'We (Uber) don't have to pay drivers based on rider fares'

68350

Well-Known Member
This is not new news... pax fare and driver fare have been "unlinked" since I believe a month of May new TOS agreement was presented to all of us next time we logged on to drive. Of course no one read the whole damn document, and your choice was to agree, or don't drive anymore. They don't have to pay us a percentage of rider fare $$$ anymore.
 

Thing

Well-Known Member
The lawyers for drivers could argue that Uber send you a payment advice with fares on it that they supposedly charged riders as they use this amount to deduct 25%

So if a rider pays $50 for a ride & Uber gives you a payment advice stating the rider was charged $40 :confused:
this is where the lawyers could argue points of law..
Uber should state the correct information, not falsify documents they supply to you & for an obvious reason in Australia the drivers pay GST on the full fare..

If Uber are charging riders more ... then they are committing tax fraud by advising drivers a lower amount was paid..
 

The Gift of Fish

Well-Known Member
This is not new news... pax fare and driver fare have been "unlinked" since I believe a month of May new TOS agreement was presented to all of us next time we logged on to drive. Of course no one read the whole damn document, and your choice was to agree, or don't drive anymore. They don't have to pay us a percentage of rider fare $$$ anymore.
Agreed; they are simply now buying a service from suppliers (us) and reselling that service at a higher price of their choice to pax. Lots of businesses do that. BUT... Uber should be forced to amend the farcical section in their contract that says they are just the driver's agent and they deduct a service fee from what they call the "rider fare". There is no separate "rider fare" and "driver fare" - a fare is what a passenger pays and driver pay is what the driver receives.

Uber claims that the plaintiff's arguments are misleading but the Uber contract on these points is complete nonsense that is designed to paint lipstick in a pig. It is what it is; we work for swine and that's ok; they are what they are, but it's time for them to cut the bullshit.
 

Golfer

Well-Known Member
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...s-a-significant-risk-on-ride-hailing-service/

how many of you cross check the fare with the passengers? I always thought that something like this would happen, just cause Uber could/can. anyway an interesting article.

Cheeky thanks for reminding me, just another nail in the coffin,
It helps with my decision to withdraw my driving services ,Dec.
I wouldn,t want to leave, with a sense of guilt of having let my Partner down .
 

Golfer

Well-Known Member
Agreed; they are simply now buying a service from suppliers (us) and reselling that service at a higher price of their choice to pax. Lots of businesses do that. BUT... Uber should be forced to amend the farcical section in their contract that says they are just the driver's agent and they deduct a service fee from what they call the "rider fare". There is no separate "rider fare" and "driver fare" - a fare is what a passenger pays and driver pay is what the driver receives.

Uber claims that the plaintiff's arguments are misleading but the Uber contract on these points is complete nonsense that is designed to paint lipstick in a pig. It is what it is; we work for swine and that's ok; they are what they are, but it's time for them to cut the bullshit.

Thank you Gift ,I,m so far behind on all this legal Jargon and reasoning
I have friends who use similar, but they watch Judge Judy
Should I
Thank for joining our humble forum, from across the "big ditch" that,s a big swim, glad you made it.
This post now " truly has two sides to it"
Ah "San Francisco flowers in your hair "
Scott Mc Kensie
 
Last edited:
I took an uber yesterday 1km and was charged $7.50 when i checked my bank statement there was a charge for $7.50 and then a charge for $1.00

Wtf is this 1 dollar charge?
 

prk

Well-Known Member
I took an uber yesterday 1km and was charged $7.50 when i checked my bank statement there was a charge for $7.50 and then a charge for $1.00

Wtf is this 1 dollar charge?

a laziness tax

Pending hold most likely, not a charge.

In all seriousness it would probably be the $1 levy the Govt has imposed to all point to point transfers. (thanks to Uber)
 

UberDriverAU

Well-Known Member
This isn't something that Uber could legally get away with in Australia. We drivers have to pay GST based on what the rider pays, so there's no way that Uber could hide that from us without committing tax fraud. I reckon it's one of the reasons why they pursued the GST case, because if drivers didn't have to be registered, they wouldn't be obliged to tell drivers what riders have paid.
 

Jack Malarkey

Well-Known Member
I took an uber yesterday 1km and was charged $7.50 when i checked my bank statement there was a charge for $7.50 and then a charge for $1.00

Wtf is this 1 dollar charge?
Wouldn't the $1 debit be simply to check that your credit card is in order? There should be a corresponding $1 credit.
 
Last edited:
Top