"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 10:36:06 on Sun, 4 Oct 2015,
tim..... remarked:

And one issue here is the problem of disability access. If all "ply for
hire" cabs have to conform with the disability act and provide equal
access, then all "contract hire" cabs should as well. This is one area
where Uber is deficient that he should be MADE to comply with.

It's not necessarily important for every private hire vehicle to offer
disability access, because the are pre-booked. As long as each firm has
some minimum number of such vehicles available if requested, that should
be sufficient.

That I understand

but unless that "minimum number" is somewhat larger than you might first
calculate, you either end up with the accessible cabs waiting around all day
for the one disabled passenger, or no accessible cabs free at the time that
passenger turns up.

And of course, it leaves the possibility of (illegal) increase in price for
the disabled cab. If all cabs are accessible them the disabled pax doesn't
need to announce their requirement, but if they are required to announce it
how do you ensue that the request hasn't magically entered the "surge
pricing" zone?

tim

On 05/10/2015 16:07, Recliner wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 05/10/2015 14:10, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 10/5/2015 1:17 PM, JNugent wrote:
On 05/10/2015 09:18, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 10/4/2015 2:10 PM, JNugent wrote:
On 03/10/2015 09:07, Someone Somewhere wrote:
Seriously?

Because a taxi is - in its very essence - a *private* space which
can be
hired by the passenger to the exclusion of others. It is not a bus.
If a
bus is what is wanted, buses are available.


What? There's a bus that takes me from Heathrow to outside my
house in
Shadwell?

Provided you're willing to change a few times, yes.


More times than the TfL planner can cope with to get outside my house.

That's a problem you have with buses. Not everyone has it.

Given the shortest possible bus route from Heathrow is over 3 hours, and
that includes a 25 minute walk at the end of it (which would be fun with
luggage) and 4 separate buses makes it utterly impractical when most
other forms of transport are roughly an hour. It's also hardly like I
live somewhere obscure or hard to reach. It seems impossible to get the
journey planner to actually generate a journey that ends at my local bus
stop.

Clearly, with a service bus time of about three hours to LHR, you are
somewhere in the broadly London area. But why leave it at just arguing
about journey times to Heathrow? Why don't you check out the bus journey
times to Ringway or Leeds-Bradford, or maybe to Prestwick?

The fact that your particular journey is awkward or time-consuming is a
matter for you, not for others.

But you would seek to block someone who offers to solve the problem
efficiently.


The fact that you do is not a good reason for disrupting the
legitimate livelihood of others.

When you say "the legitimate livelihood" you mean the level of
protectionism built in by law to prevent people making a choice of
whether to share a vehicle or hire one entirely to themselves where
sharing is better for the passengers pocket, the environment and other
road users?

How many times do I have to tell you this before it sinks in?

You DO have the right to share a taxi, or a pirate car, if that's what
you want to do.

Sure, but YOU would block the use of technology to facilitate this.

Not at all. I can see that there might be a market for a phone app that
"marries up" people in a particular small area who want to go the same
way in a shared taxi. It's exactly the sort pf thing that apps could do
easily.

And what's wrong with that, other than that it might be risky?

Nothing - as long as the passengers are doing the choosing.

What I'm against is the driver or operator doing the selecting.

I have to say that I have in fact shared a taxi, with strangers, from at
least 3 major London airports.

So it works. And that's under the law as it is today (where apparently,
a "level of protectionism built in by law to prevent people making a
choice of whether to share a vehicle or hire one entirely to themselves
where sharing is better for the passengers pocket, the environment and
other road users").

So what's the complaint?

That it has to be done by the customer, when a supplier could do it more
efficiently.

Maybe.

Or more dangerously.

On 05/10/2015 16:02, y wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 15:54:47 +0100
JNugent wrote:
On 05/10/2015 14:26, David Cantrell wrote:
On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 10:34:57PM +0100, JNugent wrote:
On 04/10/2015 20:32, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-10-04 16:58:23 +0000, JNugent said:
There is no such thing as a mini cab.
"Minicab" is a common London term for a private-hire car (that isn't a
premium one).
There is no such thing as a mini cab.

http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/234043
https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/taxis-and-minicabs/

Forgive me if I take their word for it over yours.

The word "cab" has a legal definition.

Is english your 2nd language? When 2 words are combined they generally no
longer mean the same as each original word. For example: a riverbus isn't a
red double decker that happens to float.

The word "cab" still has a legal definition, even if you wish it didn't.

On 05/10/2015 17:23, Mark Bestley wrote:
JNugent wrote:

On 05/10/2015 14:26, David Cantrell wrote:
On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 10:34:57PM +0100, JNugent wrote:
On 04/10/2015 20:32, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-10-04 16:58:23 +0000, JNugent said:
There is no such thing as a mini cab.
"Minicab" is a common London term for a private-hire car (that isn't a
premium one).
There is no such thing as a mini cab.

http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/234043
https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/taxis-and-minicabs/

Forgive me if I take their word for it over yours.

