8 ms·

Uber avoids car pick-up app restrictions in London

50 points by choult 11y ago

boona 11y ago
It's articles like these that make me wonder how many ridiculous laws there are that are not in the public consciousness. How can this possibly help make our lives better?
- ams6110 11y ago
  All the laws regulating taxi-like services were enacted because of abuses before they existed. It's a classic case of "be careful what you ask for."
  - viscanti 11y ago
    > All the laws regulating taxi-like services were enacted because of abuses before they existed. I'm not convinced. What does the hour pre-booking requirement in Miami do to prevent previous abuses? What does the business test that drivers have to pass in Germany do to prevent previous abuses? What does NYC's 30+ day process to get the correct license do to prevent previous abuses? These all seem like laws regulating taxi-like services only for the benefit of making taxis more competitive. The taxi industry in NYC has given the mayor over $500,000. Presumably they're looking to get laws passed (like the proposed cap on uber) in order to protect themselves, not to prevent abuses that previously existed. Maybe it's helpful to talk about what the previous abuses were, and then look at what are the best solutions to that in a world where everyone has smartphones. I'm not convinced that all (or even most) of the regulations out there are to prevent previous abuses, but maybe I'm missing something here.
    - forgetsusername 11y ago
      >The taxi industry in NYC has given the mayor over $500,000 You say this as if Uber isn't heavily involved in lobbying for their own benefit. I'll consider Uber to be on a level-playing field when I can be certain that any car I climb into has the proper insurance required for transporting people commercially. Right now it seems like Uber is putting that responsibility on the drivers themselves (which, I suppose, is their right). But I believe that's a huge cost advantage (with associated externalities when someone is hurt badly).
      - viscanti 11y ago
        > You say this as if Uber isn't heavily involved in lobbying for their own benefit. No. I say it to point out that there are laws that aren't for the public good. At that point, we're free to have an open discussion about which laws are for the public good and which aren't. If we start by assuming all laws are enacted to prevent previous abuses, we miss a key point here.
    - germanier 11y ago
      > What does the business test that drivers have to pass in Germany do to prevent previous abuses? They ask questions like "What insurance do I need?" and "Which taxes do I need to pay?". All those things Uber is good at... The test was introduced after many small taxi companies failed to do even the most basic accounting. Not every driver needs to pass these tests but the employer. If you claim your drivers are all "independent" contractors, well that's another problem.
  - icebraining 11y ago
    Nope, at least in NY they were enacted because taxi drivers were beating people up and putting things on fire until they got a law eliminating the competition. Striking taxi drivers was nothing new–the first strike took place in 1908, a year after the first taxi company was founded. But this strike had a hostile energy to it, as strikers went hunting for scabs to punish. As one driver put it, “the bastids that was scabbin’, we pulled the doors off their cabs.” Independent cab owners, who had nothing to gain by striking, had their windows smashed by blocks of ice and passengers thrown from their cabs. Police who tried restore order had their tires slashed and marbles thrown under their horses.
  - SilasX 11y ago
    True, but that doesn't mean they're applicable or warranted for Uber-like services. Historically, pre-book/call-a-ride/limo services have avoided much of the regulation applied to taxis that can take street hails; the distinction long preceded apps. When you pre-arrange the ride through a third party, to obviates most of the potential for abuse that led to cries for taxi regulation: - There's nothing to rob since payment is handled elsewhere. - Ditto for the issue of overcharging or deceiving a customer. - The driver is authenticated when your booking is confirmed ('look for a guy with this license plate ...') so you're not just getting into a random person's car. - The passenger asks for it so they're not getting pressured by some rando with a car. - There's a record of who was paired with whom so if someone goes missing, you know where to look. So it doesn't make sense to object to Uber/Lyft because of some image of what gypsy cabs were like.
- viscanti 11y ago
  A litmus test for telling how corrupt a city/country is, is to look at how much additional regulation they try to use to block companies like Uber. Things like Las Vegas and Miami requiring pre-booking an hour early are prime examples (obviously no public good, only protectionism for taxis).
  - nradov 11y ago
    Las Vegas doesn't require pre-booking an hour early. I was there last week, and used both Uber and Lyft a few times. Cars arrived within minutes.
    - viscanti 11y ago
      They did. It's only been a few months since that regulation was dropped.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- ionforce 11y ago
  Yesterday, I was thinking that having the minimal amount of laws should be a goal, so we (the public) should continually audit down all active laws. Like removing dead code. We don't need the "citizens cannot keep goats on Tuesdays" type laws. And then we can graduate to the insidious stuff.
  - icebraining 11y ago
    Exactly, and that's the value of Uber: forcing society to periodically re-evaluate its laws. As long as it doesn't cause heavy or permanent damage, we can always enforce the laws, kill their initiative and return to the status quo.
  - Cerium 11y ago
    Laws should have a defined lifetime, and at the end of that time be reinstated only if they have greater support than the support that initially instated them.
    - SteveNuts 11y ago
      And being able to wrap totally unrelated things into the bill.
    - ionforce 11y ago
      Interesting idea... I don't know if I buy it. But I do love auditing... How does one define "support"?
kennydude 11y ago
Yeah Uber is dodgy but when I don't know where I am in London, I can put a pin on a map and the driver will arrive to that point. Oh and I know their name and license plate instantly
digbyloftus 11y ago
>The California-based private-hire company had urged its users to oppose suggestions that had included a ban on apps being able to show where their nearby available vehicles were. >a minimum five-minute delay between pick-up confirmations being sent out and drivers being able to collect their passengers Whoa, that's not even trying to be subtle. That's just straight up trying to legislate a required level of crapiness.
