Taiwan Yubo co., Ltd.

Taiwan Yubo co., Ltd.

1284th Commissioners' Meeting (2016)

Case:

Taiwan Yubo violated the Fair Trade Law for posting false and untrue or misleading advertisements on driver recruitment

Keyword(s):

False advertising, online advertisement, recruitment advertisement

Reference:

Fair Trade Commission Decision of June 15, 2016 (the 1284th Commissioners' Meeting); Disposition Kung Ch'u Tzu No. 105065

Industry:

Other Bus Transportation (4939)

Relevant Law(s):

Article 21(1) of the Fair Trade Law

Summary:

Taiwan Yubo co., LTD(hereinafter referred to as "Taiwan Yubo") posted on driveuber.tw the wording of "Drive your own car and join the hottest sharing platform; work according to your own schedule and make maximum an extra NT$10,000 each week" and specified the requirements for joining the UberX elite as "21 years of age or older, having a driving license, a vehicle complying with the requirements, and no criminal and serious accident record." False advertising was suspected due to the above wording used in the advertisement.

Findings of the FTC after investigation:

(1) The website driveuber.tw was registered by Uber Group but managed by Taiwan Yubo to serve as a platform to promote Uber apps. All the postings were managed and reviewed by Taiwan Yubo before they could be uploaded. The UberX elite recruitment conditions and documents required were posted in 2015.

(2) The wording of "Drive your own car and join the hottest sharing platform; work according to your own schedule and make maximum an extra NT$10,000 each week" posted on driveuber.tw meant people joining Uber could use their own resources (cars) and arrange their own schedules to provide service to users of the Uber app platform and earn extra money.

(3) The driver requirements posted on driveuber.tw were conditions set by the Uber app platform as part of the consideration for passenger safety. The Uber app platform adopted strict standards to review the backgrounds of would-be Uber drivers. Therefore, people intending to join Uber had to present their valid driving licenses, car registrations, proof of insurance, proof of no accidents issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles and police clearance certificates from the police department. Otherwise, they could not become Uber drivers. Nevertheless, it was not Taiwan Yubo who specified the required documents and the requirements as Uber drivers.

Grounds for disposition:

(1) The said advertisement delivered the impression to the public that people complying with the requirements, submitting all the required documents and joining the Uber App platform could legally use their own cars and get passengers through the Uber app platform to earn maximum an extra NT$10,000 every week. According to the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, however, car owners accepting assignments from the Uber app platform could face a fine no less than NT$50,000 but no more than NT$150,000 and have their license plates impounded for two to six months, according to Article 77(2) of the Highway Act. Meanwhile, in the 2015 Su Tzu Verdict No. 1022 from the Taipei High Administrative Court, it was also confirmed that drivers using Uber apps to get passenger were in violation of Article 77(2) of the Highway Act. Therefore, people who were attracted by the driver recruitment advertisement on driveuber.tw and joined the Uber app platform to get passengers would be in violation of the aforesaid regulation in the Highway Act even if they complied with all the requirements and submitted all the required documents.

(2) Taiwan Yubo was a registered company in the country. Since the advertisements thereon were intended to attract passengers legally, they should have reviewed the content of service to avoid making false and untrue or misleading representations before the advertisements were posted. In addition to matching passengers and drivers through the Uber app platform, Taiwan Yubo also advertised to promote passenger service. In so doing, it not only misled unspecific parties to believe providing such service was legal, the transaction opportunities it created also had an impact on taxi operators and even deprived them of opportunities to get business. It therefore constituted unfair competition.

