They aren't getting it ...

[B1ts]

@dejongi
easy answer for you instead of me having to become an author, if black cabs are so unsuitable for you in london ( I still think there are people that value being able to flag on the street and or do not all have smartphones on them at the time but will go with you on that).
Why don't you just use Addison Lee?
They have the app and car availability and aircon etc you claim as pretty much your reason and they comply with the regulations....difference is their fares have to reflect an overall living wage for drivers therefore as fares are not allowed to rise under demand they will be dearer during quiter times but you already stated price was not in your reasoning....
Or as already mentioned there are many apps to virtually hail your taxi without standing in the rain as you said, why not just use one for a cab that complies rather than uber that do not and then say others should simply compete?
In other words why complain that black cabs are "not getting" something that they are legally unable to do anything about, you could "get" that you are not forced to use them, you can already do what you want them to do for you, so why get uptight that they protest they should be allowed to compete fairly?

 

[B1ts]

Excellent post
But I'm still struggling on the reference front.(as quoted)...forgive me.

Of all the above examples, not one could give a reference as to my character.
My doctor is obviously aware of me, but doesn't know me per se.
The same could be said for teachers etc. as I finished my degrees well over 20 years ago.
I am a member of one professional association, but all they can tell you is that I possess the necessary to qualify for membership, and have unundergone the necessary continuing development to maintain it.

My point is that character references are impossible to obtain from any referee who isn't very familuar with that person's character.

Even current employers cannot be sure of a person's character. ...only of the persona displayed in the work environment.
Eg...the friendliest, most productive member of a working team could be going home of an evening and abusung his family horribly, but his colleagues would never know.

I hope that makes some sense.
I'm not being argumentative, I just believe that reference gathering can very easily be both irrelevant and misleading.

It can but it is only one part of the fit and proper figuring out, probably why that descriptive term was used in the first place, it is a general guide and my guess is a better than nothing one, the list was off top of my head not exhaustive obv btw.

As I did say, none are complete independent tests on their own, the combined results (solvency, character/references, anything offered by candidate in support, if private hire licensing often have to be per approved by a local cab firm so do they have any info in regard to the person etc etc) would usually be looked at by either licensing departments or comittees to ascertain a view of the applicant, aiui they may be given benefit of doubt but all this reflects as when or if they get a complaint against them which again from those I know of over the years are often one word against another

These days it is more and more muddied as I understand it, as with more and more applicants arriving from outside the UK then obviously less options are available, they can only ask and judge each case on its merits.

In yours above although you say you have little, what you have there could show me you really are who you say and live where your documentstion says, for a start that tells me you are capable and willing to achieve a standard set by someone else with knowledge of subject, you can maintain that standard (imho good character trait) also if you were that abuser (again in your example colleagues may be unaware but unlikely the family dr would have zero concerns) and did anything to a passenger you are more likely to be traceable than someone of whom no checks were made, most authorities now insist on enhanced dbs ( old crb) checks and as I said before some authorities do not worry so much about the fit and proper relying instead on these dbs checks, however again in your example if that person has remained off radar what can definitely root them out?
If you are looking for definites it will confuse, personally I cannot see how it could be done, happy to hear suggestions though If good and I can implement in tech to authorities we could be rich lol!


It will allways be a judgement call somewhere in the line and historically fit and proper was/is it.

I am not in any way advocating the status quo of any part of the regs etc, nor do I pretend to understand them all myself, as said there are variations all over the place between authorities and if nothing else the good from uber may be a well needed shake down through all of them, my point was originally and still is simply blaming the black cabs for not getting it with this expectation they can just do as uber do is both naive and incorrect.


Regardless of references should you need to complain about a black cab (or licensed cab outside of london) either the vehicle or driver you are fully able to do so, that ability, as well as the checks and balances needed to minimize the chances of ever needing to, come at an overhead cost (be it financially or whatever, earlier was suggested black cabs should just change to mercs and work as uber do, that means no ranks, no flagging, only method then is via phone, a time overhead for those that do just want to stick their arm up) which we as passengers end up paying for.

That driver is accountable and can easily find himself not just fined but having his livelihood removed, not just what his call centre may decide but you as a customer can and should go to your local authority and report.


If on the other hand you want to complain about an uber car....there is not even a physical office to complain to let alone an accountable system for public safety as per licensed , again if as suggested earlier drivers set one up comparable to uber and had an office a lot of the "grey area" actions done currently by uber would be able to be legally tested much easier than currently whereby you would need to work any case against an ethereal company that has already used their non physical location fully to their advantage all over the world hence even their drivers taking them to court in some countries over the way they manipulate the employed/self employed attributions. Or go after the driver who will most likely have nothing own nothing and simply be a pointless exercise. The uber recourse is simply your ability to rate via the app....well call me cynical but I do not think app ratings can replace an allbeit antiquated set of rules and regs when it comes to safety in part of our public transport system.....

Personally I hope we will end up with a system of use allowing ranking, flagging and app hailing with fair to both sides pricing (whether allowing in boundary fixed pricing or forced metering set by authorities as now) but one where rules and regs are fairly and evenly set applying common sense to much that has arisen over years of council changes designed to make as sure as possible each journey is done as safely and efficiently as possible, which currently no side of the argument can claim.

Sorry for the post tangent drift viv1969

Btw the good character/standing bit was not just meant to be about personal references but things linked to solvency again such as being a bankrupt etc these things all help that judgement call I spose.

 

[B1ts]

Blimey you really do miss the point don't you. That part highlighted in bold nicely demonstrates the whole discussion we are having, and most of the taxi drivers.

It does indeed, it demonstrates you take umbrage at someone with knowledge of the subject that disagrees with your naive presumption to the point you actually quote that my 25 years of knowledge demonstrates the problem when discussing something you clearly have very little knowledge of lol.

Yes...yes it does indeed.

