TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

In message , at
05:01:26 on Mon, 5 Oct 2015, remarked:
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?

When the destination isn't mapped, or is mapped incorrectly.

There's nothing wrong, on the face of it, with a minicab company
externalising much of its 'local knowledge' to the passengers, as long
as we understand it won't work for everyone. And that's before we look
at the Digital Divide and possible disadvantages to people looking for
timely and affordable traditional solutions.
--
Roland Perry

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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.

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?

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

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 05:21:04PM -0500, wrote:
In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:
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.
We couldn't find a mechanism to manage this, even from the station with its
legendary taxi queues.

TfL staff manage to do it at central London stations occasionally, so
there's no reason that their Cambridge equivalent couldn't, or that the
local taxi companies couldn't find people to do it for their drivers.

--
David Cantrell | Bourgeois reactionary pig

comparative and superlative explained:

Huhn worse, worser, worsest, worsted, wasted

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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.

--
David Cantrell | Hero of the Information Age

Disappointment:
n: No results found for "priapic dwarf custard wrestling".

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 06:14:58PM +0200, Eric wrote:
On 2015-10-04, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-10-04 14:49:57 +0000, Eric said:
It has been known to get addresses wrong or fail to find them entirely.
So have taxi drivers.
Of course, but you did seem to present Google Maps as a better answer.

In my experience it *is* a better answer.

--
David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david

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

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 05:08:41PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
at 15:16:43 on Sun, 4 Oct 2015, Recliner remarked:
It wouldn't be at all surprising if they lurk near places with high demand.
Except it causes traffic congestion because they park in awkward places.

Blame the police for not properly enforcing parking restrictions then,
or the local authority for not properly implementing parking
restrictions.

--
David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic

Nuke a disabled unborn gay baby whale for JESUS!

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 09:54:30PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
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.

If anything it would increase it. Customers don't want to be forced to
pointlessly wait so would be more inclined to go with a driver offering
an illegal service. I certainly would.

--
David Cantrell | Godless Liberal Elitist

Aluminum makes a nice hat.
All paranoids will tell you that.
But what most do not know
Is reflections will show
On the CIA's evil landsat.

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

In message , at 14:38:01
on Mon, 5 Oct 2015, David Cantrell 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.

If anything it would increase it. Customers don't want to be forced to
pointlessly wait so would be more inclined to go with a driver offering
an illegal service. I certainly would.

Depends when you think people order a Uber. Is it when they are stood on
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?
--
Roland Perry

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

In message , at 14:34:05
on Mon, 5 Oct 2015, David Cantrell remarked:

It wouldn't be at all surprising if they lurk near places with high demand.
Except it causes traffic congestion because they park in awkward places.

Blame the police for not properly enforcing parking restrictions then,
or the local authority for not properly implementing parking
restrictions.

Policing parking in most of the country is no longer the police's job.

The parking restrictions are implemented "properly" (signage, yellow
lines and so on), the problem is people ignoring it all unless there's
an enforcer within twenty feet.
--
Roland Perry

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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.

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.

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?

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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.

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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.

--
Spud

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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.

--
Spud

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

In message , at 15:05:13 on Mon, 5 Oct
2015, y remarked:

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.

The USP appears to be a much larger pool of available drivers nearby
than ringing the phone number of some random minicab company.
--
Roland Perry

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 15:07:56 on Mon, 5 Oct 2015, Recliner
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.

If anything it would increase it. Customers don't want to be forced to
pointlessly wait so would be more inclined to go with a driver offering
an illegal service. I certainly would.

Depends when you think people order a Uber. Is it when they are stood on
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?

More likely to be inside, but Uber cars typically arrive in something like
three minutes, and probably less in an area of known high demand and hence
supply. Why then make the car hang around for an extra two minutes, adding
to the road congestion you claimed to be against?

They could set off from where they were coughcough legally parked up
awaiting a fare, two minutes later.
--
Roland Perry

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

On 2015-10-05, wrote:
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?

When the one you are using has never heard of the place you want to get
to?

And also the context does not necessarily include Uber, because their
differences from other transport is part of it.

Eric
--
ms fnd in a lbry

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

On 2015-10-05, David Cantrell wrote:
On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 06:14:58PM +0200, Eric wrote:
On 2015-10-04, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-10-04 14:49:57 +0000, Eric said:
It has been known to get addresses wrong or fail to find them entirely.
So have taxi drivers.
Of course, but you did seem to present Google Maps as a better answer.

In my experience it *is* a better answer.


"It's fine for me, so how could anyone else have a problem?"?

Eric
--
ms fnd in a lbry

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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.

