On 2015-10-04 20:27:38 +0000, Recliner said:

https://help.uber.com/h/65f52320-43a...4-e9b7c7c36dae

That sort of makes a mockery of the review thing, doesn't it? What if
I don't want the nearest car due to concerns raised in a review?

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On 05/10/2015 18:47, tim..... wrote:

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 04/10/2015 14:50, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-10-04 13:14:08 +0000, JNugent said:

Buses are still available, if not always convenient. A taxi is not a
bus.

The hybrid matatu/jitney model works reasonably well in many countries.

A public transport operator is free to apply for the necessary
permissions to make that work.

Your preferences are not a reason to abolish protection for
taxi-passengers.

Who's proposing to abolish your ability to hire a taxi to yourself? What
is being proposed is allowing people who wish to to take a shared taxi.
Those who do not wish to can continue to take one to themselves,
obviously at a fare commensurate to that.

As I have already said, several times: that is already allowed.

It's just that the passenger decides on the sharing, not the driver or
operator.

No, the passenger has to (somehow) find the other passages, that's not
the same thing at all (and completely impractical for out of London
destinations)

It could be done via an app on mobile phones. There are already similar
ways of locating people in an area with similar interests.

But don't make the mistake of assuming that your requirements are the
same as everyone else's.

On 2015-10-05 15:05:13 +0000, y said:

Since thats exactly how people used to order minicabs I'm wondering what
exactly is the killer selling point of Uber. Other than it means Aspergers
types don't actually have to talk to a person and get all stressed.

Trying to talk to someone from inside a loud nightclub can be a
challenge, for one. But many people (and not just Asperger's
sufferers) prefer to press a few buttons on an app than faff about
making a telephone call. Additionally, credit card payment is a
benefit - I pay for most things by card these days, why not a taxi?
It's a relatively high value transaction. I wouldn't pay a £10+ train
fare in cash. Indeed, I never pay *any* train fares in cash, always
credit card.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 05/10/2015 20:28, tim..... wrote:

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 05/10/2015 17:26, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 15:11:53 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 15:45:22 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
the pavement outside the venue in the pouring rain, or perhaps five
minutes earlier when they are inside in the warm and can more
comfortably use their phone to order a car to arrive in five
minute's
time?

Since thats exactly how people used to order minicabs I'm
wondering what
exactly is the killer selling point of Uber. Other than it means
Aspergers
types don't actually have to talk to a person and get all stressed.

You don't have to know the names and phone numbers of local mini
cab firms,

Google.

Obviously you like making things more difficult than they need to be.


nor explain the address to someone who may not have a shared
language.

Right, because Uber drivers are always natives.

Of course not, but you seem not to know how Uber works.


Either or both parties may be in a noisy environment.

What's more, Uber probably gets you a car more quickly, you don't
need to
pay cash (a particular advantage when abroad, if you don't have local
currency), and it's typically cheaper.

Of course its cheaper - unvetted drivers whose only qualification is
owning
a car and smartphone.

Wrong again.

That is precisely the point; no-one has been (so far) able to say with
certainty that Uber drivers *are* vetted and licensed.

The fact that Uber themselves claim to do the vetting" is alarming.

I don't believe that they do

they claim that they have checked the driver has been vetted (the rest
is just lost in lazy journalism)

Every "private hire" operator has to do that.

so what were you complaining about then?


tim

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 05/10/2015 18:41, tim..... wrote:

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 05/10/2015 09:18, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 10/4/2015 2:10 PM, JNugent wrote:
On 03/10/2015 09:07, Someone Somewhere wrote:
Seriously?

Because a taxi is - in its very essence - a *private* space which
can be
hired by the passenger to the exclusion of others. It is not a bus.
If a
bus is what is wanted, buses are available.


What? There's a bus that takes me from Heathrow to outside my
house in
Shadwell?

Provided you're willing to change a few times, yes.


More times than the TfL planner can cope with to get outside my house.

That's a problem you have with buses. Not everyone has it.

The fact that you do is not a good reason for disrupting the
legitimate livelihood of others.

How is my saying "if you wont provide a legitimate way of my sharing a
cab (on an ad hoch basis with someone that I don't know), I wont be
using a cab at all" an attack on a legitimate business

Was that a question?

I explaining to them how they can get business that they have otherwise
lost

Who is "them"?

cabbies

On 2015-10-05 16:08:52 +0000, y said:

nor explain the address to someone who may not have a shared language.

Right, because Uber drivers are always natives.

You don't have to explain the destination to *anyone* - that's the
point. They are told it by the app.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On 2015-10-05 07:12:03 +0000, Roland Perry said:

They could be taking off their Uber-hat for that trip.

Then you report them and refuse to pay.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On 05/10/2015 20:48, Neil Williams wrote:

On 2015-10-04 22:21:04 +0000, said:

We couldn't find a mechanism to manage this, even from the station
with its legendary taxi queues.

At the station might it have just about worked to put up a sign saying
something like "Why not ask others if they will share your taxi to keep
costs down and keep things moving? Wait here if you'd like to do this."
- leaving it to the passengers to get together to hire a taxi and split
its fare, and thus making it legal?

That might work, though there is a real risk that unlicensed touts would
interpose themselves and start offering "service".

Incidentally, there is a working system at Newark Airport where a
despatcher (employed by the airport) allocates passengers/groups of
passengers to taxis with a flat fare (flat by the vehicle, not per
capita) to specific places. That's places, not addresses. The last time
I used it I paid $45 from the airport to a NJ city on the Hudson.

On 05/10/2015 20:48, Neil Williams wrote:

On 2015-10-05 13:19:08 +0000, David Cantrell said:

TfL staff manage to do it at central London stations occasionally, so
there's no reason that their Cambridge equivalent couldn't, or that the
local taxi companies couldn't find people to do it for their drivers.

I thought the law was that the taxi companies could in fact not do it?
Not sure about the Council though.

The council is just a third party and could lawfully do it.

Whether they would is another matter.

On 2015-10-05 07:17:02 +0000, Roland Perry said:

"Hello, dodgy-cabs Cambridge Station, can I help you"
"Yes I need to get to the Guildhall"
"OK, cross the road and you'll find your pre-booked car waiting on the
double yellow lines, look for the driver with his hand in the air".

Modify that a bit and you have a private hire booking office. One of
the local companies operates one out of a portakabin in Central MK on a
Saturday evening, the cars wait in a car park nearby and come over to
the office once you have booked in there. Unlike the black cabs, they
are reputable and charge you the correct fare rather than refusing to
use the meter and ripping you off.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.