UKC

Ubers London licence revoked

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.

What happens to the 40,000 drivers? Oh well, I thought the app was brilliant, sure I will get flamed for that but years of being ripped off ,not picked up, refused to go "in that direction", "cash only mate" by black cabs meant I was an early and eager adopter.
Post edited at 11:17
2
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

> What happens to the 40,000 drivers? Oh well, I thought the app was brilliant, sure I will get flamed for that but years of being ripped off ,not picked up, refused to go "in that direction", "cash only mate" by black cabs meant I was an early and eager adopter.

It would be good to understand the details on this. I am a regular user and strong supporter of the app although I understand the business practices have come into question.
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

I have only seen the headlines. I imagine there will be a lot of noise from the 3.5 million odd users
 seankenny 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

> What happens to the 40,000 drivers?

Nothing in the near future:

TfL considers that Uber's approach and conduct demonstrate a lack of corporate responsibility in relation to a number of issues which have potential public safety and security implications. These include:

Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.
Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.

The Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998 includes provision to appeal a licensing decision within 21 days of it being communicated to the applicant. Uber London Limited can continue to operate until any appeal processes have been exhausted.

https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2017/september/licensing-d...


pasbury 22 Sep 2017
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Good ideas need good (and legal) implementation.
2
 The New NickB 22 Sep 2017
In reply to seankenny:

TaxiFy are also having regulation issues in London. You would almost think that TfL don't want any competition.
 seankenny 22 Sep 2017
In reply to The New NickB:

> TaxiFy are also having regulation issues in London. You would almost think that TfL don't want any competition.

TfL are just the regulator in this case surely? And no one is seriously suggesting they want a London transport infrastructure without private hire vehicles...

Suspect it will be interesting to see what comes out of this case.
2
In reply to seankenny:

Suspect it will be interesting to see what comes out of this case.

A lot more illegal (Toyota Prius) minicabs?
 seankenny 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:


> Suspect it will be interesting to see what comes out of this case.

> A lot more illegal (Toyota Prius) minicabs?

Well, a lot of work for lawyers for sure.
 marsbar 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Uber needs to up it's game.

Why would I use Uber when I know that our local mini cab firm have drivers checked?

Uber did nothing about sex offenders driving people.
1
 Mike Highbury 22 Sep 2017
In reply to The New NickB:
> TaxiFy are also having regulation issues in London. You would almost think that TfL don't want any competition.

There was a lovely article in the New York Times contrasting a trad back cab driver with a recent migrant working for Uber.

'For Mrs. Bakkali, black cabs have become a byword for populism and racism. For Mr. Walsh, Uber is shorthand for everything he believes is wrong with globalization — and proof that successive governments have failed hard-working citizens like him.'

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/04/world/europe/london-uk-brexit-uber-taxi....

In reply to marsbar:

Agree on checking drivers, although its hard to compare a local cab office to Ubers offering. Glad you like them but I think it would be naive to assume your local cab office has not partaken in some dodgy practices to maintain their market share. Open up your own next door and see what happens. I doubt lawyers will be involved.
1
 andy 22 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:

> Uber needs to up it's game.

> Why would I use Uber when I know that our local mini cab firm have drivers checked?

> Uber did nothing about sex offenders driving people.

Uber do check their drivers, don’t they? The same regs as your local minicab firm?
 The New NickB 22 Sep 2017
In reply to seankenny:

TfL regulate lots of private vehicles quite happily. I'm thinking more of the vested interests of a specific set of knowledgable private vehicle owners.
 The New NickB 22 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:

> Uber needs to up it's game.

> Why would I use Uber when I know that our local mini cab firm have drivers checked?

> Uber did nothing about sex offenders driving people.

Uber drivers are subject to the same checks as any other mini cab drivers.
 wintertree 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Not surprising - Uber's business model world wide appears to involve deliberately ignoring local regulation for as long as possible in each area where they operate.

