• UberPeople.NET - Independent community of rideshare drivers. It's FREE to be a person and enjoy all the benefits of membership. JOIN US! CLICK HERE

#UberFELONY | Excerpts from LA and SF Dist. Attys. Uber Background Checks Lawsuit

mjo

Member
I read the complaint. I could not upload it. It basically says Uber lies when it talks about its background checks being "industry leading" and gives voluminous examples of other "incorrect statements". They are also going after Uber for the "Safe Rider Fee" and the airport fee. Uber signed an agreement with the California PUC not to access airports without permission and then did it anyway. It paints a very ugly picture of Uber.
 

riChElwAy

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #4
excerpt....

<< Systemic failures in Uber’s background check process came to light through the discovery process in this enforcement action, including the fact that in Los Angeles alone, registered sex offenders, a kidnapper, identity thieves, burglars, and a convicted murderer had passed Uber’s “industry leading” background check. >>
 
  • Like
Reactions: mjo

riChElwAy

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
excerpt...

<< Because Uber’s background check process only identifies sex offense convictions less than seven years old, and must reply upon publicly-available sex-offender data sources that omit 30,000 registered sex offenders in California, Uber’s process will miss any one of the more than 30,000 registered sex offenders who fall into this category and whose conviction is more than seven years old, and Uber’s process will miss them 100 percent of the time.
This means, for example, that Uber’s background check process will NEVER disqualify a registered sex offender who applies to become an Uber driver in 2015 who was convicted in 2007 for molesting his daughter or for committing felony sexual battery on a stranger, so long as the applicant had successfully petitioned to have his name removed from the public website. >>
 
  • Like
Reactions: mjo

riChElwAy

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
excerpt....

<<
When confronted through the discovery process in this enforcement action with the fact that Uber’s background check process has systemic deficiencies that prevent Uber from identifying a large number of sex offenders, Uber made assertions designed to mislead consumers into believing that Uber’s process is as comprehensive as the Live Scan/CALDOJ Process. The Sullivan blog continues to lie to the public and assert that Uber searches the National Sex Offender Registry. >>
 
  • Like
Reactions: mjo

riChElwAy

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
excerpt...

<< Uber Driver # 1 was convicted of second degree murder, a felony, in Los Angeles in 1982. After spending 26 years in prison, he was released on parole in 2008. ... In November of 2014, less than seven years after being released from prison, he became an Uber driver. Uber Driver #1 drove for Uber in Los Angeles until May 28, 2015 and provided 1,168 rides to consumers. >>
 

riChElwAy

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #9
excerpt...

<< Uber Driver # 2 was convicted of committing lewd or lascivious acts against a child under 14, a felony, on July 25, 1999. He is required to register as a sex offender in the State of California. He applied for, and was granted, exclusion from the California Megan’s Law Website. And his name does not appear on the NSOPW. In February of 2014, he applied to drive for Uber. A background report generated by Hirease on February 17, 2014 did not uncover Driver # 2’s conviction for lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14, or the fact that he is a registered sex offender. Driver # 2 drove for Uber until May of 2015. He provided 5,697 rides to Uber passengers, including unaccompanied children. Uber’s background check process did not identify Driver # 2’s conviction or his status as a registered sex offender because Uber’s process (a) does not access criminal record repositories of unlimited duration and (b) does not access databases with complete criminal history information. The Live Scan/CALDOJ Process does not have the same limitations and would have identified Driver # 2’s criminal history. >>
 

riChElwAy

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
excerpt...

