
LOS ANGELES, Jan. 13, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Consumer Watchdog wrote Uber's CEO and board of directors to alert them about the need to disclose to shareholders that its top policy executive in the West stands to make millions of dollars for her household if Uber pursues its ballot measure limiting medical recovery and contingency fee representation in auto accident cases.
"Why a rich company like Uber would a pick a fight like this against the contingency fee system, which has helped injury victims and families of little means get access to attorneys and civil justice, is a real question. One part of the answer may be the conflict of interest in your executive ranks," wrote Consumer Watchdog president Jamie Court.
"Ramona Prieto, Uber's Head of Public Policy and Communications for the Western Region, is the fiancé of Juan Rodriguez, a partner at Bearstar Strategies," Court continued. "Rodriguez's firm reportedly has the campaign contract to create media and commercials for the ballot initiative campaign. Whether Prieto is acting in Uber's interests or her own is a question you will have to weigh. Prieto is likely an Uber executive1 for purposes of SEC Regulation S-K, Item 404(a): Related-Party Transactions. Moreover, Rodriguez is likely a 'related person' under Item 404(a)."
"What is clear here is Prieto's choice of consultants not only will enrich her household but thrusts Uber into the middle of one of the ugliest chapters in Sacramento history that is now unfolding in federal court," Court wrote in the letter, which was copied to the United States Attorney for the Eastern District Eric Grant.
"As a Los Angeles Times investigation recently uncovered2, Prieto met with California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, who is the subject of two separate Fair Political Practices Commission ethics investigations, in San Francisco to ask for his support for a legislative plan to reduce uninsured motorist coverage requirements for Uber. Four days before, Uber donated $25,000 at Lara's behest to an aligned organization sponsoring his Global Insurance Forum. Lara did not oppose the legislative plan to lower Uber's liability limits from $1 million to $60,000 despite its impact on consumers."
The letter also noted that the company's head of legal compliance, Tony West, has a prior relationship with Rodriquez that could mitigate against giving Uber advice to disclose the executive conflict. West, Kamala Harris' brother-in-law and a top campaign advisor, worked with Rodriquez, who was Harris chief campaign consultant in her first run for president.
"I write to alert you to these conflicts with the hope that you will fulfill your fiduciary duty to Uber shareholders to disclose these facts and the significant risks should you choose to pursue this ill-conceived ballot measure," the letter concluded.
Court pointed to the draconian nature of the ballot measure proposal.
The ballot measure "will have the catastrophic impact of denying seriously injured people and their families access to our civil justice system. Your initiative purports to limit attorney contingency fees to 25%. However, by including payments for expert witnesses and costs in the 25% attorneys can recover, and severely limiting medical recovery, the measure actually results in much less than 25% in most cases, and no attorneys' fees in complex cases.
"This initiative will effectively deny the vast majority of motor vehicle injury victims, whether injured in an Uber or not, access to effective legal representation.3"
The title and summary, prepared by the Attorney General, sums up the measure:
LIMITS AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT VICTIMS' RECOVERY OF MEDICAL EXPENSES AND FEES THEIR ATTORNEYS MAY RECEIVE. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Automobile accident victims often hire an attorney on a contingency basis, meaning the attorney receives an agreed-upon percentage of the victim's monetary recovery if the victim wins. This measure would:
- limit the fees such attorneys may receive so victims retain at least 75% of their monetary recovery, but does not restrict fee arrangements for defendants' attorneys;
- for certain medical expenses, increase victims' burden of proof and limit the amounts they may recover; and
- prohibit certain financial arrangements between attorneys and medical providers.
"Californians will not be anxious to give up their rights to medical recovery or legal representation in auto accident cases, unless Uber spends $100 million trying to convince them to do it," said Court. "That's a windfall for Prieto's household of tens of millions of dollars in commissions on advertising. Shareholders have a right to know, particularly because counter initiatives have been filed that will significantly and negatively impact the shareholders and the brand."
Read the release with the photo here.
[1] 17 CFR § 230.501 (f): "Executive officer shall mean the president, any vice president in charge of a principal business unit, division or function (such as sales, administration or finance), any other officer who performs a policy making function, or any other person who performs similar policy making functions for the issuer."
[2] Paige St. John, "International Travel. Fancy Meals. Missing Receipts. Who Paid the Tab For This Top Official," Los Angeles Times. December 4, 2025. https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2025-12-04/california-insurance-regulators-travels-who-paid-for-ricardo-laras-trips
[3] Nora Freeman Engstrom and Brianne Holland-Stergar, "Uber's fight to lock poor plaintiffs out of the courthouse," Sacramento Bee Opinion, November 18, 2025. Nora Freeman Engstrom is the Ernest W. McFarland Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Deborah L. Rhode Center on the Legal Profession at Stanford University. Brianne Holland-Stergar is Visiting Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Montana School of Law and a former Rhode Center Fellow. Read more at: https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/article312954687.html#storylink=cpy
SOURCE Consumer Watchdog
Share this article