The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has imposed a ₹10 lakh penalty on ANI Technologies Private Limited, which operates Ola, for misleading consumers through its advance tipping feature. In an order dated November 10, 2026, the regulator found that Ola encouraged passengers to pay additional amounts before a driver accepted their booking by suggesting that doing so could improve their chances of securing a ride.
However, the Authority found no supporting evidence that these payments actually improved ride confirmation rates. It classified the practice as a misleading advertisement, an unfair trade practice and an unfair contract under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Ola has been directed to discontinue the feature and submit a compliance report within 15 days.
How The Feature Worked
The proceedings originated from a complaint received by the CCPA in May 2025 regarding Ola’s advance tipping feature. When passengers booked a ride and waited for a driver to accept their request, the application displayed messages such as, “Adding a tip might help increase the chances of getting a ride faster.” Customers were initially offered pre-set additional payments ranging from ₹10 to ₹40, while the application also allowed users to enter amounts of up to ₹499. Ola argued that the payments were entirely voluntary and went directly to drivers without any deduction by the company.
It maintained that the feature helped drivers accept bookings that might otherwise be commercially unattractive, particularly when the distance they had to travel to pick up passengers was relatively long. However, the company’s own data submitted to the regulator raised questions about the effectiveness of the feature. Between June 10 and June 16, 2025, only around 32% of ride requests carrying an additional payment were accepted in Delhi, compared with 68% of requests without one. In Bengaluru, the acceptance rate was approximately 39% for requests with an add-on, against 68% without it.
In Mumbai, the corresponding figures were 54% and 70%. The CCPA observed that these figures did not establish that paying extra improved passengers’ chances of securing a ride. It also rejected Ola’s argument that the payment was simply a voluntary tip, noting that a tip traditionally expresses appreciation for a service already provided, whereas these payments were solicited before a driver had even accepted the booking.
CCPA Identifies A Dark Pattern
The Authority further held that Ola’s interface employed a prohibited digital practice known as ‘confirm shaming’, a type of dark pattern identified under the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023. Dark patterns are deceptive or manipulative design techniques used by digital platforms to influence consumers’ decisions, often encouraging them to take actions that may not be in their best interests. In this case, the CCPA found that passengers were being prompted to make additional payments at a particularly uncertain moment, when they were waiting for a driver to confirm their booking.
The Authority also highlighted the contradiction in Ola’s defence. If additional payments did not influence drivers’ decisions, suggesting that they improved ride confirmation chances was misleading. However, if they did influence acceptance, passengers who refused to pay extra could be placed at a disadvantage despite having already agreed to the fare displayed on the application. The order was passed by CCPA Chief Commissioner Nidhi Khare and Commissioner Anupam Mishra.
The Authority directed ANI Technologies to immediately remove all prompts, pre-set payment options, messages and interface designs that encourage or psychologically pressure customers into paying amounts over and above the upfront fare before completing their journey. This includes payments described as tips, add-ons or additional fares. Ola has also been directed to pay the ₹10 lakh penalty and submit a compliance report within 15 days of receiving the order.
Earlier Regulatory Warnings
The action against Ola comes amid increasing regulatory scrutiny of how digital platforms present prices and influence consumer decisions. The CCPA’s proceedings followed a complaint in May 2025 and subsequent examination of the company’s booking interface. The Authority had raised concerns about the practice during earlier proceedings, while the Union Ministry of Road Transport and Highways also addressed the issue. In a communication dated August 11, 2026, the ministry clarified to motor vehicle aggregators that prompts suggesting additional payments could improve ride confirmation should not be displayed before the completion of a journey.
However, the CCPA noted that Ola continued displaying messages encouraging passengers to improve their chances of quicker ride confirmation, along with pre-set additional payment options, even after this clarification. The order also rejected the argument that the feature’s limited use made it insignificant, observing that a dark pattern does not cease to be one simply because it does not influence every consumer. It pointed out that the feature had been used across more than one lakh ride requests in a single city.
The regulator further noted that ANI Technologies had reported standalone operating revenue of approximately ₹1,060 crore in the financial year 2024-25. It said the ₹10 lakh penalty, the maximum prescribed for a first contravention under the relevant provision, was necessary to create an effective deterrent. The case also reflects a wider effort to ensure that digital businesses do not use interface design to influence consumers into paying charges that are not transparently justified.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
Digital platforms have transformed everyday travel by making transport more accessible and convenient. However, convenience should never come at the cost of consumer choice, transparency or fairness. Passengers who book a ride and agree to an upfront fare should not feel compelled to make additional payments merely because an application suggests that doing so could improve their chances of receiving a service.
Drivers also deserve fair compensation, particularly for longer pick-up distances and commercially challenging trips. However, such concerns must be addressed through transparent pricing structures and fair policies rather than placing passengers in situations where they feel pressured to pay more. A genuine tipping culture should be built on appreciation for good service, not uncertainty before a service has even begun. Businesses must recognise that consumer trust is built through honest communication, ethical design and accountability.
Equally, regulators must ensure that digital innovation remains aligned with the interests and dignity of both consumers and service providers. Should ride-hailing platforms be allowed to suggest additional payments before confirming a booking, or should tipping remain entirely voluntary and take place only after a ride is completed?
Also Read: “That Would Be An Honour”: Elon Musk Backs Jensen Huang Amid Nvidia Leadership Crisis
