The Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria has rejected claims that its regulations on e-hailing services at airports played a role in Uber’s decision to leave the Nigerian market.
The Punch reported that FAAN Managing Director, Olubunmi Kuku, made the clarification while speaking with journalists at the Murtala Muhammed Airport in Lagos on Friday.
Kuku said Uber’s exit was a business decision by the company and not a consequence of FAAN’s policies, adding that the authority’s primary responsibility was to protect passengers and improve their experience at the nation’s airports.
Her comments came about a week after FAAN temporarily barred e-hailing drivers from making commercial passenger pick-ups at its airports pending the conclusion and signing of licence agreements.
The restriction had triggered speculation that FAAN was attempting to promote its newly launched airport e-hailing platform, ACHRAMS, at the expense of established operators.
However, Kuku said the decision followed complaints from passengers about the conduct of some e-hailing and car-hire operators, particularly during the December festive period.
“I work for the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria, and my first responsibility is to ensure that our passengers are safe, protected and have a seamless passenger experience.
“Regarding Uber, I can’t speak to their exit from Nigeria. I’m sure they have their own economic and regulatory considerations as to why they chose to exit,” she said.
The FAAN chief explained that the authority had received several complaints from travellers who used e-hailing and car-hire services around the airports.
“We received a lot of complaints, especially around the December holiday period, from passengers who used some of the e-hailing services, as well as car-hire services, and had very unpleasant experiences,” she said.
According to her, some of the complaints involved intimidation, passengers being taken to wrong destinations and other more serious incidents.
She also accused some drivers of exploiting the airport environment by presenting themselves as legitimate e-hailing operators before switching to car-hire services and charging passengers higher fares.
“We also had situations where some Uber and Bolt drivers would get out of their cars under the guise of coming into the airport as e-hailing drivers, and then join the car-hire operators to charge higher fares.
“Because there were widespread complaints about touting at the airport, it was important for us to provide some form of regulatory oversight for the car-hire operators,” she said.
Kuku said ACHRAMS was introduced to provide greater transparency, particularly by helping passengers know the identity of the car-hire company and driver transporting them.
“The app that was developed was strictly focused on ensuring that passengers have visibility into who the car-hire companies are and who the driver taking them from Point A to Point B is,” she said.
She stressed that FAAN was not running the car-hire businesses or collecting fares from passengers on behalf of the drivers.
“FAAN does not collect money on behalf of the drivers. Those car-hire drivers are not FAAN drivers. All we do is provide an indication of the rates based on the destination you are travelling to,” she said.
On complaints about the relatively high cost of airport car-hire services, the FAAN boss attributed the fares largely to the operators’ business model.
She added that travellers were free to select their preferred means of transportation, whether through advance bookings, e-hailing applications or airport car-hire services.
“It is the passenger’s choice whether to pre-book a car, use an e-hailing app, or use a car-hire service. We have no jurisdiction over that,” she said.
Kuku maintained that FAAN’s main concern was to ensure that passengers could identify the individuals transporting them within the airport environment and that operators could be held accountable.
“The only responsibility I have is to ensure that passengers have visibility into who is driving them and that there is accountability for those operating within our airports,” she said.
She further disclosed that liability and responsibility for drivers using e-hailing platforms had been among the major areas of disagreement between FAAN and the companies.
According to Kuku, e-hailing firms had requested designated pick-up points at the airports, a proposal FAAN was willing to accommodate, but the authority also wanted the companies to accept responsibility for the conduct and safety of drivers operating through their platforms.
“One of the issues we were struggling with the e-hailing companies over was largely around liability clauses.
“But we also wanted them to take responsibility for the drivers. However, we were told that those drivers are not Uber’s drivers; rather, they are independent drivers.
“So, with regard to any safety concerns we raised, they wanted passengers to use the safety features available on their platforms. They did not want to take on that responsibility, and we had a major issue with that,” she said.
Kuku again dismissed any suggestion that FAAN’s airport policies prompted Uber’s departure from Nigeria, saying the ride-hailing company had been considering the move before the recent disagreement.
“I’m sure they had their own reasons, and I know they had been considering exiting Nigeria for a while, which is why we had a stumbling point with them.
“So, it has nothing to do with FAAN. Again, the airport is just a small part of the wider area in which they operate within Nigeria,” she said.
