agent to that of transportation provider, which for numerous reasons already covered, they certainly do not want.



Jesusdrivesuber said:


> You forgot to add the 2 dollar base fare, hehe..


No, that's already calculated in the $99.30 fare total.


> My question is... if they have booking fees why couldn't they just create another fee for themselves? There's gotta be something impeding them from doing that, but what? This is why they went for upfront to give themselves a little raise.


I guess if they did that then they would have to admit that they were formally raising prices, in a big way. There's probably no big difference to pax if they increase the booking fee bit by bit from $1.00 to $1.50 to $1.75, but in the ride above it would have been booking fee $1.75 plus "extra fee" 22 bucks. They can say that the booking fee is for this, that and the other but justifying the much more significant up front skim would be tough, even for Uber's BS generation machine.


----------



## Rex8976 (Nov 11, 2014)

Fascinating thread!

So let me get this straight...Uber is not being 100% honest about something?

I am shocked! I am appalled!

I am shocked AND appalled!

Heavens to Betsy!


----------



## Jesusdrivesuber (Jan 5, 2017)

Rex8976 said:


> Fascinating thread!
> 
> So let me get this straight...Uber is not being 100% honest about something?
> 
> ...


Yeah, after reading about TK's life in that NYT piece, you can be sure it's all dishonest from head to toe.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Rex8976 said:


> Fascinating thread!
> 
> So let me get this straight...Uber is not being 100% honest about something?
> 
> ...


Yeah, who knew? lol


----------



## Orange president (Mar 25, 2017)

The lawyers will sue for anything. The only people that will get rich is the attorneys and I would be amazed if any drivers will even get enough to fill up their tank. 

Uber is a sinking ship. It will go down or if don't then you will be replaced by self driving cars. Don't waste your time and effort on Uber. It's just for the time being. Maybe go back to school or maybe learn a new skill.


----------



## Sgt Lucifer (Jan 21, 2017)

elelegido said:


> It might be good to have a thread where we can post the biggest Uber up front pricing skims for the reporters who are soon going to be looking to write stories on this. This topic will gain more traction now that Uber is being sued over it, so let's give the reporters some material to work with and some hard, factual numbers for them to publish in order to expose this latest scam from Uber.
> 
> I gave a 70 mile ride this morning from SFO airport to Santa Rosa. The pax was charged $134.09 to his Amex card:
> 
> ...


It's called CAPITALISM, my friend. 
You work hard to make somebody else rich. 
Are you new to this country? Welcome.


----------



## Strange Fruit (Aug 10, 2016)

elelegido said:


> I've only ever had one fare adjustment on Uber. It was a couple of years ago where I did take a wrong turn close to the dropoff. I think the guy managed to save 40 cents off his fare, lol. I did not dispute it
> 
> Before this I'd only demanded the full fare once as a result of the up front pricing scam. That time Uber inflated the fare by 15% but on a shorter trip - the fare should have been $53.38 but they charged the pax $61.05. More importantly, they boosted their take by over 50% from $12 to $19. Uber really fought to not pay me my share of the extra 7 bucks they bilked from the pax but eventually they did.
> 
> Anyway, just make it sound like you're looking out for the pax when you ask them. If they say "don't know" then say, "I'd really appreciate it if you could look at your app and tell me what the price is; it's on trips like this that Uber has been known to overcharge customers and I'd like to make sure that's not happening to you" etc. I've never had pushback from pax over it. In fact, the guy this morning tipped me $20 as he got out of the car.


Very diplomatic. I can see why that works, except I just want to know so I can compare with the math when I'm done (not gonna do it for them while driving, unless the numbers are simple enufff to do mentally). But what happens after you look at their fare and they say "well, did they over charge me"? I'm not that creative a liar. It's a deficiency for sure. I'm not even joking. I'm not going to report it for them, and I dont' want them writing in to say they were over charged, cuz Uber support may think that means they overpaid me, cuz, well do I need to explain why support is what support is? What happens after they show you the fare? Do you just say "ok, looks alright"? I can feel my nerves crawling just imagining that situation. I hate deceiving people. Not morally, cuz I don't mind in this situation, but neurotically.



Sgt Lucifer said:


> It's called CAPITALISM, my friend.
> You work hard to make somebody else rich.
> Are you new to this country? Welcome.


But but *we are the 99%*

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
And do contracts really matter? Cuz the fee addendum says "drivers who were fist activated before Sept 2014 pay 20% Uber fee" (in my market anyways). I was first activated before then, but I have a new account since, yet they won't restore me to 20% no matter how often I tried over the last year, nor even when a few different support and help center persons said I should be restored, even after a couple supporters refunded my past overcharged fees. I don't think their computers care about the contracts.


----------



## PepeLePiu (Feb 3, 2017)

elelegido said:


> It might be good to have a thread where we can post the biggest Uber up front pricing skims for the reporters who are soon going to be looking to write stories on this. This topic will gain more traction now that Uber is being sued over it, so let's give the reporters some material to work with and some hard, factual numbers for them to publish in order to expose this latest scam from Uber.
> 
> I gave a 70 mile ride this morning from SFO airport to Santa Rosa. The pax was charged $134.09 to his Amex card:
> 
> ...


Might not qualify as a scam, Uber "buys" our services for a price then "resells" them for a higher price. What is wrong is that customers are not aware of the price scheme and they think we are making a whole lot more than we actually are. That's one of the reasons they are so adamant to give tips. Every time I can, I tell my riders what's going on, some of them act really surprised at the gross amount going to Uber's coffers.
Public opinion is a very powerful tool, getting the word out might make them change their tactics and we start getting paid more for the service we provide.


----------



## Strange Fruit (Aug 10, 2016)

elelegido said:


> What makes you think that other economic ideologies are any more ethical? If they're not, then capitalism isn't the reason.


If a guy named Robert is always goofing off, and when he does you say "that's Robert", it doesn't mean there aren't other guys who also goof off all the time. You just happen to be around Robert right now.

Can we all stop saying "scam". There is no scam. And it has no bearing on the issue whether it's a scam or not. But anyways, is there really going to be a thread where people just post the discrepancy for journalists, cuz this thread got taken over by people arguing over if it's a scam or not?


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Strange Fruit said:


> What happens after they show you the fare? Do you just say "ok, looks alright"? I can feel my nerves crawling just imagining that situation.


Probably a moot point now that Uber now doesn't budge on sharing the extra revenue.


> I was first activated before then, but I have a new account since, yet they won't restore me to 20% no matter how often I tried over the last year, nor even when a few different support and help center persons said I should be restored, even after a couple supporters refunded my past overcharged fees. I don't think their computers care about the contracts.


For this reason I stopped driving outside my base city. Every time I drove in a different city they would put me up to 25% and it would be a huge ballache to get put back down to 20% once back home.



PepeLePiu said:


> Might not qualify as a scam, Uber "buys" our services for a price then "resells" them for a higher price. What is wrong is that customers are not aware of the price scheme and they think we are making a whole lot more than we actually are. That's one of the reasons they are so adamant to give tips. Every time I can, I tell my riders what's going on, some of them act really surprised at the gross amount going to Uber's coffers.
> Public opinion is a very powerful tool, getting the word out might make them change their tactics and we start getting paid more for the service we provide.


That would be perfectly fine if that were what Uber agreed with its drivers in the contract. But what they actually state in the contract is that they will act as our agent and collect the fare for us according to actual trip distance and time, and then deduct a percentage. Not charge the pax whatever number they feel like, pay us the fixed rates and then keep whatever's left.


----------



## Strange Fruit (Aug 10, 2016)

elelegido said:


> Probably a moot point now that Uber now doesn't budge on sharing the extra revenue.
> For this reason I stopped driving outside my base city. Every time I drove in a different city they would put me up to 25% and it would be a huge ballache to get put back down to 20% once back home.


It's not a moot point. I just ask for my curiousity. No way I'm battling with support over 30 cents. Cuz usually the discrepancy is a couple minutes fare. But I haven't checked that many times, so I'm wanting to find out how common these large discrepancies are, the ones that get reported here. Mine have always been really close. Do you just tell them "it looks ok to me"?


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Strange Fruit said:


> If a guy named Robert is always goofing off, and when he does you say "that's Robert", it doesn't mean there aren't other guys who also goof off all the time. You just happen to be around Robert right now.


You lost me



> Can we all stop saying "scam". There is no scam. And it has no bearing on the issue whether it's a scam or not. But anyways, is there really going to be a thread where people just post the discrepancy for journalists, cuz this thread got taken over by people arguing over if it's a scam or not?


If we take scam to mean swindle or racket, I'd say that definition fits.


----------



## Strange Fruit (Aug 10, 2016)

elelegido said:


> What makes you think that other economic ideologies are any more ethical? If they're not, then capitalism isn't the reason.





Strange Fruit said:


> If a guy named Robert is always goofing off, and when he does you say "that's Robert", it doesn't mean there aren't other guys who also goof off all the time. You just happen to be around Robert right now.





elelegido said:


> You lost me


What makes you think other guys aren't goof offs? If they are then Robert isn't the reason. It's like an analogy, with a character named Robert.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Strange Fruit said:


> It's not a moot point. I just ask for my curiousity. No way I'm battling with support over 30 cents. Cuz usually the discrepancy is a couple minutes fare. But I haven't checked that many times, so I'm wanting to find out how common these large discrepancies are, the ones that get reported here. Mine have always been really close. Do you just tell them "it looks ok to me"?


I tell them "it looks about right" if it is, or I tell them the overcharge, be it a couple of bucks or $20+ as in this example.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Hopefully some other drivers will post some evidence of up front pricing "differences". In the mean time, here is another example. This was also an airport run, going to the airport. This time, Uber bilked an extra $7.67 out of the pax, inflating their fare by 15% from $53.38 to to $61.05. The screenshot of the driver version of the fare below includes a $6.14 fare adjustment, which I told Uber I wanted as my 80% of the extra revenue they charged this pax, and they later (after putting up a valiant fight) agreed to add to my account.

The pax' receipt:










Driver trip summary:










Total fare charged to pax should have been $53.38, but Uber charged him $61.05:










As mentioned above, on this occasion Uber did agree to share with me the extra revenue they got from this pax at our agreed 80:20 split.


----------



## dirtylee (Sep 2, 2015)

Change the address to something else close by. It goes back to actual for them.


----------



## Ubercide (Apr 20, 2017)

NorCalPhil said:


> It's no different than me using a contractor to build a house, and the contractor using subs to do the work. They pay the subs whatever their negotiated rate is. The contractor keeps the difference.


Yeah, but that analogy is flawed.
The rate drivers get is not 'negotiated'. It is set by Uber take it or leave it. Drivers are not consulted in any way.


----------



## Uber Uber (Jun 27, 2015)

If you are paid $86 and Uber takes 25 percent. The passenger is surely charged easily over 100.


----------



## DavidHill76 (Apr 20, 2017)

Is this same shite going on with lyft?


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

DavidHill76 said:


> Is this same shite going on with lyft?


Good question. Time to start asking Lyft pax what their fare is and find out if the pink one is skimming too.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

NorCalPhil said:


> I'm still not convinced that this is a scam. They are able to price the ride at whatever they want initially, and the rider can agree to the upfront price (or not). Drivers have already agreed to a pricing structure: time + mileage + toll - commision. Whatever is left is kept as profit by uber.
> 
> It's no different than me using a contractor to build a house, and the contractor using subs to do the work. They pay the subs whatever their negotiated rate is. The contractor keeps the difference.
> 
> ...


Actually, if you look at their ads where they are trying to recruit drivers, they always say "up to x amount IN FARES." It's misleading enough that the driver gets less than 80% of that in all cases, but if their argument is that the actual fare charged is not related to the drivers' pay, then why advertise it AT ALL?

It's like saying "Come work at Walmart and make up to $10,000 a day IN SALES as a cashier."


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Actually, if you look at their ads where they are trying to recruit drivers, they always say "up to x amount IN FARES." It's misleading enough that the driver gets less than 80% of that in all cases, but if their argument is that the actual fare charged is not related to the drivers' pay, then why advertise it AT ALL?


Yes, there is that. This was one of the early driver deceptions - that of Uber misleadingly referring to gross revenue as earnings. "Earn $(made up number) per hour in fares!"... and it looks like they'll be hanging on to this claim for a while longer.

Of course, a driver's earnings aren't Uber's gross revenue (fares), nor are they the driver's gross revenue (fares - booking fees); they aren't even the driver's net revenue (fares - booking fees - Uber fee/commission).


----------



## Flacco (Apr 23, 2016)

Disgusted Driver said:


> Here's the original article I saw, I think there's a link to the filing:
> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...nt-paying-the-full-80-of-a-fare-that-im-owed/


Thanks. Forwarded to a class action Attorney



elelegido said:


> Liss Riordan is only in this for the money - ostensibly she represents drivers but in reality she only represents Shannon Liss Riordan. She tried to sell drivers down the river by leaping at the $100m offered by Uber to end the class action but even the judge rejected the proposed deal, saying that it was unfair to the drivers. Now, when the judge steps in to say that the deal offered to you which was rubber stamped by your own lawyer is unfair, then something's clearly wrong. Liss Riordan is most likely on a 30% plus contingency agreement, which meant that she would have netted upwards of a cool 30 million dollars from the deal. Not bad at all for a couple of years' work.
> 
> So, no; as far as drivers fighting Uber and looking for help goes, Liss Riordan is unfortunately a waste of space.
> 
> I don't think Uber is committing fraud here. It's more a case of unfair business practices and misrepresentation.


It's true that the Attorneys are the ones getting rich on these cases but these cases are huge and not many law firms will take them. I could care less who the Attorney is just so Uber gets sued (if in fact they are doing something wrong).....the thing is: how many things wrong LOL



elelegido said:


> It might be good to have a thread where we can post the biggest Uber up front pricing skims for the reporters who are soon going to be looking to write stories on this. This topic will gain more traction now that Uber is being sued over it, so let's give the reporters some material to work with and some hard, factual numbers for them to publish in order to expose this latest scam from Uber.
> 
> I gave a 70 mile ride this morning from SFO airport to Santa Rosa. The pax was charged $134.09 to his Amex card:
> 
> ...


