6 ms·

Uber's handling of edge cases is...something. My wife is banned for life from Uber because after she was overcharged by a driver by $80 (for a five minute ride

Uber's handling of edge cases is...something. My wife is banned for life from Uber because after she was overcharged by a driver by $80 (for a five minute ride), and after Uber denied her dispute of the fraudulent charge, she flagged the fraudulent charge with the credit card company and got refunded via that route. I don't think a human was in the loop for any step of this process on Uber's end.

howzitallworkeh 5y ago
Whether or not it is fair, people should be aware that chargebacks are a nuclear option, at least in the US. Sometimes they get hailed as a magic wand on consumer-advocate sites, but if you issue a chargeback with your bank, you should be prepared to completely sever relations with the vendor.
- mullingitover 5y ago
  In my wife's case, Uber compounded the bad experience of a blatant overcharge by casually, automatically dismissing her when she flagged it with them, with no option to appeal to a human. Sloppy business practice built on sloppy automation. Permanently severing relations with them was a really easy call.
stefan_ 5y ago
This is such a big thing nowadays and it needs regulation. Dispute a charge on Steam? Banned for life. Return one too many item according to some neural network on Amazon? Banned for life. Do nothing wrong at all? Random chance to wake up to a banned Google account, no recourse. Your business runs on GCP? Bad luck. There need to be serious consequences for this "the computer made a mistake" bullshit.
- mullingitover 5y ago
  It certainly feels illegal to have the threat of a ban when you make a good faith report of fraudulent charges. A business could have a pattern of deliberate overcharges that they layer in with regular transactions with the knowledge that enough users will just give in and eat the fraudulent charge to avoid losing access to the service. If the business has run the numbers and found that it's a net gain in profits from this practice, there would be a reasonable (if completely corrupt) motive for operating the scam.
  - fedreserved 5y ago
    Rico cases are meant for more then just "criminals". A civil Rico case is one route
  - judge2020 5y ago
    Regarding the dead sibling comment, it's never RICO. https://www.popehat.com/2016/06/14/lawsplainer-its-not-rico-dammit/ https://www.popehat.com/2016/06/14/lawsplainer-its-not-rico-...
- caseysoftware 5y ago
  As these systems become monopolies - or at least defacto standards - these blanket bans without insight into the process, appeal, or even notification is getting ugly. Right now, it's "only" a frustration in most cases but what happens when Amazon bans you while PillPack is how you receive your meds?
- gabereiser 5y ago
  The “Does your business run on GCP?” needs to be understood by every VP out there. If you are a software company, and a _cough_ security company, that’s all in on GCP, you don’t know what you are doing.
  - neeleshs 5y ago
    Can you say more? The risk of account locks seems very similar on any of the major cloud providers? A brief search shows similar complaints on AWS, for example.
    - gabereiser 5y ago
      Indeed. AWS has kicked customers off too. Never said they didn’t. I’ve heard more stories from people getting booted from GCP than AWS. By order of 10x it seems like. I’m sure someone’s been kicked off Azure too. Hybrid cloud with some on-prem backup solution is the only way to truly be cloud agnostic and protect yourself and your data from deletion due to a variety of issues. GCP kicked off a game developer (and deleted his data). AWS kicked off Parler. What I’m saying is that if you’re a VP in charge of cloud strategy, make sure you have a solid DR plan should you intentionally or unintentionally run afoul of that providers rules. Either from policy or politically. Doesn’t matter. GCP just has more of a track record in my news feed of deplatforming than AWS. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/02/terraria-developer-cancels-google-stadia-port-after-youtube-account-ban/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/02/terraria-developer-c...
      - mullingitover 5y ago
        > What I’m saying is that if you’re a VP in charge of cloud strategy, make sure you have a solid DR plan should you intentionally or unintentionally run afoul of that providers rules. Really all you need is a mediocre Plan A: don't run afoul of the providers' rules. It's not hard. AWS hosts a lot of content that's even more offensive than Parler, the thing that got Parler in trouble was they weren't able or willing to act on Amazon's demand that they promptly remove content that encouraged or incited violence. So if you're running a platform that hosts content like that, or you're breaking the law or generally breaking the pretty straightforward rules, yeah, have a Plan B, C and D ready to go at a moment's notice. Most of us aren't running things that cater to people who are into political violence or other liability-causing activities so it's not a thing we need to spend a lot of time and money planning for. Only exception to this rule would be GCP or any other company that's widely known for atrocious service and capricious, random bans.