The word "cab" has a legal definition.

Which law?

In London?

On 05/10/2015 17:26, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 15:11:53 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 15:45:22 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
the pavement outside the venue in the pouring rain, or perhaps five
minutes earlier when they are inside in the warm and can more
comfortably use their phone to order a car to arrive in five minute's
time?

Since thats exactly how people used to order minicabs I'm wondering what
exactly is the killer selling point of Uber. Other than it means Aspergers
types don't actually have to talk to a person and get all stressed.

You don't have to know the names and phone numbers of local mini cab firms,

Google.

Obviously you like making things more difficult than they need to be.


nor explain the address to someone who may not have a shared language.

Right, because Uber drivers are always natives.

Of course not, but you seem not to know how Uber works.


Either or both parties may be in a noisy environment.

What's more, Uber probably gets you a car more quickly, you don't need to
pay cash (a particular advantage when abroad, if you don't have local
currency), and it's typically cheaper.

Of course its cheaper - unvetted drivers whose only qualification is owning
a car and smartphone.

Wrong again.

That is precisely the point; no-one has been (so far) able to say with
certainty that Uber drivers *are* vetted and licensed.

The fact that Uber themselves claim to do the vetting" is alarming.

Vetting is a job for the PCO, with access to CRB, DVLC and other records.

"Arthur Figgis" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 03/10/2015 13:08, tim..... wrote:

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 01/10/2015 18:53, tim..... wrote:


tim

There is nothing in the London Cab Acts or the Town Police Clauses Act
which prevents passengers from teaming up for a joint-hiring. AAMOF,
they do it all the time.

That's no bloody use to a solo traveller arriving at an airport (off a
plane)

I've done it in Sofia (which meant I only got a /bit/ ripped off compared
to getting in a taxi without someone with local knowledge...) and
somewhere else I've forgotten.

There's a frequent bus at Sofia.

Though I waited god know's how long for the first one when I arrived on the
stupid o'clock in the morning Wizz flight.

Though I was bound for Plovdiv, so all I did was replace a wait at the
station by a wait at the airport

tim

On 05/10/2015 17:09, wrote:
In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:

On 04/10/2015 23:21, wrote:
In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:

On 04/10/2015 16:00, Roland Perry wrote:
In
-se
ptember.org, at 14:41:13 on Sun, 4 Oct 2015, Recliner
remarked:

Why makes Uber cabs "pirate cars"?

Unlicensed plying-for-hire, of course.

But they don't. They can only come when a registered customer books
one. So they're not pirate cars.

One of the main complaints in London is that they lurk around places
where people might want a cab, and then presumably get the customer to
book them on the spot. That's the reason for the 5-minute timeout
proposed in the consultation.

Well, that's an example of the unlicensed plying for hire.

How come? If the booking is recorded by the hire operator it isn't
illegal plying for hire.

"...get the customer to book them on the spot".

That's touting. Unlicensed plying for hire. Even a licensed driver
isn't allowed to tout.

Your interpretation depends on the order things happen. In my scenario the
hirer activates the Uber app, only possibly after seeing the car.

That is still plying for hire.

JNugent wrote:

On 05/10/2015 17:23, Mark Bestley wrote:
JNugent wrote:

On 05/10/2015 14:26, David Cantrell wrote:
On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 10:34:57PM +0100, JNugent wrote:
On 04/10/2015 20:32, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-10-04 16:58:23 +0000, JNugent said:
There is no such thing as a mini cab.
"Minicab" is a common London term for a private-hire car (that isn't a
premium one).
There is no such thing as a mini cab.

http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/234043
https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/taxis-and-minicabs/

Forgive me if I take their word for it over yours.

The word "cab" has a legal definition.

Which law?

In London?

I thought that was Hackney carriages


--
Mark

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 03/10/2015 02:13, Recliner wrote:




Why makes Uber cabs "pirate cars"?

Unlicensed plying-for-hire, of course.

Not yet proven, and simply asserting it repeatedly does not make it so.

tim

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 05/10/2015 09:18, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 10/4/2015 2:10 PM, JNugent wrote:
On 03/10/2015 09:07, Someone Somewhere wrote:
Seriously?

Because a taxi is - in its very essence - a *private* space which
can be
hired by the passenger to the exclusion of others. It is not a bus.
If a
bus is what is wanted, buses are available.


What? There's a bus that takes me from Heathrow to outside my house in
Shadwell?

Provided you're willing to change a few times, yes.


More times than the TfL planner can cope with to get outside my house.

That's a problem you have with buses. Not everyone has it.

The fact that you do is not a good reason for disrupting the legitimate
livelihood of others.

How is my saying "if you wont provide a legitimate way of my sharing a cab
(on an ad hoch basis with someone that I don't know), I wont be using a cab
at all" an attack on a legitimate business

I explaining to them how they can get business that they have otherwise lost

tim