I'm reasonably convinced that their entire present business is an excercise in gathering data and building systems to position them as leaders in autonomous shared/pool ownership/leased vehicles. They're trying to minimise capital burn by short term exploiting workers and ignoring rules.
 toad 22 Sep 2017
In reply to wintertree

The whole "greyball" thing is designed to avoid regulatory oversight, isn't it?
 andy 22 Sep 2017
In reply to toad:

> In reply to wintertree

> The whole "greyball" thing is designed to avoid regulatory oversight, isn't it?

Which they don’t use in the UK.
 MG 22 Sep 2017
In reply to andy:

How do you know? The whole point I thought was it was secret!
 wintertree 22 Sep 2017
In reply to toad:

> The whole "greyball" thing is designed to avoid regulatory oversight, isn't it?

It rather makes one wonder about their corporate ethics, doesn't it? They (with their autonomy development work) have been playing similarly loose with the rules on self driving cars over in California.
Post edited at 14:43
 andy 22 Sep 2017
In reply to MG:

> How do you know? The whole point I thought was it was secret!

Because the put out a statement saying they don’t. They’d have to be pretty dumb to say something like that (that could be easily leaked) if it’s not true.
 MG 22 Sep 2017
In reply to andy:

No, they said an "independent review" had said they didn't, which is rather different. You can imagine when they are caught what the line will be "oh well, they were wrong but nothing to do with us, they are independent"
 pebbles 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

hmm
this conversation might perhaps go a little differently if it followed a high profile case of somebody being attacked, robbed, or injured in an accident by a driver whose background or driving ability hadnt been sufficently checked
1
In reply to pebbles:

I wonder how much safer it is to stand around at night in London trying to find a taxi, or getting public transport late at night, than being attacked by your Uber driver?

You could argue that the app has made Londoners feel safer with a good value alternative to a night bus or late train with you being picked up outside your location, you know when it's there and the route is tracked and public and you can share it with your family/friends.
 marsbar 22 Sep 2017
 marsbar 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

I'd rather walk or use public transport than get in a car by myself with someone driving for a company that knew one of their drivers sexually assaulted someone and let him continue working there and do it again.

Once you get in a car it is harder to get away.
2
In reply to marsbar: I'm not condoning Ubers behaviour in the case you mention but I wonder how many sexual and violent attacks there were on women (and men) in London in the last 5 years on public transport and walking home late at night compared to sexual attacks by uber drivers?

I don't know, but I suspect you are being completely irrational in your fear.
 nniff 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

TFL has done what was expected of them and rattled the bars of Uber's cage, but have also given Uber plenty of grounds for appeal. That will bang about for a while, during which Uber will continue to operate. They will both beat their chests and concessions will be made. TfL will cover their legal costs with Uber's new £3m five years operator's licence fee (their last licence cost in the low thousands I think)
 MG 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

> You could argue that the app has made Londoners feel safer with a good value alternative to a night bus or late train with you being picked up outside your location, you know when it's there and the route is tracked and public and you can share it with your family/friends.

Clearly true. It's an excellent service. But it's still a dubious company that make a habit of trying to ignore the law and deserves a bloody nose.

 The New NickB 22 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:

I'm from Rochdale, we have had about 30 drivers from local firms convicted of sexual offences in the last few years. Problems in the industry are not unique to Uber. I'm not keen on the whole gig economy thing and some of the ethical standards of Uber as a corporate entity, but let's not pretend that Uber drivers are any less regulated than those from local firms or that those local firms are squeaky clean. As alluded to earlier, the mini cab trade can be a murky business.
 deepsoup 22 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:
> Once you get in a car it is harder to get away.

In the 90s people used to tell their kids not to get into strangers' cars or meet people off the internet. Scroll forward 20 years and we're all using the internet to summon strangers so we can get into their cars.
1
 marsbar 22 Sep 2017
In reply to The New NickB:

I am aware of that, and I also know that a large part of the Rotherham issues were down to minicab drivers not being properly checked. Rotherham council have a lot to answer for.

