Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Wed May 06, 2026 5:57 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 9:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2011 5:33 pm
Posts: 120
Sussex wrote:
I suspect we all know we can work for more than one operator.

It's just those operators often have rules prohibiting working for others.

I thinks those ops need to have a long term rethink.


It is correct that drivers can only work for one operator in Manchester as the vehicle has to carry the Licensing official stickers that have the operators name, the stickers cannot be magnetic either.

The stickers make the vehicles stand out like a sore thumb (or more like a taxi) which is how a lot make a living....by illegally plying for hire, it just costs them 130 quid a week radio rent for the privilege.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 11:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57364
Location: 1066 Country
silvercab wrote:
It is correct that drivers can only work for one operator in Manchester as the vehicle has to carry the Licensing official stickers that have the operators name, the stickers cannot be magnetic either.

I would view that as a restraint of trade.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2011 5:33 pm
Posts: 120
Sussex wrote:
silvercab wrote:
It is correct that drivers can only work for one operator in Manchester as the vehicle has to carry the Licensing official stickers that have the operators name, the stickers cannot be magnetic either.

I would view that as a restraint of trade.

Quite likely, but only if it is challenged, the requirements to have stickers at all seems to breach the Greater Manchester Act 1981 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/1981 ... 009_en.pdf which appears to prohibit them :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 4:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:58 pm
Posts: 302
https://twitter.com/Cab4Now/status/452438470909493248/photo/1/large

Uber price surge.

£4:64 a mile and minimum fare £17 lol , think I might relocate .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
UberX Is Killing Cab Industry, Drivers Say


Last week, we reported how in the span of 24 hours, 9,000 Floridians signed a petition to get Uber in Florida. But what appears to be a revolutionary way of melding technology and getting a cab is also a major potential threat to cabdrivers and the taxi industry as a whole.

Uber is basically an app with which you can request a cab or limo driver, then name your price. You can also rate the driver.

Plenty of us know what a pain in the ass getting a cab can be down here in South Florida. So, on the surface, Uber would appear ideal.

But Uber also has something called UberX, which is basically a lower-priced version of Uber that uses midrange cars for ridesharing. And according to concerned cabbies across the state and country, it's going to cripple the industry.

For the moment, in Florida, Uber is available only in Jacksonville. But the Florida Legislature is looking to change that, which is where Uber's petition comes in. And Uber has brought UberX wherever it has gone.

Uber started off with regular licensed drivers in cities such as New York; Washington, D.C.; Chicago; and San Francisco.

"It was like discovering ice cream for the first time," Jennifer Condie, a cabdriver from Palm Beach County told New Times when she first learned of the app. "This is the future, I thought."

Uber then took notice of the success of ridesharing companies such as Lyft and Sidecar.

The problem is, ridesharing services have been widely unregulated. But that didn't stop Uber from launching UberX. The lack of regulation, it would seem, is probably what spurred them on in the first place, according to some concerned cabbies.

A San Francisco assistant district attorney recently told regulators that drivers who are using UberX and other ridesharing companies are committing insurance fraud.

Basically, a rideshare such as UberX, taxi drivers like Condie say, is a threat to public safety as well as to the industry.

The reason for concern is that personal auto insurance doesn't cover commercial drivers. And, according to the drivers we spoke to, Uber has specifically told its drivers not to get insurance.

"UberX has regular passenger insurance, taking 20 percent from the driver," Condie says. "But they basically tell drivers not to get insurance, to put it on your personal insurance. But you can't put others on your insurance."

A Chicago-based cabdriver working with Uber, who goes only by the name Joe, tells New Times that Uber held a meeting of taxi drivers in his area several weeks ago. At this meeting, they told drivers that the company does not allow commercial insurance. "I'm sitting in this meeting and they're saying this to us, and I couldn't believe it," Joe says.

The UberX rep at the meeting was peppered with questions about insurance. The drivers, Joe says, were told they would receive more information about it via email. That email has yet to arrive, Joe claims.

Joe's concern is that UberX is opening the door for non-taxi drivers to start giving people lifts around the city for money without proper regulation.

"It's decimating the cab industry," he says. "They're bringing in regular people and telling them to operate as cabbies and not providing them with insurance."

The bottom line is, commercial insurance is expensive. In some states, it can cost a cabbie up to $5,000.

"It basically f*cks up their business plans," Joe says. "But if you have a passenger and he gets injured in an accident, where do they file a claim?"

For rideshare companies like UberX, Lyft, and others, there are obvious advantages to having no regulation -- for both the driver and the passenger, it's cheap. And because there is no overhead, a company like Uber has flourished with its UberX service. And Florida could be next.

"The main problem with this industry is communication," Condie says. "I have no problem with rideshare entering our market, but it has to be regulated."

Condie says another app, called MyTaxi, which has been successful in Europe and recently entered the D.C. and Miami markets, is charging drivers only 2.6 percent and $1 per ride. Uber, Condie says, is charging drivers 20 percent for the same technology while not kicking a single cent back to local government, regulators, or the State of Florida.

