|
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On 2015-10-04 17:54:35 +0000, Roland Perry said:
Yes, and thousands of them are "moved on". Better for them not to be causing the anti-social menace in the first place. How do you propose to stop them? Even with the 5 minute "delay" they will still no doubt wait in places where they are near to a likely job. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On 2015-10-04 16:14:58 +0000, Eric said:
Of course, but you did seem to present Google Maps as a better answer. It's an acceptable answer, I'd say. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
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). Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On 2015-10-04 17:02:41 +0000, JNugent said:
Vagueness could lead to the passenger being (unnecessarily) in harm's way. Nothing vague about you booking two completely distinct services, one being a shared car and one being a private car. No different to the way you can, with most private hire operators, choose the size and "quality" of the car used. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On 2015-10-04 17:04:17 +0000, JNugent said:
A public transport operator is free to apply for the necessary permissions to make that work. Actually they aren't; there is (and I did some research on this in conjunction with a friend in the transport industry) seemingly no legal framework under which such a thing can operate. It fails on bus legislation (no fixed route/restricted area of service), and on taxi legislation (shared use at separate fares). It's just that the passenger decides on the sharing, not the driver or operator. The passenger would still decide on it, they just would get the option to say "find me some people to share with to keep my journey cost down" to the operator, rather than them having to arrange the share themselves. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On 2015-10-04 17:05:06 +0000, JNugent said:
Is that a reason to introduce the same dangers to travelling in a taxi? If the passenger wishes to take that (low) risk to reduce their fare, why not? Provided it is at the passenger's option (and only their option) whether it occurs or not. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
|
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
|
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
|
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
In message , at 19:28:16 on Sun, 4 Oct
2015, Bryan Morris remarked: The last place I needed to find on Google Maps was a charity-run care home, and that's completely missing too (it was built in 2005). I once needed to check on Google Maps how to get from my place (London/Essex borders) to London Bridge Much to my surprise (I kid you not) the route was Drive to Dover Swim the English Channel to France Swim the Atlantic to New York Drive from New York to Lake Havasu City Arizona London Bridge (the old one rebuilt there) I assume some programmer at Google had a sense of humour. There was a time when one of the mapping systems (I don't remember if it was a web-based one or CD-based) sent people from south England to Newcastle via France, and various other countries, ending up with a ferry back from Scandinavia (Bergen probably). Early versions one rail planner would send you to a small town in Belgium if you typed in "Waterloo". -- Roland Perry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
In message
-sept ember.org, at 20:27:38 on Sun, 4 Oct 2015, Recliner remarked: I don't think they can. You can't pick a particular vehicle to book through Uber, can you? I thought you could (or the review thing would be a bit pointless). https://help.uber.com/h/65f52320-43a...4-e9b7c7c36dae If you are sat in the cab, the closest driver isn't very far away. -- Roland Perry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
In message , at 20:31:02 on Sun, 4 Oct
2015, Neil Williams remarked: Yes, and thousands of them are "moved on". Better for them not to be causing the anti-social menace in the first place. How do you propose to stop them? Even with the 5 minute "delay" they will still no doubt wait in places where they are near to a likely job. It'll dramatically reduce the touting and plying for hire. -- Roland Perry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On 04/10/2015 15:41, Recliner wrote:
JNugent wrote: On 03/10/2015 02:13, Recliner wrote: JNugent wrote: On 01/10/2015 18:46, tim..... wrote: "JNugent" wrote in message ... On 30/09/2015 17:49, tim..... wrote: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tph...hire-proposals so what does the team think? The law is clear. "Services" such as Ãœber cannot operate lawfully unless: (a) each vehicle is tested and licensed before commencing operations, (b) each driver applies for a licence, is investigated and not found ineligible, before commencing operations, and Uber will claim that they do do (a) and (b) (I have no idea if they are right or not) *If* they do, there's no problem. At least, not with those aspects. (c) the operator (presumably Ãœber) establishes a base within Greater London and submits to the appropriate licensing regime, thereafter complying with the requirements for record-keeping, etc. and whilst this does seem unnecessarily nanny state, complying with it isn't impossible for them The record keeping requirement is there in order to help settle allegations of unlicensed plying for hire, among other things such as being able to trace a particular driver who did a particular booked job. It's a more than reasonable requirement. The location requirement is designed to keep the operator within the jurisdiction of the licensing authority and to make them accountable to that licensing authority and the courts within its boundaries. Uber appears to have much better record keeping for every journey than back cabs. Maybe it's the latter who should have the rules tightened up? There is not, and never has been, any requirement for a licensed taxi-driver to keep a record of the names, addresses, starting point, destination points of passengers, or of the fare charged. I wasn't suggesting that they were not complying with the existing rules, just that the rules for black cabs seem more lax than for Uber. The record-keeping rules for pirate car operators in general are an attempt to limit their capacity for making false statements in an effort to "backdate" unlicensed plying for hire to make it look legal. It isn't aimed at any one firm. When sorting the sheep from the goats, it's as well to bear in mind that they are almost all goats. Next... [ ... ] 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. That's funny. |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