However TFL, not the local council oversee the minicab checks here, and could just as easily remove a particular companies licence just as they have with Uber. They are fairly strict.
 Bob Hughes 22 Sep 2017
In reply to wintertree:

> I'm reasonably convinced that their entire present business is an excercise in gathering data and building systems to position them as leaders in autonomous shared/pool ownership/leased vehicles. They're trying to minimise capital burn by short term exploiting workers and ignoring rules.

They're doing a pretty awful job of minimising capital burn. My theory is that they are fundamentally unprofitable. Q4 2016 they lost 2.8billion on revenues of 6.5 billion.

Hopefully the new CEO - who ran a tight ship at Expedia - will sort them out. Both ethically and financially.


 Postmanpat 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

The big losers from this will be London's huge population of young people, already priced out of central London property, who depend on Uber's cheap fares to get around.
1
 balmybaldwin 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

> The big losers from this will be London's huge population of young people, already priced out of central London property, who are too lazy to walk, get a bus, tube or cycle


Lets face it if anywhere could do without another transport service its London.
3
 marsbar 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

We do have buses here you know. Cheap frequent and run all night.
3
 Postmanpat 22 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:

> We do have buses here you know. Cheap frequent and run all night.

I know. Do you know any young people who live in London?
 Postmanpat 22 Sep 2017
In reply to balmybaldwin:
> Lets face it if anywhere could do without another transport service its London.

Spoken like a true socialist
Post edited at 18:43
 Hooo 22 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:

I feel a lot safer in an Uber than a night bus. There are many areas of London where I definitely would not want to be waiting around for a bus.
 marsbar 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

Yes.
 winhill 22 Sep 2017
In reply to pebbles:

> this conversation might perhaps go a little differently if it followed a high profile case of somebody being attacked, robbed, or injured in an accident by a driver whose background or driving ability hadnt been sufficently checked

Round here, if you have a conviction for sex or violent crime you have to lease the car in your brother's name and use his licence.

It's the Law.
 Postmanpat 22 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:

> Yes.

Good, so you'll understand the advantage to them of having options about how to travel at inconvenient times to inconvenient places.
 Yanis Nayu 22 Sep 2017
In reply to The New NickB:

Taxi drivers in general are a nightmare to regulate.
1
 MG 22 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

I don't think those struggling with housing costs spend much in cabs!
 Postmanpat 22 Sep 2017
In reply to MG:

> I don't think those struggling with housing costs spend much in cabs!

No, because they use uber......
 Big Ger 23 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:
Sadiq Khan is financially backed by the taxi driver's union, Unite, is he not?
Post edited at 01:27
1
 aln 23 Sep 2017
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

> Taxi drivers in general are a nightmare to regulate.

What do you mean?
In reply to Hooo:

> I feel a lot safer in an Uber than a night bus. There are many areas of London where I definitely would not want to be waiting around for a bus.

Then why go to the places where you feel unsafe?
3
 BnB 23 Sep 2017
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Because edgier districts often offer delights that you won't find in a safer but boringly homogeneous west end. Look up "warehouse rave" if you haven't had the pleasure.
 marsbar 23 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:
We generally use the bus and the tube or our legs. I grew up in the countryside. That where you will find young people with poor transport links.

Everytime I get on a bus there are lots of young people. Little Miss Marsbar and her friends don't use uber. They seem to manage.
Post edited at 10:52
1
 marsbar 23 Sep 2017
In reply to Hooo:
You don't have to wait for a bus. Use the app, it tells you in real time where your bus is, wait in the pub or wherever until it is due.

https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/buses/live-bus-arrivals
Post edited at 10:50
 Postmanpat 23 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:

> We generally use the bus and the tube or our legs. I grew up in the countryside. That where you will find young people with poor transport links.

What you do is up to you. That is not a rationale for denying people the choice to do things their way, and if that includes taking a cheap uber rather than enduring three changes of transport and walk down a dark alley and the company and assorted drunks at 1am, or for that matter at 6pm, then good luck to them.
 FactorXXX 23 Sep 2017
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Then why go to the places where you feel unsafe?

