Class Action Lawsuit Alleges Ride-Hailing Apps Colluded with Uber, Inflated Prices

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action lawsuit alleges that Curb Mobility and other ride-hailing services colluded with Uber to fix prices and stifle competition, in violation of federal antitrust laws.

Get class action lawsuit and class action settlement news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter.

The 48-page antitrust lawsuit alleges that, beginning in 2022, defendants Curb Mobility, Flywheel Technologies, Creative Mobile Technologies, and ARRO conspired with Uber to coordinate prices for their ride-hailing services, in violation of the federal Sherman Act. According to the filing, Uber and the defendants entered into a horizontal agreement that allowed riders to hail traditional taxis directly through Uber’s app.

The case asserts that Uber maintains a supracompetitive—a term meaning above what can be sustained in a competitive market—price for all ride-hailing services. The suit further contends Uber imposed “uniform or near-uniform” prices for UberX rides and taxis hailed through the Uber app.

Unfortunately for riders, the lawsuit says, Uber’s fare increases “are not accompanied by meaningful improvements in service quality, innovation, or passenger experience.”

“On the contrary,” the complaint reads, “rising wait times, diminished driver availability, reduced customer-support responsiveness, and ongoing safety concerns directly undermined the value proposition previously used to justify lower fares.”

Related Reading: Lyft Driver Independent Contractor Lawsuit Investigation

After Curb Mobility and the other defendants entered into the horizontal arrangement, the suit says, they succumbed to Uber’s pricing structure.

Per the lawsuit, this ride-hailing agreement “stripped [Curb Mobility] of independent pricing authority” and is “precisely the conduct the antitrust laws were designed to prohibit.” The class action lawsuit claims that because ride-hailing apps are all substantially the same, the market is “particularly susceptible to coordination or collusion among competitors.”

“A ride-hailing app becomes more valuable when drivers are nearby, reducing wait times and increasing the likelihood of quickly securing a ride. The same is true for drivers, as a larger pool of nearby passengers means less time between trips and less distance travelling to pick-ups,” the suit states.

This necessary dynamic between riders and drivers creates a high barrier to entry for new ride-hailing services, the lawsuit claims.

Consumers benefitted from previous competition between ride-hailing apps, the suit reasons, because it led to “lower fares, better experiences, and more choices.” The case argues that these benefits have been lost due to the horizontal agreements between Uber and alternative transportation services.

The Curb Mobility class action lawsuit seeks to cover anyone in Boston, Chicago, New York City, Seattle, San Francisco, and Washington, DC who, during the applicable statutory period, paid for rides hailed through the Uber app.

Check out ClassAction.org’s lawsuit list for the latest open class action lawsuits and investigations.