- seivan 11y ago
  In Sweden they've gone full circle with lobbyists and their friends in left-wing "news". It's hard to explain to a 50 year old marxist/activist lawyer the value of booking a cab with my watch just to grab my wallet (and card) from the restaurant I forgot them in. I've mentioned this before. No other company with bigger muscle/wallet here has whipped up an API - that's a litmus test. Tells me the "Dread Pirate" (or his CTO) was on to something... everything should be a service.
  - kartan 11y ago
    I think that this article explains why that is not so good: https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/monitor/apploitation-city-instaserfs https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/monitor/applo... "There is a place in this world for the sharing economy, and it could be a beautiful thing, but where I live these companies run the show. There are no rules. The apps are breaking the spirit of the law by abusing the independent contractor loophole and actively encourage (e.g., through dubious car placards) actually breaking the law. But it will only ever be the workers, not the companies, who are punished." The problem with this companies is that they have traditional workers but they are hired as one man companies. So the workers lose all their rights, all their benefits and all their negotiation power. I work on the tech industry, as probably most of the readers, and I understand how apps works. I don't think that the apps are a problem, but removing the rights of thousands of workers is not a good thing. The article that I linked explains it better than I can here.
    - caskance 11y ago
tomnewton 11y ago
but they make all of our lives better....
arprocter 11y ago
IME the service offered by black cabs is worse than in NYC - they apparently have 'discretion' on accepting a fare or not, so even if they pull over they might just say they don't want to go in that direction. I remember saying 'sorry, I thought I was supposed to tell /you/ where /I/ want to go'. A problem that is compounded by the fact that the Underground shuts down at night. Then again, my last experience with Uber was waiting 20 mins in the LGA cold for a driver '10 minutes away' never to arrive who then just cancelled the ride. And apparently because he never picked me up can't leave a negative review.
- cheetos 11y ago
  Honest question, why would you call an Uber to LGA? LGA has massive lines of taxis waiting to take you home. You'd easily get a cab in less than twenty minutes that is legally required to take you to your location.
  - CaptSpify 11y ago
    Not OP, I live in a different city, YMMV, etc I hate taking taxis. Their CC machine is always "broken", they always try to take me in some funky route, cabs are always dirty, and there's no way for me to give feedback on crappy drivers. I don't know if the taxis at LGA have these same problems, but I'd rather wait 10 minutes for an Uber than get an immediate taxi
    - arprocter 11y ago
      This was just a time thing. That and it was so cold my phone actually shut down before the 2nd Uber finally arrived. I guess next time I could hedge my bets by ordering Uber and waiting in the taxi line at the same time. Does anyone know if cancelling a supposedly en-route Uber could earns me a black mark? I probably would've cancelled the first ride after 15 minutes if I knew it wouldn't flag me
      - saganus 11y ago
        >it was so cold my phone actually shut down how does that work? I've never heard of electronics shutting down due to cold. Well, at least not due to cold temperatures that a human can resist. How do you know it was due to the cold? could it be that some water condensed inside the phone or something? I'm genuinely curious since I've never heard this statement before.
vjvj 11y ago
I'm surprised a lot of the posts here are missing the key point. The main argument black cab (taxi) drivers are making is that Transport for London (the regulatory body) forces them to go through a bunch of extra steps before they can work (1) whereas minicabs (e.g. Ubers) are free from this. That said, it's definitely a good thing these measures did not pass because they simply made minicabs worse rather than trying to improve the situation for taxi drivers whose "it's unfair" argument is a valid one. Even as someone who is open to new tech, there are nuanced arguments on both sides which are often overlooked. (1) For example, taxi drivers must do a navigation test learning the vast majority of roads in London ("The Knowledge"); be CRB checked where minicab drivers do not.
- adam-a 11y ago
  You make a good point. I think some of those checks - the CRB for instance, are undoubtedly good things. I wish that the black cabs would move on and require operators to have GPS devices and not rely on "The Knowledge". Impressive as it is, in my experience it results in longer routes and often relies on the passenger knowing where they are going. The main sticking point though must be the fares though - black cabs are significantly more expensive than Uber, and this is the main reason they are losing business IMO. I would be interested to see a breakdown of why the fares are more. Is it simply more money in the pockets of the drivers? Or does the extra money pay for better vehicles, insurance, training, taxes etc?
  - Digit-Al 11y ago
    I don't know why they cost what they do, but black cab taxi fares are set by TfL and they can't charge any more or less. Here is the breakdown https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/taxis-and-minicabs/taxi-fares/tariffs https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/taxis-and-minicabs/taxi-fares/tarif...
  - vjvj 11y ago
    I'd reason that legacy costs would be an issue for black taxi drivers even if they could set their own fares: All registered taxi drivers have already spent £££ getting "qualified" to be a taxi driver. If they suddenly have the ability to set lower fares to compete with minicabs, they wouldn't be happy to do so given they have already incurred the costs (albeit sunk) of being able to do what they do. If I were to start planning a solution, I would look at other ways taxi drivers can be given value-adding advantages without harming minicabs or worsening current levels of service for consumers. e.g. Only black taxis (not minicabs) can use bus lanes so anyone wanting a faster journey would be happy to pay a premium for black taxis. However, I fear this has become too politicised for intelligent consideration of the issues at hand.