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). They are not cabs. There is no such thing as a mini cab. |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On 04/10/2015 20:35, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-10-04 17:04:17 +0000, JNugent said: A public transport operator is free to apply for the necessary permissions to make that work. Actually they aren't; there is (and I did some research on this in conjunction with a friend in the transport industry) seemingly no legal framework under which such a thing can operate. It fails on bus legislation (no fixed route/restricted area of service), and on taxi legislation (shared use at separate fares). It's just that the passenger decides on the sharing, not the driver or operator. The passenger would still decide on it, they just would get the option to say "find me some people to share with to keep my journey cost down" to the operator, rather than them having to arrange the share themselves. Not legal, and vanishingly unlikely to become legal any time soon. See whether you can work out why (clue: the PCO's FIRST priority is always passenger safety). |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On 04/10/2015 20:35, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-10-04 17:05:06 +0000, JNugent said: Is that a reason to introduce the same dangers to travelling in a taxi? If the passenger wishes to take that (low) risk to reduce their fare, why not? Provided it is at the passenger's option (and only their option) whether it occurs or not. The passenger already has that option. The driver doesn't, and won't. |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
"Roland Perry" wrote in message
... Or possibly do an off books "deal" with the customer. Unlikely. One of the USPs of Uber is that you don't hand over any money to amy driver by any method. -- DAS |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On Sun, 04 Oct 2015 21:43:29 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
There was a time when one of the mapping systems (I don't remember if it was a web-based one or CD-based) sent people from south England to Newcastle via France, and various other countries, ending up with a ferry back from Scandinavia (Bergen probably). One of the Autoroute versions did this for some combinations of start and end. Also did things like routing via the IoW for journeys between Portsmouth and Bournemouth. -- Denis McMahon, |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
|
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
|
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
|
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
"Roland Perry" wrote in message
... In message , at 12:48:53 on Sat, 3 Oct 2015, D A Stocks remarked: Satnavs aren't always very good at trips to *places* rather than *addresses*. I remember many years ago getting into a cab in central London with a visitor from the USA and telling the driver the name of a small restaurant in Kensington. Where he whisked us with no additional prompting. The visitor was amazed! With Uber you confirm the pickup and drop off points on a map, and the search function is probably linked to Google so it will already know most places. That's no help if all I know is the name of a place, and can't locate it on a map. If in a strange City it can be very difficult to correlate random destinations with "points on a map". A bit of digging on the web suggests Uber may tend to use Apple rather than Google for their mapping. As a user of licensed taxis and Uber in a number of places it's fairly clear to me that a lot of the arguments against Uber in London on this thread are a bit like candle and oil lamp makers complaining about electric light. I think that in London (and maybe the UK in general) the regulations for the industry as a whole need to be brought up to date, rather than trying to put in specific rules in an attempt to restrict a newcomer to the market, especially one that is using a new business model with new technology. I have just done a little bit of research on Uber in Dublin, where I am working during the week at the moment and travel everywhere by taxi. It would appear Uber may be finding it harder to get established in the market there simply becasue their standard service doesn't offer much, if anything, that isn't already available from any other licensed taxi. AIUI the rules for the whole industry were re-written a few years ago and the result is that Uber is just another way to order and pay for a licensed taxi. -- DAS |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On 04/10/2015 23:21, wrote:
In article , (JNugent) wrote: On 04/10/2015 16:00, Roland Perry wrote: In message -september .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. |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
|
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
In message , at 00:00:33 on Mon, 5 Oct
