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

Lyft, SideCar, and Uber all slapped with $20K fines from CA regulator

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 100 posts

Re: Lyft, SideCar, and Uber all slapped with $20K fines from CA regulator

#3

Post by eli »

I'm a customer not a lawyer, but Uber certainly feels like a "provider" to me. It's not like they are just a referral service. They dispatch a driver of their choice, they process the payment, and they pay the driver.

And while I think Uber is an awesome service, it's not totally unreasonable for the state to insist that if you are acting as a taxi, you need to have proof of insurance beyond what's required for a normal driver.

Re: Lyft, SideCar, and Uber all slapped with $20K fines from CA regulator

#5

Post by dinedal »

eli wrote: post #3

I'm a customer not a lawyer, but Uber certainly feels like a "provider" to me. It's not like they are just a referral service. They dispatch a driver of their choice, they process the payment, and they pay the driver. And while I think Uber is an awesome service, it's not totally unreasonable for the state to insist that if you are acting as a taxi, you need to have proof of insurance beyond what's required for a nor…

The problem is that the cars Uber has are already insured as limos. Just by the parent company that they are getting them from, not by Uber itself.

Re: Lyft, SideCar, and Uber all slapped with $20K fines from CA regulator

#6

Post by eli »

eridius wrote: post #4

The lawsuit against Uber seems to me like nothing more than taxi drivers upset that their monopoly is being threatened. As the article said, all the Uber drivers are already licensed, and there's no explanation as to why Uber is "unfair".

Uber claims their drivers already meet the requirements, but if Uber doesn't register with CPUC how can they know if it's true? Are they supposed to take Uber's word for it?

Re: Lyft, SideCar, and Uber all slapped with $20K fines from CA regulator

#7

Post by eli »

dinedal wrote: post #5
eli wrote: post #3

I'm a customer not a lawyer, but Uber certainly feels like a "provider" to me. It's not like they are just a referral service. They dispatch a driver of their choice, they process the payment, and they pay the driver. And while I think Uber is an awesome service, it's not totally unreasonable for the state to insist that if you are acting as a taxi, you need to have proof of insurance beyond what's required for a nor…

The problem is that the cars Uber has are already insured as limos. Just by the parent company that they are getting them from, not by Uber itself.

If the drivers already have the required paperwork and insurance then why doesn't Uber just register as a taxi provider and submit it as CPUC requested? Is that really so onerous (honest question)?

Re: Lyft, SideCar, and Uber all slapped with $20K fines from CA regulator

#8

Post by tvladeck »

I really like Lyft. I use it when I need a taxi and it works very well.

Although I do agree that a world where these types of "collaborative consumption" services (like AirBNB) are essentially unregulated (or at least more open to competition) is much better, it is true that a number of industries are regulated, and incumbents that have been "playing by the rules" were promised a protected business environment. And it's not like they didn't have to give anything up in that trade - a taxi medallion in NYC is worth a lot of money - they have been exchanged for over a million dollars.

So the question is: how do we transition to the better world without being unfair to the "stranded capital"?

Re: Lyft, SideCar, and Uber all slapped with $20K fines from CA regulator

#9

Post by dinedal »

eli wrote: post #7
dinedal wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that the cars Uber has are already insured as limos. Just by the parent company that they are getting them from, not by Uber itself.

If the drivers already have the required paperwork and insurance then why doesn't Uber just register as a taxi provider and submit it as CPUC requested? Is that really so onerous (honest question)?

I believe that's a question for Uber, I'm just paraphrasing from the article which states as I've said.

Speculating though, perhaps there are limitations and red tape issues that would prevent them from doing so. Most likely, they don't want / need to operate the fleet of cars, just the technology that connects them to the customers.

Re: Lyft, SideCar, and Uber all slapped with $20K fines from CA regulator

#10

Post by cj »

usaar333 wrote: post #2

Interesting how Uber is lumped in with Lyft and SideCar. Uber drivers at least have (towncar) licenses. I haven't figured out yet how Lyft/SideCar are anything more than illegal taxi services that rename "fare" "donation".

Uber also runs Uberx, a cheaper non-towncar version of Uber similar to Lyft. Does anyone know if uberx drivers also have towncar licenses?
Post reply on HN