Mumbai: Bombay High Court have directed Uber India To explain how it deals with customer complaints.
“The affidavit of the respondent (Uber) shall determine the grievance redressal mechanism of the respondent in respect of any complaint received from the customer,” a bench of Justices Amjad Syed and SG Dige said in its October 11 order. .
The court heard a PIL by advocate Savina Crasto. He cited two instances from November 2020, when he had booked thrice Uber The cab, traveling from Mulund to South Mumbai, was dropped mid-way at Chembur “at a shady dark place”. Her plea stated that apart from the inflated fares and cancellation charges for no fault of hers, the entire journey was painful. He tried to write to Uber but its app had no option to file a complaint. On January 27, the HC had directed Cresto to compare the complaint mechanism of other app-based private taxi aggregators to understand how customer-friendly they are.
On October 11, Crasto argued that the evening on which the order was passed, Uber removed all details of his previous trips, including his name.
He said that after erasing all the data, he tampered with the evidence which was an important part of the PIL. “This clearly shows that the respondent (Uber) has deliberately removed/deleted the details of my previous trips so that I do not have the details on record before this honorable court. This is a way to remove issues affecting the public. There appears to be effort,” she said in her additional affidavit.
Asked by the judges why the data was wiped out, Uber’s lawyer replied that there may be some technical glitch in its app. The judges said Uber must restore the data and respond to Crasto’s additional affidavit on deleting the data. He also directed the central and state governments to file their replies, posting the hearing on October 25.
“The affidavit of the respondent (Uber) shall determine the grievance redressal mechanism of the respondent in respect of any complaint received from the customer,” a bench of Justices Amjad Syed and SG Dige said in its October 11 order. .
The court heard a PIL by advocate Savina Crasto. He cited two instances from November 2020, when he had booked thrice Uber The cab, traveling from Mulund to South Mumbai, was dropped mid-way at Chembur “at a shady dark place”. Her plea stated that apart from the inflated fares and cancellation charges for no fault of hers, the entire journey was painful. He tried to write to Uber but its app had no option to file a complaint. On January 27, the HC had directed Cresto to compare the complaint mechanism of other app-based private taxi aggregators to understand how customer-friendly they are.
On October 11, Crasto argued that the evening on which the order was passed, Uber removed all details of his previous trips, including his name.
He said that after erasing all the data, he tampered with the evidence which was an important part of the PIL. “This clearly shows that the respondent (Uber) has deliberately removed/deleted the details of my previous trips so that I do not have the details on record before this honorable court. This is a way to remove issues affecting the public. There appears to be effort,” she said in her additional affidavit.
Asked by the judges why the data was wiped out, Uber’s lawyer replied that there may be some technical glitch in its app. The judges said Uber must restore the data and respond to Crasto’s additional affidavit on deleting the data. He also directed the central and state governments to file their replies, posting the hearing on October 25.
.