I assume people live there and therefore want to travel to and from it?
 marsbar 23 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

No one is denying them the choice of a mini cab or a taxi.

Minicabs are cheap enough.
4
 Postmanpat 23 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:
> No one is denying them the choice of a mini cab or a taxi.

> Minicabs are cheap enough.

They are denying them the choice of uber which is much more convenient than the average dodgy minicab. three million journeys suggest that others agree. It's not for you or anybody else to tell them what choice is good for them. I agree that uber needs to show it has cleaned up its act, but I am deeply suspicious about the real motives for refusing it a licence
Post edited at 11:03
2
 marsbar 23 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

I've been thinking about this. I don't think it is fear stopping me using uber, I'm quite good at risk assessment. Chances are high that nothing would happen to me on any given journey. It's principles. It's refusing to condone their way of working. No different from avoiding Amazon, Sports Direct, Nestlé or the Daily Mail.

The irrational ones are those that assume getting a bus in London at night is dangerous.

I've always had amazing customer service from my local cab company and I am happy to keep using them on the odd occasion when I need too. I don't like the way Uber behave.
 DancingOnRock 23 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:
It's not been revoked. They're not renewing it. As per seankenny's link they have 21 days to launch an appeal. Their exsisting licence is valid until they have exhauseted all their lives of appeal.

Basically, they're being told to get their house in order if they want their licence renewed.
Post edited at 11:06
 marsbar 23 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

So you are saying tfl are allowing dodgy mini cabs but not uber?

Mini cabs in London are probably the safest in the country and are far more strictly regulated by tfl than the shocking attempts by certain councils elsewhere in England.

London minicab drivers have to take an extra driving test, navigation test, cars have an enhanced mot, cars can't be old, there is a direct complaint proceedure. Drivers always wear photo id and the cars are badged.

Don't assume that just because some councils are allowing dodgy minicabs elsewhere that tfl are picking on uber.

Personally I voted for our mayor and he does get to tell people what to do. He is an intelligent bloke and I agree with him on this.
 seankenny 23 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

> enduring [a] walk down a dark alley

How will an Uber save them from a dark alley? It won't fit.

1
 Timmd 23 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:

That all sounds really good, and rather like Sheffield. I think it's especially irresponsible of Uber to not adequately make sure DBS checks are carried out on it's drivers.
In reply to marsbar:

Fair enough. Each to their own.

As we have discussed, there are loads of reasons why Uber is better than a minicab/black cab/bus/walk/train in loads of circumstances that 3.5 million Londoners have cottoned on to. But the main one......price.

I live 30 miles from central London now, a recent black cab home from Citi Airport cost £130, and had to be in cash. My regular Ubers home from central London cost between £40-60 depending on surge pricing. Obviously my principles can be bought but I would suggest that if Amazon sold everything for 50% less than what you had to pay in the shops, then the principled ones not using Amazon could be counted on one hand (of course, I don't doubt you would be one of them )

 marsbar 23 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

I suspect a mini cab from City Airport rather than a black cab would be a very similar price to uber.

 MG 23 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:
Probably not but the reasos are a) uber is losing money hand over fist b) they pay essentially no tax and c) they prefer to ignore laws they don't like. These points need to be addressed.
 neilh 23 Sep 2017
In reply to MG:

Losing money hand over fist is a problem for Uber's shareholders/ investors and of no real concern to anybody else.
1
 MG 23 Sep 2017
In reply to neilh:
It is if it is undercutting others, at least arguably and when done to the extent it is. Not least because of the danger of future prices rises when the competition has gone.
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Tfl should set Uber a list of conditions which they have to satisfy in order to have the license renewed. It should be that simple. Sadiq is risking his popularity with this issue - over half a million people have already signed a petition protesting against this decision.
The black cab lobby is very strong but they are a bunch of old dinosaurs - they should have got on board with Uber when it first started and they missed a trick by not doing so.
Lusk 23 Sep 2017
In reply to I like climbing:

> The black cab lobby is very strong but they are a bunch of old dinosaurs

And so are their cabs.
Up to the turn of last year, I had to suffer 60 miles a day in the back of a black cab, my body has just about recovered now from my insides being rattled to bits every time we drove over the slightest undulation in the road.
My driver was a decent bloke though.
 marsbar 23 Sep 2017
In reply to MG:

I guess it depends how long it takes to get there. Minicab North London to Stansted cost me £32 a few weeks ago, but that is almost all motorway so probably cheaper.

 neilh 23 Sep 2017
In reply to MG:

Commercially it is doubtful that any taxi company will ever have a monopoly. Even when you could only get a black cab there were alternatives. It's just not realistic.

And there are plenty of alternatives to uber.

It local taxi company has had to up its game as a result.

In China uber has a similar company competing direct with a similar app.

It's not particularly unique.
In reply to Lusk:

> And so are their cabs.

> Up to the turn of last year, I had to suffer 60 miles a day in the back of a black cab, my body has just about recovered now from my insides being rattled to bits every time we drove over the slightest undulation in the road.

> My driver was a decent bloke though.

Blimey, 60 miles a day ! That must have been tough......

2 of my mates drive black cabs - top blokes but they hate Uber and don’t get that things change.
 Big Ger 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:
Oh, the irony...

Sadiq Khan could be in breach of equality legislation over the decision not to renew Uber’s licence in London, a former adviser has warned. The Mayor of London was told on Saturday that because more than 90 per cent of the 40,000 drivers are from ?ethnic minority backgrounds, the move has destroyed a “lifeline” for them.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/23/uber-vows-take-court-action-tfl-...
Post edited at 01:13
1
 Bob Hughes 24 Sep 2017
In reply to neilh:

> Losing money hand over fist is a problem for Uber's shareholders/ investors and of no real concern to anybody else.

It's a problem for anyone who's argument rests on "three and a half million londoners can't be wrong". Both sides of the business - the supply of drivers (I.e. Convenience) and the demand from customers (a function of convenience and price) rests on drivers more and charging customers less than they - and any other business - need to, to turn a profit. It's funded by venture capital money chasing start ups which can build a sufficient moat to keep other competitors out to the extent that they maintain pricing power. If te investors are wrong then great we all get cheap cab rides for a few years until the money runs out. But if they are right, then uber drives minicabs and black cabs to the margins and starts prices.
 neilh 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Bob Hughes:
It is choice. As a taxi driver you have a choice as to whether you join uber. As a consumer you have choice as to whether to use uber. It's not fixed.

Black cabs to my knowledge have not vanished even after a few years of this type of funding.

When all said and done it's a pretty low cost entry into the market. You do not need any particular skills at any level .
 Postmanpat 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Big Ger:

> Oh, the irony...

>
Labour threatens the jobs of ten times the number of people employed at Port Talbot steelworks and destroys a service employing mainly immigrant drivers and benefiting young and often immigrant users. Where is the Grauniad headline?
2
 deepsoup 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

The story of Uber losing its licence in London:

Mayor of London: "Uber will you abide by the same incredibly anaemic regulations that your competitors do?"
Uber: "No!!!"
Mayor of London: "Okay no license for you then, sorry."
Uber: "But... But... The drivers we ruthlessly exploit will be out of low paid insecure jobs in the gig economy!"
Mayor of London: "Well if you really cared about them maybe you could just treat them like actual workers and then we could grant you.."
Uber: "LOL f*ck that!"

(Nicked from the FB page of 'Occupy London')
 Bob Hughes 24 Sep 2017
In reply to neilh:

> It is choice. As a taxi driver you have a choice as to whether you join uber. As a consumer you have choice as to whether to use uber. It's not fixed.

Of course it's a choice. Just like it's a choice to use Google for search. Doesn't mean they don't enjoy market power.



pasbury 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

> Labour threatens the jobs of ten times the number of people employed at Port Talbot steelworks and destroys a service employing mainly immigrant drivers and benefiting young and often immigrant users. Where is the Grauniad headline?

