Product reviews and prices, software downloads, and tech news
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Uber background checks missed drivers' criminal records, prosecutors say
Among the drivers in Uber's service were a convicted murder and a felon
convicted of sex offenses against a minor, prosecutors charge.
Prosecutors say Uber isn't doing enough to identify drivers with criminal records.
Ube
Amid growing concerns over Uber passengers' safety, prosecutors in
California allege that the background checks the company conducts on
drivers failed to weed out 25 drivers with criminal records, including
convictions for murder, assault, sex offenses and child abuse.
The
charges were included in an amended complaint filed Wednesday by the
district attorneys of Los Angeles and San Francisco, the ride-hailing
service's hometown. The original lawsuit, filed in December,
charged the startup with misleading consumers about their safety on the
service and the quality of its driver background checks.
One of
the Uber drivers highlighted in the amended complaint was convicted of
second-degree murder in Los Angeles in 1982, prosecutors said. He was
released on parole in 2008 after spending 26 years in prison, but a
background check generated for Uber in 2014 failed to reveal the
criminal history for the driver, who provided 1,168 rides, prosecutors
said.
Another background check failed to identify a felon
convicted in 1999 of committing lewd or lascivious acts against a child
under 14 or that he is a registered sex offender. The complaint alleges
that the driver gave 5,679 rides to Uber passengers, "including
unaccompanied children."
"Uber's process cannot ensure that the
information in the background check report is actually associated with
the applicant since it does not use a unique biometric identifier such
as a fingerprint," the prosecutors said in the complaint.
Since
its launch six years ago, the ride-hailing service that pairs passengers
with drivers via a smartphone app has grown from a San Francisco-based
startup to a multinational service in 295 cities and 55 countries. But
with that rapid growth has come criticism about how the company handles
safety. Over the last year, Uber has been dogged by allegations of
drivers assaulting, raping and kidnapping passengers.
In December, an Uber driver in India was accused of beating and raping a passenger, prompting officials to ban the service in the country's capital of New Delhi. A couple of weeks later, a driver allegedly sexually assaulted and choked a young woman in Boston. A Philadelphia woman in March accused her Uber driver of rape, according to Philadelphia magazine, while other drivers have allegedly brandished knives and guns, and punched and beaten passengers.
The
company puts all potential US drivers through commercial background
checks, running candidates' names through seven years of county and
federal courthouse records, a multi-state criminal database, national
sex offender registry, Social Security trace and motor vehicle records.
Uber rejects anyone with a history of violent crimes, sexual offenses,
gun-related violations or resisting arrest.
"While we agree with
the district attorneys that safety is a priority, we disagree that the
LiveScan process used by taxi companies is an inherently better system
for screening drivers than our background checks," Uber said Wednesday
in a statement. "The reality is that neither is 100 percent foolproof --
as we discovered last year when putting hundreds of people through our
checks who identified themselves as taxi drivers. That process uncovered
convictions for DUI, rape, attempted murder, child abuse and violence."
The
suit asks for a permanent injunction against Uber requiring the company
to make changes to stop violating California law. The state is also
asking for civil penalties for all of the alleged unlawful business
practices and wants a refund given to all passengers who've paid
"airport fee tolls" or "safe rides fees."
Uber, Lyft and Sidecar,
another San Francisco-based ride-sharing service, each received letters
from the district attorneys in September outlining the officials'
concerns about their offerings. The three companies were given until
October to respond.
While Uber didn't comply with the district
attorneys' requests, Lyft opted to settle and pay $500,000 in civil
penalties. Under the terms of the agreement, Lyft promised not to make
misleading statements about how far back its background checks go or to
compare its background checks to those conducted by taxi operators.
To address passenger safety concerns, Uber in March introduced a handful of new initiatives
to improve passenger and driver safety. The company announced the
creation of a permanent global Safety Advisory Board to review the
company's safety practices and Incident Response Teams in every region
it operates in, to be on call 24 hours a day and investigate and respond
to "serious safety concerns."
No comments:
Post a Comment