Uber, Ola Get Notices From Consumer Ministry Over Reports Of Different Prices

New Delhi: The Ministry of Consumer Affairs has issued notices to ride-hailing giants Ola and Uber, demanding clarification on allegations of differential pricing based on the type of mobile device used to book rides. 

The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) took swift action following reports that fares for identical services varied depending on whether the customer was using an iPhone or an Android device.

The CCPA’s notice requires the companies to explain their pricing practices and address concerns about potential discriminatory behavior. The ministry has described the reported practice as “apparent differential pricing” and has requested a detailed response to ensure fare calculations are transparent and fair for all consumers.

The issue came to light after a Delhi-based entrepreneur shared his findings on social media, highlighting discrepancies in pricing between iPhone and Android users. In a series of posts on X, the entrepreneur compared fares across different devices and battery levels, drawing widespread attention. 

The debate gained further traction in December when an X user posted a picture showing two phones with significantly different fares for the same ride on Uber. 

Although Uber initially denied the allegations, claiming that any pricing differences were due to factors like pick-up points, ETA, and drop-off locations, many social media users continued to share their experiences of being charged varying fares based on the device they used. Uber maintained that it does not personalize pricing based on the mobile phone manufacturer.

The controversy prompted a strong response from Union Minister of Consumer Affairs Pralhad Joshi, who condemned the practice as an “unfair trade practice” and a “blatant disregard” for consumers' rights to transparency. Joshi directed the CCPA to conduct a thorough investigation and report its findings at the earliest, asserting that the government has a “zero tolerance for consumer exploitation.”