- hyperdimension 5y ago
  Sounds like the movie Brazil to me. Or Computers Don't Argue.
- yuliyp 5y ago
  Disputing charges with a credit card is an interesting thing. It's a consumer being able to unilaterally say "give me my money back" and the merchant basically being stuck with the tab. Doing a chargeback means the relationship between consumer and merchant is ineffective that they can't resolve their differences normally. That the merchant doesn't want to risk more money on serving such a customer in the future is perfectly rational.
  - colejohnson66 5y ago
    Rational? Maybe for them. But when they refuse to help the consumer, it’s the customer’s right to issue a chargeback. That’s their purpose: to deal with bad merchants. Too many chargebacks can get you dropped from your payment processor. But when the merchant bans you to hide the fact that they suck (from the processor), that’s pretty messed up.
  - mullingitover 5y ago
    Assuming the merchant is 100% honest and accurate, yes this is rational. If the merchant is error-prone and doesn't want their occasional erroneous (or intentional) overcharges affecting their relationship with credit services, it's also rational.
  - hamiltonians 5y ago
    maybe if chargebacks are so bad try to invest in better dispute resoluton processes
  - mxcrossr 5y ago
    The credit card company is the one that holds the power I guess. I wonder if someday visa will start threatening merchants who retaliate via bans as an extra card feature.
    - colejohnson66 5y ago
      Previously, Visa(?) had tried to prevent merchants from having separate cash and debit/credit prices (gas stations for example), and they got in trouble with “monopoly laws”. So I wouldn’t hold my breath on them retaliating on merchants who ban customers.
- leephillips 5y ago
  “Your business runs on GCP? Bad luck.” Luck has nothing to do with it. That’s bad planning. Really bad.
mdoms 5y ago
> she was overcharged by a driver Drivers don't charge riders - Uber does.
- mullingitover 5y ago
  When she got out of the Uber, the driver continued driving for a long time before "ending" the ride, and the tab ran the entire time which racked up extra charges.
  - hyperdimension 5y ago
    I thought the ride automatically ended, geo-fenced to the destination. Is that not the case?
    - dnautics 5y ago
      nope. As a driver, you never know when your passenger is gonna be like, "I'm gonna change my mind, let's go all the way to santa barbara instead". Both you and UBER/lyft want that ride. Surprised-not-surprised that uber doesn't send the client app a message asking for approval.
      - judge2020 5y ago
        Maybe they added this recently: > Using sensors and GPS data, RideCheck can help detect if a trip goes unusually off-course or a possible crash has occurred. If the app notices such events, we’ll check in on you and offer resources to get help. https://www.uber.com/us/en/ride/safety/ https://www.uber.com/us/en/ride/safety/
      - jobigoud 5y ago
        I once suggested my driver to drop me off before the destination as it was more convenient and he said no, that he really had to go to the exact agreed upon destination. I presumed it was for insurance purposes, like if something happens in the interval I was supposed to be in the car.
staticautomatic 5y ago
I quit using Uber a few years ago when I was overcharged a higher surge multiplier than I agreed to and support was adamant that it couldn’t have been a bug.
sen 5y ago
My wife’s Uber account (for both rides and food) is banned for life because she had a sleazy driver aggressively come on to her and when she went to get out of the car he said “I know where you live now” and drove off. She complained to Uber, they did nothing other than say “the driver left negative feedback on your ride” and her account got instantly banned. Follow up calls to them just said she “broke terms and conditions and there’s nothing they can do”. For perspective, she had a similar sleazy taxi driver years ago, who she complained about to the taxi company. He was fired immediately and the taxi company offered to help my wife with going to the police if she wanted to (and offered the in-car video). Thankfully we still have taxis locally, but the drivers have told me their numbers have dropped and Uber is winning.
- bkuehl 5y ago
  Wow, that's great to hear the taxi company stepped up, but I'm completely shocked by it! In the decade of taxi experiences prior to Uber/Lyft/ridesharing almost every taxi experience was absolutely awful. Driving erratically, on the phone, can't (or won't) take cards, won't take the route I said, literally kicking me and my spouse out of the cab and yelling at us for saying they needed to make a left turn instead of right (we lived in the area and knew where we were going). I'm convinced that a taxi driver has to literally kill someone before any action will be taken against them. I've found that Uber/Lyft usually tends to side with the rider but, like you shared, that's not always the case. The mutual rating system is a net plus IMO. Every cab company is different I guess, but I will never set foot in a cab again out of principle.