And avoiding regulations.

For her part, Condie has sent a letter to the Florida Department of Insurance.

"Operators such as Lyft/sidecar/UberX are preying on the nation's dysfunctional taxi system and the fact that city/county/state governments AND insurance regulators are not in sync with each other and have no clue what is going on," her letter says. "The risk of exposure of private insurance is so great due to fraud/abuse it can be market destabilizing."

The bill going through the Florida Legislature to get Uber into the Sunshine State recently passed its first committee.

source: http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/ ... urance.php

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 9:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Taxi Rival Uber Sued, Claims Drivers Not Legally Licensed

Image


DOWNTOWN COLUMBUS -- The ride service app Uber is facing a lawsuit in the City of Columbus. City officials say some drivers for UberX, the company's cab service, are not licensed to work as professional drivers in the city.

Similar lawsuits have been filed in San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Washington DC and Toronto.

In each case, the city claimed the Uber driver was not licensed to work as a ride for hire. Uber claims it is only an app that connects riders to drivers and it provides a service that's in high demand and competitive with local taxi companies.

During the Arnold Classic, city department of public safety spokesperson Amanda Ford said the city was aware that UberX was giving rides for free to promote their business. Unlicensed drivers can legally provide rides if they are free.

City investigators suspected UberX drivers were charging some customers. In an undercover investigation, on six separate occasions, UberX drivers gave city workers rides and charged them.

Last month, local taxi companies rallied outside of Columbus city hall and protested that app based ride services like Uber and Lyft do not follow the same licensing regulations.

The city attorney's office has filed a temporary restraining order asking UberX drivers to stop providing ride-for-hire services until further notice.

ABC 6/FOX 28 attempted to contact the drivers listed in the lawsuit. One driver responded to aBC 6/ FOX 28 and said he was unaware of the lawsuit and still providing rides.

The city of Columbus gave the green light to Uber's limo service. The city did not finish it's approval of UberX, the cab service.

source: http://www.myfox28columbus.com/shared/n ... 0472.shtml

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:22 pm
Posts: 14152
Location: Wirral
Personally I think anybody who facilitates the booking of private hire vehicles should have to have a licence regardless as to whether the customer speaks with a control centre, an online booking form or an app. Obviously it can't be a local licence because they work all over the place but there should be a national licence so at least their systems can be checked regularly to ensure that they are keeping up to date records for their drivers and records of all the bookings. I know for fact that Cabmania don't keep up to date records of drivers.

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 12:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Taxi companies file suit against Uber and Lyft



Taxi companies in Houston and San Antonio took their turf war with two online companies to federal court Tuesday, saying Uber and Lyft are operating illegally and skimming money from taxi firms that abide by the law.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. district court in Houston, asks a federal judge to declare the companies are violating city ordinances in Houston and San Antonio by accepting payments for taking riders to destinations.

Trips generated by Uber and Lyft – which connect interested riders with willing drivers via smartphone apps – have led to 26 citations in Houston; 15 were issued to drivers and the rest to the companies.

The number of citations for accepting payment has jumped in recent weeks, leading taxi companies to file the lawsuit, lawyer Martyn Hill said. It became clear, he said, that the citations hadn’t discouraged the two companies from operating and accepting payment.

Hill said city penalties aren’t strong enough to keep the companies from violating strict rules that govern taxi companies and drivers.

“If I could run a bar and all I had to do was pay a fine for $500 for not paying taxes, I might still run the bar and pay the fines,” Hill said. “That’s what’s happening here.”

Uber had not seen the lawsuit, spokeswoman Nairi Hourdajian said, but planned to continue operating.

“As they see the demand for services like Uber in Houston and they see city officials taking an informed look at the services, they are taking desperate measures,” Hourdajian said of the taxi and limo companies. “Their time and energy might be better spent improving that service.”

She said courts have repeatedly ruled in the company’s favor. In Dallas, the city took the company to court accusing it of advertising an illegal limo service, Hourdajian said.

“It took a jury 10 minutes to bring back a unanimous verdict,” Hourdajian said.

Texpatriate notes some other suits that have been filed against the newcomers. I’ll talk about this more in a minute, but first here’s a story from the weekend about those citations.


As city officials consider changes that would permit two new companies to permanently enter Houston’s paid-ride market, the companies continue racking up citations.

Uber and Lyft – which connect interested riders with willing drivers via smartphone apps – have been issued a combined 11 citations for improperly charging for rides. Drivers have been issued 15 citations since the companies launched locally in late February.

In a letter to city elected officials Wednesday, regulatory affairs department head Tina Paez said 26 citations had been issued thus far, 15 to Uber or its drivers and 11 to Lyft or its drivers. City officials are making efforts to serve the citations levied against the companies – six against Uber and five against Lyft, Paez said.

“Uber and Lyft do not have registered agents in Texas and will need to be served in California,” Paez wrote. “Once served, Uber and Lyft will have two options: Pay the fines or go to trial.”

