Driver screening

Uber’s screening process focuses on identity verification, driving safety, and criminal history.

Before a driver can take their first trip with Uber, they must submit their Social Security number (validated directly with the IRS), full name, date of birth, a valid form of government-issued ID, and a live profile photo, among other vehicle documents. They must also pass two key screenings:

1. First, a Motor Vehicle Record (MVR) check, to confirm their driving history and license validity, and to look for any disqualifying traffic violations like driving under the influence or reckless driving. Around 70% of applications who are rejected, are rejected because of the MVR check.
2. If a driver passes the MVR check, one of our third-party background check providers will conduct a criminal background check.

Our background check partners are nationally accredited by the Professional Background Screening Association (PBSA) and regulated under federal and state law to ensure completeness and accuracy.

Background check partners search local, state, and proprietary national criminal databases, federal court records, the National Sex Offender Public Website, international sanctions lists, and several databases used to flag suspected terrorists and use the driver’s name and Social Security number to trace their residence history (either lifetime or the last 7 years, depending on where the driver is applying).

These searches are layered and intentionally duplicative to create relevant leads. Any potential criminal record flagged by these searches is then verified directly at the source: one of the approximately 3,200 county courthouses across the country. That often involves someone going to the courthouse to obtain records. The final decision to disqualify a driver based on our screening process is made through human review of the records reported to us by the background check provider.

This information about screenings applies to drivers using Uber in the 50 US States and Washington, DC. and it may not apply to other forms of regulated transportation that can be requested on the Uber app, for example taxi, airport shuttle, or public transit.

The exact screening requirements for your city depend on applicable local and state regulations.

Annual driving history reruns do not apply in NYC.

We reject applicants for a wide range of offenses, barring anyone convicted of the most serious crimes reported to us from any point in their lifetime, anywhere in the U.S., including:

• Sexual assault
• Sex crimes involving minors
• Murder or homicide
• Kidnapping
• Terrorism

For other pending charges or convictions, such as felonies, robbery, or fraud, Uber generally disqualifies drivers for 7 years after their conviction, but this criteria can differ depending on state and local laws.

We also re-run criminal background checks every year. And we go further with continuous monitoring, a system Uber pioneered in 2018. This technology flags new criminal charges or convictions reported to us by our trusted background check providers, even in between annual checks. Whenever a disqualifying charge or conviction appears, the driver’s access to their Uber account is removed.

While many taxi regulators do not make their criminal screening process and disqualification criteria transparent, Uber’s background checks are as strict or stricter than the requirements that apply for taxi drivers in several large cities. For example:

• Boston taxis have a 5-year lookback for convictions (compared to Uber’s 7 year)
• Chicago taxis have a 3-year lookback—even for sexual assault convictions, which are disqualifying when reported to Uber no matter when they occurred
• Honolulu taxis have an even shorter 2-year lookback, and look only at state (not national) records
• Even New York City’s background checks are focused on in-state data; Uber’s own checks have disqualified hundreds of prospective Uber drivers that the City’s own screening process approved.

Fingerprint databases primarily record arrests, not convictions, and many of those records are incomplete or outdated. That means fingerprint checks can flag people who were never charged or convicted, while missing others who were charged or convicted but not fingerprinted. This is just one of the reasons states have rejected fingerprint-based screening for rideshare companies.

Most US jurisdictions where Uber operates impose laws and regulations that directly impact the screenings Uber must perform on Transportation Network Company drivers (rideshare drivers) and what driving offenses and criminal charges may be considered disqualifying. If you would like to learn more about the regulations and laws directly affecting driver screenings for rideshare, please see:

Alabama

• AL Code § 32-7C-29 (2024)
• Ala. Admin. Code r. 770-X-12-.03, Rule TNC-3

Alaska

• AK Stat § 28.23.100 (2025)

Arizona

• AZ Rev Stat § 28-9555 (2025)

Arkansas

• AR Code § 23-13-713 (2019)

California

• CA Bus. & Prof. Code § 7458
• CA Pub Util Code § 5445.2 (2024)
• CPUC Decision 17-11-010
• CA Pub. Util. Code § 7444

Colorado

• § 4 CCR 723-6-6711
• § 4 CCR 723-6-6712

Connecticut

• Public Act 17-140

Delaware

• Chapter 2, Title 19

Florida

• Title XXXVII. § 627.748(9)

Georgia

• GA. Code 40-5-39

Hawaii

• HRS § 279J-9

Idaho

• Idaho Code § 49-3701

Illinois

• 625 ILCS 57/1 et seq

Illinois - Chicago

• Chicago, Ill., Municipal Code § 9-115-150 (2025)

Illinois - Springfield

• Springfield City Code, Title XI, Chapter 110, Art. XLIV, § 110.910

Illinois - Rockford

• Rockford, Ill., Code of Ordinances, ch. 29, art. VI, § 29-208 (2025)