  - sen 5y ago
    I've found the taxi drivers here to be really good. Most are older career-driver types who are really nice and know the city back to front, unlike the Uber drivers who are looking at their GPS more than the road or take wrong turns repeatedly. I think location matters lots, the last city I lived in I avoided taxis at all costs because I found them to be more like you're saying... aggressive, clueless, dirty, etc.
- zapdrive 5y ago
  I'm not on any side, but I would love to make an observation. > she had a similar sleazy taxi driver years ago, who she complained about to the taxi company. He was fired immediately This actually scares me more than Uber banning your wife. I'm not saying you or your wife lied, but it's sad how just a complaint by a woman can ruin any man's life. (I'm assuming your wife didn't have any evidence and the taxi company just fired the driver due to her complaint.)
dheera 5y ago
Uber Support on Twitter: "Thanks for bringing this to our attention, @TheSofaaa . We believe this is due to a technical bug, which we are actively investigating. We apologize to you and any other drivers who may be impacted, all of whom will be fully refunded." It's kind of sad that these days the only way to get real support is to make noise on Twitter. And probably 95% of the time posts don't get that initial snowball to make noise.
- Marsymars 5y ago
  I suspect it’s not really the public nature of Twitter that makes its responses better, it’s simply that internal procedures empower people manning social media to fix customer problems more effectively than the normal customer support channels. I don’t have Twitter, but I have complained to companies via Facebook (which at this point I don’t notably use either, but still have an account) private messages, and have had my problem fixed efficiently after complete failure via multiple other methods of contact. (Those companies being Vodacom South Africa who kept sending me some customer’s invoices, and Uber Eats, which made a complete mess of an order in multiple ways.)
  - dheera 5y ago
    Yeah that's true. I was at an acquaintance's party on the rooftop of a sleek, modern apartment building near Berkeley and a tile came loose and almost fell through the floor, opening up a void into some machinery that this friend could have easily fallen through and gotten seriously injured, but with quick reactions we saved them from falling through. The acquaintance didn't care to do anything about it so I sent e-mails to their property management the next day, and got no response. I then shamed the property management co on their Facebook page in comments with photos of the void and that got a prompt response.
    - Marsymars 5y ago
      To be clear, I’m saying that I sent private messages to the company on FB, I didn’t post comments to any public location. From a company’s point of view, there wouldn’t be any difference between ignoring my emails or ignoring my FB messages, it’s purely a procedural difference in how they respond to one vs the other.
ta988 5y ago
When will people realize Uber is a bad and evil company. From the get go, with waht they did to others in the sector, how they treat drivers and clients... I really can't believe anybody is still using them...
- jfrunyon 5y ago
  But they were cheaper! ... while illegally operating at a loss without a permit to drive the competition out of the space.
  - hakfoo 5y ago
    TBH, I think the understated selling feature for Uber/Lyft was that they'd show you a price in advance of actually summoning the car. No reason a taxi service couldn't offer the same experience, but you see a lot of scenarios where that's not an option. Before Covid, I'd go to the head office in the suburbs of Chicago twice a year. The first few times, I took a taxi from the stand and watched powerlessly as the meter ticked up and up, not knowing when it would stop. With Lyft, I could at least see if it would be $25 or 65 before I agreed to summon the vehicle. In other news, I wish Metra would go straight to and from O'hare.
    - jfrunyon 5y ago
      The difference is that taxi services usually had one single rate no matter the time or day (at least where I'm at).
      - hakfoo 5y ago
        But that doesn't mean you know the exact rate between two arbitrary points, especially if there are taxes or tolls.
        jfrunyon 5y ago
        You don't know the exact rate with Uber or Lyft, either. It depends on how long the trip ends up taking, how far the trip ends up taking, etc.
runlevel1 5y ago
Indeed. My account has been locked since 2015 due to a similar edge case. My card was stolen after taking a ride so I reported it. This prevented a ride charge from going through. Uber locked my account, which then prevented me from paying. Uber support's assistance was Kafkaesque. They advised that I could reactivate my account by logging in and paying the balance. I told them I couldn't. Around and around we went. So I just use Lyft now.
jfrunyon 5y ago
> after she was overcharged by a driver How's that? Drivers don't set the fare, Uber does.

