Latest blog articles
LTFRB suspends Uber for one month
The Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board yesterday ordered a one-month suspension of Uber’s accreditation, citing “indisputable” violations of the ridesharing company. File
MANILA, Philippines - The Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) yesterday ordered a one-month suspension of Uber’s accreditation, citing “indisputable” violations of the ridesharing company.
The LTFRB directed Uber to cease and desist from operating its online booking application during the suspension period.
LTFRB spokesperson Aileen Lizada said law enforcement agencies will start the apprehension of transport network vehicle service (TNVS) units registered under Uber starting today.
She noted that all Uber units will be considered engaged in colorum operations if they continue to ferry passengers despite the suspension of its accreditation.
“The Board shall hold the respondent (Uber) responsible for all its accredited ‘colorum’ TNVS apprehended during the period of suspension should it be discovered that they are accepting passengers using their mobile application,” the order read.
Uber said it received LTFRB’s order to completely stop operations past 6 p.m. yesterday.
Headlines ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1
“We are studying the order at the moment. We will update our riders and drivers as soon as we can,” Uber said in a statement.
The latest violation of Uber proved to be the tipping point after the LTFRB was able to activate three of its own vehicles on the platform.
The LTFRB summoned Uber to a hearing last July 27 after it found that the transport network company violated the board’s order prohibiting the acceptance and activation of TNVS.
Uber said that its “right to due process was violated” as the company was not given the opportunity to explain, a claim the LTRFB denied.
The LTRFB alleged during the hearing that despite the ongoing dialogue between the government and the transport network companies, there was “something happening behind the scenes.”
The LTFRB bared that Uber lied about its passenger insurance, which it found lacking, a matter yet to be addressed.
Lizada also said that the insurance coverage by Uber for its riders was very limited and not under the Passenger Accident Management and Insurance Co. but the UCPB General Insurance Co. Inc.
The insurance package of Uber was limited to only seven provisions, which include accidental death, loss of some limbs and sight, as well as medical reimbursement.
But the LTFRB requires under Memorandum Circular 2015-028 an enhanced passenger personal accident insurance program schedule, which provides even for the loss of a single finger during vehicular accident.
Uber also does not have a “no fault indemnity” clause, which means injured or killed passengers are not covered in accidents which may be caused by fault or negligence on the part the driver, Lizada added.
The LTFRB also issued a recommendation that the transport company should extend financial assistance to its affected operators as a “form of good faith” as it was “predatory actions” that caused the current predicament of Uber drivers.
Uber and Grab were earlier fined P5 million each for various violations of the LTFRB’s orders, including the enabling of colorum vehicles on their systems, during a July 11 hearing.
It was found that Uber and Grab have around 42,000 active drivers, but only 3,700 have valid provisional authority or franchise to operate.