I forwarded this post to a Class Action Attorney along with my phone number. Not sure if they will pursue but at least we did something : )


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

babaa said:


> This is why they don't want you to be tipped. They want client to think they paid enough, but to THEM of course. Time to let Uber fail. Riders will have to take Lyft. You all made Uber what bit is, only you can help bring it down.


Lyft is no better. It's like one of the minor Kardashians, shielded from the limelight by the more prominent sister. The behaviour is equally ghetto but much less seen.


----------



## Steveyoungerthanmontana (Nov 19, 2016)

steveK2016 said:


> Well said NorCalPhil that's very well said. That's what I've been telling people.
> 
> It's unfortunate and I wish it wasn't the case, but this is not unique to Uber. Before, what a pax paid and what a driver got paid looked relatively identical. They changed to the upfront pricing scheme because of complaints and probably a lot of refunds due to drunks not understanding how much a ride would cost with surge multipliers. Now they know exactly what it'll cost up front, no more surprise pricing.
> 
> ...


Leave it to the bone head republican to take the side of Travis Kalanick. Hows that fake business going? Still making fake money and pretending to be a big shot CEO at your dock warehouse?


----------



## Surgeless in Seattle (Aug 30, 2015)

How are you guys getting your fares fast enough to show the pax? For at least the past year it takes Uber a minimum of 2-3 minutes to show me a trip's earnings. Frequently (about 2x/month) I have to wait hours.


----------



## kfeels (Mar 22, 2016)

elelegido said:


> Nobody is saying that their sole purpose is to be a collections agent. That's not what's being said at all. Again, what the contract says is:
> 
> _You appoint Company as your limited payment collection agent solely for the purpose of accepting the Fare, applicable Tolls and, depending on the region and/or if requested by you, applicable taxes and fees from the User on your behalf via the payment processing functionality facilitated by the Uber Services_
> 
> ...


In other words there is only one fare for the trip and it is defined. Uber is generating two fares for the trip one for the rider and the other for the driver and they do not match.



Jesusdrivesuber said:


> Yeah, after reading about TK's life in that NYT piece, you can be sure it's all dishonest from head to toe.


And who goes to a strip club and takes out a laptop to work on spreadsheets? Travis does!


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Steveyoungerthanmontana said:


> Leave it to the bone head republican to take the side of Travis Kalanick. Hows that fake business going? Still making fake money and pretending to be a big shot CEO at your dock warehouse?


Still an adult that understands contracts, agreements and can read. Hows that's failed bartender test? Couldn't cut it mixing one liquid with another, huh?

Never said I agreed with Travis or taking his side, but I can read contracts at a higher level than grade 3 so I know what's in the actual driver agreement we all... agreed to.

I'll be as happy as the next guy if the pending lawsuit shows Uber to be wrong in how they handled upfront pricing, but I also won't be surprised if the case gets dismissed...


----------



## Steveyoungerthanmontana (Nov 19, 2016)

steveK2016 said:


> Still an adult that understands contracts, agreements and can read. Hows that's failed bartender test? Couldn't cut it mixing one liquid with another, huh?
> 
> Never said I agreed with Travis or taking his side, but I can read contracts at a higher level than grade 3 so I know what's in the actual driver agreement we all... agreed to.
> 
> I'll be as happy as the next guy if the pending lawsuit shows Uber to be wrong in how they handled upfront pricing, but I also won't be surprised if the case gets dismissed...


Nah just don't give a crap about bartending, but don't worry I'm gonna use this little ear piece device and have someone on the other side tell me the answers so I don't have to do any actual work. You don't understand contracts, that's a fact, you just look for anyway Travis can win because you think one day you will be him LOL. You are gonna be on this forum working for UBER till Bernie Sanders can shut it down and I can't wait till we do. LOL keep kissing that corporate butt, maybe one day Travis will like one of your tweets to him.


----------



## Jesusdrivesuber (Jan 5, 2017)

DavidHill76 said:


> Is this same shite going on with lyft?


They do the same.


----------



## DexNex (Apr 18, 2015)

elelegido said:


> It might be good to have a thread where we can post the biggest Uber up front pricing skims for the reporters who are soon going to be looking to write stories on this. This topic will gain more traction now that Uber is being sued over it, so let's give the reporters some material to work with and some hard, factual numbers for them to publish in order to expose this latest scam from Uber.
> 
> I gave a 70 mile ride this morning from SFO airport to Santa Rosa. The pax was charged $134.09 to his Amex card:
> 
> ...


What was the Uber Navigation suggested route?

You are missing the most important piece of information.

Take a short/more efficient route and you not going to get paid the full fare. The trick is to check Uber's navigation and go their suggested route.



wk1102 said:


> What they did is find a loophole. Its shady af, but probay not a scam or illegal and certainly not transparent.


You can make this same loophole work in your favor, especially on longer surge runs.

Use Waze, check routes.... take the longer route if the destination is reached within a couple minutes of the shortest route. Profit.

I don't get why so many drivers haven't figured this out. You can actually INCREASE your income and DECREASE Uber's cut. I drive XL/Select. There are two ways to the airport, both take the same amount of time, but one is four miles longer. You go the short route, you effectively short your pay. ALWAYS go the longer route. 4 miles is aprox $10-12, even more during surge. I take 20-30 airport runs per week along that same route. That extra $200-300/week is huge. Miles > time always.

Uber is not skimming, drivers are just being stupid in their routing and not taking the full route. With upfront pricing, you are actually protected from passengers getting upset about your routing... Uber is now taking the longer distance route every time as distance is what makes up the largest part of the fare. The game changed, but drivers are not adapting to the new game. Drivers are still taking the most efficient (shortest distance) route, because that is what passengers were expecting prior to upfront pricing. You need to change your game to match the new method of pricing.


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

Ubercide said:


> Yeah, but that analogy is flawed.
> The rate drivers get is not 'negotiated'. It is set by Uber take it or leave it. Drivers are not consulted in any way.


You're missing the point. It doesn't matter how much 'say' the drivers have before entering into the agreement. When you sign up, you agree to their terms. It's actually pretty straightforward in that regard. As a driver you have no real say or power over anything they do other than to simply stop driving.


----------



## Ubercide (Apr 20, 2017)

NorCalPhil said:


> You're missing the point. It doesn't matter how much 'say' the drivers have before entering into the agreement. When you sign up, you agree to their terms. It's actually pretty straightforward in that regard. As a driver you have no real say or power over anything they do other than to simply stop driving.


Only because they have enough drivers are willing to accept it. 1 ant isn't enough but 100,000 ants have buying power.


----------



## excel2345 (Dec 14, 2015)

Uber recently released some financial data. It showed that they


PepeLePiu said:


> Might not qualify as a scam, Uber "buys" our services for a price then "resells" them for a higher price. What is wrong is that customers are not aware of the price scheme and they think we are making a whole lot more than we actually are. That's one of the reasons they are so adamant to give tips. Every time I can, I tell my riders what's going on, some of them act really surprised at the gross amount going to Uber's coffers.
> Public opinion is a very powerful tool, getting the word out might make them change their tactics and we start getting paid more for the service we provide.


Doesn't what you say negate Ubers ability to say they only connect drivers to passengers? If I own a hardware store and buy nails from a supplier at wholesale and sell them to you at retail aren't I a nail seller, not just connecting you to the company that actually makes the nails and taking a commission? I think this is a much more important issue as it relates to Ubers business model worldwide.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

NorCalPhil said:


> Uber just discovered a way to make passengers happy (certainty of upfront pricing), and found a new revenue stream that isn't tied to pre-existing contractual obligations, therefore padding their bottom line.


uber used to publish rates of fare, like taxis do, and drivers, for the last few years, were told we were to receive 80% of that rate of fair, minus the booking fee. Now they have slyly stopped this. But they are not telling drivers what are true commission is. When they tell me my commission is 80%, it's reasonable to believe 80% of gross. If it's 80% of something else, thats' deceptive. Maybe it's in the fine print, but if the circumstance whereby a driver agrees to something, that might be a point of contention in a lawsuit. I get these pdf files for me to agree to in app that are so small (a cell phone doesn't have a large screen), so long, when i need to get to work, its' like , "who reads this crap?" If I don't sign it, I have no job. There is no option to disagree without foregoing access. This is why I believe that there should be regulation to treat rideshare "independent contractors" with similar rights as employees. uber is being sued for this type of thing.

Even if we are not cheated, we are still underpaid, make no mistake about that one.
Just because a driver agrees to a rate, doesn't mean he or she is not being underpaid.
Are Walmart employees who are forced to go on foodstamps not being underpaid just because their unfortunate circumstance makes them exploitable by a big company? Hell yes they are underpaid. If you don't make enough to live, you are being underpaid. If you feel otherwise, then I don't agree with your definition, and in my view, any right thinking person will agree with me.

I'm not making enough to justify the miles I'm putting on my car. The only reason i agree to it as that this is my only income, ( if you want to call it that ) for the time being -- I just don't have the luxury of quitting right now. IN time, yes, but not right now, and does the fact that I allow uber to exploit me mean that they are not exploiting me? Hell no.

It never was "standard practice" to do this in the transportation industry.
I've worked on lease deals, and commission deals, and the commission was always a percentage of what the customer is charged. That is the norm in this industry. You can't
compare what they do in construction industry to this one, that's not a valid argument at all.

Uber changed it's pricing for riders, they used to publish the rate of fair, like taxis do, but UberX no longer does this. The long and short of it is simply the fact that we are not getting 75% or 80%, like we are told, we are getting a lot less.


----------



## Ubercide (Apr 20, 2017)

Oscar Levant said:


> I just don't have the luxury of quitting right now


THAT IS EXACTLY THE POSTITION WHERE UBER WANTS ALL ITS DRIVERS TO BE.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

Ubercide said:


> THAT IS EXACTLY THE POSTITION WHERE UBER WANTS ALL ITS DRIVERS TO BE.


It's how big companies exploit people. Exploitation is wrong, and in the long run, it will do Uber in. There are a number of lawsuits happening on this very issue.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

kfeels said:


> In other words there is only one fare for the trip and it is defined. Uber is generating two fares for the trip one for the rider and the other for the driver and they do not match.


Yes, that is correct. Uber is now trying to say that there are two fares for each trip - the pax' fare and the driver's fare. They've even started referring to them separately - the following quote is from one of their email replies to me:

*Partners' fares vary by city and are based on time and distance of a trip. *

Which is obviously ridiculous - there is no "partners' fare" and "passengers' fare". The fare is the fare - there is only one fare per ride, and it is clearly defined in the driver contract as the amount paid by the customer to take the ride, collected by Uber on the driver's behalf, and paid to the driver by Uber. There is no separate driver's fare - the driver has no fare as he is not being taken anywhere - he's the one providing the service.



Ubercide said:


> Yeah, but that analogy is flawed.
> The rate drivers get is not 'negotiated'. It is set by Uber take it or leave it. Drivers are not consulted in any way.


Comparing the pax : Uber : driver business relationship to a customer : contractor : subcontractor relationship is indeed a flawed analogy, but not because of rate negotiations. The reason it is flawed is because Uber puts itself forward in its contracts as simply an agent of the driver and not a middleman who sells directly to the customer. From their rider contract:

_Charges you incur will be owed directly to Third Party Providers, and Uber will collect payment of those charges from you, on the Third Party Provider's behalf as their limited payment collection agent, and payment of the Charges shall be considered the same as payment made directly by you to the Third Party Provider_

Uber is saying that the passsenger is actually paying the driver - Uber is only the agent and it is the driver who receives payment and is selling the service. Whereas in the (flawed) analogy, where a customer buys a house from the contractor, there would be 1) a direct transfer of goods and services from the middleman contractor to the customer, and payment direct from the customer to the contractor, and there would be 2) no payment of any kind from the customer to the subcontractor. These are the two main reasons why the analogy doesn't fit.


----------



## autofill (Apr 1, 2016)

elelegido said:


> Ok, you raise good questions, and I will give you the proof you're looking for, from the driver contract.
> 
> First, we need to look at the definition of the word "device" in the contract. This definition is given in sections 1.4 and 1.5:
> 
> ...


I already went over the driver's contract dispute with steveK2016 guy about month ago and clearly his reading comprehension is at a 3rd grade level.

https://uberpeople.net/threads/reporting-ubers-upfront-pricing-to-the-ftc.143477/page-3#post-2156191


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Oscar Levant said:


> uber used to publish rates of fare, like taxis do, and drivers, for the last few years, were told we were to receive 80% of that rate of fair, minus the booking fee. Now they have slyly stopped this. But they are not telling drivers what are true commission is. When they tell me my commission is 80%, it's reasonable to believe 80% of gross. If it's 80% of something else, thats' deceptive. Maybe it's in the fine print, but if the circumstance whereby a driver agrees to something, that might be a point of contention in a lawsuit. I get these pdf files for me to agree to in app that are so small (a cell phone doesn't have a large screen), so long, when i need to get to work, its' like , "who reads this crap?" If I don't sign it, I have no job. There is no option to disagree without foregoing access. This is why I believe that there should be regulation to treat rideshare "independent contractors" with similar rights as employees. uber is being sued for this type of thing.
> 
> Even if we are not cheated, we are still underpaid, make no mistake about that one.
> Just because a driver agrees to a rate, doesn't mean he or she is not being underpaid.
> ...


Now that Uber has delinked driver pay from pax revenue and brought in two different fares for each trip ("pax fare" and "driver fare"), what they are now calling the "driver fare" obviously isn't a fare at all, because it's not what the pax is paying. Instead of a fare, it becomes simply a driver pay scale. I agree, it makes no sense for drivers to earn 75%/80%/etc of a pay scale.