 

[B1ts]

I must admit that you sound just like the militant taxi drivers calling into LBC and doing the protest marches. So much misinformation that it is just laughable, and you can't see the wood for the trees. The most obvious way they can compete is right in front of you but as per my thread, they don't get it.

Ah well, I'm not loosing any sleep or income over it. The black cab trade in the mean time is.

That may just be because they probably know more about the issues then either you or I do but dont let facts confuse your opinion based on not much knowledge.

Please...what misinformation is this?
I would like to know rather than snide inuendo, I have had to go i to much more detail to satisfy the requirement of backing up my generalisations please have the courtesy to do likewise.

As above, I have explained why they are simply not able to do as you say in your thread, you simply ignore those facts because they do not fit your point of view, what specificalky is this thing they can do?

Note: CAN not should would might but actually able to do without working illegally.

 

[B1ts]

Oh don't be silly. They know it just as much or not as with a black cab. It is not for the customer to check those kind of things.


They do know who is coming, they get their details upfront. They can confirm it is the same person as that has the account. In fact their journey is also logged and tracked so not just they know who they are with, as does everyone else with access to the app.

Black cab drivers can be rapist as well, heck you can be, so can I.


That is correct, some have joined up with such services. Which is exactly my point about competing. The fast majority doesn't how ever. Their app technology and experience is pretty basic and poor though.


That is plain mis-information. Besides also misses the point, I guess comprehension is lacking a little. Being at the mercy is in relation as to whether they stop for you when hailing or not. The amount of times I've had taxis just drive past with their light on, and not just for me. Female friends have had many a time had the taxi not stop for them either. In my experience they operate a logic of their own, regardless what the regulations say.

Paragraph 2:
Yes sadly there is, as you seem to overlook they are regulated, this forces them to operate in a prescribed way using prescribed vehicles, I fail to see how you cannot understand this, not saying it is right but it is def wrong to blame the drivers as you are.
Besides the fact that many do use apps akin to uber which again you overlook.


About £5K worth per annum, yes I use them a lot.


Much more common to not have the card payment versus the ones that do. And then the ones that do seem to operate a minimum payment as well. Further more when you hail one you don't know whether you will get one that accepts cards or not. That is the point, again total bypass in comprehension skills on what customers want.


Yes sure, we all love to have the time to make such reports. Nope an automated feedback popping up at the end of the journey with a couple of clicks is much more convenient. But even more so, why would I want to report drivers like that to TFL. I just don't want a driver like that. They shouldn't have to be told to clean up their act or get a nice new comfy vehicle.


I've been using black cabs for a long time, it is just great that there are much better options now. No protests against Addison Lee, are you for real? They are constantly at odds with each other. Now I'm wondering whether you understand the London market. But again the Addison Lee model is not great for individuals. Their app is nowhere near as good, I also don't like their vehicles. Interestingly I noticed one of the Uber drivers I was with last week was also an Addison Lee drivers, perhaps that is something black cab drivers can do


Yes they can choose not too. They are the drivers, they make the money, they can make a demand for a change, heck they could even join uber as a driver. Setup their own service. So many possibilities, so little time.

1. Your naivety is breathtaking especially as I took the trouble to explain exactly why that position is incorrect. It is NOT known at all because they are not checked and controlled in the same way.
Exactly, that is my point that you still cannot see, as it is not for the passenger to check, the authorites have to, which they do for licensed cabs, uber DO NOT have the same checks simple as that, wheter you believe me or not, go check, you are just so wrong....; (

2. They know who the uber app says is driving, thats it, no checks no validity done whatsoever.
Nearly all taxi fleets journeys are tracked and logged these days, just that you do not see it on a screen in front of you in the car necessarily.

Ffs a black cab driver cannot be a convicted one nor a convicted anything much at all really, AGAIN there are checks that uber drivers DO NOT HAVE ( don't like shouting but also don't like being forced to repeat myself).
Of course it is not foolproof but that is no argument to have unchecked drivers as you are doing?

3. Your point about competing is yes they are doing what you complain they were not? Albeit a poorer app experience.

4.
Misinformation? Really? Please explain because my statement was entirely true. Prove otherwise or frankly show yourself to be a liar......

Your change of tack re mercy if those are true did you or your multitude of friends take the rear plate cab number and report them to tfl?
You expect everyone else to be proactive on your behalf so clearly you must have done your bit to remove those bad apple drivers breaking the law?

4. Minimum card payments are forced upon drivers by the pay processing companies, as is ridiculous processing fees, neither are the drivers choice, yet again due to your lack of knowledge you are blaming the wrong part of the system and one the drivers cannot change but if you wish to offer fee free no min card transaction processing for taxis I can prob get you a few thousand takers tomorrow.

5. Because if you dont report them how do tfl know to take action anout it? Telepathy?
Yet again you have ignored the facts, they have to use those vehicles they cannot simply choose another of a different type, naive again.

6 and 7.
No they cant it is illegal for them to do either of those under current legislation and no they cannot as then they cannot legally ply for hire as in ranks and flags, so again due to your complete lack of knowledge your system ends up with no rank available taxis, none available for flags and the only supply to be app based hailing of vehicles that will be blocking evrry available parking up spot or having to run continually in circles.
Bloody brilliant well done, problem clearly solved!

The system is broken!
Blaming the drivers is not the solution!
No point me saying any more as you clearly either do not read or just do not believe what I have said....please do your own research then maybe you will understand my point.
They DO "get it" protesting is pretty much all they can legally do to try and get things sorted.
The only one I know saying they just want the status quo is you.

