In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

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".

And to get from my house in central Cambridge to Cambridge station the
transportdirect.info site would send me via Newmarket.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

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.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

"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

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.

In message , at 17:21:04
on Sun, 4 Oct 2015, remarked:

Early versions one rail planner would send you to a small town in
Belgium if you typed in "Waterloo".

And to get from my house in central Cambridge to Cambridge station the
transportdirect.info site would send me via Newmarket.

And in Nottingham, if you were approaching the railway station from the
south they'd have you travel for about 15 minutes on a couple of buses
around the City Centre, rather than just get off and cross the road.
--
Roland Perry

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

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

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

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

In message , at 17:21:04
on Sun, 4 Oct 2015, remarked:

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.

The issue is the anti-social behaviour which accompanies the drivers
touting for business on the streets, even if it just about qualifies as
a "booking" once logged.

For example, what if there was a chap with a sandwich board outside
Cambridge station advertising private hire cars, and when someone
approached him they are handed a mobile phone with the company on
speed-dial.

"Hello, dodgy-cabs Cambridge Station, can I help you"
"Yes I need to get to the Guildhall"
"OK, cross the road and you'll find your pre-booked car waiting on the
double yellow lines, look for the driver with his hand in the air".
--
Roland Perry