Uber attacked over pattern of ignoring police before London ban
US - When Uber refused to comply with a warrant in a California sexual assault case, police, prosecutors and the judge were all bewildered.
Lt Brian South told the Guardian that in more than 15 years on the job, he had never seen anyone so brazenly defy a judge’s order for records. A prosecutor testified that Uber was actively preventing law enforcement from protecting riders from violence, and a judge attacked the ride-share corporation for a “horrific” pattern of ignoring police, describing its typical response as “give as little as possible, be as uncooperative as possible”. The judge’s forceful rebuke in a criminal case where a driver was accused of restraining and attacking a female passenger is one of many allegations across the globe of Uber neglecting the safety of riders and drivers by failing to work with law enforcement and ignoring standard regulations. Last week, Uber lost its license in London in part due to the government’s concerns about the company’s failure to report sexual assaults to police. While Uber is fighting London to stay in operation there, critics throughout the world are pushing other local municipalities to follow suit and some say the law enforcement concerns cited in the UK are far from unique. Several women in the US, who say they were sexually assaulted in Uber cars, are now filing fresh lawsuits against the company and spoke exclusively with the Guardian this week about their claims of fundamental public safety problems at Uber. The San Francisco-based firm is facing widespread pressure after months of bad press surrounding corporate misconduct and sexual harassment, shady tactics to evade law enforcement and claims that Uber mistreats and underpays its drivers. In Moraga, a city 20 miles east of Uber’s San Francisco headquarters, court records reveal particularly damning allegations related to the company’s evasion of police. After a driver was arrested on suspicion of sexual battery in May, prosecutors successfully obtained a warrant for information related to the more than 1,000 rides the suspect had given in the previous 90 days. Uber claimed the order was overly broad, ignored the warrant, missed the deadline imposed by the judge and failed to properly communicate with police, according to a court transcript. Prosecutors were then forced to delay the investigation and bring Uber to court in an unusual hearing where Judge Clare Maier sanctioned the company and angrily demanded it comply with the order she had already signed.
(Theguardian.com)