50 points by choult 11y ago

boona 11y ago

It's articles like these that make me wonder how many ridiculous laws there are that are not in the public consciousness. How can this possibly help make our lives better?

ams6110 11y ago
All the laws regulating taxi-like services were enacted because of abuses before they existed. It's a classic case of "be careful what you ask for."
- viscanti 11y ago
  > All the laws regulating taxi-like services were enacted because of abuses before they existed. I'm not convinced. What does the hour pre-booking requirement in Miami do to prevent previous abuses? What does the business test that drivers have to pass in Germany do to prevent previous abuses? What does NYC's 30+ day process to get the correct license do to prevent previous abuses? These all seem like laws regulating taxi-like services only for the benefit of making taxis more competitive. The taxi industry in NYC has given the mayor over $500,000. Presumably they're looking to get laws passed (like the proposed cap on uber) in order to protect themselves, not to prevent abuses that previously existed. Maybe it's helpful to talk about what the previous abuses were, and then look at what are the best solutions to that in a world where everyone has smartphones. I'm not convinced that all (or even most) of the regulations out there are to prevent previous abuses, but maybe I'm missing something here.
  - forgetsusername 11y ago
    >The taxi industry in NYC has given the mayor over $500,000 You say this as if Uber isn't heavily involved in lobbying for their own benefit. I'll consider Uber to be on a level-playing field when I can be certain that any car I climb into has the proper insurance required for transporting people commercially. Right now it seems like Uber is putting that responsibility on the drivers themselves (which, I suppose, is their right). But I believe that's a huge cost advantage (with associated externalities when someone is hurt badly).
    - viscanti 11y ago
      > You say this as if Uber isn't heavily involved in lobbying for their own benefit. No. I say it to point out that there are laws that aren't for the public good. At that point, we're free to have an open discussion about which laws are for the public good and which aren't. If we start by assuming all laws are enacted to prevent previous abuses, we miss a key point here.
  - germanier 11y ago
    > What does the business test that drivers have to pass in Germany do to prevent previous abuses? They ask questions like "What insurance do I need?" and "Which taxes do I need to pay?". All those things Uber is good at... The test was introduced after many small taxi companies failed to do even the most basic accounting. Not every driver needs to pass these tests but the employer. If you claim your drivers are all "independent" contractors, well that's another problem.
- icebraining 11y ago
  Nope, at least in NY they were enacted because taxi drivers were beating people up and putting things on fire until they got a law eliminating the competition. Striking taxi drivers was nothing new–the first strike took place in 1908, a year after the first taxi company was founded. But this strike had a hostile energy to it, as strikers went hunting for scabs to punish. As one driver put it, “the bastids that was scabbin’, we pulled the doors off their cabs.” Independent cab owners, who had nothing to gain by striking, had their windows smashed by blocks of ice and passengers thrown from their cabs. Police who tried restore order had their tires slashed and marbles thrown under their horses.
- SilasX 11y ago
  True, but that doesn't mean they're applicable or warranted for Uber-like services. Historically, pre-book/call-a-ride/limo services have avoided much of the regulation applied to taxis that can take street hails; the distinction long preceded apps. When you pre-arrange the ride through a third party, to obviates most of the potential for abuse that led to cries for taxi regulation: - There's nothing to rob since payment is handled elsewhere. - Ditto for the issue of overcharging or deceiving a customer. - The driver is authenticated when your booking is confirmed ('look for a guy with this license plate ...') so you're not just getting into a random person's car. - The passenger asks for it so they're not getting pressured by some rando with a car. - There's a record of who was paired with whom so if someone goes missing, you know where to look. So it doesn't make sense to object to Uber/Lyft because of some image of what gypsy cabs were like.