howzitallworkeh 5y ago

Whether or not it is fair, people should be aware that chargebacks are a nuclear option, at least in the US. Sometimes they get hailed as a magic wand on consumer-advocate sites, but if you issue a chargeback with your bank, you should be prepared to completely sever relations with the vendor.

mullingitover 5y ago
In my wife's case, Uber compounded the bad experience of a blatant overcharge by casually, automatically dismissing her when she flagged it with them, with no option to appeal to a human. Sloppy business practice built on sloppy automation. Permanently severing relations with them was a really easy call.

stefan_ 5y ago

This is such a big thing nowadays and it needs regulation. Dispute a charge on Steam? Banned for life. Return one too many item according to some neural network on Amazon? Banned for life. Do nothing wrong at all? Random chance to wake up to a banned Google account, no recourse. Your business runs on GCP? Bad luck. There need to be serious consequences for this "the computer made a mistake" bullshit.

mullingitover 5y ago
It certainly feels illegal to have the threat of a ban when you make a good faith report of fraudulent charges. A business could have a pattern of deliberate overcharges that they layer in with regular transactions with the knowledge that enough users will just give in and eat the fraudulent charge to avoid losing access to the service. If the business has run the numbers and found that it's a net gain in profits from this practice, there would be a reasonable (if completely corrupt) motive for operating the scam.
- fedreserved 5y ago
  Rico cases are meant for more then just "criminals". A civil Rico case is one route
- judge2020 5y ago
  Regarding the dead sibling comment, it's never RICO. https://www.popehat.com/2016/06/14/lawsplainer-its-not-rico-dammit/ https://www.popehat.com/2016/06/14/lawsplainer-its-not-rico-...
caseysoftware 5y ago
As these systems become monopolies - or at least defacto standards - these blanket bans without insight into the process, appeal, or even notification is getting ugly. Right now, it's "only" a frustration in most cases but what happens when Amazon bans you while PillPack is how you receive your meds?
gabereiser 5y ago
The “Does your business run on GCP?” needs to be understood by every VP out there. If you are a software company, and a _cough_ security company, that’s all in on GCP, you don’t know what you are doing.
- neeleshs 5y ago
  Can you say more? The risk of account locks seems very similar on any of the major cloud providers? A brief search shows similar complaints on AWS, for example.
  - gabereiser 5y ago
    Indeed. AWS has kicked customers off too. Never said they didn’t. I’ve heard more stories from people getting booted from GCP than AWS. By order of 10x it seems like. I’m sure someone’s been kicked off Azure too. Hybrid cloud with some on-prem backup solution is the only way to truly be cloud agnostic and protect yourself and your data from deletion due to a variety of issues. GCP kicked off a game developer (and deleted his data). AWS kicked off Parler. What I’m saying is that if you’re a VP in charge of cloud strategy, make sure you have a solid DR plan should you intentionally or unintentionally run afoul of that providers rules. Either from policy or politically. Doesn’t matter. GCP just has more of a track record in my news feed of deplatforming than AWS. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/02/terraria-developer-cancels-google-stadia-port-after-youtube-account-ban/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/02/terraria-developer-c...
    - mullingitover 5y ago
      > What I’m saying is that if you’re a VP in charge of cloud strategy, make sure you have a solid DR plan should you intentionally or unintentionally run afoul of that providers rules. Really all you need is a mediocre Plan A: don't run afoul of the providers' rules. It's not hard. AWS hosts a lot of content that's even more offensive than Parler, the thing that got Parler in trouble was they weren't able or willing to act on Amazon's demand that they promptly remove content that encouraged or incited violence. So if you're running a platform that hosts content like that, or you're breaking the law or generally breaking the pretty straightforward rules, yeah, have a Plan B, C and D ready to go at a moment's notice. Most of us aren't running things that cater to people who are into political violence or other liability-causing activities so it's not a thing we need to spend a lot of time and money planning for. Only exception to this rule would be GCP or any other company that's widely known for atrocious service and capricious, random bans.
hyperdimension 5y ago
Sounds like the movie Brazil to me. Or Computers Don't Argue.
yuliyp 5y ago
Disputing charges with a credit card is an interesting thing. It's a consumer being able to unilaterally say "give me my money back" and the merchant basically being stuck with the tab. Doing a chargeback means the relationship between consumer and merchant is ineffective that they can't resolve their differences normally. That the merchant doesn't want to risk more money on serving such a customer in the future is perfectly rational.
- colejohnson66 5y ago
  Rational? Maybe for them. But when they refuse to help the consumer, it’s the customer’s right to issue a chargeback. That’s their purpose: to deal with bad merchants. Too many chargebacks can get you dropped from your payment processor. But when the merchant bans you to hide the fact that they suck (from the processor), that’s pretty messed up.
- mullingitover 5y ago
  Assuming the merchant is 100% honest and accurate, yes this is rational. If the merchant is error-prone and doesn't want their occasional erroneous (or intentional) overcharges affecting their relationship with credit services, it's also rational.
- hamiltonians 5y ago
  maybe if chargebacks are so bad try to invest in better dispute resoluton processes
- mxcrossr 5y ago
  The credit card company is the one that holds the power I guess. I wonder if someday visa will start threatening merchants who retaliate via bans as an extra card feature.
  - colejohnson66 5y ago
    Previously, Visa(?) had tried to prevent merchants from having separate cash and debit/credit prices (gas stations for example), and they got in trouble with “monopoly laws”. So I wouldn’t hold my breath on them retaliating on merchants who ban customers.
leephillips 5y ago
“Your business runs on GCP? Bad luck.” Luck has nothing to do with it. That’s bad planning. Really bad.