I think you mean Telegraph headline; only they could put such a bizarre spin on it.
1
 marsbar 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

Are you yanking my chain?

I'm finding"Tories concerned about real people like low paid young Londonders and ethnic minority drivers" a little hard to believe.

Tories pretend to care about stuff to annoy Labour mayor who insists on sticking to pesky annoying regulations perhaps.
4
 Postmanpat 24 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:

> Are you yanking my chain?

> I'm finding"Tories concerned about real people like low paid young Londonders and ethnic minority drivers" a little hard to believe.

>
So is it your view that those of those "left" are the only ones concerned about such people and are therefore morally superior to others?
1
 Timmd 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:
> So is it your view that those of those "left" are the only ones concerned about such people and are therefore morally superior to others?

It potentially may have more to do with how the poor (and the disabled) have fared under Austerity and changes to the benefits system? If one looks at the tax decisions, too, it's hard to see this government as one which cares about the poor (imho).

My lovely step mother is a Tory (I suppose one might call her that), so I don't hate Tories or think there's a moral difference.
Post edited at 13:49
4
 neilh 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Bob Hughes:

There is an element of hypocrisy here - black cabs were in effect operating a monopoly with high prices. Uber usurped that position.so which monopoly do you want - über or black cabs?
 marsbar 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

My view is that young Londoners will manage perfectly well without Uber just like they did before, that the poorest young Londoners can't afford it anyway, and generally use the bus and that it's odd to be concerned for Uber drivers and yet not concerned about their lack of employment rights.

It's hypocrisy more than a left right thing.
1
 marsbar 24 Sep 2017
In reply to neilh:

I think there is clearly an argument for looking at the cost of black cabs and whether the knowledge is needed these days when sat nav is cheap and easy.

However in the end the rules are there they are clear and Uber needs to man up or give up, and stop whining.

All these arguments about the customers and the race of the drivers are a distraction from the facts. People who would be calling snowflake in other circumstances are suddenly caring and concerned.

Uber is being expected to follow the same rules as the minicabs which doesn't seem unreasonable. Most of the minicab drivers are also ethnically diverse just like Uber. The drivers will be needed and could work for other companies than Uber.
 Postmanpat 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Timmd:

> My lovely step mother is a Tory (I suppose one might call her that), so I don't hate Tories or think there's a moral difference.
>
I know. I await marsbar's reply......

 Postmanpat 24 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:

> My view is that young Londoners will manage perfectly well without Uber just like they did before,
>
My impression is that for underpaid millennials it's a godsend. I think you are out of touch, whereas I'm down with the youth
 nufkin 24 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:

> whether the knowledge is needed these days when sat nav is cheap and easy.

I would expect most black cab drivers would argue that there's much more to getting their licence and doing their job than just knowing where things are. There's always exceptions, but in my experience cabbies tend to be better drivers (or at least more aware), for example, and having distinctive vehicles means you have a good idea of what to expect in traffic (sudden stops for passengers, impossible u-turns, doors opening etc.). Mind you, I tend to assume that everyone driving a Prius these days works for Uber.

> The drivers will be needed and could work for other companies than Uber.

Quite - the other ride-sharing companies must be pretty chuffed right now
 neilh 24 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:

Employment rights for cabbies..........they are all selfemployed. ...... even black cabbies.

If you are going to target uber then you need to target everyone else in that sector on employment rights.
 Mike Highbury 24 Sep 2017
In reply to marsbar:
> My view is that young Londoners will manage perfectly well without Uber just like they did before, that the poorest young Londoners can't afford it anyway,

That's as maybe but, from what you have said, I've a suspicion that you have little experience of night buses from Trafalgar Sq at two in the morning nor of standing at bus stops on the (Camden Road) for a couple of hours waiting for night buses that never arrive, whilst waving away unlicensed cabs (blokes driving around in their cars) touting for business...

