After a bomb injured dozens in New York City’s Chelsea neighborhood on Saturday, people called the ride-service Uber to take them to safety. The vehicles arrived as promised but with a catch: Uber nearly doubled its fares from normal rates.
The decision to impose so-called “surge pricing,” which Uber uses during periods of high demand for its cars, led to complaints on social media as customers accused the company of price-gouging. Uber, for its part, told Fortune that it removed the price increases in Chelsea almost immediately after learning of the explosion.
Here’s how it played out on Twitter, where customers began recounting their experience after news of the bomb, which went off around 9:30 p.m.:
https://twitter.com/whatiswally/status/777356319233810432
https://twitter.com/GibbensJohn/status/777366421022052353
Here’s a tweet from Uber, announcing it would suspend the surge fares. Note the time stamp on the tweet is very shortly after news of the explosion, and comes well before the customers’ complaints (it’s unclear if the customers are misinformed or just posted their complaints well after the ride).
https://twitter.com/Uber_NYC/status/777322948810182660
Uber also appeared to be working to refund surge fares to customers:
https://twitter.com/Uber_NYC/status/777548418277380096
This isn’t the first time Uber has landed in controversy for introducing surge prices during a terror scare. In 2014, the company said it was “truly sorry” for raising prices during a deadly hostage taking episode in Sydney, Australia.
Get Data Sheet, Fortune’s technology newsletter.
During the Sydney episode, however, Uber also argued that surge pricing made sense because it gave drivers an incentive to get on the road.
The argument makes sense from the perspective of market theory. After all, drivers are unlikely to head towards an active terror scene without a financial incentive, and some people even defended Uber’s initial decision to impose surge pricing after the New York bomb:
People harassing Uber for surge pricing in Chelsea don't really know how uber works.
— boxxa (@boxxa) September 18, 2016
Overall, though, the majority of people appear to be uneasy with companies using emergencies or tragic events to earn extra profits. In 2014, New York’s Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced an agreement with Uber in which the car company agreed to make its policies conform to a state law that restricts price-gouging during disasters.
This story was updated at 11am ET to include Uber’s response and to provide additional context.
