Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber London loses licence to operate

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 609 posts

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#351

Post by geocar »

gtsteve wrote: post #101
geocar wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> none of these are as convenient or cost effective as Uber. I disagree, and let me tell you why: https://i.imgur.com/JITqdiP.png I have blocked out the location of my home and the identity of my "driver", but this guy shouldn't be driving, let alone driving a passenger. I'm never riding Uber again. > I can see the night tube getting a lot more use but I know quite a few people who don't like to take it after having…

This has happened to me before. I wrote to Uber's support and they recalculated the correct route and refunded me the difference. Did you try that? This sort of thing happens with black cabs outside airports from time to time but with Uber you at least have some sort of way of getting your money back.

> I wrote to Uber's support and they recalculated the correct route and refunded me the difference. Did you try that?

Yes. I pressed the contact button and had to type in a great deal. I never saw any refund, but I don't care about the money: I want my time back, and the best I can do is simply not give Uber any more of my time.

> This sort of thing happens with black cabs outside airports from time to time

Addison Lee has been extremely reliable, and since it's fixed-fee the driver is motivated to get you home quickly.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#352

Post by geocar »

endless1234 wrote: post #124
geocar wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> none of these are as convenient or cost effective as Uber. I disagree, and let me tell you why: https://i.imgur.com/JITqdiP.png I have blocked out the location of my home and the identity of my "driver", but this guy shouldn't be driving, let alone driving a passenger. I'm never riding Uber again. > I can see the night tube getting a lot more use but I know quite a few people who don't like to take it after having…

Did you contact Uber about that trip? Their business ethics seem to be generally shitty, sure, but they should be very quick to refund especially in such a clear case.

Uber don't make contacting them easy, and even if I got one: A refund doesn't cut it. My time is valuable to me. If I wanted to take an hour to get home I would've taken the tube.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#353

Post by stordoff »

danpalmer wrote: post #283
kaishiro wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Endangered your safety? Did someone force you into the vehicle?

The seatbelt broke 10 mins into the journey while we were on a motorway. It's illegal to stop on the motorway, and being left at the side of the road isn't exactly a great alternative.

I'm not really sure what you expect the driver or Uber to do in that situation - there's no good solution AFAICT. The only option would be to leave the motorway at the next exit and arrange alternative transport.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#354

Post by Tycho »

Is there clear evidence that Uber is less safe for drivers and passengers than competing services? They've been operating for a while with millions of users, so I expect any shortcomings would be evident in the statistics by now.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#355

Post by kodablah »

Nursie wrote: post #333
kodablah wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...it seems to be explicitly about... The BBC article is a bit light on details. Do you have a link where I can read the detailed license revocation reasons so I can make my own judgement?

Check out the rest of the thread, onion2k gave a few

I saw those links, and can Google others as well when searching for Uber wrongdoing. I want their details, not a commenters.

I saw the Tfl's statement which only had four abstract bullet points. What did they ask about Greyball and what was answered? Which unreported crimes and were there cover-up attempts by the company?

In general, one might expect a level of detailed transparency in these rulings lest it's seen as a foregone conclusion retroactively finding reasons. Is there a commission report I can read or a committee hearing I can watch?

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#356

Post by geocar »

flurdy wrote: post #114
geocar wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> none of these are as convenient or cost effective as Uber. I disagree, and let me tell you why: https://i.imgur.com/JITqdiP.png I have blocked out the location of my home and the identity of my "driver", but this guy shouldn't be driving, let alone driving a passenger. I'm never riding Uber again. > I can see the night tube getting a lot more use but I know quite a few people who don't like to take it after having…

> If you're too drunk to ride the drunk train/bus, there are cheap hotels all over London That may be but getting any at 11pm+ is impossible. I have tried a few times after missing my last train home... Always end up calling a friend to sleep on their couch or more likely office meeting room sofa...

I've had very good luck getting them in City: Most I've spent is something like £70 since they're not getting any better offer that late in the day.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#357

Post by conanbatt »

kbart wrote: post #274
trentnix wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do? You sure about that? Then why not just let them compete?

"They do? You sure about that?" Yes, I pay with credit card 9/10 times and get a receipt. I doubt any of these companies are big enough to have offshore companies to route their income through. "Then why not just let them compete?" They do. There's quite big competition in my city among public transport (city owned), many local taxi companies, private taxi drivers and Uber. Competition is quite fierce and costumers c…

I dont think people appreciate the uneven response. They equate allowing Uber to Uber vs taxis. But thats not whats being discussed: cabs arent banned. Its Uber vs Governments. The foe is large and abusive.

You can exercise your opinion by not taking an Uber. Why would you ban a third person from using uber?

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#358

Post by squigg »

erwan wrote: post #292
Nursie wrote: post #40

If they can't or won't reform then excellent, let's be rid of them. I don't want to give any business to a company that are seeking to become a worldwide cab monopoly, and squirrel away any profits to the US. We have a perfectly healthy cab ecosystem in my city, app-driven and with fare competition and city regulation. Which I suppose is why Uber, though present, hasn't really taken off here. That said, talk of profi…

This decision has officially nothing to do with tax evasion/optimization. It is on grounds of consumer protection that Uber's licence is not being renewed. Anyone who has taken a black cab should immediately understand the hypocrisy motivating this decision. The user experience is absolutely horrendous and there's no good tracking system to make black cab drivers accountable. In short, as everyone knows, it is just a…

I'm sorry but you will have to do more to explain your point on black cab user experience being horrendous. Whilst it can be hard to get a hold of one at times, in my experience of 20 years of using them, the user experience is great - the drivers are typically friendly and get you there as quickly as they can. I have used Uber many times in London and abandoned it months ago, as the drivers don't have the local knowledge required to quickly move across what is a very busy city. SatNav isn't everything - give me driver experience every single time.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#359

Post by conanbatt »

Nursie wrote: post #174
microcolonel wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They behave as if they are attempting this, IMHO. Every rational company should behave as if they're attempting to become a monopoly, this is a completely meaningless point to argue either way.

This is like the idea that every rational company must skirt the very edges of the law, regardless of good ethics, to maximise profit. I don't personally believe either to be true, and I do believe there's a very real difference between out-competing the competition and using a ton of VC money to undercut them, or skirting rules and regulations that may add cost.

Taxis have an ACTUAL monopoly. Are you seriously siding with "banning potential monopoly" to protect an entrenched centuries old monopoly.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#360

Post by k-mcgrady »

vizzah wrote: post #171
k-mcgrady wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Uber literally made no impact on the quality if life to your average Londoner and won't be missed. As a Londoner I dispute that claim. It's made a huge difference for a lot of people. Until the night tube's arrival last year getting home from late nights out was expensive, difficult, or impossible. It's quite useful when moving flat - something younger Londoners tend to do quite a lot. I had to go somewhere with s…

I read what many Londoners say about Uber like they never heard about Addison Lee cabs, which existed years before, offer a nice app, professional drivers and fixed tariffs. Last time I checked, tariffs were about 20% higher than Uber. But depending on congestion, could end up cheaper. Most of my friends were praising Uber, but I was warning them that their prices are unsustainable and slightly higher easy-to-hail ca…

I always thought AL required pre-booking. Can I get a car to my door/where ever I'm standing in 3-5 minutes?
Post reply on HN