Chinese (Simplified) 
Chinese (Traditional) 
English 
French 
Alemão 
Italian 
Japanese 
Norwegian 
Spanish 
4 min read
2 comments
The case of a passenger who lost her device reignites debate about rewards, platform fees, and legal limits on returning items.
One of the passenger forgot his cell phone in the car using an app and heard from the driver: delivery only upon payment of R$150. The episode, which is not isolated, exposes a blind spot in everyday driving: after all, what can be charged for the return of a forgotten item and who sets that value.
The topic mobilizes consumers and drivers because involves application rules, principles of the Consumer Protection Code and provisions of the Civil Code on findings. When the bill goes from being a simple operating fee to a “reward,” questions begin about what is fair and what is abusive.
The case that went viral
A passenger reported that he forgot his cell phone on the floor of the vehicle and was charged R$150 to get the device back. She agreed to pay because she was afraid of the loss of buying a new phone., something many users would do in the same situation.
-
The highest bridge, costing $13 billion, is scheduled for completion in 2026 and promises to revolutionize transportation, cut dangerous routes, and boost the entire region's economy.
-
In a country marked by corruption and poverty, politicians bought 40 luxury Maseratis – years later, the vehicles remain parked and rusting after having been used only once.
-
Why doesn't everyone speak the same language?
-
The world's largest stadium in 1950 was Brazilian, surpassing the 183 seats of Hampden Park and becoming the largest stadium in the world at the time, thanks to its massive architecture.
Similar reports show varying charges. There are platforms that provide a fixed logistics fee, such as R$50 for the driver's return., regardless of the value of the forgotten item. In other cases, drivers try to negotiate their own prices, which creates conflict.
The frequently cited legal point is the rule of discovery: The Civil Code allows for a reward to anyone who finds and returns a good, with mentions of percentages and reimbursement for expenses such as transportation and maintenance. In practice, this is interpreted as an incentive for return and good faith on the part of those seeking the owner.
But there are clear boundaries. Retaining the item found to force payment is conduct that may be considered illegal., and the correct option, if there's no agreement, is to hand the item over to an authority or to the platform itself, which maintains support channels for lost items. The reward cannot be turned into coercion.
Application fee x negotiated value
Companies usually standardize a displacement rate to cover fuel and driver time on the return journey. This charge is predictable, appears in the terms of use, and does not depend on the price of the forgotten object.
When the driver ignores the platform fee and sets a value on its own, space opens up for contestation. The service contracted was the ride, not the custody of the object., and any additional charge must be objectively and proportionally based. If it is exceeded, can be seen as an abusive practice, since the relationship is governed by the Consumer Protection Code.
By the CDC, all charges must be transparent, previously informed and proportional. An operational fee to return the item is justifiable. Turning returns into “redemption conditions” with arbitrary prices puts pressure on vulnerable consumers., especially when it comes to cell phones, documents or cards.
In case of disagreement, the recommended path is register everything in the app support, keep conversations in writing and, if necessary, take the dispute to Procon or the Small Claims CourtThis creates a trail of evidence and avoids negotiation under pressure.
Good practices for drivers
For those who drive via app, following official protocol protects against conflicts: report the finding to the platform, arrange return via the system and receive the standardized fee. If direct return is not possible, delivery to a police station or designated post prevents accusations of undue retention.
Another practice that helps is photograph the item at the time of finding and report it immediately, preserving good faith. Transparency reduces wear and tear and builds trust with passengers.
First, use the “lost items” area of the app to activate support and contact the driver. Second, arrange the return in a public place and with the official fee. Avoid advance transfers outside the system and prefer to register the payment through the app whenever this option is available.
If the charge is higher than expected and you feel coerced, refuse, ask for the object to be handed over to the police authority e file a police report. Saving prints and protocols is essential for any refund or claim.
And what about the “5% of the object’s value”?
The idea is circulating that the reward would be 5% of the value of the property. Even if this reference is invoked, it does not authorize retention of the item or unilateral demand. Any reward must be reasonable, voluntary and cannot replace the fee already provided by the platform., which covers the displacement.
In other words, reward is recognition, not mandatory tollIf there is disagreement, the following rule applies: return via app or authority, without bargaining on someone else's item.
The episode of passenger charged at R$150 exposes a real dilemma: return costs vs. consumer rights. Clear and standardized fees reduce conflicts, while arbitrary charges create insecurity. To be successful, driver follows protocol, passenger uses official channels and the platform does its part with efficient support.
And you, what would you do in her place? I would pay one extra reward in addition to the app fee or consider abusive any value outside the system? You who drive, accepts only the fixed rate Or do you think higher compensation is fair when the return is long? Tell us in the comments what the rules of the game should be in your city and why. Real stories help improve service for everyone.
In Porto Alegre, I left my phone in an Uber. My daughter contacted him, and he charged a R$50,00 return fee, explaining that this is the return policy. My daughter accepted, and when he returned it, she even gave him a R$200,00 reward. This amount is much less than the cost of a new device, not to mention the loss of data on the device.
I would file a police report with all the information I obtained. I would activate the platform and also register the complaint with the app's central office. I would pay and then go to a police station to complete the report with information about the extortion.
It has happened to me, both as a passenger and as a driver. It is common not to charge, but the reward also serves to remunerate the effort of returning the vehicle.