[viraptor]

This is pure speculation, but I think the fee could be a result of this scenario: By now they've got teams of lawyers going through all common and city specific laws regarding transportation. Those teams are supposed to flag anything that opponents can use to either stop or fine the service. As a result they found in some of the cities they operate in, that the service operator rather than the driver is supposed to explicitly give money towards insurance and safety check of all vehicles they manage.

They solved the potential future issue by adding a small charge that's explicitly labeled "for insurance, safety checks, etc." With all the legal issues they run against right now, preventing potential future trouble seems to make more sense than ignoring the environment.

[Someone]

"they found in some of the cities they operate in, that the service operator rather than the driver is supposed to explicitly give money towards insurance and safety check of all vehicles they manage. They solved the potential future issue by adding a small charge that's explicitly labeled "for insurance, safety checks, etc.""

Huh? Law says you need to spend money in _some_ cities, and you solve that by getting more money from _all_ your customers?

I would think you solve that issue by spending money, and ensuring they have the paperwork that proves that they did spend money on safety checks and insurance.

[viraptor]

There's compliance - "if you sue us we will spend time countering your claims showing all the documentation" and there's this action - "hey everyone, see how we comply with pretty much everything in these and similar rules? don't even bother questioning it"