 

[dejongj]

@dejongi
easy answer for you instead of me having to become an author, if black cabs are so unsuitable for you in london ( I still think there are people that value being able to flag on the street and or do not all have smartphones on them at the time but will go with you on that).
Why don't you just use Addison Lee?
They have the app and car availability and aircon etc you claim as pretty much your reason and they comply with the regulations....difference is their fares have to reflect an overall living wage for drivers therefore as fares are not allowed to rise under demand they will be dearer during quiter times but you already stated price was not in your reasoning....
Or as already mentioned there are many apps to virtually hail your taxi without standing in the rain as you said, why not just use one for a cab that complies rather than uber that do not and then say others should simply compete?
In other words why complain that black cabs are "not getting" something that they are legally unable to do anything about, you could "get" that you are not forced to use them, you can already do what you want them to do for you, so why get uptight that they protest they should be allowed to compete fairly?

I really don't like Addison Lee. I am not forced to use them indeed and given the choice of a good alternative option I won't either. But hey, it's not my livelyhood at stake. I do get annoyed by their protests as they block the traffic in London and think it would be much more productive for them to approach it differently. You see it's will all the right intentions

 

[dejongj]

Yeah you're obviulously right, should only be looked at from one perspective and sod the reasons for regulation in an industry obviously comparable to fishcakes....

It is not what they are doing...the correct analogy would be if the chef was wanting to change the specifications but was legally not allowed to.

If you researched the constraints and prescribed regulations rather than repeatedly asserting such a naive position you might get some understanding but I don't see that happening here tbh.

Additionally, apart from the rather odd comparison of the apprentice where rarely does anyone have any in depth knowledge of that which they project manage....fishcake manufacture hardly has the same risk and attribution profile as the taxi trade which is don't forget part of the public transport system so needs some form of rule and regulation whether you personally cannot understand that or not.

Unsurprisingly I disagree. The customer pays for their livelyhood. It is legal to provide a service that the customer want, they can provide that service instead.

To follow your chef analogy, you can produce something that is champagne but not call it champagne unless it comes from the champagne region. Great let's produce that and call it something different, which is let's face it is what uber does. The same, transporting people from one place to another, but in a more convenient and better way.

It really doesn't have to be hard to compete with that.

 

[Phil V]

Oh dear oh dear...Terry said it for the black cabs and steel and I'm happy to defend steel further.

I live not far from the Radcar steel works and I disagree with you on a number of levels but I'll try and be brief and simple...

We can't compete with the Chinese on price but we're not exactly on a level playing field are we? And then there's the personal beneficial and environmental considerations.

On competitiveness. I do wonder why people persist in believing that the market is all and everything and that the most efficient producers will succeed and inefficient ones will perish and that's the right and natural order of things as that's simplistic, naive and often simply barkingly wrong. It's just not the way the world works outside of the mind of free market proponents. In the real world other states manipulate the markets and provide aid and support to their home producers and manage their economies in their own interests. We don't do that as apparently EC rules don't allow us to but that is rather odd as the French, German's and Italian's seem to have a slightly laxer copy of the EC rule book and all support, subsidise and indeed own what out government seems to be prevented from.

On well being. Working can be much more than just about the money. At it's best it gives a sense of achievement and wellbeing, it gives people a sense of purpose and allows the building of personal relationships and communities. Life on the dole isn't so conducive to wellbeing.

On the environment. Our steel works and wider industries have to comply with EC directives and UK statutory instruments. I do wonder if the Chinese conform to the similar standards, I'd be willing to bet that things aren't quite so strict and that the environment suffers as a result.

And there's also the issue of quality, you may or may not remember a little news story from a few years ago... the rail companies reported that tracks were bending and guess why... they'd stopped buying British made steel and had bought a load of cheap but crap steel from China.

One thing which has annoyed the hell out of me is the stance of the Labour Party. Labour politicians are shouting at the Tories demanding action and the events of a few years ago have been airbrushed from history. It's like something from 1984 with minions busy rewriting the history books. Back a few years to the last Labour government... the Redcar steel works was deep in trouble and they turned their backs and just didn't care. I remember one Labour woman (I forget her name) complaining with a pained look on her face that when she was out knocking on doors "all people wanted to talk about was the steel works." I have a hard time forgiving her arrogance and the indifference of the Labour party back then. Back then local big wigs campaigned to get the local Labour MP's out and called for them to be kept out for a generation and as a life long Labour supporter I had to agree and I haven't voted for them since.

When I see Labour bleating about the Redcar works now I just think "You F-ing hypocrite."

IMO the government should save the steel industry, once it goes it's gone forever. They don't have to do anything too odd, just do what most of our competitor nations would do. Impose import restrictions, provide aid and find ways to award contracts to home producers.

I totally agree with all of that...
except the EU doesn't stop us from subsidising or owning industries, that's a list of successive governments who've chosen to believe the free market knows best.

 

[dejongj]

That may just be because they probably know more about the issues then either you or I do but dont let facts confuse your opinion based on not much knowledge.

Please...what misinformation is this?
I would like to know rather than snide inuendo, I have had to go i to much more detail to satisfy the requirement of backing up my generalisations please have the courtesy to do likewise.

As above, I have explained why they are simply not able to do as you say in your thread, you simply ignore those facts because they do not fit your point of view, what specificalky is this thing they can do?

Note: CAN not should would might but actually able to do without working illegally.

I am not ignoring it at all, there is nothing standing in their way of doing what uber does. They just won't be a "Black Cab" but they are still a taxi driver. To the end customer who pays their income it is the same thing, they pick up someone and drop them off at another location. It happens all around the word since the beginning of time. So rather than lobbying to get uber out of business, lobby to get the rules changes or work in a different way. If they are no more tfl taxis left then perhaps they get the hint to get with the times.

 

[dejongj]

1. Your naivety is breathtaking especially as I took the trouble to explain exactly why that position is incorrect. It is NOT known at all because they are not checked and controlled in the same way.
Exactly, that is my point that you still cannot see, as it is not for the passenger to check, the authorites have to, which they do for licensed cabs, uber DO NOT have the same checks simple as that, wheter you believe me or not, go check, you are just so wrong....; (

2. They know who the uber app says is driving, thats it, no checks no validity done whatsoever.
Nearly all taxi fleets journeys are tracked and logged these days, just that you do not see it on a screen in front of you in the car necessarily.

