Ola knew driver was being investigated by police but let him keep driving

Rideshare operator Ola knew one of their drivers was being investigated by police but allowed him to drive for a further four days – until he sexually assaulted another woman in his car.

The second survivor of his offending, who cannot be identified due to an automatic suppression order, told Stuff that Ola should have at least stood the driver down while the first complaint was investigated.

“It shouldn’t take a second victim to get a driver off the road. One is bad enough and perhaps not the company’s fault, but two becomes their responsibility.”

The driver, who has interim name suppression, has pleaded guilty to two charges of indecently assaulting two women while working for Ola in Auckland city.

READ MORE:
* My Ola driver asked to come inside for a ‘good time’
* Ola driver kicks out teen passengers on Auckland Harbour Bridge
* Police lose file after Auckland woman complains of stalker’s ‘terrifying’ home invasion
* Uber’s new tipping service a tone-deaf cultural barb

The driver, aged in his 50s, is due to be sentenced in September and his lawyer has told the court he will be applying for permanent name suppression and a discharge without conviction.

News of the lawyer’s application has left the woman “shocked”.

Court documents released to Stuff show the driver was working in town in the early hours of December 31, 2021 when he accepted a fare from a woman.

When he pulled up he leaned over and opened the front passenger door, saying “hello, hello, very nice.”

When the woman went to sit in the back seat, the driver told her “no, you in the front.”

The woman walked past the open door and sat in the back, reminding the driver of Covid-19 restrictions. At the time, Auckland was under the orange traffic light restrictions that included the requirement to wear face masks on public transport and spaced seating.

The driver kept insisting – but she laughed off his repeated requests.

The driver told her “you look very nice” and said he liked her perfume. His comments made the woman uncomfortable, and she began recording his advances on her cellphone.

In her statement to police, she described the man as “creepy” and that he made her “super nervous”.

Court documents show when they arrived at her address, the driver turned and extended his hand through the gap in the front seats, wishing her a happy new year.

She shook his hand but as she did so he moved his hand up her wrist and grabbed her by the arm, pulling her towards him.

He then asked “can I?”

She responded “no” and got out of the car.

The woman made a complaint to the police on the same day. In her statement she explained her motivations for coming forward.

“I am not emotionally traumatised by this, but I just wouldn’t want this to happen to someone else.”

Police documents released to Stuff under the Official Information Act provide a glimpse behind the scenes of the investigation and show police treated the complaint seriously and took prompt action.

On the same day the complaint was made, a detective made an application to the Auckland District Court for a production order – a formal request for information from a third party – in this case the driver’s employer, Ola.

The court application shows police were after records of the driver’s location around the time of the offending and any CCTV footage from inside the car.

The production order released to Stuff under the Official Information Act has been heavily redacted. It is not possible to determine how much information the police shared with Ola, but Stuff understands it did not include the alleged offence.

However, the company knew their driver was being investigated by the police as a result of the production order.

Ola responded later the same day, confirming they’d received the order. The company also sent through information on the trip and asked for further details of the allegation, explaining they had obligations to report to Waka Kotahi (NZ Transport Agency).

But the driver was allowed to continue driving.

Four days later, on January 10, 2022, at 4am, the driver picked up a female passenger who sat in the front seat.

The driver told her “you smell good, I like your perfume” before touching her knee and running his hand up her thigh.

He continued to try and make small talk, but the woman did not engage.

She reported the touching to Ola who in turn alerted police by email.

“We have now since banned this driver” Ola wrote to the detective, “I hope this doesn’t impact your investigation, however he clearly cannot be trusted transporting passengers around.”

Ola also forwarded the trip information and details of the second survivor who later made a formal complaint to the police.

The second survivor of the driver’s offending believes Ola owes her an explanation.

“The main perpetrator in my eyes, as I’m the second victim, is Ola… They gave him the environment to keep assaulting passengers.

“If they really applied their ‘zero tolerance’ policy this would never have happened to me.”

She said the experience had put her off using rideshare companies.

“I never thought about safety when I ordered the Ola ride, but now it’s made me aware of the risks that you take when getting in the car with a stranger.”

She said she had heard of parents trusting rideshare companies to transport their children unaccompanied.

“I could not imagine putting a child or teenager by themselves with a stranger who has complete control and could have assaulted someone a few days before and still be on the road.”

She wants to see tighter regulations on rideshare companies and drivers.

“Public safety should be more important than these big company profits and false sense of security.”

That sentiment was echoed by advocate Ruth Money who has been supporting the second survivor.

“There’s no doubt in my mind incidents happen and that we only know about a small percentage of the sexual violence that goes on inside rideshares,” Money said.

Statistics from 2020 showed only 7% of sexual violence was reported to police.

She said it was “unfathomable” that the driver was allowed to keep working once Ola became aware the police were investigating.

Money said the offending happened over the Christmas and New Year period, at a time of year when many people have a few extra drinks and are vulnerable.

“I simply cannot believe the dangerous situation they put the community in by having him driving.”

Money said she would like to see rideshare drivers have to install cameras like taxis.

Money said she wanted road safety regular Waka Kotahi to make a submission, or file an affidavit, in relation to name suppression and the driver’s intention for a discharge without conviction.

Waka Kotahi’s Andrew Galloway said it would be inappropriate to make submissions but even if the driver’s application for a discharge without conviction was successful, it would not prevent the authority from revoking his passenger licence.

He said while Ola did not notify Waka Kotahi of the police investigation within the required 48 hours, the company did ask police for further details. He said since the incident, Ola has agreed in future to notifying Waka Kotahi if they receive production orders relating to drivers in the future.

“On balance, rideshare operators are excellent at notifying us.”

He said Waka Kotahi get on average three “improper behaviour complaints” about rideshare drivers per week.

Galloway’s advice to drivers is direct and simple: “You’re a professional driver, endorsed by the agency to carry out a role.”

He said Waka Kotahi will take allegations seriously and investigate them and suspend drivers if necessary.

Stuff contacted Ola’s New Zealand chief executive Brian Dewil, asking for an interview. Dewil said the company was “cooperating” with the police and Waka Kotahi but declined to be interviewed saying the case was “confidential”.

Stuff asked Dewil why the driver was not stood down following the first complaint, if Ola had apologised to both women and whether the public can have faith in Ola’s processes. Dewil did not respond.