mdoms 5y ago

> she was overcharged by a driver Drivers don't charge riders - Uber does.

mullingitover 5y ago
When she got out of the Uber, the driver continued driving for a long time before "ending" the ride, and the tab ran the entire time which racked up extra charges.
- hyperdimension 5y ago
  I thought the ride automatically ended, geo-fenced to the destination. Is that not the case?
  - dnautics 5y ago
    nope. As a driver, you never know when your passenger is gonna be like, "I'm gonna change my mind, let's go all the way to santa barbara instead". Both you and UBER/lyft want that ride. Surprised-not-surprised that uber doesn't send the client app a message asking for approval.
    - judge2020 5y ago
      Maybe they added this recently: > Using sensors and GPS data, RideCheck can help detect if a trip goes unusually off-course or a possible crash has occurred. If the app notices such events, we’ll check in on you and offer resources to get help. https://www.uber.com/us/en/ride/safety/ https://www.uber.com/us/en/ride/safety/
    - jobigoud 5y ago
      I once suggested my driver to drop me off before the destination as it was more convenient and he said no, that he really had to go to the exact agreed upon destination. I presumed it was for insurance purposes, like if something happens in the interval I was supposed to be in the car.

staticautomatic 5y ago

I quit using Uber a few years ago when I was overcharged a higher surge multiplier than I agreed to and support was adamant that it couldn’t have been a bug.

sen 5y ago

My wife’s Uber account (for both rides and food) is banned for life because she had a sleazy driver aggressively come on to her and when she went to get out of the car he said “I know where you live now” and drove off. She complained to Uber, they did nothing other than say “the driver left negative feedback on your ride” and her account got instantly banned. Follow up calls to them just said she “broke terms and conditions and there’s nothing they can do”. For perspective, she had a similar sleazy taxi driver years ago, who she complained about to the taxi company. He was fired immediately and the taxi company offered to help my wife with going to the police if she wanted to (and offered the in-car video). Thankfully we still have taxis locally, but the drivers have told me their numbers have dropped and Uber is winning.

