Uber licence 'not renewed' in London - thoughts?

TheMoonandBack

Stoke, that's an issue for you and the clearly rubbish taxi's you are forced to use. Uber's system may iliminate those issues but the reason TFL aren't renewing their London license are :

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” — including for the following issues:

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 — which relates to carrying out background checks to ensure workers do not have a criminal record
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

People like Uber, people like Ryanair...I don't

vikingaero

Uber users and Uber themselves see themselves as "innovative" as an explanation as to why they should stay in business in London: "Help London stay open to innovative companies.." says the petition for Uber.

So that's 600,000 people who endorse an unethical and immoral business. The company is built on the lies and bullying of it's founder. It can't stop lying because that is its core culture. Worse still are the users who are effectively endorsing scum culture.

Mercdriver

Stoke wrote: »

Case in point:
Yesterday, I took two local taxis and both had me. Two different ways. The first taxi turned up, half an hour late, had no idea where he was going (I had to direct him) and then charged me 5 pounds more than what I usually pay. I told him that was much more than normal and that 12 was more reasonable. He was having none of it. My fault for not agreeing a price.

I then flagged a taxi down later and said "how much to X". He told me 15 which I said was too much. He then said 10. Once we arrived at the destination, he demanded 12.

The sooner uber comes and kills these dodgy local taxi companies the better.

Be careful what you wish for...

Report the companies' practises to the local authorities licensing department every time it happens and publicly name and shame them in your local rag using the Uber controversy to get it in the paper.

chattychappy

lush_walrus wrote: »

Black cabs for me, they always understand what I am asking, if they talk on a phone I am not exposed to it. You get what you pay for frankly.

Yep, you pays your money, you takes your choice. Except that TfL wants to take away your choice.

TheMoonandBack wrote: »

Uber should play by the rules, if they can't then the authorities will stop them - this is now happening. Like most corrupt organisations they have danced and dodged but now it's caught up with them.

In principle, I agree with you. But we live in a country with a burgeoning bureaucracy that has developed a disdain for innovation. In my view it is the establishment that has become corrupt and works for self interest. Regulation is applied when it suits "them" to snuff out those that rock the boat. Meanwhile we have any number of public authorities who simply refuse to apply regulations when its not in their interest - even when pressed by the little man. Hence NHS scandals, Grenfell Tower, Jimmy Saville and my pet bugbear - planning departments refusing to enforce planning conditions.

bigadaj

chattychappy wrote: »

Yep, you pays your money, you takes your choice. Except that TfL wants to take away your choice.



In principle, I agree with you. But we live in a country with a burgeoning bureaucracy that has developed a disdain for innovation. In my view it is the establishment that has become corrupt and works for self interest. Regulation is applied when it suits "them" to snuff out those that rock the boat. Meanwhile we have any number of public authorities who simply refuse to apply regulations when its not in their interest - even when pressed by the little man. Hence NHS scandals, Grenfell Tower, Jimmy Saville and my pet bugbear - planning departments refusing to enforce planning conditions.

The oldest and best restrictive practices are obviously operated by the legal profession though, Shakespeare recognised that.

An absolute free market doesn't work, nor does a communist one, where we lie between those extremes is down to individuals or rather their consensus.

shaun_from_Africa

I've no interactions with Uber drivers directly but if they act the same way in London that they do in my local town, I'm not in the least bit surprised about what has happened.

Horley town used to have ample parking spaces in "pay and display" carparks but in their wisdom, the local council decided to lease 50 spaces in one carpark to Uber. (this was well over half of the spaces available).
That might have been fine if the drivers only used those 50 spaces but this didn't happen.
At times it was totally impossible to get parked in there as the Uber vehicles were parked in just about all of the available spaces (without valid tickets) and there was an area with rubbish bins and this became their toilet area.
Many of the drivers became extremely aggressive when asked to move and the local parking enforcement people never went in there as they were scared to do so.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/12/uber-backlash-surrey-town-hundreds-sign-petition-amid-claims/

Car_54

chattychappy wrote: »

Meanwhile we have any number of public authorities who simply refuse to apply regulations when its not in their interest - even when pressed by the little man. Hence NHS scandals, Grenfell Tower, .....

So, which regulations have you decided were ignored in respect of Grenfell Tower? You could save us many £ millions by rendering the public inquiry unnecessary.

chattychappy

bigadaj wrote: »

The oldest and best restrictive practices are obviously operated by the legal profession though, Shakespeare recognised that.

Ha ha ha... yep an establishment friend gave me a "let's kill all the lawyers" fridge magnet when I qualified, saying I had out established her. You are dead right, one of the most corrupt "professions" I know (I'm not in it anymore). There have been some moves to make entry easier, but it is quite shocking what solicitors get away with without being struck off, whilst newcomers are put off. (But there are certainly some thorougly decent lawyers too...)

Car_54 wrote: »

So, which regulations have you decided were ignored in respect of Grenfell Tower? You could save us many £ millions by rendering the public inquiry unnecessary.

Ha ha ha... yep.... let's have an enquiry.... As you say... The establishment rewards itself for such a disaster by trousering £ millions of our money setting up a quango/bureaucracy without doing real justice. OF COURSE, I could be wrong - perhaps a few people will be locked up for manslaughter. I'm not holding my breath, though.

Car_54

chattychappy wrote: »

Ha ha ha... yep.... let's have an enquiry.... As you say... The establishment rewards itself for such a disaster by trousering £ millions of our money setting up a quango/bureaucracy without doing real justice. OF COURSE, I could be wrong - perhaps a few people will be locked up for manslaughter. I'm not holding my breath, though.

You haven't answered the question. Which regulations?

Mercdriver

chattychappy wrote: »

Ha ha ha... yep.... let's have an enquiry.... As you say... The establishment rewards itself for such a disaster by trousering £ millions of our money setting up a quango/bureaucracy without doing real justice. OF COURSE, I could be wrong - perhaps a few people will be locked up for manslaughter. I'm not holding my breath, though.

How does the establishment 'trouser' such money? Please explain - you're getting as conspiracy theorist as Strider