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

541–550 of 609 posts

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#541

Post by dalore »

DanBC wrote: post #503
Boothroid wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience TfL are a pretty crappy organisation themselves. Cab drivers commonly take longer routes in order to inflate their fares. Try complaining about this and see how far you get. Worse, try seeing what happens if you are injured through negligence of a bus driver (as happened to my girlfriend). They will fight you even in spite of incriminating CCTV until they are dragged into court, and only offer to set…

> Cab drivers commonly take longer routes in order to inflate their fares. Keep a receipt and make a complaint. Longer routes would be really obvious in the taximeter data. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/2304/pdfs/uksi_20062...

Yeah bit of work there already. Receipts are a joke, they often give you a blank piece of paper where you write whatever you want on it. They think they are doing you are favour because they assume you are going to write more on it then the true cost so when you claim you make a profit.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#542

Post by dalore »

astura wrote: post #438
cjsuk wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve lived in London for over 35 years. It’s common parlance. That kebab shop was a mugging. You were mugged in the apple store. Etc etc.

I consulted three dictionaries, including a British one, before writing that comment. Your use very fringe at best and is very inappropriate anywhere else, as it was pointed out to you.

If you overpayed you were mugged. Very normal term here in the UK.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#543

Post by eric_the_read »

twic wrote: post #534
Pyxl101 wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buying a company that owns an asset or holds a license is a reasonable way to obtain said asset or license. Nothing wrong with that.

If you're talking about a license in the sense of a right, like a copyright or patent license, or a license to drill for oil somewhere, then yes. But this is a license in the sense of regulatory approval of a specific organisation, which is not something it's proper to buy and sell. You can't buy someone's driving license, gun license, medical license, license, etc.

It's common in many parts of the US to buy a liquor license from an existing establishment.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#544

Post by dalore »

danpalmer wrote: post #227
sambe wrote: post #16

When I have reported black cab drivers misleading passengers, lying about pricing and regulations or bus drivers driving dangerously and being rude to everyone, TfL are totally uninterested. They give the impression that they know the scams operate and don't care. It's an interesting comparison with my Uber experience, which has been almost flawless and issues are usually fixed by Uber themselves promptly.

I used an Uber for a 45 minute journey recently. The seatbelt didn't work. In the UK it's illegal to not wear a seatbelt, and it's against Uber's terms of service for me not to wear a seatbelt, and against their terms of service for the driver not to provide one. Uber didn't care, told me they would "talk to the driver". I'd have expected at least an acknowledgement that they endangered my safety, but no, no acknowle…

You still chose to ride. You're the one not wearing a seat belt. You were within your right to exit the vehicle and order a new one but you choose not. Of course Uber doesn't care. You didnt care enough either so what should Uber do?

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#545

Post by dalore »

cyclonetiger wrote: post #312
bsmithers wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We have a perfectly healthy cab ecosystem in my city, app-driven and with fare competition and city regulation Sure, but that doesn't exist in the majority of cities. The user experience is why I use Uber.

> The user experience is why I use Uber. User experience is why I avoid Uber. I've only used ride hailing services at airports, and Uber drivers tended to be very aggressive on the roads compared to Lyft or regular cab drivers. I had one driver miss an exit on a freeway, and then proceed to REVERSE on the freeway to get back to the exit. That about sealed it for me with Uber.

UK doesn't have Lyft. I'm sure if we did it would be similar. I tried out Lyft in Miami. Was good.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#546

Post by Sargos »

overcast wrote: post #254

Uber needs to license their software to existing companies. Stop trying to push cab companies out of business, and start trying to be cabOS. The user experience is why we use the thing, I don't give a rats ass who is picking me up, as long as they are safe and courteous. And they come pick me up with a few taps of a phone app.

One of the big reasons for Uber's success is that cab companies and city regulators don't want there to be a CabOS. They are actively against integrating technology into their systems and, while some of them have been forced to in recent years, they resent it and try to flout it when they can (in my experiences). It's really hard to get away from "the meter's not working"

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#547

Post by darrenf »

astura wrote: post #438
cjsuk wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve lived in London for over 35 years. It’s common parlance. That kebab shop was a mugging. You were mugged in the apple store. Etc etc.

I consulted three dictionaries, including a British one, before writing that comment. Your use very fringe at best and is very inappropriate anywhere else, as it was pointed out to you.

Honestly it seems those dictionaries are not at all up to date with common English informal phrases. Source: native and resident Londoner of >40 years, and user of "mugging" in the "ripped off" sense for most of them.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#548

Post by Boothroid »

DanBC wrote: post #503
Boothroid wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience TfL are a pretty crappy organisation themselves. Cab drivers commonly take longer routes in order to inflate their fares. Try complaining about this and see how far you get. Worse, try seeing what happens if you are injured through negligence of a bus driver (as happened to my girlfriend). They will fight you even in spite of incriminating CCTV until they are dragged into court, and only offer to set…

> Cab drivers commonly take longer routes in order to inflate their fares. Keep a receipt and make a complaint. Longer routes would be really obvious in the taximeter data. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/2304/pdfs/uksi_20062...

Do you speak from experience? I do - and they put it down to discretion of the driver to cater for traffic conditions etc - even when I could physically see the alternate route around Clapham Common was empty! Plus you get obvious contempt from the people handling your complaint for good measure. The system is not designed for the benefit of transport users.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#549

Post by darrenf »

princeb wrote: post #366
squigg wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 know…

uber is pretty much useless in zone 1 since the roads are too narrow and the traffic too extreme. you could literally take a leisurely walk from the british museum down to leicester square garden faster than a minicab. black cabs have the benefit of being allowed to travel on bus lanes and that makes all the difference in central London. that said, black cabs get more and more unreliable the further away from central…

As someone who grew up in zone 4 and has lived for 18 years in zone 6, I don't recognise the last point here at all.

Re: Uber London loses licence to operate

#550

Post by ubernostrum »

twic wrote: post #534
Pyxl101 wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buying a company that owns an asset or holds a license is a reasonable way to obtain said asset or license. Nothing wrong with that.

If you're talking about a license in the sense of a right, like a copyright or patent license, or a license to drill for oil somewhere, then yes. But this is a license in the sense of regulatory approval of a specific organisation, which is not something it's proper to buy and sell. You can't buy someone's driving license, gun license, medical license, license, etc.

In the insurance field "acqui-license" deals, like "acqui-hire" in tech, are not impossible or even necessarily discouraged. Every US state has its own set of regulations for who can be issued a license to sell insurance, and usually it's easier from a bureaucracy perspective to maintain the license once you have it than it is to get a new one. So buying and selling of companies solely for their existing insurance licenses is a thing.
Post reply on HN