#United States #Consumer Watchdog #Sacramento #Insurance #Uber

Consumer Watchdog Questions Uber's Insurance Practices

Consumer advocacy group, Consumer Watchdog, has raised significant concerns about Uber's insurance policies and the company's transparency regarding its financial operations to the California legislature. In recent revelations, it appears that Uber failed to disclose critical information about its insurance structure, particularly how a large part of its coverage is self-funded. This lack of transparency has drawn the attention of Consumer Watchdog, which is now calling for thorough investigations and accountability on Uber's part.

On May 26, 2026, Consumer Watchdog officials urged state legislators to look into why Uber did not inform them that a staggering $12.5 billion of its insurance coverage comes from its own resources. In 2025, when Uber sought to reduce its uninsured motorist coverage under SB 371, the company's public policy executives misrepresented key aspects of its insurance framework to state officials. This misleading presentation raises questions about Uber’s accountability and governance.

Misrepresentation of Facts
During a presentation to the California Assembly, Ramona Prieto, Uber’s head of public policy, claimed that around 45% of every ride fare goes toward government-required insurance. Using a theoretical example, she suggested that if a trip to Los Angeles International Airport costs $100, $45 would be mandated for insurance payments. However, investigations revealed that Uber has been largely self-insured, allowing it to control the rates and conditions under which it pays for insurance risks. In fact, Uber’s disclosures indicate that roughly 95% of the funds attributed to insurance payments are retained within Uber’s own operations.

The Consumer Watchdog report, titled "Uber's License To Kill Insurance Scam: How Uber Is Limiting Its Liability To Raid Its Insurance Reserves Fund Robotaxis," exposes how the company's insurance reserves nearly doubled from 2023 to 2025. This substantial growth contradicts company claims that its costs are unreasonably high, especially when the rates are self-defined and not truly reflective of market rates.

Potential Consequences and Bonuses
The motivations behind Uber's push for reduced insurance coverage have led to serious concerns about corporate practices. Reports indicate that top executives negotiated financial bonuses directly linked to the passage of SB 371. For instance, Uber executives, including Jill Hazelbaker - who recently received a hefty promotion to President and Chief Corporate Affairs Officer with additional stock grants - benefited financially from Uber's legislative maneuvering.

Jamie Court, the President of Consumer Watchdog, expressed deep concern: “Uber’s deceptive practices raise issues of ethical governance and accountability. The misrepresentation of their insurance rates to regulators allowed them to lessen their liabilities regarding uninsured motorist collisions.” He emphasizes that Uber’s self-serving narrative should not shield the company from legislative scrutiny and responsibility.

A Call for Legislative Action
Consumer Watchdog's stance is clear: there must be consequences for Uber's misrepresentation to the legislature. The group is not only pushing for an inquiry but is also advocating for broader changes in how companies like Uber handle insurance and liability laws.