On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 10:49:27PM +0100, JNugent wrote:
On 07/10/2015 22:21, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2015\10\07 17:23, JNugent wrote:
But the PCO (which at one time was a branch of the Met Police)
And is now called TfL Taxis & Private Hire. The PCO name is dead.
It is still used daily.

So's "minicab", but you insist that there's no such thing.

Hypocrite.

--
David Cantrell | Enforcer, South London Linguistic Massive

You can't spell "slaughter" without "laughter"

On 12/10/2015 13:07, David Cantrell wrote:

On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 10:49:27PM +0100, JNugent wrote:
On 07/10/2015 22:21, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2015\10\07 17:23, JNugent wrote:

But the PCO (which at one time was a branch of the Met Police)
And is now called TfL Taxis & Private Hire. The PCO name is dead.

It is still used daily.

So's "minicab", but you insist that there's no such thing.

The term PCO has never been held in court to be illegal when advertising
the services of an unlicensed vehicle.

"Minicab" has.

Yersterdat, when using google maps, I had one of those recommendations that pop up, to use the Uber app. I had a look but the reviews were atrocious. The fares seemed to be sky-high (this was not in Britain).

Here is one:
"Most ridiculously charged set up.. the driver told me amount is 177 and i was charged 277 by uber on my online payment... the biggest cheat they are ....the driver said that there is no tax and again they charged double tax.. i will never use uber and no one should use they are the cheats..."

If Uber really are as bad as that, then why:

1) do so many people use them that the Hackney Cab trade
is suffering badly?

2) do none of the contributors to this thread relate bad
experiences?

On 14/10/2015 13:52, Offramp wrote:
Yersterdat, when using google maps, I had one of those recommendations
that pop up, to use the Uber app. I had a look but the reviews were
atrocious. The fares seemed to be sky-high (this was not in Britain).

Here is one:
"Most ridiculously charged set up.. the driver told me amount is 177
and i was charged 277 by uber on my online payment... the biggest
cheat they are ...the driver said that there is no tax and again
they charged double tax.. i will never use uber and no one should
use they are the cheats..."

I've taken Uber in 3 different cities around the world (UK, Europe and
the US) and one of the noticeable things is that whilst in the vehicle
money is never discussed - you get an estimate before the journey starts
and when you arrive you just get out and walk away (I do tend to say
thanks and goodbye!).

I'm guessing the reviews were for India given the amounts and the language?

On 2015\10\11 13:58, JNugent wrote:
On 11/10/2015 12:28, wrote:
In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:


Unlicensed plying for hire (by drivers of vehicles not licensed to
ply for hire) is pretty conclusive evidence of not being a fit and
proper person within the meaning(s) of the 1976 Act. It demonstrates
contempt for the law.

But is a first offence worthy of a life sentence? Their licences were
generally suspended for a period but that penalty is already many
times more
costly to them than that imposed by the court.

If you follow the "fit and proper person" reasoning, one conviction is
already one too many. If you're not f&p, you're not f&p, after all. I'd
extend that to DUI for any taxi-driver or pirate car driver.

Unlicensed plying for hire is pretty central to the "minicab" economy
and does severe damage to the business of taxi-drivers. If this wages
snatch (for that is what it is - workers being deprived of - part of -
their earnings) for just one month were concentrated just in one hit, it
would make the front pages of every newspaper.

It ought not to be tolerated at all, as doing so sends out completely
the wrong signals to pirate car drivers and operators.

OK, I can see an argument for clemency; maybe not a whole-life penalty,
but at least a year (as DUI would incur). And the same for any operator
who suffers or permits the use of his facilities - including 2-way
radios - in an effort to disguise the offence.

So then the minicab boss phones up his brother who's the boss of the
curry house. "My daughter's husband has been stitched up by the black
cab kuffar, he can't drive my taxis for the next year." "Send him over
to me, my granddaughter's husband is no good as a waiter so I'll send
him to you". And next Friday the man who stood outside the pub shouting
"Taxi Taxi" is a waiter, and the man who was a waiter is shouting "Taxi
Taxi", and no-one loses a penny of income. And then a year and a half
later when the new taxi tout gets caught, they switch back.

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 05:52:53AM -0700, Offramp wrote:
Yersterdat, when using google maps, I had one of those recommendations that=
pop up, to use the Uber app. I had a look but the reviews were atrocious. =
The fares seemed to be sky-high (this was not in Britain).