Maybe Uber will just lower the pay scale and abolish the percentages. I doubt they will, though, because they will want to maintain the illusion of the real business relationship supposedly being between the drivers and the pax, with Uber just taking a set percentage as commission. As I said above, they want to have their cake and eat it, i.e have all the benefits of being just an agent, but with all the revenue charging (and keeping) ability of a middleman who sells directly to the customer.



autofill said:


> I already went over the driver's contract dispute with steveK2016 guy about month ago and clearly his reading comprehension is at a 3rd grade level.


We don't all have to agree on this - it's ok for different groups of people to look at the same documents and interpret them in totally different ways. To me, Uber has defined very clearly in the contract what the fare is, how it is calculated, who pays it, who collects it and who receives it. There is nothing ambiguous to me in the contract, no loopholes etc; it's crystal clear.

What the guys who are defending Uber don't understand is the difference between being an agent for a supplier, and being a middleman between that supplier and the end customer. Norcalphil thinks that Uber is like a housing contractor middleman who buys the services of a subcontractor and sells them to a customer for a profit, wheras Uber contradicts this in its contracts, specifically stating that it is not a service provider but instead an agent. This whole debate boils down to this agent vs service provider distinction. But it's fine; not everyone will get it; it's quite a subtle difference.


----------



## kfeels (Mar 22, 2016)

Uber's business model was created in the so-called "sharing economy", except with their decision to use up-front pricing they have limited their sharing and now have evolved into a business model that is not sharing but taking from one (the pax), pocketing it quietly, and not sharing with the driver.

Thank you for making the distinction that Uber is an agent here. What defines this for me to be against this upfront pricing is that I use my own car and if Uber can charge the rider this elevated fare they should share it with the driver as an agent. In an employer/employee relationship, Uber would be entitled to keep this extra money especially if it was to cover the expenses of a car if they provided said car to the driver.

Worse is that they are using this extra money to fund their effort in the race to develop a viable driverless car which will eventually replace drivers.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

kfeels said:


> Thank you for making the distinction that Uber is an agent here. What defines this for me to be against this upfront pricing is that I use my own and if Uber can charge the rider this elevated fare they should share it with the driver as an agent. In an employer/employee relationship, Uber would be entitled to keep this extra money especially if it was to cover the expenses of a car if they provided it said car to the driver.
> 
> Worse is that they are using this extra money to fund their effort in the race to develop a viable driverless car which will eventually replace drivers.


You understand the crux of the issue. Uber _claims_ in its contracts, and to the outside world in its communications, that it's simply an agent for the drivers, handling their invoicing and fare collection for them and then taking their percentage and the booking fee, but in their day to day operations with up front pricing the _reality_ is that they are purchasing services from drivers at fixed rates and then reselling them at a higher rate to their customers and keeping the difference as profit. In other words, they have become an independent transportation provider.

As you allude to, in making this transition away from acting as our agent, they are moving a lot closer to being an employer.


----------



## Lebowskii (Oct 27, 2016)

NorCalPhil said:


> I'm still not convinced that this is a scam. They are able to price the ride at whatever they want initially, and the rider can agree to the upfront price (or not). Drivers have already agreed to a pricing structure: time + mileage + toll - commision. Whatever is left is kept as profit by uber.
> 
> It's no different than me using a contractor to build a house, and the contractor using subs to do the work. They pay the subs whatever their negotiated rate is. The contractor keeps the difference.
> 
> ...


If they are going to do upfront fares they should go hand in hand with upfront driver pay than no one could argue... it's fraudulent


----------



## ntcindetroit (Mar 23, 2017)

It's a $68 or $69 Billion dollars business model that nobody appreciates as it's just garbage in, garbage out. They even introduced the 5-star rating to the America where raters are unchecked of dubious identity.


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

I believe it's all crooked. But I had to ride in an Uber because on the other hand, Lyft's Fare Estimator isn't working - and they blame my equipment. I have plenty of connectivity to get a fare and a ride on Uber. My Lyft app works fine except for the Fare Estimator and other riders in my area are seeing the spinning circle of thought overlaying their fare estimator.

I am not sure - because of the above issue - but I hear that Lyft is less forthcoming on PrimeTime fares.

This all being said, the two times I rode Uber in the last month, I was charged about 20 cents too much. Not enough to be all uptight about, but sort of reminds me of Richard Pryor's character in Superman III and the how all those half-cents added up.


----------



## KekeLo (Aug 26, 2015)

elelegido said:


> The upfront price skimming is an issue for several reasons.
> 
> 1) The driver contract states that Uber's cut will be a percentage of the fare plus a booking fee, not whatever the pax agrees to pay minus the driver's pay. They don't change the contract because they want to continue to claim agent status - "all we do is collect fares on behalf of the drivers". They're trying to have their cake and eat it; best of both worlds.
> 
> ...


NUFF SAID


----------



## PepeLePiu (Feb 3, 2017)

excel2345 said:


> Uber recently released some financial data. It showed that they
> 
> Doesn't what you say negate Ubers ability to say they only connect drivers to passengers? If I own a hardware store and buy nails from a supplier at wholesale and sell them to you at retail aren't I a nail seller, not just connecting you to the company that actually makes the nails and taking a commission? I think this is a much more important issue as it relates to Ubers business model worldwide.


I do agree with you on the bad practices and their effort to hide them from the paying customers, and I also wish I could get my hands on that extra 16-25% income that they get for doing nothing. But I still say is not a scam is just another shady practice. I do disclose that info to all of the riders that are willing to listen.


----------



## kfeels (Mar 22, 2016)

Lebowskii said:


> If they are going to do upfront fares they should go hand in hand with upfront driver pay than no one could argue... it's fraudulent


Great idea, share upfront pricing with driver and include the fare on the acceptance screen so you know what you are getting into (even though rider address is not listed on acceptance screen anymore)


----------



## nickd8775 (Jul 12, 2015)

We can get about 90% of the fare paid by the rider by going a longer route. Let's say a trip is 10 miles the most direct way, all on a 60 mph highway. Rates are 90 cents a mile and 10 cents a minute, $1 base, $2 booking. They charge an upfront fare of $15 but pay drivers based on $11, so there's $2 unaccounted for as profit. Now you could take a route that adds 5 miles and 5 minutes. The fare you get paid on is 80% of $16, you get $12.80. Passenger still pays $15, Uber makes less profit. That's one way to beat the upfront fare. 
Another way to beat it is to change the dropoff location to somewhere along the way, then change it again to the neighbor of the original destination. That has Uber revert to charging the passenger by distance and time. In this case, the passenger would pay $13 and you get $8.80. 
I do the second method to passengers that tip that I don't take a longer route for. 
Many of my trips are to the airport. I figured out how many times I could loop around the terminals after dropping off the passenger to run the meter up to 90% of the fare charged. Passengers aren't looking at the Uber app while they're in the security line so they won't see me padding my payout. It's 1.5 miles per loop, so I do one loop for every 10 miles of the trip because they overcharge about 12%. Nobody has asked me to end the trip or rated me low because of that. 
It's sad that I have to play these games just to get my "included tip".


----------



## TBone (Jan 19, 2015)

elelegido said:


> Here's where the disagreement is. Uber specifies only one "Fare" in the contract, which it says that it collects from the User and pays to the driver, minus fees. In the contact, there is only one Fare, which it specifies in the contract is calculated according to their published rates and actual trip data and is collected from the User. There is no other Fare in the contract.
> 
> Now, with up front pricing, Uber likes the Fare in the contract when it comes to paying us, but they no longer want to charge the User this Fare, instead they swap it out on the User side for a different fare which is calculated according to an undisclosed methodology and is an estimate, not actual. You think that they should be allowed to swap because the contract does not specifically say they can't charge additional fees direct to the client.
> 
> The problem with this is that Uber tells pax that the fare they pay can be the up front price presented before the trip, and they tell us that the fare is according to the rate tables and actual trip data. My argument is that there can only be one fare. The fare is the fare - there can't be one fare that Uber collects from the pax and a different, lower fare that they pay us. The driver contract states what the fare is and how it is calculated and Uber is in breach of that.


Thanks Travis for clearing up how you screw customers and drivers over. Now explain why you screwed your employees over stock options.


----------



## Ubercide (Apr 20, 2017)

TBone said:


> Thanks Travis for clearing up how you screw customers and drivers over. Now explain why you screwed your employees over stock options.


He did? Please link to article


----------



## Buckpasser (Sep 30, 2015)

When is someone going to go "POSTAL" at an Uber office ?


----------



## uber strike (Jan 10, 2016)

Yup. The only way to see what Uber is doing is to ask rider for screenshot. Save the evidence and use it against uber at arbitration. Claim that Uber is stealing your money rather than overcharging riders.


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

Here is another point. Are we getting taxed on what the passengers pay or just 20-28% more than our payout?


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

JimS said:


> Here is another point. Are we getting taxed on what the passengers pay or just 20-28% more than our payout?


That's another can of worms right there. The 1099k, which is used to report 3rd party transactions, should include the full total of the receipts from passengers, including Uber's up front pricing bonus. When drivers do their taxes, they deduct from the total the booking fees, tolls, and Uber commission. But what do we deduct Uber's up front pricing bonus as? There's no official name for the extra money they get from skimming the fare. And if Uber is not including their bonus on the 1099k, then they are not reporting correctly. I don't know the answers to these questions.


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)




----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

nickd8775 said:


> We can get about 90% of the fare paid by the rider by going a longer route. Let's say a trip is 10 miles the most direct way, all on a 60 mph highway. Rates are 90 cents a mile and 10 cents a minute, $1 base, $2 booking. They charge an upfront fare of $15 but pay drivers based on $11, so there's $2 unaccounted for as profit. Now you could take a route that adds 5 miles and 5 minutes. The fare you get paid on is 80% of $16, you get $12.80. Passenger still pays $15, Uber makes less profit. That's one way to beat the upfront fare.
> Another way to beat it is to change the dropoff location to somewhere along the way, then change it again to the neighbor of the original destination. That has Uber revert to charging the passenger by distance and time. In this case, the passenger would pay $13 and you get $8.80.
> I do the second method to passengers that tip that I don't take a longer route for.
> Many of my trips are to the airport. I figured out how many times I could loop around the terminals after dropping off the passenger to run the meter up to 90% of the fare charged. Passengers aren't looking at the Uber app while they're in the security line so they won't see me padding my payout. It's 1.5 miles per loop, so I do one loop for every 10 miles of the trip because they overcharge about 12%. Nobody has asked me to end the trip or rated me low because of that.
> It's sad that I have to play these games just to get my "included tip".


Too funny! Laps around the airport huh?

I will stretch things a little when it's not busy, i.e. take the two legs of the triangle instead of the hypotenuse and/or drive a block away before ending, but I was under the impression that if time and miles goes over the up front fare, they charge time and miles. So be careful, if you go over, they might complain.


----------



## Tom Harding (Sep 26, 2016)

elelegido said:


> That's another can of worms right there. The 1099k, which is used to report 3rd party transactions, should include the full total of the receipts from passengers, including Uber's up front pricing bonus. When drivers do their taxes, they deduct from the total the booking fees, tolls, and Uber commission. But what do we deduct Uber's up front pricing bonus as? There's no official name for the extra money they get from skimming the fare. And if Uber is not including their bonus on the 1099k, then they are not reporting correctly. I don't know the answers to these questions.


I keep a record of mileage, expenses, and payments from Uber. Reimbursements are also kept, like mileage and cleaning fees.
During tax time I compare my records (the most accurate) with what Uber and Lyft provide, their annual summary. I go with my numbers, regardless of what Uber and Lyft show. This last tax time I was within $100 of the summary after deducting all the fees and tolls.
Upfront pricing is included in the overall Uber income, but it is also part of Uber's commission, so it is compensated for. 
An example is:
Total Uber Income - $24,000
Uber Commission (includes UP front pricing) - $6700
Tolls - $400
Combined fees - $1400
Promotions - $200 (careful here because Uber includes missed tolls as Promotions or "other")
Net Uber Income - $15,900
My Tolls and car wash expense - $575
Final net = $15,575
Uber's summary shows miles driven. That is actual trip mileage, not total business mileage.
My recorded business mileage might be 20,000 miles or $13,440
My record meal expense might be $650, but you can only deduct half of that - $325
Uber Income after expenses is $$15,900- $13440-$325=$2135 net ride share income


----------



## Wardell Curry (Jul 9, 2016)

Does anyone know if you can decline uber's upfront price as a rider before the trip starts? Because when I request uber x , I am always given an upfront fare which seems high. I would rather trust the driver to take the most efficient route which will mean a lower fare. And since I drive often in my city I can direct him if he seems to be trying to "extend " the trip.


----------



## Wardell Curry (Jul 9, 2016)

Disgusted Driver said:


> Too funny! Laps around the airport huh?
> 
> I will stretch things a little when it's not busy, i.e. take the two legs of the triangle instead of the hypotenuse and/or drive a block away before ending, but I was under the impression that if time and miles goes over the up front fare, they charge time and miles. So be careful, if you go over, they might complain.


Lol


Disgusted Driver said:


> Too funny! Laps around the airport huh?
> 
> I will stretch things a little when it's not busy, i.e. take the two legs of the triangle instead of the hypotenuse and/or drive a block away before ending, but I was under the impression that if time and miles goes over the up front fare, they charge time and miles. So be careful, if you go over, they might complain.


I agree. But this driver seems like a guy who put a lot of thought and effort into perfecting his scheme. I'd guess he doesn't go over the upfront fare much if at all.


----------



## Tom Harding (Sep 26, 2016)

JimS said:


> View attachment 115566


The $1.95 booking fee is Uber's and drivers get no part of that. The rest are fees, so the driver got 75% of the fare, not including fees and booking fee.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

Wardell Curry said:


> Does anyone know if you can decline uber's upfront price as a rider before the trip starts? Because when I request uber x , I am always given an upfront fare which seems high. I would rather trust the driver to take the most efficient route which will mean a lower fare. And since I drive often in my city I can direct him if he seems to be trying to "extend " the trip.