Ffs a black cab driver cannot be a convicted one nor a convicted anything much at all really, AGAIN there are checks that uber drivers DO NOT HAVE ( don't like shouting but also don't like being forced to repeat myself).
Of course it is not foolproof but that is no argument to have unchecked drivers as you are doing?

3. Your point about competing is yes they are doing what you complain they were not? Albeit a poorer app experience.

4.
Misinformation? Really? Please explain because my statement was entirely true. Prove otherwise or frankly show yourself to be a liar......

Your change of tack re mercy if those are true did you or your multitude of friends take the rear plate cab number and report them to tfl?
You expect everyone else to be proactive on your behalf so clearly you must have done your bit to remove those bad apple drivers breaking the law?

4. Minimum card payments are forced upon drivers by the pay processing companies, as is ridiculous processing fees, neither are the drivers choice, yet again due to your lack of knowledge you are blaming the wrong part of the system and one the drivers cannot change but if you wish to offer fee free no min card transaction processing for taxis I can prob get you a few thousand takers tomorrow.

5. Because if you dont report them how do tfl know to take action anout it? Telepathy?
Yet again you have ignored the facts, they have to use those vehicles they cannot simply choose another of a different type, naive again.

6 and 7.
No they cant it is illegal for them to do either of those under current legislation and no they cannot as then they cannot legally ply for hire as in ranks and flags, so again due to your complete lack of knowledge your system ends up with no rank available taxis, none available for flags and the only supply to be app based hailing of vehicles that will be blocking evrry available parking up spot or having to run continually in circles.
Bloody brilliant well done, problem clearly solved!

The system is broken!
Blaming the drivers is not the solution!
No point me saying any more as you clearly either do not read or just do not believe what I have said....please do your own research then maybe you will understand my point.
They DO "get it" protesting is pretty much all they can legally do to try and get things sorted.
The only one I know saying they just want the status quo is you.

You are still following the recipe it's a pointless discussion that way. Don't forget where the money comes from.

And I know more about background checks than you'll ever do. Basically they will only highlight what we already know.

 

[nilagin]

What is this "bus" of which you speak?

Those pain in the arse vehicles allowed to block roads so people can get on or off, and in some parts get lanes set out for them and them alone when in the main part that lane goes relatively unused whilst all other traffic is forced into using another lane. Add to that they are invariably driven by people who think they own the road because they are a "professional driver" and everyone has to make way for them.

 

[POAH]

Black cabs are not private hire.

Otherwise yes my point exactly uber and unlicensed private hire cabs are pretty much the same and therefore expecting the licensed regulated trade to directly compete is not realistic unless one side or the other is made or allowed to work under the same constraints in particular those regarding safety of the public they carry.

you can wave a black cab down, you cant with uber or a private hire. bitching cause you have some competition is quite sad

 

[B1ts]

Unsurprisingly I disagree. The customer pays for their livelyhood. It is legal to provide a service that the customer want, they can provide that service instead.

To follow your chef analogy, you can produce something that is champagne but not call it champagne unless it comes from the champagne region. Great let's produce that and call it something different, which is let's face it is what uber does. The same, transporting people from one place to another, but in a more convenient and better way.

It really doesn't have to be hard to compete with that.

It was your chef analogy not mine, not fully comparable to a regulated and controlled public transport system as you well know, yes we will have to agree to disagree as you are just wrong. The black cabs in London cannot legally just decide to drive mercs nor join or replicate uber nor compete effectively with the lower overheads that come from not complying to the same laws and regulations. Simply put it IS illegal for them to do as you suggest and you just saying no its not does not change that.

It should not be rocket science, it should be a lot easier and cost effective to be able to convey people from a to b but thanks to govt and local authority legislation (laws and bye laws not just guidelines or suggestions) it is currebtly not.

To get changes your ire should be directed at those able to implement change, the national and local govt, not the drivers.

To follow your albeit extremely narrow analogy rethink your process but include that the first has to implement quality control and the latter chooses to just use free water out of whatever river they stumble upon, which is safer? Your answer would appear to be the former should just go and act as badly as the latter.

 

[B1ts]

I am not ignoring it at all, there is nothing standing in their way of doing what uber does. They just won't be a "Black Cab" but they are still a taxi driver. To the end customer who pays their income it is the same thing, they pick up someone and drop them off at another location. It happens all around the word since the beginning of time. So rather than lobbying to get uber out of business, lobby to get the rules changes or work in a different way. If they are no more tfl taxis left then perhaps they get the hint to get with the times.

Blimey...YES there IS something on the way, they cannot then rank, be flagged etc apart from all the other aspects that actually an aweful lot of people fo find useful. Ask uber if their london drivers are "taxi" drivers, do you even inderstand the difference between a hackney carriage and private hire let alone licensed private hire?
Personally I think the seperation is outmoded and outdated as do most drivers I know of either type HOWEVER they are powerless to get a change, the only ones who can change the laws are gov and local authorites who only listen and claim the rules are in the interest of guess who? US the public, you know like you who complain yet say you want no part of actually improving things, to paraphrase another..... for stupidity in any authority system all it takes is good people to do nothing ....well done for being angelic

 

[B1ts]

To the end customer who pays their income it is the same thing, they pick up someone and drop them off at another location. It happens all around the word since the beginning of time. So rather than lobbying to get uber out of business, lobby to get the rules changes or work in a different way. If they are no more tfl taxis left then perhaps they get the hint to get with the times.

To the end customer yes, why do you think I am trying to disseminate the information that in law they are not.
They are not lobbying to ban uber they are protesting that uber are being allowed to operate without having to comply with the same laws and regs as licensed vehicles have to and the playing field needs to be level, simples.

