However, both organisations told her they would not give the information to police unless a formal court order was made. At the same time, police didn't seem to be in a hurry to ask for the information, Carter said.
"What is it with these big offshore companies who have no interest in integrity?" she immediately tweeted about Uber.
"Last year, when I spotted a fraud in our business, I alerted the victim and gave details to police.
"Can we please have more proactive, conscientious business practice."
Carter believed the issue raised wider concerns about whether police take "petty" crimes seriously enough and whether the Privacy Act was getting in the way of speedy investigations.
Of the 49,805 thefts and related crimes reported in Auckland between January 2018 and January this year, 88.1 per cent of them, or 43,887, were still unsolved.
Nationally, there were 135,698 thefts and related crimes in the same period with 83.6 per cent remaining unsolved.
A police spokesman said they would be conducting several inquiries into the theft of Carter's handbag and that the matter was ongoing.
He said police treated all crimes seriously but greater priority was given to more serious offences.
"Urgent priority is given to matters where there are concerns for the safety of members of the public."
A privacy expert also said companies had become increasingly careful about giving out personal information to police after Westpac's payout to journalist Nicky Hager last month.
Lowndes Jordan lawyer Rick Shera said the Privacy Act included an exception allowing organisations to give private data to police if it was "reasonably necessary for the enforcement of a criminal investigation".
However in 2017, the Privacy Commissioner found Westpac had breached Hager's privacy by giving his bank details to police after officers made a simple request for it as part of an investigation hunting for sources behind the journalist's 2014 book Dirty Politics.
Westpac backed this up last month by admitting its actions had been wrong and promising to tighten its policies to require police to always get a court order when they wanted private data.
Shera thought this was the best balance between privacy and fighting crime.
A court order was still relatively easy for police to get, but added a layer of protection by allowing an independent party - such as a registrar or judge - to ask whether the requested information was necessary or not, he said.
If a crime was "far more serious", such as cases involving child exploitation, companies might still choose to hand over private data voluntarily to police, he said.
An AT spokesman said the "only party given access" to its CCTV footage was police for "law enforcement purposes".
An Uber spokeswoman said the company has "robust published guidelines that outline how we work with police, and the disclosure of personal information is consistent with New Zealand law".
Carter, for her part, said police largely did a great job and she understood her stolen handbag was not a major crime at a time when police were busy guarding mosques.
She was also able to replace her credit cards and her passport within days.
However, the loss of her passport had initially given her a fright because she had been due to fly overseas days later. She also lost a sentimental gift from her husband in the theft.
"If we got this person now with the leads I gave police, it might stop them trying something a bit more extreme next time."
