4 ms·

They are willing to cooperate with the police. They just don't file the complaints themselves. I would say this is reasonable since it is the policy at all comp

They are willing to cooperate with the police. They just don't file the complaints themselves. I would say this is reasonable since it is the policy at all companies I have worked with as well. Any charge of employees doing criminal acts are reported by those who see them. If no one else at the company sees it, then it is left up to the alleged victim. They company does not want to be seen as attacking it's employees based in hearsay. In Ubers case these aren't even employees so they are left carrying hearsays to the police against third parties.

anon1385 9y ago
>They are willing to cooperate with the police Except when they aren't: https://fymhotsauce.rocks/blogs/news/my-uber-driver-robbed-me-so-i-took-uber-to-court-and-won https://fymhotsauce.rocks/blogs/news/my-uber-driver-robbed-m...
DanBC 9y ago
> They are willing to cooperate with the police. From the article: > It is expected, however, that serious crimes will be dealt with promptly, and reported directly to the police as well. And > At this point, the police attempted to investigate (pepper spray is an offensive weapon in the UK) but, the letter indicated, Uber refused to provide more information unless a formal request via the Data Protection Act was submitted. But they report every crime if they're the victim: > Uber are however proactive in reporting lower level document frauds to both the MPS and LTPH.
- eyko 9y ago
  > At this point, the police attempted to investigate (pepper spray is an offensive weapon in the UK) but, the letter indicated, Uber refused to provide more information unless a formal request via the Data Protection Act was submitted. If I understood correctly, the victim did not contact the police, but that Uber contacted the police after the second assault, after which the scenario above happened. Also, why is it an issue for the police to make a formal request and why does this reflect negatively, instead of positively, on Uber?
  - DanBC 9y ago
    Police shouldn't need to make a formal request, because Uber should have reported it after the first instance. Police are not asking for hidden confidential information here. They're asking Uber to obey the licensing conditions, which are to report criminal behaviour of their drivers.
    - true_religion 9y ago
      Do the licensing conditions require taxi services to report contractor addresses, telephone numbers, and rider history immediately anytime there is any potential criminal dispute? If so, then essentially your history is an open book to any UK police departments. If not, then your ride history is safe under the Data Protection Act. DPA isn't some black magic. Medical providers are required to report abuses as well, but they don't send patient history or tell who else an employee has worked with or on unless there's a formal request. Regardless, I hope that Uber comes into compliance with the ULL shortly, and their future behavior is not merely in line with the standard but better than that of other smaller minicab companies.
swish_bob 9y ago
Except as a taxi operator (in London) they are required to report these incidents to the police if they are made aware of them. They appear not to, to the extent that the Met have complained.

anon1385 9y ago

>They are willing to cooperate with the police Except when they aren't: https://fymhotsauce.rocks/blogs/news/my-uber-driver-robbed-me-so-i-took-uber-to-court-and-won https://fymhotsauce.rocks/blogs/news/my-uber-driver-robbed-m...

DanBC 9y ago

> They are willing to cooperate with the police. From the article: > It is expected, however, that serious crimes will be dealt with promptly, and reported directly to the police as well. And > At this point, the police attempted to investigate (pepper spray is an offensive weapon in the UK) but, the letter indicated, Uber refused to provide more information unless a formal request via the Data Protection Act was submitted. But they report every crime if they're the victim: > Uber are however proactive in reporting lower level document frauds to both the MPS and LTPH.

eyko 9y ago
> At this point, the police attempted to investigate (pepper spray is an offensive weapon in the UK) but, the letter indicated, Uber refused to provide more information unless a formal request via the Data Protection Act was submitted. If I understood correctly, the victim did not contact the police, but that Uber contacted the police after the second assault, after which the scenario above happened. Also, why is it an issue for the police to make a formal request and why does this reflect negatively, instead of positively, on Uber?
- DanBC 9y ago
  Police shouldn't need to make a formal request, because Uber should have reported it after the first instance. Police are not asking for hidden confidential information here. They're asking Uber to obey the licensing conditions, which are to report criminal behaviour of their drivers.
  - true_religion 9y ago
    Do the licensing conditions require taxi services to report contractor addresses, telephone numbers, and rider history immediately anytime there is any potential criminal dispute? If so, then essentially your history is an open book to any UK police departments. If not, then your ride history is safe under the Data Protection Act. DPA isn't some black magic. Medical providers are required to report abuses as well, but they don't send patient history or tell who else an employee has worked with or on unless there's a formal request. Regardless, I hope that Uber comes into compliance with the ULL shortly, and their future behavior is not merely in line with the standard but better than that of other smaller minicab companies.

swish_bob 9y ago

Except as a taxi operator (in London) they are required to report these incidents to the police if they are made aware of them. They appear not to, to the extent that the Met have complained.