bkuehl 5y ago
Wow, that's great to hear the taxi company stepped up, but I'm completely shocked by it! In the decade of taxi experiences prior to Uber/Lyft/ridesharing almost every taxi experience was absolutely awful. Driving erratically, on the phone, can't (or won't) take cards, won't take the route I said, literally kicking me and my spouse out of the cab and yelling at us for saying they needed to make a left turn instead of right (we lived in the area and knew where we were going). I'm convinced that a taxi driver has to literally kill someone before any action will be taken against them. I've found that Uber/Lyft usually tends to side with the rider but, like you shared, that's not always the case. The mutual rating system is a net plus IMO. Every cab company is different I guess, but I will never set foot in a cab again out of principle.
- sen 5y ago
  I've found the taxi drivers here to be really good. Most are older career-driver types who are really nice and know the city back to front, unlike the Uber drivers who are looking at their GPS more than the road or take wrong turns repeatedly. I think location matters lots, the last city I lived in I avoided taxis at all costs because I found them to be more like you're saying... aggressive, clueless, dirty, etc.
zapdrive 5y ago
I'm not on any side, but I would love to make an observation. > she had a similar sleazy taxi driver years ago, who she complained about to the taxi company. He was fired immediately This actually scares me more than Uber banning your wife. I'm not saying you or your wife lied, but it's sad how just a complaint by a woman can ruin any man's life. (I'm assuming your wife didn't have any evidence and the taxi company just fired the driver due to her complaint.)

dheera 5y ago

Uber Support on Twitter: "Thanks for bringing this to our attention, @TheSofaaa . We believe this is due to a technical bug, which we are actively investigating. We apologize to you and any other drivers who may be impacted, all of whom will be fully refunded." It's kind of sad that these days the only way to get real support is to make noise on Twitter. And probably 95% of the time posts don't get that initial snowball to make noise.

Marsymars 5y ago
I suspect it’s not really the public nature of Twitter that makes its responses better, it’s simply that internal procedures empower people manning social media to fix customer problems more effectively than the normal customer support channels. I don’t have Twitter, but I have complained to companies via Facebook (which at this point I don’t notably use either, but still have an account) private messages, and have had my problem fixed efficiently after complete failure via multiple other methods of contact. (Those companies being Vodacom South Africa who kept sending me some customer’s invoices, and Uber Eats, which made a complete mess of an order in multiple ways.)
- dheera 5y ago
  Yeah that's true. I was at an acquaintance's party on the rooftop of a sleek, modern apartment building near Berkeley and a tile came loose and almost fell through the floor, opening up a void into some machinery that this friend could have easily fallen through and gotten seriously injured, but with quick reactions we saved them from falling through. The acquaintance didn't care to do anything about it so I sent e-mails to their property management the next day, and got no response. I then shamed the property management co on their Facebook page in comments with photos of the void and that got a prompt response.
  - Marsymars 5y ago
    To be clear, I’m saying that I sent private messages to the company on FB, I didn’t post comments to any public location. From a company’s point of view, there wouldn’t be any difference between ignoring my emails or ignoring my FB messages, it’s purely a procedural difference in how they respond to one vs the other.

ta988 5y ago

When will people realize Uber is a bad and evil company. From the get go, with waht they did to others in the sector, how they treat drivers and clients... I really can't believe anybody is still using them...

jfrunyon 5y ago
But they were cheaper! ... while illegally operating at a loss without a permit to drive the competition out of the space.
- hakfoo 5y ago
  TBH, I think the understated selling feature for Uber/Lyft was that they'd show you a price in advance of actually summoning the car. No reason a taxi service couldn't offer the same experience, but you see a lot of scenarios where that's not an option. Before Covid, I'd go to the head office in the suburbs of Chicago twice a year. The first few times, I took a taxi from the stand and watched powerlessly as the meter ticked up and up, not knowing when it would stop. With Lyft, I could at least see if it would be $25 or 65 before I agreed to summon the vehicle. In other news, I wish Metra would go straight to and from O'hare.
  - jfrunyon 5y ago
    The difference is that taxi services usually had one single rate no matter the time or day (at least where I'm at).
    - hakfoo 5y ago
      But that doesn't mean you know the exact rate between two arbitrary points, especially if there are taxes or tolls.
      - jfrunyon 5y ago
        You don't know the exact rate with Uber or Lyft, either. It depends on how long the trip ends up taking, how far the trip ends up taking, etc.

runlevel1 5y ago

Indeed. My account has been locked since 2015 due to a similar edge case. My card was stolen after taking a ride so I reported it. This prevented a ride charge from going through. Uber locked my account, which then prevented me from paying. Uber support's assistance was Kafkaesque. They advised that I could reactivate my account by logging in and paying the balance. I told them I couldn't. Around and around we went. So I just use Lyft now.

jfrunyon 5y ago

> after she was overcharged by a driver How's that? Drivers don't set the fare, Uber does.