I hink the easiest way to beat the up front fare as a pax is to enter one destination and then switch to a different one once you get picked up. Since you have not agreed to an up front price for the new destination, they will revert to time and mileage.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Wardell Curry said:


> Does anyone know if you can decline uber's upfront price as a rider before the trip starts? Because when I request uber x , I am always given an upfront fare which seems high. I would rather trust the driver to take the most efficient route which will mean a lower fare. And since I drive often in my city I can direct him if he seems to be trying to "extend " the trip.


You can decline the upfront price by not clicking "Request Ride" and finding alternate transportation.


----------



## Wardell Curry (Jul 9, 2016)

Disgusted Driver said:


> I hink the easiest way to beat the up front fare as a pax is to enter one destination and then switch to a different one once you get picked up. Since you have not agreed to an up front price for the new destination, they will revert to time and mileage.


Ah gotcha. Thanks. And Can I change the destination before the driver gets there and the trips starts to make it less stressful for them?


----------



## george_lol (Apr 4, 2017)

NorCalPhil said:


> I'm still not convinced that this is a scam. They are able to price the ride at whatever they want initially, and the rider can agree to the upfront price (or not). Drivers have already agreed to a pricing structure: time + mileage + toll - commision. Whatever is left is kept as profit by uber.
> 
> It's no different than me using a contractor to build a house, and the contractor using subs to do the work. They pay the subs whatever their negotiated rate is. The contractor keeps the difference.
> 
> ...


Are you a troll for Uber?
It's a scam no matter how you try to explain it away.
This is an unethical, immoral business practice.
My last 2 rides today I talked to my passengers and got screen shots of what they were billed and then showed them what Uber paid me and how it was calculated. Both were upset so I recommended they use Lyft from now on. Also, it was clear from the screen shots that Uber fudged the pick up and/or drop off addresses for the rider and used real addresses for the driver (me).


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

george_lol said:


> Are you a troll for Uber?
> It's a scam no matter how you try to explain it away.
> This is an unethical, immoral business practice.
> My last 2 rides today I talked to my passengers and got screen shots of what they were billed and then showed them what Uber paid me and how it was calculated. Both were upset so I recommended they use Lyft from now on. Also, it was clear from the screen shots that Uber fudged the pick up and/or drop off addresses for the rider and used real addresses for the driver (me).


Do you feel sympathy for, and show your pay statement for comparison to, the pax that you got a 3.9x surge for?

The pax pays what the app says they pay. Yes, the driver has an issue by not benefiting from the up front extra, but for drivers to feel upset that the pax is paying more is a ridiculous concept. Pax should be paying twice what they are being charged now, there should be a permanent 2.0x surge indefinitely.

Are you a consumer advocate or do you want to make money?

The fight here is for Uber to pay the Driver the difference in the upfront pricing, but I have no sympathy for the pax. They pay what the app tells them it costs.

The irony would be if this is just a test run to see if pax will pay 30% more, consistently, eventually to either charge 60% more and cutting the driver in on the profit, but demand dies down because driver's have been telling pax they are overpaying and moving them to Lyft. Lol.

Probably not how it'll go down, but we'll see what happens with the lawsuit...


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

george_lol said:


> Are you a troll for Uber?
> It's a scam no matter how you try to explain it away.
> This is an unethical, immoral business practice.
> My last 2 rides today I talked to my passengers and got screen shots of what they were billed and then showed them what Uber paid me and how it was calculated. Both were upset so I recommended they use Lyft from now on. Also, it was clear from the screen shots that Uber fudged the pick up and/or drop off addresses for the rider and used real addresses for the driver (me).


Of course I'm a troll for Uber-you're just another poster on this forum who, when disagreed with, insists the other MUST be a troll because your dainty psyche can't take disagreement, thoughtful or otherwise. Grow up.

And thanks for your point of view. I disagree.


----------



## Tippy711 (Apr 14, 2017)

God this forum is full of Uber trolls!


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

NorCalPhil said:


> Of course I'm a troll for Uber-you're just another poster on this forum who, when disagreed with, insists the other MUST be a troll because your dainty psyche can't take disagreement, thoughtful or otherwise. Grow up.
> 
> And thanks for your point of view. I disagree.


My dainty sensibilities are in a knot but I'll get over it even though I disagree with you.


----------



## villetta (Feb 11, 2016)

Lee239 said:


> This is why they won't raise rates, they are already over charging the pax, if they raise them so that the driver gets more they will have to charge that much more. When I drove a taxi the split was them 55% and me 45% of the total fare, the pax paid tolls in both directions, we paid gas, we had flat fares to every destination and the driver and company knew how much each ride cost. we were responsible to collect the fee and 99% was cash, 10 years ago. All we had was a machine to swipe the imprint of the credit card, no debit back then.


They have been conditioning passengers, many of whom may never have been taxi customers, that taxi rates are too high since 2012. If you remove all the Uber gibberish, booking fee, per minutes, and per miles, Uber essentially charged $1.77 per mile. It looks like San Francisco taxi rate is $2.75 per mile. So, it appears Uber rates are creeping towards the taxi rates (which are actually still low for earning a livelihood) , but passengers don't realize that, and the drivers, who actually provide the service at rates which they have no say over, are not being compensated either.


----------



## BurgerTiime (Jun 22, 2015)




----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

Tom Harding said:


> The $1.95 booking fee is Uber's and drivers get no part of that. The rest are fees, so the driver got 75% of the fare, not including fees and booking fee.


Well, duh. I'm saying that after Uber skimmed an extra 80¢, the driver kept 66% of the total, less airport fees, because Uber doesn't keep those. You're exactly why Uber is happy to keep jacking up the booking fee (was $1 when I started) - because we get no part of it. Now they figured out how to get more from the pax without paying more to the driver. Read my signature. It's their business plan to charge more and pay less.



Tom Harding said:


> My record meal expense might be $650, but you can only deduct half of that - $325


Can you show me where in the IRS code out says you can deduct your meals? Unless it's a business expense (ie: entertaining clients), you don't get to deduct any of it. No different than buying lunch in the corporate cafeteria. It's the half part that really gets me. I'd really like to know.


----------



## brendon292 (Aug 2, 2016)

JimS said:


> Read my signature. It's their business plan to charge more and pay less.


Any context to go along with that quote? Was this said in public or in secret? Which manager was it? Was it said recently?



steveK2016 said:


> I have no sympathy for the pax. They pay what the app tells them it costs.


Exactly this. The passenger sees in exactly what the trip will cost them before they request. It is up to them to decide if they want to pay that price. Do they feel sympathy for us when we make $2.30 on a trip? F*ck no they don't.


----------



## Stupid Loser (Feb 7, 2017)

The fact that Uber doesn't refund the overage is what proves it to be a scam more than not sharing with the driver.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Stupid Loser said:


> The fact that Uber doesn't refund the overage is what proves it to be a scam more than not sharing with the driver.


I think many people have a weird notion of what a scam is. I used to run a web development and graphics company. We had a posted rate of $60 an hour for service but when a new client requested new service, theyd rather know what the cost is upfront. So i would estimate how long it would take me for any given project. So you want a brochure made, well, thatll probbaly take 4 hours wprth of time so i quote $240. Customer approves that cost. Turned out, my designer was on point and finished the job, approved by customer, in under 2 hours. Customer still pays the agreed quoted price.

Is that a scam? Customer got their product that they wanted for the cost they agreed to. How i as the provider got to that finished good is my business. Customer was given a price, customer agreed to that price, customer paid that price.

Consumers pay what they feel is the value of a goods or service. The app tells them right up front how much itll cost thrn charges that exact amount. Worst scam in history if you think that is a scam.


----------



## Stupid Loser (Feb 7, 2017)

steveK2016 said:


> I think many people have a weird notion of what a scam is. I used to run a web development and graphics company. We had a posted rate of $60 an hour for service but when a new client requested new service, theyd rather know what the cost is upfront. So i would estimate how long it would take me for any given project. So you want a brochure made, well, thatll probbaly take 4 hours wprth of time so i quote $240. Customer approves that cost. Turned out, my designer was on point and finished the job, approved by customer, in under 2 hours. Customer still pays the agreed quoted price.
> 
> Is that a scam? Customer got their product that they wanted for the cost they agreed to. How i as the provider got to that finished good is my business. Customer was given a price, customer agreed to that price, customer paid that price.
> 
> Consumers pay what they feel is the value of a goods or service. The app tells them right up front how much itll cost thrn charges that exact amount. Worst scam in history if you think that is a scam.


I guess I'm just using the word "scam" to describe deceit in the same way that people use the word "rip-off" to describe something they perceive as over-priced. Perhaps not the most accurate word to use, but you get the point. If you're hung up on something that petty, you're probably trying to justify doing what we're talking about.

Oh. Yeah. You did.

Not that you care, but in my opinion, people like you really suck. Some of us are just old-fashioned, I guess. If I quoted someone a price of $100 for 4 hours of work, then it only took me 2 hours, I would return the extra $50.

No wonder you defend Uber's BS. You're cut from the same soiled cloth.

I believe in karma. And integrity. And being able to look at myself in the mirror and sleep peacefully at night. The kind of things that sociopaths aren't concerned with.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

Stupid Loser said:


> I guess I'm just using the word "scam" to describe deceit in the same way that people use the word "rip-off" to describe something they perceive as over-priced. Perhaps not the most accurate word to use, but you get the point. If you're hung up on something that petty, you're probably trying to justify doing what we're talking about.
> 
> Oh. Yeah. You did.
> 
> ...


I'm going to come in some where in the middle here. If I quote $100 for a job I expect to take 4 hours and it only takes 2, the customer pays $100. They agreed to $100 for the job up front. If it ends up taking you 6 hours are you going to expect them to give you another $50? No, you are going to have to eat it. So it's like any contractor. You estimate a little high and hope you don't run into any problems. The point is, it's a fixed price contract not an hourly contract so you are entitled to the amount for doing the particular job. Now, if you charge by the hour then of course they should only be paying for the time worked. I consider myself to be a man of my word and I would not have any trouble sleeping if I were able to make more money on a job because I got it done quicker.
Uber on the other hand has a different problem here. I have to disagree with steveK2016 , I don't think the contract is as clear as he seems to feel. In one place they talk about collecting payments and passing them on and in another it's time and miles. That is most likely going to bite them in the ass because if they write the contract, the courts will typically resolve contradictory interpretations in the other parties favor since the contract writer had full control over the ability to get their meaning across. Give it a couple of years and we shall see how rich the attorneys get off that one. Whatever the case, I think that having the natural presumption that Uber is perpetrating a scam is a reasonable suspicion until proven otherwise given their past history and lack of any sense of business ethics.


----------



## ntcindetroit (Mar 23, 2017)

steveK2016 said:


> ...
> 
> Is that a scam? Customer got their product that they wanted for the cost they agreed to. How i as the provider got to that finished good is my business. Customer was given a price, customer agreed to that price, customer paid that price.
> 
> Consumers pay what they feel is the value of a goods or service. The app tells them right up front how much itll cost thrn charges that exact amount. Worst scam in history if you think that is a scam.


A scam is a scam. If you told designer she/he will get paid of 72% of customer charge minus office overhead, and you do not follow up with the payment formula, but decided she/he deserves two hours at published rate, then you commit breach of contract.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

ntcindetroit said:


> A scam is a scam. If you told designer she/he will get paid of 72% of customer charge minus office overhead, and you do not follow up with the payment formula, but decided she/he deserves two hours at published rate, then you commit breach of contract.


What does that have to do with the question of the pax being scammed, which is what i was talking about?

If you want to get into the driver side of the argument we can but its been discussed in detail elsewhere. Nowhere in our driver contract does it say we get paid a set percentage of what the pax pays. Contract says we get paid by the rate table and uber keeps 25% of that charge.

But i do agree that charging the Customer more and keeping the driver out of it is bad business practice. There is a pending lawsuit to address this, i hope the outcome is the driver gets paid more but im not optimistic based on how the contract is written.


----------



## Stupid Loser (Feb 7, 2017)

Disgusted Driver said:


> I'm going to come in some where in the middle here. If I quote $100 for a job I expect to take 4 hours and it only takes 2, the customer pays $100. They agreed to $100 for the job up front. If it ends up taking you 6 hours are you going to expect them to give you another $50? No, you are going to have to eat it. So it's like any contractor. You estimate a little high and hope you don't run into any problems. The point is, it's a fixed price contract not an hourly contract so you are entitled to the amount for doing the particular job. Now, if you charge by the hour then of course they should only be paying for the time worked. I consider myself to be a man of my word and I would not have any trouble sleeping if I were able to make more money on a job because I got it done quicker.


Of course you're going to estimate high to protect yourself. But, if the job finishes sooner than expected, AND the payment agreed upon was based on an hourly wage, then the excess should be refunded, or not charged, depending on when you were paid.

The whole point of estimating high is to protect yourself from unforseen bumps in the road, thus, the chances of it taking longer and you having to eat it shouldn't happen. And even if it does happen, it's the kind of thing that would be extremely rare, since you should know what you're doing anyway. In that situation, cut your (minor) losses and move on. The reputation points you earn from your customers will be much more valuable going forward.

The way Uber charges their customers is based on the time and mileage the ride is expected to take. To add an overage to protect themselves from unforseen events on the road is understandable, but to not return the excess charge to the customer after reviewing the final details of the ride is entirely dishonest. Especially when you factor in that they (Uber) didn't do ANYTHING to justify keeping the excess. If nothing else, it should be passed on to the driver since he/she did all the work and supplied all the necessary resources!

Steve and Phil must be undercover Uber execs. They have to be. Who else would defend this nonsense with such unwavering dedication? What do they gain from incessantly licking Uber's balls?


