This[1] suggests that they do have specialized channels to report this exact type of problem, and that they do investigate and take action on reported cases. It says they also periodically send reminder emails about the legal requirements for drivers.
I talked to a driver once that said that he got suspended when a rider had erroneously reported that he "looked high" (despite that being the only complaint that day despite him having had many passengers). He complained that Uber had not even bothered to hear his side of the story before suspending him and they should've told him to come to a driver center to get tested, instead of just taking someone's report at face value. He said he went to the hospital to get drug tested and had to submit the results to get reinstated. So at least from anecdata, it seems non-compliant drivers do get booted on a shoot-first-ask-later fashion.
It sounds like the problem here is that some drivers still choose to break the law on the 1 out a 1000 chance they run into the service dog situation, even despite all the warnings telling them not to do it.
I talked to a driver once that said that he got suspended when a rider had erroneously reported that he "looked high" (despite that being the only complaint that day despite him having had many passengers). He complained that Uber had not even bothered to hear his side of the story before suspending him and they should've told him to come to a driver center to get tested, instead of just taking someone's report at face value. He said he went to the hospital to get drug tested and had to submit the results to get reinstated. So at least from anecdata, it seems non-compliant drivers do get booted on a shoot-first-ask-later fashion.
It sounds like the problem here is that some drivers still choose to break the law on the 1 out a 1000 chance they run into the service dog situation, even despite all the warnings telling them not to do it.
[1](https://accessibility.uber.com/)