If there are no more tfl cabs that can only be if they do as you keep saying they should since that puts them in an illegal position to work as tfl licensed vehicles (leaving us with no ranked or flaggable cabs just smartphone hailing only).

Do you really expect some few thousand people to give up their living (as most fares are rank or flag whatever your useage) and knowinglyvwork flouting publiccsafety etc just to suit your ideals when the real answer is to lobby for change, as the black cabs are already doing but as stated the govt and local auth claim the current way is both best for and is what we the public want.

Tell the national and local govt that they dont get it and needs to change, the drivers can only work within the law.

 

[B1ts]

You are still following the recipe it's a pointless discussion that way. Don't forget where the money comes from.

And I know more about background checks than you'll ever do. Basically they will only highlight what we already know.

This is my last post to you (thank god). May reply to others if any are genuinely interested/interesting
Unless of course you actually come back to me with proof of your claim of my earlier misinformation, else you were clearly just lying?

The money comes from the users of the public transport being operated by those willing and able to do so. Sadly some of that money now goes to others not willing or able to do so legally but hey it appears more convenient and cheaper to some so that must be the way everyone should do it eh.

Your last paragraph....well the summary alone shows me how little you realky know of enhanced dbs checks...how could you already know about someones history?

If you really know about them how do you not know that a licensed cab driver has to have one and uber drivers do not? Again I mentioned this earlier, you clearly ignored that yet replied you were not ignoring my information, cannot have it both ways i am afraid.

Actually to be blunt (and in ref to another earlier post of yours I was not and am not criticising your intent in any of this btw) however your last paragraph just on its own is enough for me to say this discussion with you is clearly pointless. I would like to think that you may at least report all these numerous black cabs you keep coming upon breaking the current laws but as you say you cannot be bothered I doubt it, as I doubt anything much will improve if we all have that attitude.

You clearly feel bothered enough to complain on here and to have this debate, which of course does nothing to change things, why not put that effort into reporting those black cabs instead? Improve the service to become what you want it to be, it is after all allegedly part of public transport and I am sure you would complain if a bus continually failed to pick you up or was always filthy inside (obv ymmv on bus tidyness acceptance lol)

 

[B1ts]

you can wave a black cab down, you cant with uber or a private hire. bitching cause you have some competition is quite sad

Sadly far far more behind it all than just that comparison, as I say its old and broken imho needs sorting, by those that can which is govt and authorities. Noone is bitching about competition just unfair competition.

I not supporting or non-supporting black cab drivers in the way they operate, as I say I personally think it overcomplicated etc in fact in my local authority you qualify as both hackney and private hire driver by exactly the same tests, as do most vehicles, and can even hold a dual licence but then have to work as prescribed depending which type of plate you can put on your vehicle (hackney plates tend to change hands for sums of money, another much needing looking at area that noone here as time to go into, trust me), I am simply explaining that they are prescribed by law to operate the way they do and it is unfair to compare to the way uber chooses to operate as a fair comparison and simply blame the licensed drivers as culpable for the difference as the op did.

 

[Finste]

I totally agree with all of that...
except the EU doesn't stop us from subsidising or owning industries, that's a list of successive governments who've chosen to believe the free market knows best.

Mostly they do....

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/consumers/government_aid_en.html

Regards...

 

[B1ts]

Just for clarity.... obviously there will be black cab drivers moaning about competition somewhere out there (always has been before uber so dont expect it to change) but aiui the ones protesting were not, they were protesting about unfair competition, different thing, anyhoo I am not in any way supporting that view or either view particularly tbh, just saying you may as well blame the bank tellers for the crisis and big bonuses as blame the drivers for the system brought about by many years of national and local control and regulation.
Right problem wrong target

 

[Phil V]

Mostly they do....

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/consumers/government_aid_en.html

Regards...

2nd paragraph

It is the Commission’s job to prevent this, allowing government support only if it is genuinely in the wider public interest – if it aims to benefit society or the economy as a whole.

When would a government want to help industry if it wasn't in the wider public interest?

 

[dejongj]

It was your chef analogy not mine

Ahem you appear to be confused, my analogy was regarding the apprentice, and about a chap (who just happened to be a fulfilling the role of a chef) who kept on citing the that he was following the instructions, not realising that it is all rubbish. That was the point, that he was fulfilling the role of a chef was neither here nor there....

The black cabs in London cannot legally just decide to drive mercs nor join or replicate uber nor compete effectively with the lower overheads that come from not complying to the same laws and regulations.

Bingo !!! You nearly got it.

It should not be rocket science, it should be a lot easier and cost effective to be able to convey people from a to b but thanks to govt and local authority legislation (laws and bye laws not just guidelines or suggestions) it is currebtly not.

So provide a different service that is not subject to those then

To the end customer yes, why do you think I am trying to disseminate the information that in law they are not.
They are not lobbying to ban uber they are protesting that uber are being allowed to operate without having to comply with the same laws and regs as licensed vehicles have to and the playing field needs to be level, simples.

That may be the formal line indeed, doesn't come across like that though....

If there are no more tfl cabs that can only be if they do as you keep saying they should since that puts them in an illegal position to work as tfl licensed vehicles (leaving us with no ranked or flaggable cabs just smartphone hailing only).

Sounds good to me, that will make tfl change their mind on the model they operate.

Do you really expect some few thousand people to give up their living (as most fares are rank or flag whatever your useage) and knowinglyvwork flouting publiccsafety etc just to suit your ideals

And there you go again with the misinformation ....

This is my last post to you (thank god).

I doubt it.

Unless of course you actually come back to me with proof of your claim of my earlier misinformation, else you were clearly just lying?