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Disgusted Driver said:


> I'm going to come in some where in the middle here. If I quote $100 for a job I expect to take 4 hours and it only takes 2, the customer pays $100. They agreed to $100 for the job up front. If it ends up taking you 6 hours are you going to expect them to give you another $50? No, you are going to have to eat it. So it's like any contractor. You estimate a little high and hope you don't run into any problems. The point is, it's a fixed price contract not an hourly contract so you are entitled to the amount for doing the particular job. Now, if you charge by the hour then of course they should only be paying for the time worked. I consider myself to be a man of my word and I would not have any trouble sleeping if I were able to make more money on a job because I got it done quicker.
> Uber on the other hand has a different problem here. I have to disagree with steveK2016 , I don't think the contract is as clear as he seems to feel. In one place they talk about collecting payments and passing them on and in another it's time and miles. That is most likely going to bite them in the ass because if they write the contract, the courts will typically resolve contradictory interpretations in the other parties favor since the contract writer had full control over the ability to get their meaning across. Give it a couple of years and we shall see how rich the attorneys get off that one. Whatever the case, I think that having the natural presumption that Uber is perpetrating a scam is a reasonable suspicion until proven otherwise given their past history and lack of any sense of business ethics.


Exactly. I had built 5 homes as the general contractor in a past life. We sold the home owner on X price and i bought the build at Y price. If i am able to maximize my efficiencies to build the home as affforsably as possible but within the quality as i sold to the buyer, the nore efficient i am at producing the finished good, the more profit i make. Does that mean i scammed the buyer? Or scammed the subcontractors? They all agreed to a price i negotiated, those that can negotiate better earns more.

Yes, im a capitalist at heart and im not ashamed of that.

The section for collection is merely stating that whatever uber does collect on our behalf is considered a payment direct from the pax. It doesnt say that what the pax pays is what the driver earns, less commission.

I do agree, itll be in the courts hands soon enough. Im highly in favor of drivers getting their share of the extra charges. I hope im wrong and will delightfully admit to being wrong if the suit settles and we start getting paid more!



Stupid Loser said:


> Of course you're going to estimate high to protect yourself. But, if the job finishes sooner than expected, AND the payment agreed upon was based on an hourly wage, then the excess should be refunded, or not charged, depending on when you were paid.
> 
> The whole point of estimating high is to protect yourself from unforseen bumps in the road, thus, the chances of it taking longer and you having to eat it shouldn't happen. And even if it does happen, it's the kind of thing that would be extremely rare, since you should know what you're doing anyway. In that situation, cut your (minor) losses and move on. The reputation points you earn from your customers will be much more valuable going forward.
> 
> ...


The payment agreed upon was the quoted price. Just because I have posted rates doesn't nullify my quoted price. There's two ways of being charged: By the quote or by the hour. Much like with the Uber app, there's two ways of being charged: by the quote or by the rate table. By the quote is the primary method, which more than likely stemmed from pax actually believing they were being scammed with surge pricing and not actually knowing how much their ride was going to be before they took the trip. Now they know.

You are changing my analogy. I never said I quoted them hourly, I just have an hourly rate posted on my website. The customer requested a quote, i provided a quote. We agreed to the quote that for $240 they would get a brochure. They got the brochure they desired and paid the agreed $240, my designer knocked it out in 2 hours and I absolutely will keep the difference.

The thing most of you are missing here is you are arguing a point that can easily applied to Surges!

If Uber is not doing anything wrong upping their prices to 4x, 7x and yes, I've seen an 11.9x, then they are technically not doing anything wrong having a permanent, hidden 1.3x surge. There is no difference in their ability to do any of the above additional charges.

The problem is that when it's 11.9x, us drivers will cream out panties and think nothing of the pax as we happily take someone 10 miles down the road for a $150 charge. We're only not happy because we are not seeing a benefit to the permanent 1.3x surge pricing. We should. We absolutely should!

Haha, i wish I was an Uber Exec, I'd be making a lot of money and not have to actually drive for the low rates in my market.

It just seems many of you are life long employees and have never run or tried to understand how a business is run.

Just yesterday I'm sure many of you were clamoring for Uber to raise their rates, I know I do! Well they have and pax are willing to pay for it as demand has not died down since this upfront pricing scheme started. Now they need to raise it even more and cut the driver in on those higher rates!

How hard is that to understand?


----------



## Stupid Loser (Feb 7, 2017)

You hope you're wrong, but you also believe you're right. Typical sociopath/narcissist, playing both sides so that you always win no matter how it turns out! Just like Uber! Can't stand people like that. I better log out before I let a petty internet debate start to piss me off.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Stupid Loser said:


> You hope you're wrong, but you also believe you're right. Typical sociopath/narcissist, playing both sides so that you always win no matter how it turns out! Just like Uber! Can't stand people like that. I better log out before I let a petty internet debate start to piss me off.


So I should hope I'm right?

I read the contract, I believe the contract is pretty clear. Others disagree, which is fine. The contract sucks, I believe it is clear that they are only obligated to pay us by the rate table in our city. Technically, they aren't even obligated to pay us surge pricing. They do, however, because the purpose of a surge is to get drivers to drive in a certain high demand area. That would defeat the purpose of a surge if the driver wasn't incentivized to do so.


----------



## Stupid Loser (Feb 7, 2017)

I've worked with people like you before, Steve. Don't think that I don't know that you're not disclosing all the details from your little brochure example. As if you didn't know that your designer could do it that fast. Of course you knew. When the customer asked for an upfront quote, you saw it as an opportunity to milk him/her for a little bonus.

I watched the hotel owner that I used to work for pull that crap on people all the time. Nothing but a greedy, self-serving opportunist. If he ever detected the slightest weakness or naivete in another person, he would exploit it to the maximum for his own personal gain. No heart (empathy), no courage (to face adversity), no discipline (to refrain from destructive behavior), no honor. Absolute disgrace.

Superficial people's biggest fear is always of not being able to keep up with the Joneses. Material means more to them than righteousness. Once my disgust subsides, I can only offer my pity.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Stupid Loser said:


> Typical sociopath/narcissist


Not sure if you know what those words mean. One of the defining characteristics of narcissist is an inability to handle criticism. The fact that I can accept that fact that I am wrong, even hope to be wrong, rules that out.

Where did you get your psychology degree that you seem to be so well at diagnosing personality disorders?



Stupid Loser said:


> I've worked with people like you before, Steve. Don't think that I don't know that you're not disclosing all the details from your little brochure example. As if you didn't know that your designer could do it that fast. Of course you knew. When the customer asked for an upfront quote, you saw it as an opportunity to milk him/her for a little bonus.
> 
> I watched the hotel owner that I used to work for pull that crap on people all the time. Nothing but a greedy, self-serving opportunist. If he ever detected the slightest weakness or naivete in another person, he would exploit it to the maximum for his own personal gain. No heart (empathy), no courage (to face adversity), no discipline (to refrain from destructive behavior), no honor. Absolute disgrace.
> 
> Superficial people's biggest fear is always of not being able to keep up with the Joneses. Material means more to them than righteousness. Once my disgust subsides, I can only offer my pity.


People get more and more efficient at their jobs. The market dictates what the value of a finished good is. If my valuation of my finished good was outside of the norm of market value, my customer would walk. There are 1000's of other designers they can hire for that brochure, but perhaps my company was well known enough that my brand notoriety was enough to warrant a premium charge for the brochure. Maybe they could have gotten that brochure made for $100 by hiring their nephew who downloaded a pirated version of Photoshop/Illustrator. As a company, we would have paid $5000 for the entire Creative Suite (at one point).

Every time you quote a customer, that is your opportunity to earn revenue. The company is far from a monopoly and I had plenty of competition that helps to dictate market value. My job as a business owner is to maximize the business profits.

You don't know me personally, so I would definitely refrain from assuming I would take advantage of individuals with no empathy. I am my brothers keeper and if I agree to pay you something, I will not short change you, but that doesn't change the effects of my analogy. Business set prices all the time. If they are far above market value, they may lose business. If they have a brand name that warrants premium pricing, they may not.

Product from one company is not always equal to product of another company. Some people are brand people and will pay the 30% markup on brand names, some people are product people and will be satisfied with paying less for store brand products.


----------



## Stupid Loser (Feb 7, 2017)

steveK2016 said:


> Where did you get your psychology degree that you seem to be so well at diagnosing personality disorders?


The best school there is. The school of life. My father was like you. He would know when he was wrong but would keep his nose in the air and play on as if he was right. He acted like it didn't bother him, but his coolness was a facade, too.

You're not handling criticism, you're dismissing it because you simply don't believe it. As a narcissist would do. Maybe you should study a little more.

By the way, the OP already explained perfectly what was wrong with the upfront pricing by highlighting its duplicitous nature. Clear as day. Two separate fares. One real fare and one imaginary fare explained away by the usual vagueness and slick wordplay that sociopaths love to employ. You repeatedly ignore this reality that he pointed out. But, why? Can't give up now after you put so much effort into defending Uber's shadiness?

Accept it, Stevie, this is a BLATANT act of deception on Uber's part and no good can come of it for them. A lawsuit wouldn't exist if the complaints weren't legit. It's that simple. Uber also doesn't have the best reputation, in case you hadn't noticed...

This reminds me of how the Mormons ignore the mountains of evidence that their prophet was a con-man in order to keep their fragile delusions intact... "Well, he was telling the truth THIS TIME! Yeah, that's it!"

Stop being so wishy-washy, just pick a side already! This isn't a theory that's still under scrutiny, there's a definitive line here! Uber has been caught... AGAIN!

Oh, and, by the way, just to clear up the confusion about whether or not the upfront fares are sometimes LOWER than they should be, well, just see what happens when a passenger with an upfront fare changes their mind and decides to go much further than they originally planned. How do you think Uber handles that? Let them have all those extra miles for free? Of course not. A passenger being undercharged NEVER happens. That's just another distracting suggestion to take your mind off the reality that Uber is up to no good with this "feature", as usual. They'll never shortchange themselves, voluntarily. Don't be so gullible, McFly.

Bottom line is, upfront fares were devised as an underhanded method of securing more profit, period. But, since it's shady and they know it, they tried to keep it hidden as best they could. The majority of passengers aren't even aware of it. They just ask me, "why is this trip more expensive than it used to be?"

Haven't you ever heard the saying, "The proof is in the pudding"? How dense does one have to be to fall for this crap? And to attempt to justify it, too?!? Unbelievable.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Stupid Loser said:


> The best school there is. The school of life. My father was like you. He would know when he was wrong but would keep his nose in the air and play on as if he was right. He acted like it didn't bother him, but his coolness was a facade, too.
> 
> You're not handling criticism, you're dismissing it because you simply don't believe it. As a narcissist would do. Maybe you should study a little more.
> 
> ...


The pax app states that they are either charged the fare estimate or charged by the rate table (paraphrased) so when they go over the estimated upfront charge, they revert to the rate table. There is nothing deceptive about that, they state it right there on the app.

Upfront fees were devised to handle complaints that pax were surprised by prices when all they showed were surge multipliers. The amount of complaints and refunds were more than likely outrageous, which is probably why they lost $3 billion every year with Pax paying, on average, 40% of the fare they were intended to pay.

With the upfront pricing, it's no longer a surprise what your bill will be, unless you change the destination to make it longer.

There is nothing inherently wrong with upfront pricing or with the fact of charging the pax more.

The issue is that driver pay is not coinciding with this rate increase. That is a problem and I 100% agree that it is a problem. I'm a pragmatist, I look at the problem at hand and avoid looking at it at only the perspective of a driver. It's easy to just call Uber a scam when you're wearing your driver glasses. While Uber is going against the spirit of their relationship with the Driver, I'm not sure they are legally breaking the contract because of how I've read and interpreted said contract. I could be wrong. I absolutely could be wrong. As a Driver, I hope I am wrong. Why wouldn't I want to be paid more?

Now if the lawyers at Napoli Shkolink PLLC, the firm running the law suit against Uber on this very topic, can find a way to prove that what Uber is doing is in fact violating the contractual terms, fantastic! I hope they do! I am pessimistic on their chance though...


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

steveK2016 said:


> I think many people have a weird notion of what a scam is. I used to run a web development and graphics company. We had a posted rate of $60 an hour for service but when a new client requested new service, theyd rather know what the cost is upfront. So i would estimate how long it would take me for any given project. So you want a brochure made, well, thatll probbaly take 4 hours wprth of time so i quote $240. Customer approves that cost. Turned out, my designer was on point and finished the job, approved by customer, in under 2 hours. Customer still pays the agreed quoted price.


I'll bet you only paid the designer for two hours and kept the whole other $120.



JimS said:


> Read my signature. It's their business plan to charge more and pay less.





brendon292 said:


> Any context to go along with that quote? Was this said in public or in secret? Which manager was it? Was it said recently?


Granted, a self professed Uber Ops Mgr that lasted about a week on this forum about a year ago. It was said in public. I believe the moderators deleted all reference to him. Everything else he talked about was pretty legit. Not necessary to discount that quote, seeing it's been progressively true.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

JimS said:


> I'll bet you only paid the designer for two hours and kept the whole other $120.
> 
> Granted, a self professed Uber Ops Mgr that lasted about a week on this forum about a year ago. It was said in public. I believe the moderators deleted all reference to him. Everything else he talked about was pretty legit. Not necessary to discount that quote, seeing it's been progressively true.


Of course I would. The designer is paid by the hour and it'd be more than $120 because I'm not going to pay staff the same amount I charge the customer.... a Designer typically makes about $35 an hour.


----------



## Carbalbm (Jun 6, 2016)

Stupid Loser said:


> I guess I'm just using the word "scam" to describe deceit in the same way that people use the word "rip-off" to describe something they perceive as over-priced. Perhaps not the most accurate word to use, but you get the point. If you're hung up on something that petty, you're probably trying to justify doing what we're talking about.
> 
> Oh. Yeah. You did.
> 
> ...