2015, D A Stocks remarked: With Uber you confirm the pickup and drop off points on a map, and the search function is probably linked to Google so it will already know most places. That's no help if all I know is the name of a place, and can't locate it on a map. If in a strange City it can be very difficult to correlate random destinations with "points on a map". A bit of digging on the web suggests Uber may tend to use Apple rather than Google for their mapping. Looking at my iPhone, where I live the maps are more up to date than Google's, but they have significantly fewer 'landmarks' plotted. It doesn't have the 'shared space' premises near the Oval that a charity I work with moved to a year ago (either under the name of the building nor the charity). That's somewhere I did have to look up on a map when they moved there from WC2. Of course, it might be in "The Knowledge" either. -- Roland Perry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
In message
-septe mber.org, at 21:18:00 on Sun, 4 Oct 2015, Recliner remarked: I don't think they can. You can't pick a particular vehicle to book through Uber, can you? I thought you could (or the review thing would be a bit pointless). https://help.uber.com/h/65f52320-43a...4-e9b7c7c36dae If you are sat in the cab, the closest driver isn't very far away. I doubt that the location is logged quite that accurately. And there would be nothing to stop Uber's algorithms from randomly choosing from any of the drivers within, say, 200m if there's a cluster of them. Speculation. And if sing GPS it's quite likely they have your location (and that of the cab) within about 20m. -- Roland Perry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
In message
-septe mber.org, at 21:18:00 on Sun, 4 Oct 2015, Recliner remarked: They can't get customers to book them on the spot: the booking has to be made through Uber. They can get the customer to book them through Uber, on the spot. I don't think they can. You can't pick a particular vehicle to book through Uber, can you? And Uber cars aren't marked. That doesn't matter if you are already sat in it, talking to the driver. How would you identify it as an Uber car? Because the driver will have accosted you as you walked along the pavement. Surely that's more likely to be how an unlicensed car would behave, rather than an Uber driver? The latter would be more likely to be automatically spotted if he behaves in that way, and has more to lose. Whichever is more likely, Uber drivers do it too. As a would-be passenger, why wouldn't you simply use the app to book a car, knowing that there are several in the vicinity? You'd do it before even coming out on to the street. Many people don't think that far ahead. Huh? That's exactly how Uber customers use it. The touts are picking up people who haven't. Do we actually know if there actually is some illegality going on? https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-an...ompliance-and- enforcement No comments? Clifford Chance reports some infractions in #3 of this piece (from a lobbying body, but they won't have made up the quotes): http://uk.businessinsider.com/ubers-...ifford-chance- fighting-to-ban-it-here-are-the-5-big-arguments-2015-10 Remind me again of who is paying Clifford Chance? Doesn't matter, they are top-10 firm who can't be found out making up quotes. So the things they say must be true. -- Roland Perry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
In message , at 22:45:13 on Sun, 4 Oct
2015, D A Stocks remarked: Or possibly do an off books "deal" with the customer. Unlikely. One of the USPs of Uber is that you don't hand over any money to amy driver by any method. They could be taking off their Uber-hat for that trip. -- Roland Perry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
|
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
In message
-septe mber.org, at 07:45:50 on Mon, 5 Oct 2015, Recliner remarked: They can't get customers to book them on the spot: the booking has to be made through Uber. They can get the customer to book them through Uber, on the spot. I don't think they can. You can't pick a particular vehicle to book through Uber, can you? And Uber cars aren't marked. That doesn't matter if you are already sat in it, talking to the driver. How would you identify it as an Uber car? Because the driver will have accosted you as you walked along the pavement. Surely that's more likely to be how an unlicensed car would behave, rather than an Uber driver? The latter would be more likely to be automatically spotted if he behaves in that way, and has more to lose. Whichever is more likely, Uber drivers do it too. How do you know? Because I've read the literature. I've even posted two cites. https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-an...ompliance-and- enforcement No comments? Still no comments? Clifford Chance reports some infractions in #3 of this piece (from a lobbying body, but they won't have made up the quotes): http://uk.businessinsider.com/ubers-...ifford-chance- fighting-to-ban-it-here-are-the-5-big-arguments-2015-10 Remind me again of who is paying Clifford Chance? Doesn't matter, they are top-10 firm who can't be found out making up quotes. So the things they say must be true. I wonder if the people they're quoting actually *know* that the offending drivers work for Uber? Or do they just blame Uber as it's the best known new-era mini cab firm? Many of the claims are from other minicab firms, who are in a good position to identify which competitors they see misbehaving. And those reports from the police will be based on questioning the drivers as to who they are working with. -- Roland Perry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
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. |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On 10/4/2015 5:07 PM, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-10-04 14:10:10 +0000, Roland Perry said: Yes, and the results in strange overseas cities can often be very patchy. True, though London, the city in question, has extremely good coverage, and I have never had issues finding anywhere I wanted to go on it. Indeed, it is my primary tool for finding places in London whatever mode of transport I happen to be using. Oddly enough have a look for Barbican Underground station on google maps at the moment - it seems to have migrated 150 yds north... |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