(3) The said advertisement misled consumers or concerned parties to believe people complying with the requirements, submitting all the required documents and joining the Uber app platform could legally use their own cars and get passengers through the Uber app platform to earn maximum an extra NT$10,000 every week. Private owners accepting assignments through the Uber app platform had no idea that they were in violation of related regulations in the Highway Act and could be subject to fines and license plat impoundment or revocation. Taiwan Yubo had never disclosed the risk at issue. Consequently, the wording posted on driveuber.tw that people complying with their requirements and able to present all the documents specified could join Uber to provide service legally was inconsistent with existing regulations. The difference from reality was beyond what the general or specific public could accept. It could lead to wrong perceptions or decisions and also create unfair competition. The FTC concluded that the conduct was a false and untrue or misleading representation with regard to content of service and able to affect transaction decision in violation of Paragraph 4 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law and Paragraph 1 of the same Article was applicable.

Appendix:

Taiwan Yubo co., Ltd.'s Uniform Invoice Number: 54343159

Summarized by: Chuang, Ching-Yi; Supervised by: Chen, Jen-Ying

(1)	The website driveuber.tw was registered by Uber Group but managed by Taiwan Yubo to serve as a platform to promote Uber apps. All the postings were managed and reviewed by Taiwan Yubo before they could be uploaded. The UberX elite recruitment conditions and documents required were posted in 2015.
(2)	The wording of "Drive your own car and join the hottest sharing platform; work according to your own schedule and make maximum an extra NT$10,000 each week" posted on driveuber.tw meant people joining Uber could use their own resources (cars) and arrange their own schedules to provide service to users of the Uber app platform and earn extra money.
(3)	The driver requirements posted on driveuber.tw were conditions set by the Uber app platform as part of the consideration for passenger safety. The Uber app platform adopted strict standards to review the backgrounds of would-be Uber drivers. Therefore, people intending to join Uber had to present their valid driving licenses, car registrations, proof of insurance, proof of no accidents issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles and police clearance certificates from the police department. Otherwise, they could not become Uber drivers. Nevertheless, it was not Taiwan Yubo who specified the required documents and the requirements as Uber drivers.

(1)	The said advertisement delivered the impression to the public that people complying with the requirements, submitting all the required documents and joining the Uber App platform could legally use their own cars and get passengers through the Uber app platform to earn maximum an extra NT$10,000 every week. According to the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, however, car owners accepting assignments from the Uber app platform could face a fine no less than NT$50,000 but no more than NT$150,000 and have their license plates impounded for two to six months, according to Article 77(2) of the Highway Act. Meanwhile, in the 2015 Su Tzu Verdict No. 1022 from the Taipei High Administrative Court, it was also confirmed that drivers using Uber apps to get passenger were in violation of Article 77(2) of the Highway Act. Therefore, people who were attracted by the driver recruitment advertisement on driveuber.tw and joined the Uber app platform to get passengers would be in violation of the aforesaid regulation in the Highway Act even if they complied with all the requirements and submitted all the required documents.
(2)	Taiwan Yubo was a registered company in the country. Since the advertisements thereon were intended to attract passengers legally, they should have reviewed the content of service to avoid making false and untrue or misleading representations before the advertisements were posted. In addition to matching passengers and drivers through the Uber app platform, Taiwan Yubo also advertised to promote passenger service. In so doing, it not only misled unspecific parties to believe providing such service was legal, the transaction opportunities it created also had an impact on taxi operators and even deprived them of opportunities to get business. It therefore constituted unfair competition.
(3)	The said advertisement misled consumers or concerned parties to believe people complying with the requirements, submitting all the required documents and joining the Uber app platform could legally use their own cars and get passengers through the Uber app platform to earn maximum an extra NT$10,000 every week. Private owners accepting assignments through the Uber app platform had no idea that they were in violation of related regulations in the Highway Act and could be subject to fines and license plat impoundment or revocation. Taiwan Yubo had never disclosed the risk at issue. Consequently, the wording posted on driveuber.tw that people complying with their requirements and able to present all the documents specified could join Uber to provide service legally was inconsistent with existing regulations. The difference from reality was beyond what the general or specific public could accept. It could lead to wrong perceptions or decisions and also create unfair competition. The FTC concluded that the conduct was a false and untrue or misleading representation with regard to content of service and able to affect transaction decision in violation of Paragraph 4 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law and Paragraph 1 of the same Article was applicable.