Here is one:
"Most ridiculously charged set up.. the driver told me amount is 177 and i =
was charged 277 by uber on my online payment... the biggest cheat they are =
...the driver said that there is no tax and again they charged double tax..=
i will never use uber and no one should use they are the cheats..."

The *driver* told him it was 177 currency units? That's not how Uber
works. You get an estimate (and it's made very clear that it's an
estimate, not a quote) in the app, not from the driver.

And how do you know that that's a sky-high fare? It doesn't say what the
journey was.

No idea what he's talking about with this "tax" thing. Given the utter
illiteracy of the review, and the nonsense about tax, and the nonsense
about getting a quote from the driver, I'm inclined to say that this is
a fake review from a black cab driver.

--
David Cantrell | Hero of the Information Age

fdisk format reinstall, doo-dah, doo-dah;
fdisk format reinstall, it's the Windows way

On 15/10/2015 13:44, David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 05:52:53AM -0700, Offramp wrote:
Yersterdat, when using google maps, I had one of those recommendations that=
pop up, to use the Uber app. I had a look but the reviews were atrocious. =
The fares seemed to be sky-high (this was not in Britain).

Here is one:
"Most ridiculously charged set up.. the driver told me amount is 177 and i =
was charged 277 by uber on my online payment... the biggest cheat they are =
...the driver said that there is no tax and again they charged double tax..=
i will never use uber and no one should use they are the cheats..."

The *driver* told him it was 177 currency units? That's not how Uber
works. You get an estimate (and it's made very clear that it's an
estimate, not a quote) in the app, not from the driver.

And how do you know that that's a sky-high fare? It doesn't say what the
journey was.

No idea what he's talking about with this "tax" thing. Given the utter
illiteracy of the review, and the nonsense about tax, and the nonsense
about getting a quote from the driver, I'm inclined to say that this is
a fake review from a black cab driver.

You think the denominated currency was sterling, do you?

On 15/10/2015 08:41, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2015\10\11 13:58, JNugent wrote:
On 11/10/2015 12:28, wrote:
In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:


Unlicensed plying for hire (by drivers of vehicles not licensed to
ply for hire) is pretty conclusive evidence of not being a fit and
proper person within the meaning(s) of the 1976 Act. It demonstrates
contempt for the law.

But is a first offence worthy of a life sentence? Their licences were
generally suspended for a period but that penalty is already many
times more
costly to them than that imposed by the court.

If you follow the "fit and proper person" reasoning, one conviction is
already one too many. If you're not f&p, you're not f&p, after all. I'd
extend that to DUI for any taxi-driver or pirate car driver.

Unlicensed plying for hire is pretty central to the "minicab" economy
and does severe damage to the business of taxi-drivers. If this wages
snatch (for that is what it is - workers being deprived of - part of -
their earnings) for just one month were concentrated just in one hit, it
would make the front pages of every newspaper.

It ought not to be tolerated at all, as doing so sends out completely
the wrong signals to pirate car drivers and operators.

OK, I can see an argument for clemency; maybe not a whole-life penalty,
but at least a year (as DUI would incur). And the same for any operator
who suffers or permits the use of his facilities - including 2-way
radios - in an effort to disguise the offence.

So then the minicab boss phones up his brother who's the boss of the
curry house. "My daughter's husband has been stitched up by the black
cab kuffar, he can't drive my taxis for the next year." "Send him over
to me, my granddaughter's husband is no good as a waiter so I'll send
him to you". And next Friday the man who stood outside the pub shouting
"Taxi Taxi" is a waiter, and the man who was a waiter is shouting "Taxi
Taxi", and no-one loses a penny of income. And then a year and a half
later when the new taxi tout gets caught, they switch back.

At least the public are not being placed in the hands of someone who has
proven not to be a fit and proper person to be entrusted with their safety.

On 14/10/2015 21:52, Recliner wrote:
Robin9 wrote:

Offramp;151065 Wrote:
Yersterdat, when using google maps, I had one of those recommendations
that pop up, to use the Uber app. I had a look but the reviews were
atrocious. The fares seemed to be sky-high (this was not in Britain).

Here is one:
"Most ridiculously charged set up.. the driver told me amount is 177 and
i was charged 277 by uber on my online payment... the biggest cheat they
are ....the driver said that there is no tax and again they charged
double tax.. i will never use uber and no one should use they are the
cheats..."

If Uber really are as bad as that, then why:

1) do so many people use them that the Hackney Cab trade
is suffering badly?

2) do none of the contributors to this thread relate bad
experiences?

Good questions. I wonder who posted those reviews...

Usenet contributors?

Not likely, is it?