On 01/10/2015 18:53, tim..... wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message
...

wrote:
In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:

On 30/09/2015 17:49, tim..... wrote:

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tph...hire-proposals

so what does the team think?

tim

The law is clear.

"Services" such as Ãœber cannot operate lawfully unless:

(a) each vehicle is tested and licensed before commencing operations,

(b) each driver applies for a licence, is investigated and not found
ineligible, before commencing operations, and

(c) the operator (presumably Ãœber) establishes a base within Greater
London and submits to the appropriate licensing regime, thereafter
complying with the requirements for record-keeping, etc.

Do all of those (especially assessing and licensing the drivers to
weed out dodgy characters) and Ãœber is effectively pointless.

Indeed. The absolutely crucial protection for the public is (b). Why
people
think it's a good idea to get into cars with possible mass murderers
I just
don't understand.

Those seem fair enough, but I think it would be absurd to stop cabs being
boarded within 5 mins or showing a map of locally available cars. By all
means protect consumers, but not cartels. For example, in an Internet and
Cloud age, why does record keeping have to be based locally? The changes
should be based strictly on increasing competition while protecting
consumers, not suppliers.

One of the points I have issue with is the prohibition of "ride sharing"
(by customer choice).

Personally, I think that it should be encouraged, I can't understand the
Taxi "industries" dislike of it.

When travelling in e.g. Germany/Sweden/Finland (all personal
experiences), on arrival at the airport I can go to the taxi pick up and
chose to share a ride with other people going my way (at the appropriate
discount).

ISTM that there would be more punters for long distance rides if this
was available in the UK. I'm buggered if I'm going to walk up to the
rank for a 150 pound taxi for a journey I can do by train for 20 quid,
but if offered the opportunity to share the ride with 2 others for 50
quid each I would happily take it.

Why is the aversion to this so great that the authorities think that
they have to legislate against it, not for it (as other countries do)?

tim

There is nothing in the London Cab Acts or the Town Police Clauses Act
which prevents passengers from teaming up for a joint-hiring. AAMOF,
they do it all the time.

What the law will not stomach is the operator and/or driver of the cab
(or pirate car) doing the arranging. It has to be up to the passenger to
do the picking and choosing of travelling companions.

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 01/10/2015 18:53, tim..... wrote:


tim

There is nothing in the London Cab Acts or the Town Police Clauses Act
which prevents passengers from teaming up for a joint-hiring. AAMOF, they
do it all the time.

That's no bloody use to a solo traveller arriving at an airport (off a
plane)


What the law will not stomach

why the hell not?

what's the rational for this visceral aversion? None that I can see!

I can understand if the argument was "protectionist" (though I wouldn't
agree with it),

But "will not stomach" That's an absolutely bollox reason

is the operator and/or driver of the cab (or pirate car) doing the
arranging.

But it wouldn't be the driver if it was arranged by an airport "official"

It has to be up to the passenger to do the picking and choosing of
travelling companions.

Why?

(and don't say "because the law says so" [1] - The question here is "why
does the law say so")

tim

[1]Which is what you did last time I broached this subject

On 03/10/2015 13:08, tim..... wrote:

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 01/10/2015 18:53, tim..... wrote:


tim

There is nothing in the London Cab Acts or the Town Police Clauses Act
which prevents passengers from teaming up for a joint-hiring. AAMOF,
they do it all the time.

That's no bloody use to a solo traveller arriving at an airport (off a
plane)

I've done it in Sofia (which meant I only got a /bit/ ripped off
compared to getting in a taxi without someone with local knowledge...)
and somewhere else I've forgotten.

I suggested it to someone in the queue^H^H line with me at a US airport
who was getting off the same flight to go to the same hotel for the same
conference, but she clearly thought I was mad and quite possibly an
ax(e)-murderer and so we joined the convoy of one-passenger cars heading
into town.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On 04/10/2015 12:30, Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 03/10/2015 13:08, tim..... wrote:

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 01/10/2015 18:53, tim..... wrote:


tim

There is nothing in the London Cab Acts or the Town Police Clauses Act
which prevents passengers from teaming up for a joint-hiring. AAMOF,
they do it all the time.

That's no bloody use to a solo traveller arriving at an airport (off a
plane)

I've done it in Sofia (which meant I only got a /bit/ ripped off
compared to getting in a taxi without someone with local knowledge...)
and somewhere else I've forgotten.

I suggested it to someone in the queue^H^H line with me at a US airport
who was getting off the same flight to go to the same hotel for the same
conference, but she clearly thought I was mad and quite possibly an
ax(e)-murderer and so we joined the convoy of one-passenger cars heading
into town.

Ah... someone who has (at least partly) cottoned on to the safety aspects.

"Arthur Figgis" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 03/10/2015 13:08, tim..... wrote:

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 01/10/2015 18:53, tim..... wrote:


tim

There is nothing in the London Cab Acts or the Town Police Clauses Act
which prevents passengers from teaming up for a joint-hiring. AAMOF,
they do it all the time.

That's no bloody use to a solo traveller arriving at an airport (off a
plane)

I've done it in Sofia (which meant I only got a /bit/ ripped off compared
to getting in a taxi without someone with local knowledge...) and
somewhere else I've forgotten.

There's a frequent bus at Sofia.

Though I waited god know's how long for the first one when I arrived on the
stupid o'clock in the morning Wizz flight.

Though I was bound for Plovdiv, so all I did was replace a wait at the
station by a wait at the airport

tim

On 03/10/2015 13:08, tim..... wrote:

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 01/10/2015 18:53, tim..... wrote:

There is nothing in the London Cab Acts or the Town Police Clauses Act
which prevents passengers from teaming up for a joint-hiring. AAMOF,
they do it all the time.

That's no bloody use to a solo traveller arriving at an airport (off a
plane)

Yes, it is. Use an app.

Or something.

What the law will not stomach
is the operator and/or driver of the cab (or pirate car) doing the
arranging.

But it wouldn't be the driver if it was arranged by an airport "official"

True. If the passenger wishes to delegate that choice to a third party,
that's fine. The law will not accept the driver being the delegate,
that's all. And for good safety-related reasons.

It has to be up to the passenger to do the picking and choosing of
travelling companions.

Why?

Because they could be at risk from fellow "passengers".

Are you unable to understand that?

On 2015-10-04 13:17:54 +0000, JNugent said:

Because they could be at risk from fellow "passengers".

Are you unable to understand that?

They could when riding a bus or train, as well. Many people choose
daily to do that without incident.

Nobody is suggesting making this compulsory, simply making it a legal option.

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

On 04/10/2015 14:48, Neil Williams wrote:

On 2015-10-04 13:17:54 +0000, JNugent said:

Because they could be at risk from fellow "passengers".

Are you unable to understand that?

They could when riding a bus or train, as well.

True.

Is that a reason to introduce the same dangers to travelling in a taxi?

On 2015-10-04 17:05:06 +0000, JNugent said:

Is that a reason to introduce the same dangers to travelling in a taxi?

If the passenger wishes to take that (low) risk to reduce their fare,
why not? Provided it is at the passenger's option (and only their
option) whether it occurs or not.

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

On 04/10/2015 20:35, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-10-04 17:05:06 +0000, JNugent said:

Is that a reason to introduce the same dangers to travelling in a taxi?

If the passenger wishes to take that (low) risk to reduce their fare,
why not? Provided it is at the passenger's option (and only their
option) whether it occurs or not.

The passenger already has that option.

The driver doesn't, and won't.