If it took you 6 hours instead of 2 hours, would you charge an extra $50? Uber doesn't charge more if the route takes longer and has to pay the driver more.


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

steveK2016 said:


> Of course I would. The designer is paid by the hour and it'd be more than $120 because I'm not going to pay staff the same amount I charge the customer.... a Designer typically makes about $35 an hour.


I know that you charge a shop rate. Thus the modifier "whole" for the other $120.

So, yes. In your business, everyone is happy. Designer gets what he agrees to, you get paid what you agreed to, buyer pays what they agreed to. Everyone is happy.

The problem with upfront pricing is that the CONTRACT between UBER and the DRIVER is to be paid a percentage of what is collected, regardless of the 7 pages of gobblity glop arguments you have made. AND, the passenger is supposed to get paid per a published rate card. I hope the lawsuit succeeds.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

Carbalbm said:


> If it took you 6 hours instead of 2 hours, would you charge an extra $50? Uber doesn't charge more if the route takes longer and has to pay the driver more.


Ummm,. actually I think Uber will charge more. It is not clear at this point but I think what you will find is that they are charging the pax the higher of the upfront fare OR the time and mileage. If that is in fact the case then house never loses on this.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

JimS said:


> I know that you charge a shop rate. Thus the modifier "whole" for the other $120.
> 
> So, yes. In your business, everyone is happy. Designer gets what he agrees to, you get paid what you agreed to, buyer pays what they agreed to. Everyone is happy.
> 
> The problem with upfront pricing is that the CONTRACT between UBER and the DRIVER is to be paid a percentage of what is collected, regardless of the 7 pages of gobblity glop arguments you have made. AND, the passenger is supposed to get paid per a published rate card. I hope the lawsuit succeeds.


Show me where the contract specifically says the Driver is paid a percentage of what is collected. It doesn't.

There are a variety of sections that one could loosely put together to maybe assume that they're only supposed to charge the pax something and that the driver is supposed to get something else, but it does not explicitly say that.

Two sections that people point out when arguing this point from the contract: assigning Uber as collections agent and the notion that payment by pax to Uber is to be considered payment to driver from pax.

The problem is, you have to make assumptions to come to the conclusion that those sections mean you get paid a percentage of what the pax pays.

You cannot make assumptions with contracts. The top of section 4 clearly states that driver is entitled to charge up to the amount for a fare as calculated by your markets rate table. Uber as a collection agents is just that, we authorize them to collect credit card payment for the amount above. That payment to you from Uber is to be considered a payment from the pax to you. It doesn't say what the pax is charged is paid to the driver. It just simply doesn't say that.

I do agree with you that in this scenario with Uber, drivers are not happy because we're used to seeing pax being charged the rate table and being paid 75% of that. The contract never changed, they just starting charging more. We should demand that we receive the difference, but the pax is certainly not being screwed here.


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

This is what I signed up for. I charge the passenger based on mileage and distance. Uber adds a booking fee and keeps a percentage. And if they change their mind, they tell me so:


----------



## Carbalbm (Jun 6, 2016)

Disgusted Driver said:


> Ummm,. actually I think Uber will charge more. It is not clear at this point but I think what you will find is that they are charging the pax the higher of the upfront fare OR the time and mileage. If that is in fact the case then house never loses on this.


Unless the rider changes the destination, no adjustment is made to upfront pricing.


----------



## Wardell Curry (Jul 9, 2016)

The real scam is forcing the pax to choose an upfront price. I rather Uber gave options like you can pay the upfront price or pay the price based on the prevailing rates for time and distance.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

Carbalbm said:


> Unless the rider changes the destination, no adjustment is made to upfront pricing.


How sure are you of this? What if along the way, I stopped at a drive through for them that was on the route. Would that be considered a change in destination? What if they ask me to drop someone off along the way and we don't change the destination? If what you are saying is true than we can make a fortune on this. Order a trip from point A to point C and point B in the middle of the route can be my house where I sit for 2 hours before finishing the short trip. So I have a feeling it's more complicated than just changing a destination otherwise they are going to get hosed on some trips and I'd be happy to help do it to them.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Disgusted Driver said:


> How sure are you of this? What if along the way, I stopped at a drive through for them that was on the route. Would that be considered a change in destination? What if they ask me to drop someone off along the way and we don't change the destination? If what you are saying is true than we can make a fortune on this. Order a trip from point A to point C and point B in the middle of the route can be my house where I sit for 2 hours before finishing the short trip. So I have a feeling it's more complicated than just changing a destination otherwise they are going to get hosed on some trips and I'd be happy to help do it to them.


If the changes exceed the upfront price, it reverts to the rate table. $0.12 a minute in a drive through would take a long time for it to exceed the upfront price, but if they want a return trip, or to make multiple, deviated stops, that may automatically revert it to the rate table.

Of course, as mentioned, if pax changes the destination in the app itself, it nullifies the upfront price and goes by the rate table.


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

steveK2016 said:


> If the changes exceed the upfront price, it reverts to the rate table. $0.12 a minute in a drive through would take a long time for it to exceed the upfront price, but if they want a return trip, or to make multiple, deviated stops, that may automatically revert it to the rate table.
> 
> Of course, as mentioned, if pax changes the destination in the app itself, it nullifies the upfront price and goes by the rate table.


The genius of this, from Uber's perspective, is they can't lose. They can only collect the normal rate-calculated amount or their inflated estimates.


----------



## nickd8775 (Jul 12, 2015)

NorCalPhil said:


> The genius of this, from Uber's perspective, is they can't lose. They can only collect the normal rate-calculated amount or their inflated estimates.


They can lose. If your payout is within 90% of the upfront fare, they don't charge the passenger extra.


----------



## Stupid Loser (Feb 7, 2017)

Steve, I would just like to know why, once you realized that the brochure only took half the time that you thought it would take, you didn't let the customer know about it, and that you would only be charging him half of the original quote.

Seems that you don't care much for the Golden Rule.

I bet if you approached me to do some work for you, and I tell you it will cost $500 for 5 hours, then later you find out I finished in 2 hours, you'd be furious that you had to pay $300 extra. You'd feel deceived. You'd feel ripped off. And you know it.

Then, when I try to weasel my way out of it by saying, "hey man, you agreed to pay that price", or, "I was paid for the job, not by the hour (even though an hourly rate was mentioned)", you'd become even more angry and probably threaten some kind of legal action, right?

Problem with people like you is that it's always OK when you do it to someone else, but how dare anyone do the same to you. Seen it a million times.



nickd8775 said:


> They can lose. If your payout is within 90% of the upfront fare, they don't charge the passenger extra.


That's not really "losing". They're still making a profit, albeit a smaller one, and the pennies they "sacrifice" in those rare cases is heavily offset by the thousands of dollars they scrape every day from this wonderful new pricing scheme. But, it sure fooled you! Uber thanks you for your partnership. 

Tell me, why is it that Uber eventually agreed to pay elelegido his cut of the excess fare if Uber really isn't doing anything wrong? Why didn't they tell him he wasn't entitled to it? Could it be that they know that he is indeed entitled to it, as we all are, but since he's only one of the few making a fuss about it, they paid him to appease him, probably in hopes that he would keep quiet and not draw attention to their ruse?



Carbalbm said:


> If it took you 6 hours instead of 2 hours, would you charge an extra $50? Uber doesn't charge more if the route takes longer and has to pay the driver more.


No, because I wouldn't take that long in the first place. Because I'd know how much time I would need to finish a job, plus a little wiggle room. In the rare event that it takes longer than the quoted time, I would just absorb whatever the perceived cost is, because, obviously, it wouldn't be right to raise the quote on the customer after an agreement had already been reached.

And, yes, Uber does charge more if the ride keeps going. They'll switch back to the rate table fare and charge the customer accordingly.


----------



## dirtylee (Sep 2, 2015)

Upfront is consistently 10% than actual. Just pad a few miles per trip.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

steveK2016 said:


> Exactly. I had built 5 homes as the general contractor in a past life. We sold the home owner on X price and i bought the build at Y price.


This made you a home builder. You were not an agent for other homebuilders, a setup in which you would simply refer customers to them and handle invoicing and payments; instead you were a home builder who bought and sold home builds. You were a housing provider. Uber, on the other hand, styles itself as merely an agent for drivers. They claim they are not a transportation company nor a transportation provider. They claim that what they do is provide the marketplace (driver app, pax app and website) for the transactions to take place in, collect fares on behalf of drivers, and provide a support function for both drivers and pax.

What you're doing above is compare Uber's up front pricing operation with your setup as a housing provider, but that doesn't fit with what Uber claims for itself. Do you see? It's the difference between being a supplier, as you were, and being an agent, which is what Uber claims to be. It doesn't fit with what Uber claims, but you are in fact 100% correct in your comparison; Uber _is_ operating as a transportation provider now with its up front pricing. Just as you did when you bought builds at a lower price and sold them for a higher price, Uber is now buying rides at a lower price and selling them for a higher price. Contrary to its claims, Uber is now a fully fledged transportation provider and, with this change in its business model, the mantra of "Uber is not a transportation company; it is a technology company" does not apply; it is false.

So, if we can see that it is true that Uber is now a transportation provider , who cares? Well, the reason it matters is that Uber's driver contract still reflects Uber's previous operations as drivers' agent and it still states the previous rules under which fares will be calculated, collected and paid, which Uber is no longer complying with in its new role of transportation provider. As I showed earlier, the driver contract explicitly states:

1) That the fare will be calculated _after_ the trip has been completed:
_Fare is calculated based upon a base fare amount plus distance (as determined by Company using location-based services enabled through the Device) and/or time amounts, as detailed at www.uber.com/cities for the applicable Territory ("Fare Calculation")._

2) Uber will act as my payment collection agent solely to collect the fare on my behalf:
You: _(i) appoint Company as your limited payment collection agent solely for the purpose of accepting the Fare, applicable Tolls and, depending on the region and/or if requested by you, applicable taxes and fees from the User on your behalf_

3) Payment made by the pax to Uber will be the same as payment from the pax direct to me:
_payment made by User to Company (or to an Affiliate of Company acting as an agent of Company) shall be considered the same as payment made directly by User to you._

It's clear from the above that Uber is now in breach of contract. Even though it says in our driver contract that the fare will be calculated after the trip is completed according to actual data from the driver app, Uber is now calculating the fare from estimates before the trip even starts. And, even though Uber says in our driver contract that the fare will be calculated from the distance and time rates at www.uber.com/cities, it is now calculating pax according to an unknown methodology which Uber will not explain to us. Of course, you could say that Uber _is_ collecting the Fare (as defined in the contract as miles+time), but that this is the _driver_ fare. You could also say, as Uber does, that there is also an additional _passenger_ fare which, although it isn't mentioned anywhere in the contract, can be charged to the pax by Uber on top of the driver fare, because there is nothing in the contract which says they can't. But there is such a clause:

You: _(i) appoint Company as your limited payment collection agent *solely for the purpose of accepting the Fare*, applicable Tolls and, depending on the region and/or if requested by you, applicable taxes and fees from the User on your behalf_

Solely for the purpose of collecting the Fare (with capital F, which means that it is the fare defined in the contract - calculated after the ride is complete from actual data, according to published rates). Solely to collect _the_ Fare, which precludes collecting any other type of additional fare.

Finally, this is a three party arrangement: pax, Uber and driver. A → B → C. A pays B, who then pays C. Uber says that A paying B is to be considered the same as A paying C directly. Merriam Webster defines "same" as meaning:

- something that is exactly like another person or thing being discussed or referred to
- something that has not changed *:* something that is exactly like it was at an earlier time.

Therefore, if A pays B $50, and we assert that A paying B is the same as A paying C, then according to Webster's definition, A paying C would therefore be a payment of $50. The payment from A to C, according to Websters, would not have changed - it would be exactly like it was at an earlier time, when A paid B.

Your definition of "same" is clearly different from both mine and Websters. You take the clause in the contract to mean that, even though it says the two payments will be the same, somehow the amounts of the payments will not necessarily be the same. So, according to you, A paying B $50 is the same as B paying C $35, for example. I can't see any reason why you would believe this when it obviously is not so.

Anyway, as before, everything in the contract has been very well defined by Uber. They have done a good job to make sure there is no ambiguity in the contract, which may later prove to be to their detriment. With their recent move to transport provider status, they are clearly now in breach of it.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

The extent of these up front price rises is getting ridiculous. I got this quote this morning at 12:20 am, to go from 100 Olive Ave to the next door neighbour's house at number 102. There is no surge on the driver app.

The houses are 100 feet apart. So, it's safe to say that this would be a minimum fare ride. It's also safe to say that, at 12:20am there isn't going to be any traffic between the two houses or any need to divert to a longer route around traffic. So, this ride should be a minimum fare ride, which in this area is $6.75. Booking fee here is $1.75. A 20% driver who took this ride if I were to request it would receive $5 x 0.8 = $4. A 25 percenter would receive $3.75.

Uber, on the other hand, would bill the pax $7.80. They would pay the 20 percenter $4 and keep $3.80 for themselves. A split of 51% driver / 49% Uber. For a 25 percenter, it's even worse - the driver gets $3.75 and Uber $4.05; a split of 48% driver / 52% Uber. So in the latter case, Uber gets the lion's share of the pot: they receive _more_ than the driver who is doing the work.

This is nuts.


----------



## excel2345 (Dec 14, 2015)

Since everyone(myself included) seems to feel we should be paid based on what the passenger paid how about we flip this over. A passenger is on a pool ride and receives a quote of less than the actual rate card rate because Uber's algorithm feels there will be a couple of matches to the ride. It turns out that there are no matches. The ride is less than the rate card, how should the driver be paid, on the time and mileage rate or the actual price charged?


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

excel2345 said:


> Since everyone(myself included) seems to feel we should be paid based on what the passenger paid how about we flip this over. A passenger is on a pool ride and receives a quote of less than the actual rate card rate because Uber's algorithm feels there will be a couple of matches to the ride. It turns out that there are no matches. The ride is less than the rate card, how should the driver be paid, on the time and mileage rate or the actual price charged?