Twenty-six is not a whole lot. For some context, I reached out to spokespeople for the two companies to ask them about their ridership numbers in Houston so far. According to them, there have been over 20,000 rides via UberX, and five thousand via Lyft. Now obviously enforcement is dependent on the number of enforcement officers out there, but still that’s a pretty high trip-to-ticket ratio, and I don’t know that I want a swarm of cops out there policing ride sharers – surely there are higher priorities than that. The number I’d really like to know is the volume of cab rides since February, and how it compares to previous months and to the same months a year and two years ago. A lot of people have been using Lyft and Uber, but how much of that is coming out of the cab companies’ hides, and how much of it is new volume? I’m sure some of it has come at the expense of the cabbies, but it would be nice to know how much. If their decline is significantly less than the number of rides that Uber and Lyft have provided, then I’m not sure how much sympathy I have.

I will say that I have a copy of a taxi demand study in Seattle, conducted after the entry of ridesharing companies and provided to me by a representative of Lyft, that shows an increase in demand for limo services and a flat demand curve for traditional taxis, which goes back well before the newcomers’ entries. It may well be that the effect on Houston’s cabs has been minimal. (Here’s a copy of the taxi study done for Houston that was to be discussed with Council yesterday.) I’m sympathetic to the concerns about Lyft and Uber skirting the law, and I agree with Texpate that Uber’s overly aggressive email campaign has been off-putting. Pretty much every city these companies have entered, there have been complaints about how they have gone about establishing themselves and interacting with local governments. Be that as it may, I’m not sure how this is a matter for the courts, and I’d like to know what the cab companies say their losses are. And yes, I’m ready for Council to put this to bed.

http://blog.chron.com/kuffsworld/2014/0 ... utalkshcat

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 08, 2014 4:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:58 pm
Posts: 302
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/uber-taxi-firm-you-can-7087771



Uber allows customers to order one of its private cabs using a smart phone and get real time information about how far away it is



A cab firm powered by smart phones has launched in Manchester.

California-based Uber has been a global success story after launching in dozens of cities around the world.

It allows customers to order one of its private cabs using a smart phone and get real time information about how far away it is.

Although a number of taxi and cab firms currently allow online and smartphone bookings, the San Francisco-based firm is purely-app based and does not take phone bookings.

Its creators says the software offers a number of innovative features, such as the ability for passengers to easily share their current location and ETA with others.

The privately-owned firm, whose investors include Google, has been quietly operating in Manchester for five weeks.

It wants to makeover the image of private hire firms by sending users the photo and name of drivers, offering cashless payments – and the chance to give feedback by rating their drivers.

The firm has secured an operator licence and signed up a fleet of licensed private hire drivers to work for them.

Drivers, who are already licensed taxi drivers signed up by the firm, are automatically selected based on their proximity to the customer.

Uber says its rates are 30 per cent cheaper than a black cab.

The service launched its operation in London in 2012 and its fans now include Lily Allen and Pixie Lott.

Manchester is the next UK city to run the service.

But despite the San Francisco’s blue chip fan base, the business deny they are just for high-end business users with students and shoppers among their first users.

Max Lines, who is heading up the Manchester operation, told the M.E.N.: “We have had a wide variety of customers. The prices are competitive.

“There are growing number of people with smart phones. We are launching in Manchester in a big way, not just in the city centre.

“All our drivers are licensed cab drivers who have decided to work with us.

“The transactions are all done cashlessly and the location software removes the need for a dispatcher meaning drivers can be busier during their shifts.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 08, 2014 4:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
I really should have put this article on the correct thread - thanks andycable - will admin remove the following thread;

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=24360

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 08, 2014 6:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:58 pm
Posts: 302
captain cab wrote:
I really should have put this article on the correct thread - thanks andycable - will admin remove the following thread;

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=24360


ooops hadn't noticed your earlier posting , sorry :) :) :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 08, 2014 6:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
andycable wrote:
captain cab wrote:
I really should have put this article on the correct thread - thanks andycable - will admin remove the following thread;

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=24360


ooops hadn't noticed your earlier posting , sorry :) :) :)


My error - as soon as I posted it I remembered the UBER thread you started - it should be here :wink:

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2014 11:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 1:13 pm
Posts: 1
listen people who ever has uber taxi use this code V7O50 a friend of mine found it you get £45, right now I've got £55 uber credit


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 7:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 8:15 pm
Posts: 9170
Yes uber taxi £30 wrote:
listen people who ever has uber taxi use this code V7O50 a friend of mine found it you get £45, right now I've got £55 uber credit


A 1st post with no Axe to grind!..Id reckon that's blatant advertising or has more tongue in cheek than a Cows head in a butchers window. :oops:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
bloodnock wrote:
Yes uber taxi £30 wrote:
listen people who ever has uber taxi use this code V7O50 a friend of mine found it you get £45, right now I've got £55 uber credit


A 1st post with no Axe to grind!..Id reckon that's blatant advertising or has more tongue in cheek than a Cows head in a butchers window. :oops:

And advertising it to taxi drivers who drive taxis and don't use taxis is going to work. :lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 879 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group