Illinois - Peoria

• Peoria City Code, Chapter 30, Article II, Division 3, § 30-103 (2025)

Illinois - Bloomington-Normal

• Bloomington City Code § 40-910

Indiana

• IN Code § 8-2.1-19.1-5 (2024)

Iowa

• Iowa Code 2026, Section 321N.3

Kansas

• Kan. Stat. Ann. § 8-2712

Kentucky

• 601 KAR 1:113

Louisiana

• La. Admin. Code tit. 70, § IX-5013

Maine

• 24-A M.R.S.A. § 7301

Maryland

• MD Code, Public Utilities, § 10-404
• Waiver

Massachusetts

• M.G.L. 159A1/2
• 220 CMR 274.00

Michigan

• MCL 257.2101

Minnesota - Duluth

• Duluth City Code § 47-62.1

Minnesota - Mankato

• Mankato City Code, Chapter 6, Art. III, Div. 5, § 6-189

Minnesota - Minneapolis

• Minneapolis Code of Ordinances, Title 13, Chapter 343, § 343.120

Minnesota - Moorhead

• Moorhead Code § 2-6E-10

Minnesota - Rochester

• Rochester Code of Ordinances, tit. 5, ch. 5-6, § 5-6-12 (2025)

Minnesota - Saint Paul

• St. Paul, Minn., Leg. Code § 373.12 (2025)

Mississippi

• Miss. Admin. Code Pt. 9, R. 1.16

Missouri

• § 387.420, RSMo

Nebraska

• Neb. Rev. Stat. § 75-326

Nevada

• NRS 706A.163

New Hampshire

• N.H. Rev. Stat. § 376-A:12

New Jersey

• NJ Rev Stat § 39:5H-20 (2024)

New Mexico

• NM Stat § 65-7-12 (2024)

New York

• NY Veh & Traf L § 1696 (2025)
• NY Veh & Traf L § 1699 (2025)

North Carolina

• N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-280.6

North Dakota

• N.D.C.C. § 39-34-01

Ohio

• Ohio Revised Code § 4925.04

Oklahoma

• 47 OK Stat §1019 (2025)

Oregon - Ashland

• Ashland MC 6.28.050

Oregon - Bend

• Bend Code 7.35.030

Oregon - Corvallis

• Corvallis Code 8.07.030

Oregon - Eugene

• Eugene Code 3.345

Oregon - Grants Pass

• Grants Pass Code 4.16.030

Oregon - Gresham

• Gresham Code 9.65.090

Oregon - Lincoln City

• Lincoln City Code 10.20.030(c)

Oregon - Medford

• Medford Code 8.335(3)

Oregon - Newport

• Newport Code 4.15.030(c)

Oregon - Pendleton

• Pendleton Ordinance 3987 § 4(c-d)

Oregon - Portland

• Portland CC 16.40.270(d-e)

Oregon - Redmond

• Redmond Code 7.656(3)

Oregon - Roseburg

• Roseburg Code 9.08.030(c)

Oregon - Salem

• Salem Code 30.705(c)

Oregon - Sisters

• Sisters Code 5.40.030(3)

Pennsylvania

• 53 Pa.C.S.A. § 57A12

Rhode Island

• R.I. Code R. 815-RICR-50-10-5.4

South Carolina

• S.C. Code Ann. § 58-23-1650 (Supp. 2024)

South Dakota

• SDCL § 32-40-3

South Dakota - Aberdeen

• Aberdeen Code 58-105

South Dakota - Brookings

• Brookings Code 26-284

South Dakota - Sioux Falls

• Sioux Falls Code of Ordinances § 124.066 (2024)

Tennessee

• TN Code § 65-15-306 (2021)

Texas

• Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 2402.107

Utah

• Utah Code § 13-51-107

Vermont

• 23 V.S.A. § 751

Virginia

• Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-2099.49

Washington

• RCW 46.72B.090

Washington - King County

• Seattle Municipal Code § 6.310.270 (2025)

Washington - District of Columbia

• D.C. Official Code § 50–301.29b (2024)

West Virginia

• W. Va. Code § 17-29-13 (2025)

Wisconsin

• Wis. Stat. § 440.445

Wyoming

• WY Stat § 31-20-106 (2024)

Note: This list is provided for reference purposes and should not be considered exhaustive or legal advice. Local and state laws also are amended or modified from time to time, and this list may not be a complete and current list. Should you have additional questions about these laws and how they affect your use of Uber, please consult your local regulator or legal counsel.