Yes, buses are better now but London in the small hours was or can be a dangerous place.
 MG 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

Is it your view that a company that provides a good service needn't be "fit and proper" in other ways? That the end justifies the means?
 Postmanpat 24 Sep 2017
In reply to MG:

> Is it your view that a company that provides a good service needn't be "fit and proper" in other ways? That the end justifies the means?

No, as I have said, if Uber needs to clean up its act then it needs to clean up it's act, but I don't trust that this is an entirely apolitical judgement.
 BnB 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

> No, as I have said, if Uber needs to clean up its act then it needs to clean up it's act, but I don't trust that this is an entirely apolitical judgement.

Are you suggesting that Sadiq Khan was subject to the influence of other vested interests, eg unionised lobbying? Or do you think that he sought to make a point, political or otherwise, about the conduct of a global business in our capital city?

The former would be invidious, the latter a defensible moral stance (whether politically motivated or not).
 Postmanpat 24 Sep 2017
In reply to BnB:

> Are you suggesting that Sadiq Khan was subject to the influence of other vested interests, eg unionised lobbying? Or do you think that he sought to make a point, political or otherwise, about the conduct of a global business in our capital city?

>
Possibly both. Do you think that, had say BT or BP had equivalent problems they would have been addressed in the same way? I suspect another way woild have been found.

 BnB 24 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:

> Possibly both. Do you think that, had say BT or BP had equivalent problems they would have been addressed in the same way? I suspect another way woild have been found.

BP or BT. The clue's in the name.

I'm conflicted on this one. There's no doubt (the petition is already approaching 3/4 of a million) that users will feel inconvenienced by the withdrawal of a service that offers innovative financial and safety benefits. On the other hand, I find Uber's business ethics, as opposed to its disruptive model, contemptible.
 Postmanpat 24 Sep 2017
In reply to BnB:

> BP or BT. The clue's in the name.

> I'm conflicted on this one. There's no doubt (the petition is already approaching 3/4 of a million) that users will feel inconvenienced by the withdrawal of a service that offers innovative financial and safety benefits. On the other hand, I find Uber's business ethics, as opposed to its disruptive model, contemptible.

So am I actually. But I don't trust the motivation or the methodology of the judgment.
 elsewhere 24 Sep 2017
In reply to BnB:
Uber will appeal.

Is there any change to Uber's service before the courts decide?
 Hooo 24 Sep 2017
In reply to nufkin:

> in my experience cabbies tend to be better drivers (or at least more aware),

On what planet did you experience that!?
Forty years of pedal and motor cycle travel in London has made me despise black cab drivers. They genuinely believe that they have more right to be on the road than anyone else, and will change direction without warning or the slightest concern for anyone else on the road.
Black cabs are the number 2 hazard (after HGVs) for a two wheeled traveller in London. There are certainly a lot of terrible drivers in minicabs too, but they don't have same sense of entitlement.
 Big Ger 25 Sep 2017
In reply to BnB:

> Are you suggesting that Sadiq Khan was subject to the influence of other vested interests, eg unionised lobbying?

Khan is supported financially by the Unite union, the one ....Black Cab drivers.... are members of....
 Big Ger 25 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

"Docklands, Docklands, alles Uber?"
 andy 25 Sep 2017
In reply to BnB:
> Are you suggesting that Sadiq Khan was subject to the influence of other vested interests, eg unionised lobbying? Or do you think that he sought to make a point, political or otherwise, about the conduct of a global business in our capital city?

> The former would be invidious, the latter a defensible moral stance (whether politically motivated or not).

Article in the Times today suggests it’s the former, as it appears TfL have carried out numerous inspections (ten since 2013) and found uber met the requirements of its regulations, and in April passed its annual compliance test which was 20-odd TfL officials poring over records and documents. So someone’s not been doing their job very well... Whoops.
Post edited at 07:23
 Postmanpat 25 Sep 2017
In reply to andy:

I don't get that one of Uber's transgressions is apparently that it reported attacks by drivers to TFL rather than direct to the police. Therefore TFL refuses it a licence. Isn't TFL to blame either for not passing on the information directly to the police or insisting that the correct protocol be observed at the time?
 Mike Highbury 25 Sep 2017
In reply to Postmanpat:
> I don't get that one of Uber's transgressions is apparently that it reported attacks by drivers to TFL rather than direct to the police.