See above, and below

The money comes from the users of the public transport being operated by those willing and able to do so. Sadly some of that money now goes to others not willing or able to do so legally but hey it appears more convenient and cheaper to some so that must be the way everyone should do it eh.

More misinformation

Your last paragraph....well the summary alone shows me how little you realky know of enhanced dbs checks...how could you already know about someones history?

Well a DBS check is not an intelligence check, it reports on events that have already occurred. Hence it is information that is already known about someone, and provides no indication of what they are about to do or what connections they maintain.

If you really know about them how do you not know that a licensed cab driver has to have one and uber drivers do not? Again I mentioned this earlier, you clearly ignored that yet replied you were not ignoring my information, cannot have it both ways i am afraid.

Why do apply so many assumptions to that event. It is correct so I am not disputing it, so what is there to say? As per my previous point it only shows what we already know about people. Whilst useful, it is not the guarantee that you seem to hold it as. So we know that the driver hasn't been a rapist so far, doesn't mean he/she can't be one tonight

Actually to be blunt (and in ref to another earlier post of yours I was not and am not criticising your intent in any of this btw) however your last paragraph just on its own is enough for me to say this discussion with you is clearly pointless. I would like to think that you may at least report all these numerous black cabs you keep coming upon breaking the current laws but as you say you cannot be bothered I doubt it, as I doubt anything much will improve if we all have that attitude.

I am approaching this from a consumer perspective, my time is much more valuable than that time spend on reporting a dirty taxi, or one that didn't stop for me. I do it the consumer way and vote with my wallet. And if it improves, I'll happily go back.

You clearly feel bothered enough to complain on here and to have this debate, which of course does nothing to change things, why not put that effort into reporting those black cabs instead?

ROFLMAO Firstly I wasn't complaining, secondly I didn't start this with the intention to improve black cab business. I really don't car. I start caring when there is no alternative for my needs as a consumer.

Improve the service to become what you want it to be, it is after all allegedly part of public transport and I am sure you would complain if a bus continually failed to pick you up or was always filthy inside (obv ymmv on bus tidyness acceptance lol)

Seriously, you are now coming across like Roy Cropper from Coronation street a serial complainer. As long as there is an alternative, why would I spend my money on changing another persons commercial enterprise? A bus, are you mad? I am not going on any bus.

 

[Llamaman]

First the black cab drivers. Instead of competing on what customers want and providing that by changing of supplementing their offering. No instead they rather waste money to remain in the past and provide a poor service.

I don't know why you think Black Cabs provide a poor service. I've found the drivers to be knowledgeable, mostly courteous and the cars clean and safe.
Compare to minicabs I've had where the drivers have been high, the car knackered and the driver no idea of where he was, let alone going (on the second lap of the sat-nav-led circle I had to offer to drive the f*cking car myself). With Uberhyped you can't even be sure if the driver has a license or insurance as the background checks are carried out after they start.

Oh, and with black cabs you don't get your user details 'stolen' to pay for drug mules to ferry their wares around town (an amusing, if troubling story).

 

[dejongj]

I don't know why you think Black Cabs provide a poor service. I've found the drivers to be knowledgeable, mostly courteous and the cars clean and safe.
Compare to minicabs I've had where the drivers have been high, the car knackered and the driver no idea of where he was, let alone going (on the second lap of the sat-nav-led circle I had to offer to drive the f*cking car myself). With Uberhyped you can't even be sure if the driver has a license or insurance as the background checks are carried out after they start.

Oh, and with black cabs you don't get your user details 'stolen' to pay for drug mules to ferry their wares around town (an amusing, if troubling story).

To be fair the kind of minicabs that you are talking about is nowhere near what the likes of uber and Addison Lee provide. I've had my fair share of those, which was also used to great advantage dare I say as £20 from central London to Virginia water was a bargain but I digress. I don't check the license of many a vehicle or road worthiness. There are processes in place to cover such matters for us all. They are not fool proof, but neither are those of TFL. Unless I'm mistaken they are not instant and continuous but periodic. Nor is there any intelligence applied to it but are checked against what we already know.

What is this story about uber user details being stolen? Never heard of that one before.

 

[Llamaman]

To be fair the kind of minicabs that you are talking about is nowhere near what the likes of uber and Addison Lee provide. I've had my fair share of those, which was also used to great advantage dare I say as £20 from central London to Virginia water was a bargain but I digress. I don't check the license of many a vehicle or road worthiness. There are processes in place to cover such matters for us all. They are not fool proof, but neither are those of TFL. Unless I'm mistaken they are not instant and continuous but periodic. Nor is there any intelligence applied to it but are checked against what we already know.

What is this story about uber user details being stolen? Never heard of that one before.

I agree that Add Lee provide an excellent service and have put many smaller minicab firms out of business (many deservedly so). But that is a centralized firm with strict brand standards - as I understand it, Uber has no such controls and basically anyone with a car can join. The point about licenses/road worthiness/insurance is more important than your offhand dismissiveness warrants - if I'm in a car I want to know that should the worse happen, there is insurance to cover me. I don't want to have to take out my own insurance - it should be covered by the service. With Uber, you have no idea whether the driver has any insurance for commercial passengers. A license-plate reading camera linked to the DVLA will only pick up completely uninsured vehicles - not those with personal insurance but providing a commercial service (and so effectively uninsured). [see edit below]

Edit: the story about 'stolen' details was on BBC a while ago. Apparently the journalist noticed that according to the app he was in a cab, so he followed the route on the app. The passenger took several meandering journeys over a local area - it looked suspiciously like a dealer going to buyers. Other people have reported similar issues.

Edit: I've since discovered that Uber now have insurance for drivers whilst on a fare, so that's a start. however, it's still not enough, see my comment below.