viscanti 11y ago
A litmus test for telling how corrupt a city/country is, is to look at how much additional regulation they try to use to block companies like Uber. Things like Las Vegas and Miami requiring pre-booking an hour early are prime examples (obviously no public good, only protectionism for taxis).
- nradov 11y ago
  Las Vegas doesn't require pre-booking an hour early. I was there last week, and used both Uber and Lyft a few times. Cars arrived within minutes.
  - viscanti 11y ago
    They did. It's only been a few months since that regulation was dropped.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
ionforce 11y ago
Yesterday, I was thinking that having the minimal amount of laws should be a goal, so we (the public) should continually audit down all active laws. Like removing dead code. We don't need the "citizens cannot keep goats on Tuesdays" type laws. And then we can graduate to the insidious stuff.
- icebraining 11y ago
  Exactly, and that's the value of Uber: forcing society to periodically re-evaluate its laws. As long as it doesn't cause heavy or permanent damage, we can always enforce the laws, kill their initiative and return to the status quo.
- Cerium 11y ago
  Laws should have a defined lifetime, and at the end of that time be reinstated only if they have greater support than the support that initially instated them.
  - SteveNuts 11y ago
    And being able to wrap totally unrelated things into the bill.
  - ionforce 11y ago
    Interesting idea... I don't know if I buy it. But I do love auditing... How does one define "support"?

kennydude 11y ago

Yeah Uber is dodgy but when I don't know where I am in London, I can put a pin on a map and the driver will arrive to that point. Oh and I know their name and license plate instantly

digbyloftus 11y ago

>The California-based private-hire company had urged its users to oppose suggestions that had included a ban on apps being able to show where their nearby available vehicles were. >a minimum five-minute delay between pick-up confirmations being sent out and drivers being able to collect their passengers Whoa, that's not even trying to be subtle. That's just straight up trying to legislate a required level of crapiness.

seivan 11y ago
In Sweden they've gone full circle with lobbyists and their friends in left-wing "news". It's hard to explain to a 50 year old marxist/activist lawyer the value of booking a cab with my watch just to grab my wallet (and card) from the restaurant I forgot them in. I've mentioned this before. No other company with bigger muscle/wallet here has whipped up an API - that's a litmus test. Tells me the "Dread Pirate" (or his CTO) was on to something... everything should be a service.
- kartan 11y ago
  I think that this article explains why that is not so good: https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/monitor/apploitation-city-instaserfs https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/monitor/applo... "There is a place in this world for the sharing economy, and it could be a beautiful thing, but where I live these companies run the show. There are no rules. The apps are breaking the spirit of the law by abusing the independent contractor loophole and actively encourage (e.g., through dubious car placards) actually breaking the law. But it will only ever be the workers, not the companies, who are punished." The problem with this companies is that they have traditional workers but they are hired as one man companies. So the workers lose all their rights, all their benefits and all their negotiation power. I work on the tech industry, as probably most of the readers, and I understand how apps works. I don't think that the apps are a problem, but removing the rights of thousands of workers is not a good thing. The article that I linked explains it better than I can here.
  - caskance 11y ago

tomnewton 11y ago

but they make all of our lives better....