<< Uber Driver # 3 was convicted of felony sexual exploitation of children in Wyoming on November 7, 2005. According to publicly available court records, he was found to be in violation of his probation in April 2011. He was not released from probation until March 2013. He registers as a sex offender in the State of California. In August 2013, he applied to drive for Uber. A background report generated by Hirease on August 19, 2013 did not uncover Driver # 3’s conviction for felony sexual exploitation of children, his status as a registered sex offender, or the fact that he was on probation until just five months earlier. He drove for Uber in Los Angeles until May 22, 2015 and provided 3,173 rides to consumers, including unaccompanied children. California law allowed Hirease to report Driver # 3’s conviction to Uber because he was released from probation within seven years of the background check. Uber’s background check process did not identify Driver # 3’s conviction or his status as a registered sex offender because Uber’s process (a) does not access databases with complete criminal history information, (b) does not access criminal record repositories of unlimited duration, and (c) does not actually go back as far as the law allows. The Live Scan/CALDOJ Process does not have the same limitations and would have identified Driver # 3’s criminal history. >>
 

Fuzzyelvis

Well-Known Member
This is the same sort of issue Houston had with the background checks and why Uber finally started insisting on Houston drivers getting their TNC license involving a fingerprint check. But they won't unless the city insists and it's a big market they don't want to lose.
 

riChElwAy

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #15
excerpt...

<< Uber Driver # 7 was convicted in 2010 of 29 felony counts of theft, grand theft, filing false or fraudulent real estate trust deeds, and money laundering. Court records show that he victimized nine people – three of whom were elderly or disabled – and that he stole $3 million. The victims were only able to recover $1 million. On information and belief, he drives for Uber in the Los Angeles area. California law allowed Uber’s background check provider to report Driver # 7’s conviction to Uber because he was convicted within seven years of the background check. Uber’s background check process either failed to identify Uber Driver # 7’s criminal history, or identified the history and passed him nonetheless. On information and belief, Uber’s background check process did not identify Driver # 7’s conviction for assault because Uber’s process does not access databases with complete criminal history information. The Live Scan/CALDOJ Process does not have the same limitations and would have identified Driver # 7’s criminal history. >>
 

riChElwAy

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #16
excerpt...

<<
Uber Driver # 8 was convicted of felony robbery on July 5, 2006. He was sentenced to serve a term of two years in prison. He was subsequently convicted of driving on a suspended license in 2009 and again in 2010. Also in 2010, Driver # 8 was convicted of a felony for being an ex-felon in possession of a gun. Uber Driver # 8 began driving for Uber in June 2013 in Los Angeles. In March 2014, he was arrested for residential burglary. He was convicted of that crime in August 2014. And he is currently in state prison serving his sentence for this offense. Uber did not deactivate his account until June 2015. California law allowed Hirease to report Driver # 8’s criminal history to Uber because he was convicted of robbery and being an ex-felon in possession of a gun within seven years of the background check. Uber’s background check process either
failed to identify Uber Driver # 8’s convictions for residential burglary or being an ex-felon in possession of a gun, or identified the history and passed him nonetheless. On information and belief, Uber’s background check process did not identify Driver # 8’s conviction for robbery because Uber’s process does not access databases with complete criminal history information. The Live Scan/CALDOJ Process does not have the same limitations and would have identified Driver # 8’s criminal history. >>
 

riChElwAy

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #17
excerpt...

<< Uber Driver # 9’s criminal history includes convictions for misdemeanor identity theft in 2008, as well as for felony identity theft in 2012. >>
 

riChElwAy

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #18
excerpt...

<< Uber Driver # 10 was convicted of 14 counts of felony identity theft in 2011. After his release from incarceration, he applied to work for a commercial transportation company but was rejected after undergoing a fingerprint-based background check. He began driving for Uber in February of 2013 in Los Angeles... >>
 

riChElwAy

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #19
excerpt...

<< Uber Driver # 20 was convicted in 2007 of misdemeanor reckless driving and driving in excess of 100 miles per hour. >>
 

riChElwAy

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #20
excerpt...

<< Uber Driver # 23 received a citation at SFO on May 4, 2014. He provided San Francisco Police with a driver’s license that had expired in December of 2007. When the citing police officer noticed that the photograph on the driver’s Uber profile did not look like Driver # 23, Driver # 23 stated that he was using his brother’s Uber account. >>
 
Top