In litigation, the City of San Francisco and City of Los Angeles reported that Uber in January 2013 agreed with the California Public Utilities Commission not to transport passengers onto airport property unless granted permission by the relevant airport authority. Uber obtained no such permission from Los Angeles International Airport or San Francisco International Airport as of December 2014. Despite the CPUC agreement and a cease-and-desist letter from the San Francisco International Airport, Uber continued operation. The cities described Uber’s conduct as “intransigent refusal” to follow the law.
Charged nonexistent “Airport Fee Toll” for journeys to SFO
Through October 2014, Uber charged passengers a $4.00 “Airport Fee Toll” to travel to San Francisco International Airport, although there was no such fee charged by the airport, city, or anyone else. The city reported that some drivers (though by all indications not many) had permission to operate commercially at SFO, but that they paid $3.85 at most in fees to SFO. Uber always charged more—indeed, as much as $8 if two passengers shared an UberPool vehicle to SFO.
Charged nonexistent “Logan Massport Surcharge & Toll”
In 2013-2014, Uber charged a nonexistent $8.75 “Logan Massport Surcharge & Toll” for rides to or from Boston’s Logan airport. Uber’s web site said was to “cover… Massport fees and other costs related to airport trips.” But neither Massport nor Logan airport charged any such fees. Furthermore, Uber charged an “East Boston Toll” of $5.25, but the largest toll any UberX driver was actually obliged to pay was $3.50. Uber reimbursed drivers for the actual toll and retained the remainder.
Cullinane et al v. Uber Technologies, Inc. No. 1:14-cv-14750-DPW. Massachusetts District Court. December 30, 2014. Complaint. Supreme Court briefing as to Uber’s motion to compel arbitration and avoid litigation (also restating and summarizing merits of the case).