arprocter 11y ago

IME the service offered by black cabs is worse than in NYC - they apparently have 'discretion' on accepting a fare or not, so even if they pull over they might just say they don't want to go in that direction. I remember saying 'sorry, I thought I was supposed to tell /you/ where /I/ want to go'. A problem that is compounded by the fact that the Underground shuts down at night. Then again, my last experience with Uber was waiting 20 mins in the LGA cold for a driver '10 minutes away' never to arrive who then just cancelled the ride. And apparently because he never picked me up can't leave a negative review.

cheetos 11y ago
Honest question, why would you call an Uber to LGA? LGA has massive lines of taxis waiting to take you home. You'd easily get a cab in less than twenty minutes that is legally required to take you to your location.
- CaptSpify 11y ago
  Not OP, I live in a different city, YMMV, etc I hate taking taxis. Their CC machine is always "broken", they always try to take me in some funky route, cabs are always dirty, and there's no way for me to give feedback on crappy drivers. I don't know if the taxis at LGA have these same problems, but I'd rather wait 10 minutes for an Uber than get an immediate taxi
  - arprocter 11y ago
    This was just a time thing. That and it was so cold my phone actually shut down before the 2nd Uber finally arrived. I guess next time I could hedge my bets by ordering Uber and waiting in the taxi line at the same time. Does anyone know if cancelling a supposedly en-route Uber could earns me a black mark? I probably would've cancelled the first ride after 15 minutes if I knew it wouldn't flag me
    - saganus 11y ago
      >it was so cold my phone actually shut down how does that work? I've never heard of electronics shutting down due to cold. Well, at least not due to cold temperatures that a human can resist. How do you know it was due to the cold? could it be that some water condensed inside the phone or something? I'm genuinely curious since I've never heard this statement before.

vjvj 11y ago

I'm surprised a lot of the posts here are missing the key point. The main argument black cab (taxi) drivers are making is that Transport for London (the regulatory body) forces them to go through a bunch of extra steps before they can work (1) whereas minicabs (e.g. Ubers) are free from this. That said, it's definitely a good thing these measures did not pass because they simply made minicabs worse rather than trying to improve the situation for taxi drivers whose "it's unfair" argument is a valid one. Even as someone who is open to new tech, there are nuanced arguments on both sides which are often overlooked. (1) For example, taxi drivers must do a navigation test learning the vast majority of roads in London ("The Knowledge"); be CRB checked where minicab drivers do not.

adam-a 11y ago
You make a good point. I think some of those checks - the CRB for instance, are undoubtedly good things. I wish that the black cabs would move on and require operators to have GPS devices and not rely on "The Knowledge". Impressive as it is, in my experience it results in longer routes and often relies on the passenger knowing where they are going. The main sticking point though must be the fares though - black cabs are significantly more expensive than Uber, and this is the main reason they are losing business IMO. I would be interested to see a breakdown of why the fares are more. Is it simply more money in the pockets of the drivers? Or does the extra money pay for better vehicles, insurance, training, taxes etc?
- Digit-Al 11y ago
  I don't know why they cost what they do, but black cab taxi fares are set by TfL and they can't charge any more or less. Here is the breakdown https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/taxis-and-minicabs/taxi-fares/tariffs https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/taxis-and-minicabs/taxi-fares/tarif...
- vjvj 11y ago
  I'd reason that legacy costs would be an issue for black taxi drivers even if they could set their own fares: All registered taxi drivers have already spent £££ getting "qualified" to be a taxi driver. If they suddenly have the ability to set lower fares to compete with minicabs, they wouldn't be happy to do so given they have already incurred the costs (albeit sunk) of being able to do what they do. If I were to start planning a solution, I would look at other ways taxi drivers can be given value-adding advantages without harming minicabs or worsening current levels of service for consumers. e.g. Only black taxis (not minicabs) can use bus lanes so anyone wanting a faster journey would be happy to pay a premium for black taxis. However, I fear this has become too politicised for intelligent consideration of the issues at hand.