I think it's not so much a matter of what we feel we should be paid based on; it's a matter of our contract with Uber saying what our revenue should be calculated on and Uber ignoring it.

Regarding whether we would like to receive a share of what Pool pax pay or fixed rates, the matter is not that straightforward because Uber likes to subsidise Pool rides to compete with Lyft, and even municipal buses. A pax a couple of nights ago told me that he paid $3.75 for his 4 mile ride across town. This was some kind of promotional rate (Pool minimum in SF is $7.20). So, we wouldn't want to get caught up in Uber's subsidy mess.

However, if Pool subsidies and Pool promo offers were excluded, I would take an 80% share of revenue, sure. I have given many, many Pool rides from the airport where the Uber X fare would have been $30 and pax on a multi-rider Pool told me that they are paying $26 - $28 each. I'd rather take 80% of $56, or $84 if there are three pax, than 80% of the discounted Pool rate card amount, which is around $18 on the SFO to downtown SF run. Likewise with the short hop downtown Pools that have 3 or 4 pickups. Uber gets $28.80 for four pax and, under the current system, they pay me 8 or 9 bucks. Sure I'll take 80% of $28.80 instead.

Some Pool rides with solo riders would mean that I'd earn less money than the rates table, but solo rides on Pool are few and far between and in any case Uber does not give pax a meaningful discount when they don't think the ride will be matched.

So, yeah, where do I sign?


----------



## Wardell Curry (Jul 9, 2016)

Basically because of upfront pricing, there is an incentive for a driver to take the "long way" to get as close to possible to the upfront rate without going over it. Because of this, many pax will not even say anything as long as you don't go over. If you go over they will likely ask for a fare review for an inefficient route.


----------



## Arti (Apr 28, 2017)

I ask myself when are we going to stop this kind of corporate bullying? when are WE the hand that feeds Uber Lyft and all other TNC company going to show these people that we area the reason for their billions? when are we going to show them? what Happened that we working for the minimum of all wages and empty promises while they make their billion that right billion and we are making what. Only you and I can make a difference when we stand together and say enough is enough!


----------



## Dback2004 (Nov 7, 2015)

Uber has figured out in the bigger markets they can actually charge an up front and pocket the difference, which, IMO is a breach of contract with drivers which elelegido pointed out.


elelegido said:


> This made you a home builder. You were not an agent for other homebuilders, a setup in which you would simply refer customers to them and handle invoicing and payments; instead you were a home builder who bought and sold home builds. You were a housing provider.


Uber could do this if they were a transportation provider. My company does it all the time in the services industry, but we're a provider, not an agent. We don't allow our clients to enter into a direct agreement with our employees (or our ICs when we have them). Therefore we deliver more efficiently than the quoted price and pocket the savings.



steveK2016 said:


> Is that a scam? Customer got their product that they wanted for the cost they agreed to. How i as the provider got to that finished good is my business. Customer was given a price, customer agreed to that price, customer paid that price.


As previously stated, the model works if you're a provider. Uber maintains they are a technology company and act as an agent and that the relationship is entered into directly between drivers and pax. Therefor they are not a provider and can't charge a different amount than what they're paying the drivers.

Disclaimer: My opinion only after reading my contract and my contract only. I am not an attorney.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Dback2004 said:


> Uber has figured out in the bigger markets they can actually charge an up front and pocket the difference, which, IMO is a breach of contract with drivers which elelegido pointed out.
> 
> Uber could do this if they were a transportation provider. My company does it all the time in the services industry, but we're a provider, not an agent. We don't allow our clients to enter into a direct agreement with our employees (or our ICs when we have them). Therefore we deliver more efficiently than the quoted price and pocket the savings.
> 
> ...


Bingo. Either Uber is my agent (it takes a percentage and/or charges a fee) or it's a service provider (it buys the service from me for a lower price and resells it for a higher price). But it cannot be both in the same transaction.


----------



## Fritz Duval (Feb 4, 2017)

NorCalPhil said:


> I'm still not convinced that this is a scam. They are able to price the ride at whatever they want initially, and the rider can agree to the upfront price (or not). Drivers have already agreed to a pricing structure: time + mileage + toll - commision. Whatever is left is kept as profit by uber.
> 
> It's no different than me using a contractor to build a house, and the contractor using subs to do the work. They pay the subs whatever their negotiated rate is. The contractor keeps the difference.
> 
> ...


Not well said at all!! This is one of the reasons Uber enjoys low rates, they get a steady flow of passengers. Times like this Uber finds another way to skim money. The bottom line is drivers get 20 to 25 percent of X rides period. With up front pricing, Uber price was high, than they should do the right thing and refund or credit the passenger. This is a form of stealing. Drivers or Uber shouldnt get to keep any over charges period. This is also how Uber can give quest and hiring bonus. Uber will steal and do what ever until there caught. This time we all can hope there customers catch them. Game over!!

Also. If Uber can attempt to bully and deceive Apple, what makes you think they wouldnt do it to a Jane or Joe. Again they will continue to do intil there caught red handed...


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

DexNex said:


> What was the Uber Navigation suggested route?
> 
> You are missing the most important piece of information.
> 
> ...


The problem with your approach is that the rider will assume you're trying to long-haul them and make more money. They won't understand that they're going to get the same charge no matter what. So your rating will suffer which may not be an issue if you have a fairly decent rating but if you're on the edge it could get you deactivated.


----------



## TBone (Jan 19, 2015)

Ubercide said:


> He did? Please link to article


https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcr...oyees-were-misled-on-equity-compensation/amp/

A different article made it sound worse than this one.


----------



## NGOwner (Nov 15, 2016)

The lawsuit should go nationwide.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-uber-drivers-lawsuit-20170429-story.html

[NG]Owner


----------



## Ubercide (Apr 20, 2017)

NGOwner said:


> The lawsuit should go nationwide.
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-uber-drivers-lawsuit-20170429-story.html
> 
> [NG]Owner


Count me in.

Uber has been unlawfully taking away more than just fare differences for a long time.

Like removing fares because a customer says so without even consulting the driver.

That is just theft.


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

But I think the prime victim here is the passenger. Though we are supposed to get a cut of the revenue, the problem is that we are getting paid per the rate card. The PASSENGERS are being overcharged.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Stupid Loser said:


> Steve, I would just like to know why, once you realized that the brochure only took half the time that you thought it would take, you didn't let the customer know about it, and that you would only be charging him half of the original quote.
> 
> Seems that you don't care much for the Golden Rule.
> 
> ...


You can try to be upset all you want. That was the agreed upon price. How you would find out how long it took me to make your finished good is questionable. Do you know how long it takes to build your car? Would you be upset if you found out they found a way to be 30% more efficient but didn't reduce the price of the finished good?

I wouldn't be concerned with your threats of legal action. When I provide a quote, you sign on the dotted line and accept that quote. If you did no research to find out what the market rate for that brochure would be, is that my fault? Well, I would have provided market price regardless if it takes me 2 or 4 hours to complete the project. If you want to pay strictly by the hour, you can take your chances and accept that rate schedule versus a quoted rate. Now if I quoted for 4 hours, that's different. I quoted a flat fee for a finished good.

Developing efficiencies to save on your COGS while maintaining your selling price is the staple of any good business.

I'd never accept a quote without getting a quote from multiple suppliers to ensure I'm paying the best rate I can.

Uber pax can do the same, maybe they've got a friend that'll take them somewhere for $5 in gas. The city bus is also affordable. You act like they have no option but to be at the mercy of Uber.

Again, the pricing is not the issue here. The issue is paying the drivers. The pax should be paying far more than 30% pre-upfront pricing.



JimS said:


> But I think the prime victim here is the passenger. Though we are supposed to get a cut of the revenue, the problem is that we are getting paid per the rate card. The PASSENGERS are being overcharged.


A passenger pays what the app tells them to pay. It clearly shows in the app that the rate table is not 100% the only way to pay. If that were the case, Surges would also be wrong. Yet I guarantee you, JimS that when you get that 4x surge, you aren't thinking "I shouldn't take this ride, I'm overcharging the passenger!" You take that ride and hope they're going 30 miles across town!


----------



## autofill (Apr 1, 2016)

steveK2016 said:


> You can try to be upset all you want. That was the agreed upon price. How you would find out how long it took me to make your finished good is questionable. Do you know how long it takes to build your car? Would you be upset if you found out they found a way to be 30% more efficient but didn't reduce the price of the finished good?
> 
> I wouldn't be concerned with your threats of legal action. When I provide a quote, you sign on the dotted line and accept that quote. If you did no research to find out what the market rate for that brochure would be, is that my fault? Well, I would have provided market price regardless if it takes me 2 or 4 hours to complete the project. If you want to pay strictly by the hour, you can take your chances and accept that rate schedule versus a quoted rate. Now if I quoted for 4 hours, that's different. I quoted a flat fee for a finished good.
> 
> ...


The reading comprehension of a first grader. Twisted the whole story around in his reply. Nutz.


----------



## Too Many Miles (Jan 26, 2016)

NorCalPhil said:


> I'm still not convinced that this is a scam. They are able to price the ride at whatever they want initially, and the rider can agree to the upfront price (or not). Drivers have already agreed to a pricing structure: time + mileage + toll - commision. Whatever is left is kept as profit by uber.
> 
> It's no different than me using a contractor to build a house, and the contractor using subs to do the work. They pay the subs whatever their negotiated rate is. The contractor keeps the difference.
> 
> ...


I am amazed at how confused and uninformed drivers are. Most drivers never read their agreement with Uber and most of the ones that read it do not understand it.
The reason for the law suit regarding up front pricing is valid and clear if you read the contract. Uber is violating the contract with is nothing new.

First we have a definition of "Fare": It is what the rider pays the drivers for transportation services. Uber does not provide any transportation services (they want to make sure that this is clear because if they provide transportation services then they can be categorized as a transportation company and their scam of ride sharing will not work the same way).
Uber's primary function is to connect riders with drivers (just like a booking service for the airlines).
Uber's second function is to act as a payment processing service (just like a credit card).
Uber does not pay you, therefore you are not an independent contractor for Uber. Proof of this is the fact that you receive a 1099-K for Tax purposes (3rd party payment processing), meaning that you are being paid by the riders and that YOU ARE PAYING UBER their fee (this shows on the 1099k), for the service they provide to you.
Uber can determined how the "fare" is calculated, but they cannot have 2 
different fares for the same trip and they cannot keep the difference.

Drivers DO NOT AGREE TO BE PAID BY THE MILE AND TIME, drivers agree to be paid the "fare" which is calculated by the mile and time (IT IS NOT THE SAME).

For Uber pool, you do not agree to be paid by the mile and time either, you agree that the rate at which the fare is calculated is just different from Uber x. Uber in this case is charging whatever they want.mostly too little, they do not even follow the pricing in the agreement to calculate the fare that they are charging.

Last but not least, Uber has managed to control the "transportation" pricing (a market in which they have absolutely no rights), not allowing for free market competition among those who provide the transportation services.

Ride sharing services are currently a big scam and regulations will eventually catch up.
If Travis continues to lead the company, it will surely sink hard. The business model of subsidizing is unsustainable and once both companies stop that, then it will make sense for competition to start showing up.

Read your contracts carefully and you will understand this information.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

autofill said:


> The reading comprehension of a first grader. Twisted the whole story around in his reply. Nutz.


Let's keep it civil... Steve and Phil have their own interpretation and even if they never agree with the rest of us on this, it's ok; it's their opinion and we should respect them.


----------



## autofill (Apr 1, 2016)

elelegido said:


> Let's keep it civil... Steve and Phil have their own interpretation and even if they never agree with the rest of us on this, it's ok; it's their opinion and we should respect them.


Respected.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Too Many Miles said:


> I am amazed at how confused and uninformed drivers are. Most drivers never read their agreement with Uber and most of the ones that read it do not understand it.
> The reason for the law suit regarding up front pricing is valid and clear if you read the contract. Uber is violating the contract with is nothing new.
> 
> First we have a definition of "Fare": It is what the rider pays the drivers for transportation services. Uber does not provide any transportation services (they want to make sure that this is clear because if they provide transportation services then they can be categorized as a transportation company and their scam of ride sharing will not work the same way).
> ...


Can't argue with any of this. The drivers' lawyers will hopefully present all of these arguments in court, and I can't see how a judge could side with Uber on it- to me the contract is crystal clear. But Uber is expert on spray painting stripes on a horse and selling it as a zebra, and there is no shortage of buyers. Guess we'll wait and see.


----------



## Too Many Miles (Jan 26, 2016)

elelegido said:


> Can't argue with any of this. The drivers' lawyers will hopefully present all of these arguments in court, and I can't see how a judge could side with Uber on it- to me the contract is crystal clear. But Uber is expert on spray painting stripes on a horse and selling it as a zebra, and there is no shortage of buyers. Guess we'll wait and see.


This is normal for Uber, they ignore all rules and laws, they have over 90 law suits in Federal Court and they settle everything ending up with a slap on their hand. Somehow it works for them. Look at the law suit for keeping 48% of the tips from Uber taxi, the settlement is a joke, returning the money (to the last penny) to the riders.
The one thing that is now hurting Uber with all this things is the bad publicity, people now know what Uber is about.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Too Many Miles said:


> The one thing that is now hurting Uber with all this things is the bad publicity, people now know what Uber is about.


Do customers care, though? As long as they get a cheap ride, I don't think it matters too much.

I think that if the court decides in favour of the drivers who brought the up front pricing suit, we'll get awarded enough compensation to buy ourselves a couple of packs of gum each. The real victory would be enforcement of the driver contract, with Uber being told that if it is our agent then they must do as they say in the contract - calculate the fare as specified according to actual distance & time, collect the fare for us and then pay it to us, minus their fee. This would force them to re-link their revenue to our pay. If they want more revenue, which they clearly do (and need) then our pay goes up too as their "partner".