I thick, obviously, but why did the victims not report these terribly serious offences to the police themselves?

 Bob Hughes 25 Sep 2017
In reply to neilh:

> There is an element of hypocrisy here - black cabs were in effect operating a monopoly with high prices. Uber usurped that position.so which monopoly do you want - über or black cabs?

Just to be clear on my stance, i don't think Uber should be permanently banned from London. I also don't think there is any harm in TfL firing a warning shot for them to keep in line. I have no doubt that one way or another Uber will be up and running again in London in the foreseeable future.

Mainly my argument is: those who point to the number of Londoners who love Uber should bear in mind that the product is sold at an artificially low price. I could raise 62bn dollars and use it to give away free pizzas; the day I get prohibited from doing that there will be howls of protest from people who like free pizza.

To answer your point more directly, at least in the case of black cabs they are recognised as a monopoly and therefore their fees are regulated.
 neilh 25 Sep 2017
In reply to Bob Hughes:

A regulated monoply with high fees......sounds great for the consumer!

When the howls of protest start after Uber burns through its money, there will be alternatives. There is another USA based one called I think Ify which is waiting for a licence from TFL.
 summo 25 Sep 2017
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Seems to me that the unions are just holding people in London and the south east to ransom. The underground train drivers strike left right and centre.. get a little extra bonus to go back to work.. the tube drivers then strike because in a city that runs near 24/7 people want and need to travel, so there should be night trains. No night trains then you need a taxi.. oh look the black cabs and their no longer that special since Sat nav knowledge want the out of hours transport monopoly. They are fleecing people.

I think they need to wake up, as most taxi drivers and tube drivers will obsolete in less than half a century.
 Bob Hughes 25 Sep 2017
In reply to neilh:

> A regulated monoply with high fees......sounds great for the consumer!

> When the howls of protest start after Uber burns through its money, there will be alternatives. There is another USA based one called I think Ify which is waiting for a licence from TFL.

Lyft - apparently they too 100% of the growth in San Francisco last year and Uber shrank in its home city. The only reason Lyft is still in business is that Travis Kalanick was such a car crash of a boss. I have high hopes for Dara K who did a great job at Expedia and seems to be addressing theis latest hiccup in the right way.
 neilh 25 Sep 2017
In reply to Bob Hughes:

I agree about their new boss. Lyft is also more expensive than Uber so I am told.
 AJM 25 Sep 2017
In reply to Mike Highbury:

> I thick, obviously, but why did the victims not report these terribly serious offences to the police themselves?

Based on this (I make no guarantees on content, and am merely highlighting it, although this section is largely drawn from the Mets letter which presumably one could verify) they had every belief based on their interactions with them that Uber would report it. Apparently they've been very involved since the police contacted them.

https://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/understanding-uber-not-app/

Pat - again based on the linked article, the argument that it's sufficient to include it in a run of the mill regulatory filing rather than doing something more pressing/urgent, as the incident might require seems to be a problem TfL have with it. Letting the guy continue working and including it in some mundane paperwork, rather than reporting it to the police..... it's an approach, I suppose.
 Bob Hughes 25 Sep 2017
In reply to AJM:

thanks for the link - that was a very good article.
 nufkin 25 Sep 2017
In reply to Hooo:

Granted, they're not all brilliant - though by 'better' I wasn't really meaning to imply 'nicer'. I just tend to find they seem to be a bit more aware of their dimensions and capabilities. But maybe I'm just more aware that they'll likely move into the bus lane or take a sudden turn and so subconsciously afford them more slack.


It would be nicer if they had cleaner engines, however (though at least you know when one's coming up behind)

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...