Isha (name changed), a Bengaluru-based resident, was trying to book a ride on a Saturday morning from Marathahalli to Jayanagar 9th Block. Fifteen seconds into the booking, a pop-up appeared asking her to add a tip for a better chance of getting a ride.
However, visibly agitated by her past booking experiences, she chose not to add one. After 40 minutes and multiple rejections—bouncing from one app to another—she eventually upgraded from an auto to a cab, and the ride was booked instantly.
During the trip, upon enquiring, she realised her rides weren’t getting cancelled due to traffic (Bengaluru is infamous for) but because she was being penalised for not adding a tip.
As mobility platforms like Uber, Rapido, and others switched to a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) model for auto rickshaw bookings, users are experiencing a new pain point: rides are often accepted only if a tip is added upfront. Multiple users across cities say that drivers now routinely decline rides unless a tip, sometimes explicitly demanded, is included.
Adding to the friction, platforms have largely disabled in-app digital payment options such as credit/debit cards, app-based UPI, or wallet credits. Instead, riders are being nudged to pay the driver directly via cash or by scanning the driver’s personal UPI QR code. This shift, while touted as driver-empowering, is raising concerns around transparency, convenience, and accountability for customers.
Garima, a Pune-based commuter who travels daily from Yerwada Metro Station to Hadapsar Railway Station, relies on Uber and Rapido for her commute. She’s noticed a growing trend of drivers ignoring the app fare and quoting their own price instead. “There’s no booking if you don’t add a tip, especially on Rapido,” she said.
Criticising the practice, Prahlad Joshi, Minister of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, took to X and wrote, “The practice of ‘Advance Tip’ is deeply concerning. Forcing or nudging users to pay a tip in advance, for faster service, is unethical and exploitative. Such actions fall under unfair trade practices. A tip is a token of appreciation, not a matter of right, and is to be given after the service. Taking cognisance of this, I asked CCPA to look into the matter, and today, CCPA has issued a notice to @Uber, seeking an explanation. Fairness, transparency, and accountability must be upheld in all customer interactions.”
Drivers bear losses, too
The current system is failing both riders and drivers, said Satya Arikutharam, an independent urban mobility expert.
“There are no industry-wide standards for interoperability. Drivers are forced to pay subscription fees to each platform to be discoverable by riders. On average, a driver may spend ₹75–₹100 daily on subscriptions across three to four platforms. That’s nearly a third of their daily fuel expenses, which range from ₹300 to ₹375,” he said.
Platforms have deliberately taken on the role of mere facilitators to avoid tax liabilities and accountability for ride quality, he noted. “If they position themselves as intermediaries, they’d be responsible for service standards and taxation. But by acting only as ‘discovery platforms’, they escape those obligations,” he said.
Advanced tipping, he argued, is being promoted not for the consumer’s benefit but to retain the driver base. “Platforms want drivers to stay logged into their app over competitors’. To appease drivers, they’ve sidelined the customer entirely,” he said.
Drivers, too, are switching platforms throughout the day depending on which one offers better incentives.
Consumers bear brunt
It is not a coincidence that users across cities feel the same pain. Namit Shah, a Hyderabad-based daily cab user, says he faces ride cancellations almost every day. “Drivers call after accepting the ride, ask for the drop location, and then start demanding extra money. If I don’t agree, they cancel the ride,” he says.
“This is especially frustrating—and almost like a trap—because drivers exploit your vulnerability. When you’re rushing to the office, you become willing to pay whatever they ask. For a 2 km ride, I end up paying ₹120–₹150, which is double or even triple the actual fare.
Ayushmati, a media professional in Delhi, has also seen a noticeable change since platforms adopted a zero-commission model. “During peak hours or even mild traffic, no one accepts bookings. You can try for an hour. That’s when you give up and go back to hailing a running auto—it’s cheaper and faster now,” she said.
Garima, Isha, Namit, and Ayushmati all echoed the same sentiment: the system has become so unreliable that traditional street-hailing feels more dependable than app-based bookings.
Regulatory vacuum
Experts say these issues are unfolding in a regulatory vacuum. “There are no clear rules. What little guidance exists—like the 2016 aggregator guidelines—is stuck in court,” said Arikutharam.
“The last hearing was in 2022. The case has been pending for nine years with no clarity on the next date. Everyone is interpreting the ‘no coercive action’ clause as a free pass.”
Meanwhile, consumers are paying the price for these gaps in regulation.