LTFRB still studying Uber’s P10-M fine offer
Despite prodding from senators, the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) has yet to decide whether or not to accept Uber’s offer to pay a P10-million fine in place of the month-long suspension it imposed on the transport network company (TNC) starting on Aug. 15.
But LTFRB Board Member Aileen Lizada assured the public on Wednesday that the board was doing its “best to resolve [the issue] in the soonest possible time” given the “urgency of the matter.”
“Paramount to the board is the convenience of the riding public, balanced with their respective safety. Crucial is seeing Uber’s commitment and sincerity to abide with government’s policies,” Lizada told reporters at the end of the LTFRB’s two-hour hearing on Uber’s petition.
After meeting last week with the Senate committee on public services headed by Sen. Grace Poe, Uber filed a motion in the LTFRB, asking that it be allowed to pay a P10-million fine instead of fully serving the one-month suspension.
The LTFRB meted out the penalty against the TNC after it was found to have violated the agency’s order to stop accepting and accrediting new drivers into its platform while issues concerning the ride-sharing industry were being sorted out.
Poe, who expressed hope the suspension would last just a week, came to Uber’s defense, saying the TNC was “following the law” but “it is our regulation itself that’s making it slower.”
In Wednesday’s hearing, Vigor Mendoza, head of Kilusan sa Pagbabago sa Industriya ng Transportasyon, proposed that Uber should not just pay P10 million but a whopping P6 billion fine, based on their computation under the Joint Administrative Order 2014-01.
Under the order’s schedule of fines, cars operating without the necessary franchise, otherwise known as “colorum,” are to pay a penalty of P120,000 each. Mendoza said that since the TNC was operating around 50,000 colorum cars, the fine to be imposed must be P6 billion.
But Lizada said the amount was “too much,” adding: “We do listen and we are reasonable. The concern is the suspension [order] being converted to a fine. [The proposal] deviates from the main issue.”