Uber can only act on the information that is reported to it, and some jurisdictions limit the reporting of criminal convictions in certain circumstances - across all industries using private background checks, not just rideshare - after 7 years. For more information on these limitations, please see:

• California
• Kansas
• Maryland
• Montana
• New Hampshire
• New Mexico
• New York
• Washington

Note: This list is provided for reference purposes and should not be considered exhaustive or legal advice. Local and state laws also are amended or modified from time to time, and this list may not be a complete and current list. Should you have additional questions about these laws and how they affect your use of Uber, please consult your local regulator or legal counsel.

Many cities have also adopted "fair chance" or "ban the box" policies with the goal of giving everyone, including those with criminal convictions, a fair chance to be considered for work based on their abilities. These rules typically work by waiting to check an applicant's criminal history until later in the hiring process, often after a job offer has been extended.

Where these laws could apply to ridesharing trips, for example in New York City, careful consideration of fairness is weighed against legal requirements imposed by the applicable rideshare laws to ensure compliance and safety in our communities.

If you have specific questions we recommend consultation with legal counsel.

Uber can only act on the information that is reported to it and criminal offenses and convictions can be removed from the public record through sealing or expungement petitions, and in some cases, this removal is automatic by operation of law. Clean Slate Laws automatically seal or expunge certain types of records and affect all industries using private background checks, not just rideshare. For more information on public records limitations or automatic expungement/sealing laws that may affect background checks in your city, please see:

Alaska

• Alaska Stat. § 22.35

California

• CA Penal Code § 851.93 (2024)
• CA Penal Code § 1203.425 (2024)

Colorado

• Colo. Rev. Stat. §24-72-704
• Colo. Rev. Stat. §24-72-705

Connecticut

• Conn. Gen. Stat. §54-142a(e)(1)
• Conn. Gen. Stat. §54-142a(a),(c)

Delaware

• 11 Del. Code § 4371 - 4375

District of Columbia

• D.C. Law 24-284

Florida

• Fla. Stat. §943.0595

Georgia

• O.C.G.A. §35-3-37

Hawaii

• HB 1595
• Act 241

Illinois

• IL HB1836 25-26

Indiana

• IC 35-38-9-1

Kentucky

• K.R.S. §431.076(1)(a)

Louisiana

• Act 454

Maryland

• Md. Code Ann., Crim. Proc. § 10- 105.1(a)
• Md. Code Ann., Criminal Law, §5-601

Massachusetts

• Mass. Gen. Laws, ch. 276, §100C

Michigan

• Act No. 193
• Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §28.243(7), (8), (10)

Minnesota

• Minn. Stat. §609A.055
• Minn. Stat. §609A.015

Missouri

• Mo. Const. art. XIV, §§ 1–2 (amended 2022)

Nebraska

• Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-3523

Nevada

• Nev. Rev. Stat. §179.255

New Hampshire

• N.H. Rev
• ev. Stat. Ann. §651:5(II-a)

New Jersey

• N.J. Stat. Ann. §2C:52-5.4
• N.J. Stat. Ann. §2C:52-6.1
• N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:52-6(a)

New Mexico

• Chapter 26, Article 2C [Sections 26-2C-1 to 26-2C-42]

New York

• N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 160.57
• N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law §160.50(1),(3),(5)

North Carolina

• N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-146

Oklahoma

• 22 O.S. §§ 18 and 19

Pennsylvania

• 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. §9122.2(a)

Rhode Island

• R.I. Gen. Laws §12-1-12.1
• R.I. Gen. Laws §12-1.3-5

South Carolina

• S.C. Code Ann. §17-22-950(A)

South Dakota

• S.D. Codified Laws §23A-3-34
• S.D. Codified Laws §23A-3-35

Utah

• Utah Code § 77-40a-303

Vermont

• 13 V.S.A. § 7606
• 23 V.S.A. §2303
• 13 V.S.A. §7603

Virginia

• Va. Code Ann. §19.2-392.6

Note: This list is provided for reference purposes and should not be considered exhaustive or legal advice. Local and state laws also are amended or modified from time to time, and this list may not be a complete and current list. Should you have additional questions about these laws and how they affect your use of Uber, please consult your local regulator or legal counsel.

While background checks are essential screening tools, reports from background check providers may be incomplete or inaccurate due to several other factors. These factors include country, state, and local law restrictions on record access, human or electronic errors, temporary court closures, lost or destroyed records, reporting delays, technical issues with electronic access points, limited data sharing across local, state, and federal agencies, inconsistent availability of international records, and relying on the information provided by the individual.

We use technology to continuously check criminal records to strengthen our screening process. This technology continuously receives information from available data sources to detect whether a driver has been reported to have a new criminal charge or conviction, and it notifies Uber when this is the case. If an offense involving an active driver is identified, our screening team reviews it to evaluate the driver’s continued eligibility with Uber, and removes them from the platform if the driver is found to no longer meet Uber’s screening criteria and the criteria set forth in local laws.

Access to the criminal records data required for this technology can vary based on local court record practices and accessibility, and as a result functionality may vary by location.