 

[dejongj]

I agree that Add Lee provide an excellent service and have put many smaller minicab firms out of business (many deservedly so). But that is a centralized firm with strict brand standards - as I understand it, Uber has no such controls and basically anyone with a car can join. The point about licenses/road worthiness/insurance is more important than your offhand dismissiveness warrants - if I'm in a car I want to know that should the worse happen, there is insurance to cover me. I don't want to have to take out my own insurance - it should be covered by the service. With Uber, you have no idea whether the driver has any insurance for commercial passengers. A license-plate reading camera linked to the DVLA will only pick up completely uninsured vehicles - not those with personal insurance but providing a commercial service (and so effectively uninsured).

Edit: the story about 'stolen' details was on BBC a while ago. Apparently the journalist noticed that according to the app he was in a cab, so he followed the route on the app. The passenger took several meandering journeys over a local area - it looked suspiciously like a dealer going to buyers. Other people have reported similar issues.

Ok I'm getting bored with this now, not with you @Llamaman but with the information being spread.

So from a private hire drivers perspective. Don't they have to get a license? Don't they get a DBS and police check with that application? Don't they have to renew it regularly? How is that different to taxicab drivers?

So from a vehicle perspective. Don't they have to have appropriate insurance? Don't they have an annual vehicle check? Don't they have twice per annum an MOT test? How is that different to the black taxis?

So from an private hire operators perspective. Do t they get audited? Don't they have to check the drivers details? Don't they have to maintain logs of passenger, vehicle, driver, journey details? Hasn't uber passed the inspection every single time? How is that different to a taxicab operator?

As TFL themselves state, and @B1ts alluded to, the principle difference is the ability to use ranks and be flagged down.

Please let's start removing all the misinformation (and I'm being very nice and patient here I think).

 

[Llamaman]

As I understand it, Hackney Carriages drivers have to prove they have adequate insurance for commercial passengers as a prerequisite of obtaining and keeping their badge. Additional checks are carried out at random to ensure ongoing compliance.

Uber does the absolute minimum of checking, and are happy to approve drivers with fake documents. If someone proves the system doesn't work, they report the investigator, but don't fix the system;
http://www.theguardian.com/technolo...london-black-cab-drivers-claims-flawed-checks
Basically, you can give them a post-it note with "inzsewerants pollysee" written on it in wax crayon and that'll tick their compliance boxes.
Uber only checks insurance on application, allowing drivers to cancel their insurance policy after application, and drive around uninsured. TFL apparently didn't think of this flaw with their own testing of Uber's systems - they only checked Uber were applying the system they claimed to have, and didn't audit whether the system was fundamentally flawed.

The good news is that apparently Uber now (not when they first launched) has public liability insurance for its drivers, but only once they have a fare. In the period between fares (the "trolling period"), they are not covered by Uber, and are possibly (there'll need to be some test cases) not covered by their personal insurance because they are conducting commercial work whilst touting for fares. Don't believe me? How about an insurance expert?
http://www.propertycasualty360.com/2015/02/09/uh-ohuber-has-some-coverage-issues?page=3


I'm not going to get involved in the hyperbole about background checks because electronic journey logging details (something Black Cabs don't have, unless booked via an app) should act as deterrent.

 

[B1ts]

Ok I'm getting bored with this now, not with you @Llamaman but with the information being spread.

So from a private hire drivers perspective. Don't they have to get a license? Don't they get a DBS and police check with that application? Don't they have to renew it regularly? How is that different to taxicab drivers?

So from a vehicle perspective. Don't they have to have appropriate insurance? Don't they have an annual vehicle check? Don't they have twice per annum an MOT test? How is that different to the black taxis?

So from an private hire operators perspective. Do t they get audited? Don't they have to check the drivers details? Don't they have to maintain logs of passenger, vehicle, driver, journey details? Hasn't uber passed the inspection every single time? How is that different to a taxicab operator?

As TFL themselves state, and @B1ts alluded to, the principle difference is the ability to use ranks and be flagged down.

Please let's start removing all the misinformation (and I'm being very nice and patient here I think).

Ffs.
In the case of uber:
No
No
No
And the principal difference I alluded too all along were those very facts had you bothered to check rather than lying that it was mis-information.
The ranking and flagging purely cameb in to it with you constant assertions that there were no reasons we as customers (well more you actually) would be better off if the black cabs all joined uber.

There, removed your mis information and my patience is done here as you clearly either did not read or understand if you did the earlier posts.

 

[dejongj]

Ffs.
In the case of uber:
No
No
No
And the principal difference I alluded too all along were those very facts had you bothered to check rather than lying that it was mis-information.
The ranking and flagging purely cameb in to it with you constant assertions that there were no reasons we as customers (well more you actually) would be better off if the black cabs all joined uber.

There, removed your mis information and my patience is done here as you clearly either did not read or understand if you did the earlier posts.

So all of this is just nonsense?

https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/what-we-do/taxi-and-private-hire

Are you saying uber drivers aren't private hire drivers? Uber isn't a private hire operator?

 

[dejongj]

As I understand it, Hackney Carriages drivers have to prove they have adequate insurance for commercial passengers as a prerequisite of obtaining and keeping their badge. Additional checks are carried out at random to ensure ongoing compliance.

Uber does the absolute minimum of checking, and are happy to approve drivers with fake documents. If someone proves the system doesn't work, they report the investigator, but don't fix the system;
http://www.theguardian.com/technolo...london-black-cab-drivers-claims-flawed-checks
Basically, you can give them a post-it note with "inzsewerants pollysee" written on it in wax crayon and that'll tick their compliance boxes.
Uber only checks insurance on application, allowing drivers to cancel their insurance policy after application, and drive around uninsured. TFL apparently didn't think of this flaw with their own testing of Uber's systems - they only checked Uber were applying the system they claimed to have, and didn't audit whether the system was fundamentally flawed.