In message , at 09:25:02 on Mon, 5 Oct
2015, Someone Somewhere remarked: Yes, and the results in strange overseas cities can often be very patchy. True, though London, the city in question, has extremely good coverage, and I have never had issues finding anywhere I wanted to go on it. Indeed, it is my primary tool for finding places in London whatever mode of transport I happen to be using. Oddly enough have a look for Barbican Underground station on google maps at the moment - it seems to have migrated 150 yds north... Not quite. Barbican Station is shown in pretty much the right place, in between Virgin Active Barbican and Tesco Express. There's a blob marked "Barbican" 150m north that's apparently for the "Barbican Centre." What's a bit strange, though is that a search for "Barbican Station" brings up the Barbican Centre location on a layer that doesn't have the Station marked at all, either with a small square or with a Roundel. To get the small-square showing the Underground station you have to click the words "Underground Station" in the results that show the Barbican Centre. (At which point the layer displayed doesn't have any Roundels on it [eg at Moorgate]). And their facility to "Report a Data Problem" doesn't work because there's no text to click on. I wonder where the "Report a problem with the 'Report a Data Problem' function" is?? -- Roland Perry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
In message
-sept ember.org, at 08:22:04 on Mon, 5 Oct 2015, Recliner remarked: https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-an...ompliance-and- enforcement No comments? Still no comments? What's there to comment on? It shows that some private hire drivers don't follow the rules. I don't think anyone was disputing that. You appear to be claiming that no Uber drivers fall into that category. -- Roland Perry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On 2015-10-04, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-10-04 16:14:58 +0000, Eric said: Of course, but you did seem to present Google Maps as a better answer. It's an acceptable answer, I'd say. FSVO... But it fails and/or misleads, aside from being unavailable at some times to some people. Eric -- ms fnd in a lbry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
In message , at 09:50:35 on Mon, 5 Oct
2015, Roland Perry remarked: Oddly enough have a look for Barbican Underground station on google maps at the moment - it seems to have migrated 150 yds north... Not quite. Barbican Station is shown in pretty much the right place, in between Virgin Active Barbican and Tesco Express. There's a blob marked "Barbican" 150m north that's apparently for the "Barbican Centre." Meanwhile, on iPhone Maps, Barbican Station is shown halfway down the platform, 50m west of its actual entrance, with no street access at all. Barbican Centre is shown 200m east of the station. And I now notice Google Maps has the real Barbican Centre as well. It appears that the fake Barbican Centre off Fann St is so annotated because someone has added a photo to Panoramio with the wrong caption. What's a bit strange, though is that a search for "Barbican Station" brings up the Barbican Centre location on a layer that doesn't have the Station marked at all, either with a small square or with a Roundel. To get the small-square showing the Underground station you have to click the words "Underground Station" in the results that show the Barbican Centre. (At which point the layer displayed doesn't have any Roundels on it [eg at Moorgate]). Poking around a bit more, if you search Google Maps for "Barbican London Underground Station, it pinpoints the correct location (of the entrance). But it puts the Roundel 150m north where the fake Barbican Centre is! -- Roland Perry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
In message
-septe mber.org, at 09:13:59 on Mon, 5 Oct 2015, Recliner remarked: https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-an...ompliance-and- enforcement No comments? Still no comments? What's there to comment on? It shows that some private hire drivers don't follow the rules. I don't think anyone was disputing that. You appear to be claiming that no Uber drivers fall into that category. I don't know whether they do or not. I didn't think any firms were mentioned in that article? Uber was mentioned in the other article. Enforcement officers identify Uber cars by the simple expedient of using the Uber app! One of the tricks the touts do is to park illegally in taxi ranks (hence the large numbers "moved on" before they have a chance to get a fare and be prosecuted for plying for hire), and thus force black cabs to double-park in the street, from where the black cabs are also moved on. The upshot is that the touts get first dibs on people emerging from venues near the ranks. -- Roland Perry |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
On Monday, 5 October 2015 11:40:03 UTC+2, Eric wrote:
On 2015-10-04, Neil Williams wrote: On 2015-10-04 16:14:58 +0000, Eric said: Of course, but you did seem to present Google Maps as a better answer. It's an acceptable answer, I'd say. FSVO... But it fails and/or misleads, aside from being unavailable at some times to some people. Right, but the context here is arranging a journey by Uber. Under what circumstances is it possible to order a car from Uber but be unable to check the route via Apple or Google maps? Robin |
TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
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. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 01:30 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk