Motors Uber loses licence to operate

British law is weird, a Taxi can be a Hackney Carriage (as in one you hail on the street) or a private hire vehicle (one you book ahead of time), they are different things in the eyes of the law.

Yes it's dumb, but this is the UK, we specialise in dumb rules.

 

I had a huge reply written out, but I realised that it's pointless to even debate you. Ordinarily I wouldn't be so blunt - and ordinarily I wouldn't rise to the bait which your posts clearly present - but I've had more than a few glasses of wine this evening, so... f' it.

You are arrogant. You judge everyone else by your own standards, and consider other viewpoints inferior if they do not agree with your own.

Your experience of taxis/minicabs/whatever in your tiny little town of "8k pop" cannot possibly hope to compare with the volume of people who use taxis/minicabs/whatever on a daily basis in London. My experience of using taxis/minicabs/whatever in Cardiff cannot possibly hope to compare with the volume of people who use taxis/minicabs/whatever on a daily basis in London.

 

...

 

Having watched a documentary about this and the impact it has had on people's lives I am glad. It's disgusting what they have done to people.

 

What have they done to people?

 

From what I understand Uber is generally a bad business model for drivers but people have still been taken in by it thinking its a viable earner. Such people don't get much sympathy from me. Don't go off on a business venture without doing some basic arithmetic first.

Ubers current model seems to be a convenient way for drivers to depreciate their car and convert that depreciation into quick cash. Which can be a good earner for people that are caught short for a few quid. Its probably not that good as a career once you take long term costs of driving people around (Servicing, tyres, fuel, replacement cars, insurance, etc).

As for revoking the license to operate, I don't think incumbants should ever be protected. As long as people have the necessities to drive others around, like insurance covering passengers, set up as a business, register with an authority along with possible background check they should be free to drive people around commercially. Ideas like buying licenses to operate as a taxi is non-sense

 

But in Hyderabad in India, Jamie sees for himself the human consequences of Uber's utopian vision - drivers driven to suicide over falling earnings.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0916ghz

I recommend a watch. Very good docu, but quite disgusting how people are being treated.

 

Do we ever.

 

They are regulated but far, far too expensive. It is not worth using a taxi under almost any circumstance (where public transport is available).

 

Uber operates in different ways in different countries. We don't have UberPOP (the branch of self-employed non-licensed drivers, the orginal 'ride sharing' excuse) operating in London at all, or anywhere else in the UK I can find for that matter!

One thing that's not entirely clear is exactly what licensing practices TFL are claiming Uber are not conforming to. To drive for Uber, drivers must attain a PCH license (which involves testing, background checks, proof of having appropriate insurance, etc).
That license is issued by TFL.

 

I've experienced cabs cheating people in a few countries, bad meters in Vietnam and in China taxis taking you all over the place for what should be a short drive.
Before moving abroad I heard about about cab drivers taking advantage of drunk guys and read about rape cases. My wife takes an uber home alone when she goes out with friends, she is 154cm and 50kg.

 

Most women I know prefer uber to cabs for a very simple reason - it is very easy to track who picked you up, from where and where they stopped. In case something wrong happens, you already have evidence