#United States #Los Angeles #Consumer Watchdog #Uber #Ramona Prieto

Consumer Watchdog Calls on Uber for Transparency in Executive Conflicts

In a recent development, Consumer Watchdog has addressed a critical letter to Uber's CEO and board members highlighting the pressing necessity for transparency regarding potential conflicts of interest among Uber's top executives. This issue arises in the context of a contentious ballot measure proposed to limit medical recovery and contingency fee representation for victims of automobile accidents.

The letter specifically underscores the financial interests of Ramona Prieto, who serves as Uber's Head of Public Policy and Communications for the Western Region. Prieto is engaged to Juan Rodriguez, a partner at Bearstar Strategies, which has reportedly been contracted to run the campaign for Uber's ballot initiative. This situation has led to substantial concerns over whether Prieto is prioritizing her financial interests over Uber's strategic goals, raising questions about the ethical implications of their relationship.

Consumer Watchdog President Jamie Court emphasized the gravity of this conflict, indicating that Prieto's engagement and her fiancé's position may present ethical dilemmas under SEC Regulation S-K, particularly concerning related-party transactions. Court's letter argues that Uber's decision to pursue such a controversial measure may be more tied to enhancing personal wealth than addressing consumer needs.

The letter detailed revelations from a Los Angeles Times investigation regarding Prieto's interactions with California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, who is entangled in multiple ethics investigations. It was revealed that Prieto met with Lara to seek his backing for legislation intending to lower Uber's liability insurance requirements, coinciding with a $25,000 donation made by Uber at Lara's request. These instances illustrate the potential intertwining of corporate power and personal gain, posing risks not only to public trust but also to shareholder interests.

Moreover, Court pointed out Tony West, Uber's head of legal compliance, who has historical ties to Rodriguez and may influence disclosures regarding the existing conflicts. This intricate web of relationships raises alarms about the necessity for full disclosure and compliance with fiduciary duties, particularly for shareholders concerned about long-term impacts on their investments.

The ballot initiative itself is deemed detrimental, as it proposes severe restrictions on the recovery of medical expenses for accident victims and limits the attorneys' fees, which are often based on contingency arrangements. The measure is likely to create barriers to access for plaintiffs in the legal system, disproportionately affecting those already disadvantaged. It operates under the guise of protecting victims’ financial recoveries while streamlining the advantages for corporations like Uber.

Court argues that the proposal, if passed, will gravely hinder the ability of injured parties—regardless of whether they are victims of Uber accidents—to secure effective legal representation. By limiting recoveries to a mere fraction of their needs, the measure not only threatens justice but also serves to protect the corporation from liability, reflecting an alarming trend of corporate interests overshadowing public welfare.