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

Right, because Uber drivers are always natives.

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.

--
Spud

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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?

--
Mark

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

"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

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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.

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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.

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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?

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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.

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

"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

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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.

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

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

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

"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

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

"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

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 03/10/2015 13:19, tim..... wrote:



What?

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.

not from the Airport to my required destination (or even close)

Buses are still available, if not always convenient. A taxi is not a bus.

Your preferences are not a reason to abolish protection for
taxi-passengers.

But it's someone else's choice of protection, that I personally don't
believe that I need.

I know, let's ban woman going into pubs on their own - for their own
protection!

just see what an uproar that proposal would cause!

tim



HTH.

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 04/10/2015 14:50, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-10-04 13:14:08 +0000, JNugent said:

Buses are still available, if not always convenient. A taxi is not a
bus.

The hybrid matatu/jitney model works reasonably well in many countries.

A public transport operator is free to apply for the necessary permissions
to make that work.

Your preferences are not a reason to abolish protection for
taxi-passengers.

Who's proposing to abolish your ability to hire a taxi to yourself? What
is being proposed is allowing people who wish to to take a shared taxi.
Those who do not wish to can continue to take one to themselves,
obviously at a fare commensurate to that.

As I have already said, several times: that is already allowed.

It's just that the passenger decides on the sharing, not the driver or
operator.

No, the passenger has to (somehow) find the other passages, that's not the
same thing at all (and completely impractical for out of London
destinations)

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

In message , at 18:17:47 on Mon, 5 Oct 2015,
tim..... remarked:
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.

It's queuing theory 101, not that difficult.
--
Roland Perry

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
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),

All of the "jitney" type journeys that I have undertaken have been based
upon a fixed route.

Cape Town, V&A Waterfront to Station - this partly mirrors a bus route and
actually stops at the same stops. People use it because it is cheaper. I
used it because it was the first that came along - for the experience.
After twice as many people got in at the next stop as the car could hold it
was an experience that I decided not to voluntarily repeat. I got the bus
the other way (protected by the armed guard!!!!! FFS this is CT not
Jo'berg)

N Africa - Usually from the dedicated cab "Gare Routiere" (In most towns,
not to be confused with the bus Gare Routiere) to the place named on the
front - which is in Arabic so I couldn't read it. Or hailed anywhere on the
route, but as they usually insist on leaving full, the chances of doing that
much before the final stop is slim.

On the subject of picking up a "friend" on the way, one of the journeys that
I did in some, out of the way less used route, the driver stopped to make a
delivery of some items to a local bar and then a bit later to drop some
shopping off at what I suspect was some relation's home.

All in all an interesting experience which the majority of tourists never
see because this method of travel is very much aimed at Arabic speakers only
(in more than one place I simply couldn't find the Gare Routiere and had to
give up and catch the train instead.)

I've no experience of Asia, the cabs don't try to rip you off in the way
that Arab taxis do (IME)

tim

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 14:47:31 on Sun, 4 Oct
2015, Neil Williams remarked:

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".

You've used Google Maps' search facility before, I'm assuming?

Yes, and the results in strange overseas cities can often be very patchy.

Having just watched that prog on Patagonia on the Beeb, I keyed it into
Google maps to have a look (specifically to see wherever there are any roads
that access it)

It jumped immediately to a hotel in the centre of London.

Going back to the menu and adding Chile to the search and it jumped me to
the Chilean embassy in London

Bloody useless

(getting slightly back on topic, having now watched Ep2 need to find out the
route of the Patagonia express to see if that's accessible)

tim

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
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.

I don't believe that they do

they claim that they have checked the driver has been vetted (the rest is
just lost in lazy journalism)

tim

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 18:17:47 on Mon, 5 Oct 2015,
tim..... remarked:
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.

It's queuing theory 101, not that difficult.

to a graduate level statistician perhaps,

to the average numpty who runs a cab office?

Hell, you can't even argue that the people who run websites are going to be
sufficiently proficient.

They are operated by "computer wizards" who, e.g. are completely incapable
of working out how to keep login passwords secure.

tim

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

On 2015-10-04 21:34:57 +0000, JNugent said:

They are not cabs.

There is no such thing as a mini cab.

It is a common figure of speech. You may dislike it, but you cannot
dispute that it is a well-understood slang term in London.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

On 2015-10-05 15:02:38 +0000, y said:

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.

Or Milton Keynes is not a city, but it is a "New City", which is a term
coined by the CNT to simply mean a large New Town.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

TfL Taxi Consultation to "kill" Uber
 

On 2015-10-05 17:18:59 +0000, JNugent said:

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

The word "minicab" does not share that legal definition.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.