On 22/09/2017 11:21, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:18:36 GMT
Recliner wrote:
TfL has concluded the ride-hailing app firm was not fit and proper to hold
a private hire operator licence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

Oh, shame. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving company.

Really? And general minicabs were well known for being safe, and part
of well run companies that weren't involved in serious criminality
and/or used for laundering money by their criminal owners? All
allegedly of course.

This stinks of protectionism from TfL - yes, there may have been some
minor issues with Uber but they are generally a great solution to
getting around in cities you don't know or aren't able to communicate
in, and avoid vagaries of random pricing.

Hopefully they resolve their issues sooner rather than later and that
their partner drivers can continue to earn money rather than being left,
literally, on the streets with no wage.

On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 11:31:09 +0100, Someone Somewhere
wrote:

On 22/09/2017 11:21, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:18:36 GMT
Recliner wrote:
TfL has concluded the ride-hailing app firm was not fit and proper to hold
a private hire operator licence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

Oh, shame. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving company.

Really? And general minicabs were well known for being safe, and part
of well run companies that weren't involved in serious criminality
and/or used for laundering money by their criminal owners? All
allegedly of course.

This stinks of protectionism from TfL - yes, there may have been some
minor issues with Uber but they are generally a great solution to
getting around in cities you don't know or aren't able to communicate
in, and avoid vagaries of random pricing.

Hopefully they resolve their issues sooner rather than later and that
their partner drivers can continue to earn money rather than being left,
literally, on the streets with no wage.

Presumably the drivers will just migrate to working for some other
private hire firm.

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 11:31:09 +0100, Someone Somewhere
wrote:

On 22/09/2017 11:21, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:18:36 GMT
Recliner wrote:
TfL has concluded the ride-hailing app firm was not fit and proper to
hold
a private hire operator licence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

Oh, shame. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving company.

Really? And general minicabs were well known for being safe, and part
of well run companies that weren't involved in serious criminality
and/or used for laundering money by their criminal owners? All
allegedly of course.

This stinks of protectionism from TfL - yes, there may have been some
minor issues with Uber but they are generally a great solution to
getting around in cities you don't know or aren't able to communicate
in, and avoid vagaries of random pricing.

Hopefully they resolve their issues sooner rather than later and that
their partner drivers can continue to earn money rather than being left,
literally, on the streets with no wage.

Presumably the drivers will just migrate to working for some other
private hire firm.

and I thought you were the one always telling us that the other PH companies
in London supplied drivers with their cars

tim

On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 12:38:52 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Recliner" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 11:31:09 +0100, Someone Somewhere
wrote:

On 22/09/2017 11:21, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:18:36 GMT
Recliner wrote:
TfL has concluded the ride-hailing app firm was not fit and proper to
hold
a private hire operator licence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

Oh, shame. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving company.

Really? And general minicabs were well known for being safe, and part
of well run companies that weren't involved in serious criminality
and/or used for laundering money by their criminal owners? All
allegedly of course.

This stinks of protectionism from TfL - yes, there may have been some
minor issues with Uber but they are generally a great solution to
getting around in cities you don't know or aren't able to communicate
in, and avoid vagaries of random pricing.

Hopefully they resolve their issues sooner rather than later and that
their partner drivers can continue to earn money rather than being left,
literally, on the streets with no wage.

Presumably the drivers will just migrate to working for some other
private hire firm.

and I thought you were the one always telling us that the other PH companies
in London supplied drivers with their cars

No, I've said some PH companies provide cars, some don't. And even the
ones that do, don't necessarily provide them to all drivers (my local
one that I use regularly is an example of that).

On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 11:31:09 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 22/09/2017 11:21, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:18:36 GMT
Recliner wrote:
TfL has concluded the ride-hailing app firm was not fit and proper to hold
a private hire operator licence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

Oh, shame. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving company.

Really? And general minicabs were well known for being safe, and part
of well run companies that weren't involved in serious criminality
and/or used for laundering money by their criminal owners? All
allegedly of course.

And they lose their licenses too if its proven.