The good news is that apparently Uber now (not when they first launched) has public liability insurance for its drivers, but only once they have a fare. In the period between fares (the "trolling period"), they are not covered by Uber, and are possibly (there'll need to be some test cases) not covered by their personal insurance because they are conducting commercial work whilst touting for fares. Don't believe me? How about an insurance expert?
http://www.propertycasualty360.com/2015/02/09/uh-ohuber-has-some-coverage-issues?page=3


I'm not going to get involved in the hyperbole about background checks because electronic journey logging details (something Black Cabs don't have, unless booked via an app) should act as deterrent.

You'll find that many undercover operations highlight flaws with many systems. Uber operates its license (number 7979) in accordance with the rules laid out, as do the drivers.

We can all get edge cases out like the most prolific rapist in London which was a black cab driver. It is pointless.

If all was all well then the combined tfl and police enforcement teams would be a lot smaller. Like with any systems where there are rules people don't always play by them.

But to portray that is is some lawless land where no DBS checks, no police checks, no vehicle checks are done etc is just plainly not true. It is part of the usual scaremongering game played out as part of the protectionism racquet in the London (especially) taxi trade.

 

[big soft moose]

is there a prize for saying 'edge cases' the most times in one 7 day period ?

 

[dejongj]

is there a prize for saying 'edge cases' the most times in one 7 day period ?

I'd rather not say it at all. I mean come on, where people work things go wrong. That is why there are compliance teams, enforcement teams, a whole audit service industry etc. Using one of those as an example that it is all wrong is just plain ridiculous hence an edge case.

 

[Llamaman]

I'd rather not say it at all. I mean come on, where people work things go wrong. That is why there are compliance teams, enforcement teams, a whole audit service industry etc. Using one of those as an example that it is all wrong is just plain ridiculous hence an edge case.

I think how a firm reacts is illuminating. Uber's reaction was to shoot the messenger, call the police (really?) and sweep the actual problem under the carpet.

 

[Llamaman]

is there a prize for saying 'edge cases' the most times in one 7 day period ?

I know album sales aren't what they used to be, but if he's having to do product endorsements things have really hit rock (bu-dum!) bottom.

 

[dejongj]

I think how a firm reacts is illuminating. Uber's reaction was to shoot the messenger, call the police (really?) and sweep the actual problem under the carpet.

Well that is one part of the story. The TFL side and investigation did not necessitate in revoking the operators license or anything.

And someone knowingly submitting false documentation should be reported. Shouldn't they?

To me this whole event is just an attempt to undermine and discredit the competition.

 

[eeyore]

Just a note on the steel industry. What steel mills are left in the UK? Genuinely interested in this as we have a few UK national programmes that do require it.
I'm guessing that the steel for hs2 should it go ahead will be, of foreign origin? What about our submarine and ship building industry (assuming trident 2 and type 23 production goes ahead) Are we buying in stuff for that?
If it's of foreign origin trident 2 could be compromised before it even sets sail!

 

[eeyore]

That's not me saying foreign steel is rubbish I like all steels from all countries and all compositions.
Where we could have a weak link is one of the attributes we hold quit closely about our subs is the thickness of the steel used on the pressure hull. It's not inconceivable that a foreign supplier could work our what the steel is for and work out what thickness the hull is. This can then work out to be it's max depth it can go to. One of key performance specs we don't let our friends know, let alone anyone else.

It sounds a bit far fetched but something to think about

 

[Llamaman]

And someone knowingly submitting false documentation should be reported. Shouldn't they?

It was a sting operation by a journalist. This country has a proud tradition of allowing such things as, when used appropriately, they are an important tool in the arsenal of the investigative journalist.

Trying to set the law on them amounts to an attempt to intimidate the press. Not cool.

I don't have a problem with Uber's business model, which is innovative, but if we are going to regulate the industry (and there are strong safety reasons to do so), then that regulation needs to apply to all, without allowing certain firms to leverage outdated legislation (as Uber have done with their meter-that-isn't-a-meter) at the expense of existing industry. If the rules are dumb, change them. But don't let one side cheat.

 

[Llamaman]

we don't let our friends know, let alone anyone else.

The Americans know. Because they service the subs. Our "independent" deterrent isn't all that independent.

 

[eeyore]

The Americans know. Because they service the subs. Our "independent" deterrent isn't all that independent.

That's mainly around a certain weapon system and usually it's taken off the boat and sent away.
The uk goes to great lengths to hide some things, particularly the sub's acoustic signature and its steel thickness. Both are key attributes to our stealthiness of our submarines.

 

[dejongj]

It was a sting operation by a journalist. This country has a proud tradition of allowing such things as, when used appropriately, they are an important tool in the arsenal of the investigative journalist.

Trying to set the law on them amounts to an attempt to intimidate the press. Not cool.

I don't have a problem with Uber's business model, which is innovative, but if we are going to regulate the industry (and there are strong safety reasons to do so), then that regulation needs to apply to all, without allowing certain firms to leverage outdated legislation (as Uber have done with their meter-that-isn't-a-meter) at the expense of existing industry. If the rules are dumb, change them. But don't let one side cheat.

Regarding sting operations I agree. However there is sting and there is sting. They can't go too far. It is a whole different discussion all together with lots of ideology involved. Some I agree with and some I don't. Personally I don't think it is good enough to just say it was done in the name of a sting.

But they are regulated just like any other private hire business. The operator, the drivers, their vehicles are subject to all the checks and balances that others in the private hire and taxi trade are. As TFL said themselves in the link I provided earlier, the material difference is that taxicabs can utilise the ranks and be flagged down.

A full further report was commissioned in the operating model and that is that of a private hire.

So I am really confused when @B1ts very clearly states that they aren't subject to license applications, DBS and police checks, vehicles aren't subject to an annual inspection and two mots per year etc. The regulations and TFL suggest and actually confirm they are.

So why do you and b1ts suggest they don't? I'm happy to change my stance if they aren't subjected to that, however all the evidence and legal reports have found such allegations to be false.