----------



## Too Many Miles (Jan 26, 2016)

elelegido said:


> Do customers care, though? As long as they get a cheap ride, I don't think it matters too much.
> 
> I think that if the court decides in favour of the drivers who brought the up front pricing suit, we'll get awarded enough compensation to buy ourselves a couple of packs of gum each. The real victory would be enforcement of the driver contract, with Uber being told that if it is our agent then they must do as they say in the contract - calculate the fare as specified according to actual distance & time, collect the fare for us and then pay it to us, minus their fee. This would force them to re-link their revenue to our pay. If they want more revenue, which they clearly do (and need) then our pay goes up too as their "partner".


The passengers dont care, most of them are willing to pay more. The problem is with the drivers.
The courts won't make a decision because Uber looks to settle everything.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Too Many Miles said:


> The courts won't make a decision because Uber looks to settle everything.


True. Some good may come out of it, though. For example, because of the Liss Riordan case; Uber no longer deactivates over acceptance rates, which is a huge benefit to cherry pickers.


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

elelegido said:


> Let's keep it civil... Steve and Phil have their own interpretation and even if they never agree with the rest of us on this, it's ok; it's their opinion and we should respect them.


Indeed. I think most of the people in this thread have solid points to make, which is why we'll just have to wait until it all washes out.

Interpretation. Even the reasoned explanations of what a Fare is in the drivers contract leaves out one important piece - the passengers don't agree to our contract. They have their own with Uber, and they are mutually exclusive. How Fare is defined for them (or not, I haven't read it) may not be the same. I don't ride on the platform so I don't know.


----------



## Too Many Miles (Jan 26, 2016)

NorCalPhil said:


> Indeed. I think most of the people in this thread have solid points to make, which is why we'll just have to wait until it all washes out.
> 
> Interpretation. Even the reasoned explanations of what a Fare is in the drivers contract leaves out one important piece - the passengers don't agree to our contract. They have their own with Uber, and they are mutually exclusive. How Fare is defined for them (or not, I haven't read it) may not be the same. I don't ride on the platform so I don't know.


The contract for the riders states the same definition and rules.


----------



## negeorgia (Feb 1, 2015)

I simply call it the 'because we can fee' and move on. Heck, in my market the minnow is $4 and $1.35 booking fee, yet when I check the rider app; a minnow estimate is $5.20, $5.35 or $5.75 and I get $3.20 each time; so upfront pricing even applies to minnows and a discounted or inflated booking fee from time to time.


----------



## Too Many Miles (Jan 26, 2016)

negeorgia said:


> I simply call it the 'because we can fee' and move on. Heck, in my market the minnow is $4 and $1.35 booking fee, yet when I check the rider app; a minnow estimate is $5.20, $5.35 or $5.75 and I get $3.20 each time; so upfront pricing even applies to minnows and a discounted or inflated booking fee from time to time.


You might feel different if the minimum was $3.00 with no base, $2.35 booking fee and $3.00 per gallon in a state with a very high cost of living and the highest taxes in the country.


----------



## negeorgia (Feb 1, 2015)

Too Many Miles said:


> You might feel different if the minimum was $3.00 with no base, $2.35 booking fee and $3.00 per gallon in a state with a very high cost of living and the highest taxes in the country.


Feel different about what? My principals apply to every market. If you can tolerate the earnings per trip, mile or hour; keep driving.... If you hate all three, stop. I would never recommend anyone ride share with a car payment or without an emergency fund.


----------



## Muber1 (Jul 25, 2016)

NorCalPhil said:


> I'm still not convinced that this is a scam. They are able to price the ride at whatever they want initially, and the rider can agree to the upfront price (or not). Drivers have already agreed to a pricing structure: time + mileage + toll - commision. Whatever is left is kept as profit by uber.
> 
> It's no different than me using a contractor to build a house, and the contractor using subs to do the work. They pay the subs whatever their negotiated rate is. The contractor keeps the difference.
> 
> ...


Yeah, but as a Pax, you don't have a choice of choosing any other possible route... as with any gps application you get 3 differnet routes for example. Over here in Houston, a ride to the airport from the burbs can be $35 no traffic, and jumps to $60 during rush hr as uber takes you on 55 mile trip vs 35 miles to save 10 min... if I'm in no rush i would like to have my options


----------



## somedriverguy (Sep 6, 2016)

NorCalPhil said:


> I'm still not convinced that this is a scam. They are able to price the ride at whatever they want initially, and the rider can agree to the upfront price (or not). Drivers have already agreed to a pricing structure: time + mileage + toll - commision. Whatever is left is kept as profit by uber.
> 
> It's no different than me using a contractor to build a house, and the contractor using subs to do the work. They pay the subs whatever their negotiated rate is. The contractor keeps the difference.
> 
> ...


Except UBER keeps claiming that they need to lower the rates to stay competitive. Which means upfront pricing is just their way of lying to everyone invloved.


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

somedriverguy said:


> Except UBER keeps claiming that they need to lower the rates to stay competitive. Which means upfront pricing is just their way of lying to everyone invloved.


Like I said, I don't listen to their PR machine.


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

So this is what I've been doing to make a little more money to match what the pax is paying. 
Sorry if this has been mentioned, as I haven't read every post here. 

First I use Google maps navigation. 
While in a ride I will get other routes options with "similar ETA" from Google. 
I discreetly click on"similar ETA". The new route still appear immediately showing the difference in time and mileage. Many times I find it's just a couple minutes longer, but a few miles also, which is great especially on a nice surge trip. I've never had a pax complain since they can see my phone and see I'm following the GPS, even if it's not the route they would have taken. 
On long trips I can do this more than once to add more miles to trip. 
If I don't like the new route, I just continue with old route and gps will automatically change back.


----------



## run26912 (Sep 23, 2015)

elelegido said:


> Yes, that is correct. Uber is now trying to say that there are two fares for each trip - the pax' fare and the driver's fare. They've even started referring to them separately - the following quote is from one of their email replies to me:
> 
> *Partners' fares vary by city and are based on time and distance of a trip. *
> 
> ...


Very good points. Uber claims to be an AGENT of the DRIVER. This not PRACTICED in reality. However they disguise the reality on the tax forms the way they do their 1099s by pushing ALL REVENUE they collected onto the driver, making it look like they are an AGENT. The real SCANDAL is that UBER NEVER DISCLOSES to the DRIVER how much the PAX actually PAID... YET, the DRIVER WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERY PENNY PAID BY THE PAX under their GROSS INCOME. This is what makes me so sick. As an AGENT, they SHOULD BE TRANSPARENT and let the drivers KNOW exactly how much they collected from the PAX since the DRIVER is the one that will be responsible for every last cent as GROSS INCOME on their 1099.

THIS IS absolutely SKIMMING. Illegal? perhaps not. IMMORAL? Absolutely.

BONG!!!



elelegido said:


> Bingo. Either Uber is my agent (it takes a percentage and/or charges a fee) or it's a service provider (it buys the service from me for a lower price and resells it for a higher price). But it cannot be both in the same transaction.


DOUBLE BONG!!!

Hit the nail right on the head!

As our AGENT, they should be transparent and letting us KNOW exactly how much the PAX paid UBER, we will be responsible for THAT AMOUNT in the eyes of the IRS as gross income. That is indisputable. Uber is supposed to be a pay-thru entity but not only doesn't provide transparency, they ACTIVELY try to HIDE IT. How long do they think these kind of shady actions will go unnoticed? It's a culture of manipulation, shortcuts and abuse with an eye on only the short-term while preaching some BS long-term make believe fantasy including self-driving cars (what a joke! needs a HUMAN to interact every 1 mile) and flying cars (get real).

The cover up is worse than the crime, ask Martha Stewart. What is really disgusting is the cover-up isn't even well done. They are SLOPPY at best. Uber is best at pissing off almost everyone including their own employees, executives, the media, the president, drivers, pax, regulators, sovereign governments, cabbies, investors, and xxxx <-- fill in the blank.

Karma is a b*tch.

BONG!!!


----------



## Too Many Miles (Jan 26, 2016)

run26912 said:


> Very good points. Uber claims to be an AGENT of the DRIVER. This not PRACTICED in reality. However they disguise the reality on the tax forms the way they do their 1099s by pushing ALL REVENUE they collected onto the driver, making it look like they are an AGENT. The real SCANDAL is that UBER NEVER DISCLOSES to the DRIVER how much the PAX actually PAID... YET, the DRIVER WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERY PENNY PAID BY THE PAX under their GROSS INCOME. This is what makes me so sick. As an AGENT, they SHOULD BE TRANSPARENT and let the drivers KNOW exactly how much they collected from the PAX since the DRIVER is the one that will be responsible for every last cent as GROSS INCOME on their 1099.
> 
> THIS IS absolutely SKIMMING. Illegal? perhaps not. IMMORAL? Absolutely.
> 
> ...


IRS might be the next agency going after Uber and we all know that if there is an agency that you don't try to fool, it is the mighty IRS.
In this country there are 2 things that will happen to everyone, one is that you will die, the other one is that you will pay taxes, one way or another.


----------



## Fisfis (Oct 17, 2014)

steveK2016 said:


> The thing is, if Uber is able to charge surge rates above the base rates on the fly, then upfront pricing is no different then a surge right?
> 
> Well, when they present the price to the Rider in the app, this is what it told to explain the pricing.
> 
> ...


According to what you state, if whatever the pax pays has nothing to do with what Uber and the driver agreed to, then surge or no surge you would always get paid the base fare.

When Uber came out to the scene, the exact verbiage was whatever the driver collects at the end of the trip, minus 20%

They started deviating from the original claim after they rolled the safety rider fee.

Once it became pretty obvious that it was a scam, they reworded it to booking fee, because riders started questioning why the **** did they have to pay for a driver's background check for every single trip.

If mileage plus time constitutes the fare, then wtf is that extra amount of expense I'm paying for? Obviously, it's not surge or the mileage. Then what is it?

Uber justifies this as mileage expense, assuming that the driver took the most inefficient route, which again relates this income to "mileage."

So, if uber is getting an extra piece from that mileage income, then why the driver is not getting compensated for any of it?

Because, Uber doesn't have an expense in their booking that could explain the extra profit. It's just overage, a sum of money that should be refunded back to the paying customers.

But what does Uber do? They don't share with the driver. They don't return it back to the customer. They just keep it and that's not legal at all.


----------



## asriznet (Apr 13, 2017)

Is uber's solution for this is driver to follow the exact route generated from the upfront fare? By doing so, will the driver get's compensated exactly how much the rider actually pays for?

It's simple, driver takes a more efficient route, uber is abusing this and making profit out of it.


----------



## Too Many Miles (Jan 26, 2016)

Fisfis said:


> According to what you state, if whatever the pax pays has nothing to do with what Uber and the driver agreed to, then surge or no surge you would always get paid the base fare.
> 
> When Uber came out to the scene, the exact verbiage was whatever the driver collects at the end of the trip, minus 20%
> 
> ...


The safety fee was changed to booking fee because of one of the law suits from rider, mainly because of false advertisement claims which made Uber get rid of some words (like safest) and frasesee. Booking fee is more appropriate and legal, but if they are going to call it that then it should be something that goes directly to them and not through the drivers, because then it appears as if WE are paying 2 fees to Uber. It is basically a scam to keep more money.
The upfront fare is a great idea as far as consumer protection (so if drivers want to take a much longer route like taxi's have done for years, the riders are not screwed). The problem is that It is abused a little by Uber, which translated to the volume they have, it is a fortune.
It is clearly a violation of the agreement because they are keeping a part of the fare that does not belong to them, unless they change the agreement.
You say that keeping it "is not legal at all". Can you tell me 3 things that Uber has ever done that are actually legal? OR at least one?
The truth is catching up with Uber, they have to change or they won't survive.


----------



## jfinks (Nov 24, 2016)

What ever you guys are saying about illegal is way off base. Fact is you never really know what the Pax pays all the time. I have asked and it is higher than you think sometimes. If pax pays $18, and you get $7 off of that then that is what you owe taxes on ($7 minus mileage deduction). $18 is Ubers revenue, that is totally separate from your revenue. Uber would take the $18 minus the $7 they paid you and their net would be $11. Then out of that 11 they would pay insurance and any other expenses like support and incentives. 

I'm not saying this is right, but that is what they are doing to make money.


----------



## Too Many Miles (Jan 26, 2016)

jfinks said:


> What ever you guys are saying about illegal is way off base. Fact is you never really know what the Pax pays all the time. I have asked and it is higher than you think sometimes. If pax pays $18, and you get $7 off of that then that is what you owe taxes on ($7 minus mileage deduction). $18 is Ubers revenue, that is totally separate from your revenue. Uber would take the $18 minus the $7 they paid you and their net would be $11. Then out of that 11 they would pay insurance and any other expenses like support and incentives.
> 
> I'm not saying this is right, but that is what they are doing to make money.


No, they are not doing it to make money, they are doing it to lose more money. They take that and give it back to the drivers in the form of subsidies.
Uber loses money, and the money from the investors is not enough so they steal from the drivers to give it back to them and make them think that they make more.


----------



## jfinks (Nov 24, 2016)

Too Many Miles said:


> No, they are not doing it to make money, they are doing it to lose more money. They take that and give it back to the drivers in the former of subsidies.
> Uber loses money, and the money from the investors is not enough so they steal from the drivers to give it back to them and make them think that they make more.


Some yes is given back. Have you seen the detailed financials from Uber? I don't think you have, neither have I.


----------



## Too Many Miles (Jan 26, 2016)

jfinks said:


> Some yes is given back. Have you seen the detailed financials from Uber? I don't think you have, neither have I.


What is given back is growth, but at this point, Uber's ways is finally hurting the company. Eventually when they can't subsidize any more, rates will go up, which will upset the spoiled riders and competition will come.


----------