This stinks of protectionism from TfL - yes, there may have been some
minor issues with Uber but they are generally a great solution to

Minor? Use google.

getting around in cities you don't know or aren't able to communicate
in, and avoid vagaries of random pricing.

Hopefully they resolve their issues sooner rather than later and that
their partner drivers can continue to earn money rather than being left,
literally, on the streets with no wage.

Where's my violin when I need it....

On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 11:31:09 +0100, Someone Somewhere
wrote:

On 22/09/2017 11:21, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:18:36 GMT
Recliner wrote:
TfL has concluded the ride-hailing app firm was not fit and proper to hold
a private hire operator licence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

Oh, shame. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving company.

Really? And general minicabs were well known for being safe, and part
of well run companies that weren't involved in serious criminality
and/or used for laundering money by their criminal owners? All
allegedly of course.

This stinks of protectionism from TfL - yes, there may have been some
minor issues with Uber but they are generally a great solution to
getting around in cities you don't know or aren't able to communicate
in, and avoid vagaries of random pricing.

Hopefully they resolve their issues sooner rather than later and that
their partner drivers can continue to earn money rather than being left,
literally, on the streets with no wage.

Reading some more, at looks like the actual Uber shutdown might not
happen any time soon:

"At the moment, Uber's licence expires on the 30th September.

However, the company is able to appeal TfL's ruling and has 21 days to
appeal. Uber will be able to operate until the legal process of the
appeal is exhausted, with some experts predicting the process could
take years."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/22/does-uber-losing-licence-mean-londoners-will-service-cut/

On 2017\09\22 11:31, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 22/09/2017 11:21, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:18:36 GMT
Recliner wrote:
TfL has concluded the ride-hailing app firm was not fit and proper to
hold
a private hire operator licence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

Oh, shame. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving company.

Really?Â* And general minicabs were well known for being safe, and part
of well run companies that weren't involved in serious criminality
and/or used for laundering money by their criminal owners?Â* All
allegedly of course.

Uber drivers committed 2/3 of the minicab rapes, while only being 1/3 of
the minicab drivers, which makes their drivers 4 times as rapey as the
average minicab driver.

Basil Jet wrote:
On 2017\09\22 11:31, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 22/09/2017 11:21, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:18:36 GMT
Recliner wrote:
TfL has concluded the ride-hailing app firm was not fit and proper to
hold
a private hire operator licence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

Oh, shame. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving company.

Really?Â* And general minicabs were well known for being safe, and part
of well run companies that weren't involved in serious criminality
and/or used for laundering money by their criminal owners?Â* All
allegedly of course.

Uber drivers committed 2/3 of the minicab rapes, while only being 1/3 of
the minicab drivers, which makes their drivers 4 times as rapey as the
average minicab driver.

And I think that Uber has been negligent in reporting crimes committed by
its drivers.

In article , (Someone
Somewhere) wrote:

On 22/09/2017 11:21, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:18:36 GMT
Recliner wrote:
TfL has concluded the ride-hailing app firm was not fit and proper to
hold a private hire operator licence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640

Oh, shame. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving company.

Really? And general minicabs were well known for being safe, and
part of well run companies that weren't involved in serious
criminality and/or used for laundering money by their criminal
owners? All allegedly of course.

This stinks of protectionism from TfL - yes, there may have been
some minor issues with Uber but they are generally a great solution
to getting around in cities you don't know or aren't able to
communicate in, and avoid vagaries of random pricing.

The reasons given in the TfL press release look serious enough to me:

"TfL considers that Uber's approach and conduct demonstrate a lack of
corporate responsibility in relation to a number of issues which have
potential public safety and security implications. These include:

Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks
are obtained.
Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that
could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app
and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties."

The fourth one (evasion of regulation) looks particularly serious and a
matter for criminal prosecution if proved. It will be interesting to see
what the courts say about that one at the appeal. They tend to take a dim
view of such practices.

Hopefully they resolve their issues sooner rather than later and that
their partner drivers can continue to earn money rather than being
left, literally, on the streets with no wage.

It will require firm evidence of radically changed practices by the Uber
management.

--
Colin Rosenstiel