Uber licence 'not renewed' in London - thoughts?

Apodemus

daveyjp wrote: »

This completely misses the main bodies who have concerns about Uber - the Met and City of London Police.

I don't know about London, but in some cities, a disproportionate number of taxi drivers are ex-Police...

[Deleted User]

daveyjp wrote: »

This completely misses the main bodies who have concerns about Uber - the Met and City of London Police.

What you have to understand is that these decisions don't get made in a vacuum, they get made in the context of lobbying from stakeholders. This isn't a courtroom, it's far closer to a political process, and what happened yesterday was absolutely tied to the lobbying that's gone on over this issue for many years. There is no safety concern suitably large enough at present to justify banning Uber entirely within the city limits. I personally don't expect it will come to that, but if it does then it would be borderline disgraceful in my opinion.

daveyjp

Uber managed to get where they are now by intense lobbying of former Mayor and previous occupants of of number 10 an 11 Downing Street.

The company were then subject to light touch regulation. A UK director has just admitted on TV their regulatory and reporting systems in terms of passenger safety aren't good enough.

Mercdriver

gordon_harris wrote: »

I appreciate that Uber isn't perfect, but I find it incredibly difficult to stomach this kind of hyperbole about exploitation. It's essentially an app that allows people to make money out of their car. Calling it exploitation makes about as much sense as calling Air BnB exploitative. If drivers don't want to do it then they won't do it.

I don't want some guy using his car for H&R that may or may not be insured for it. He has an accident and I am unable to do business, what happens? I sue the driver as his insurance company won't do anything and he doesn't have public liability insurance? No thanks, I don't take the chance with Uber.

You do know what happens when Uber squeezes out comprtition don't you? They increase costs and prices rise.

chattychappy

If I have an app, I have some cash, and an uber driver is willing to take me somewhere, I really don't think it is any business of a regulator to stop the arrangement. It wouldn't stop me asking a mate and slipping him a fiver.

Thousands of people are using uber everyday. Thousands of people drive for them. Uber has grown the market. Close it down: thousands will lose an income, even if other players enter the market.

As for minimum wage - well I wasn't in favour of that anyway. But it is an example of the way something designed for one way of working is now being applied outside of its original intended domain for political ends.

I feel much safer in an uber car than an NHS hospital. We are over regulated when we need less, and under-regulated when we need more.

After the Thatcher years, it seemed a good idea to have a single body organising "integrated transport" in London. But TfL has steadily increased its power and is now bloated and unfit for purpose.

Mercdriver

Apodemus wrote: »

I don't know about London, but in some cities, a disproportionate number of taxi drivers are ex-Police...

And? You're suggesting what exactly? Come with evidence if you are suggesting corruption.

Mercdriver

chattychappy wrote: »

If I have an app, I have some cash, and an uber driver is willing to take me somewhere, I really don't think it is any business of a regulator to stop the arrangement. It wouldn't stop me asking a mate and slipping him a fiver.

Thousands of people are using uber everyday. Thousands of people drive for them. Uber has grown the market. Close it down: thousands will lose an income, even if other players enter the market.

As for minimum wage - well I wasn't in favour of that anyway. But it is an example of the way something designed for one way of working is now being applied outside of its original intended domain for political ends.

I feel much safer in an uber car than an NHS hospital. We are over regulated when we need less, and under-regulated when we need more.

After the Thatcher years, it seemed a good idea to have a single body organising "integrated transport" in London. But TfL has steadily increased its power and is now bloated and unfit for purpose.

So because he is earning next to nothing he doesn't pay for insurances, doesn't maintain his car and then has an accident with you in the back. You'd care a whole lot more then.

chattychappy

Mercdriver wrote: »

So because he is earning next to nothing he doesn't pay for insurances, doesn't maintain his car and then has an accident with you in the back. You'd care a whole lot more then.

The way to enforce this is to have Police/TfL spot checks/mystery customers etc, not to ban an entire company.

glentoran99

Mercdriver wrote: »

So because he is earning next to nothing he doesn't pay for insurances, doesn't maintain his car and then has an accident with you in the back. You'd care a whole lot more then.

Why is this more likely to happen with UBER than any other company?

shaunandelly

London..... slush money of the world pumping up property by insane amounts...serviced by immigrants living 10 to a room...and the problem is how much a taxi costs.