Birmingham UK to Uber: Want a new licence? Tell us about your operating model Birmingham authorities have asked for more information on Uber's business model and operations before granting it a new licence. The not-a-taxi firm had a one-year licence to operate in the UK's second city, but this expired last month. According to Reuters, the city regulator has extended the licence on a temporary basis …
Because it doesn't happen by "vetted" drivers.
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/taxi-driver-jailed-sex-attack-10902353
https://www.birminghampost.co.uk/news/local-news/birmingham-taxi-driver-rapist-jailed-3969549
Also many Uber drivers in Brum also work for regular minicab companies as well.
Which is why there's a whole load of checks and balances in place to protect passengers and catch drivers who try to do such things.
Didn't work so well in the Worboys case, did they? So TfL getting on their high horse about standards seems rather hypocritical. Likewise those Brummie examples.
Not that I'm in favour of Uber holding a licence to do anything more complex than sitting on a park bench.
"Didn't work so well in the Worboys case, did they? So TfL getting on their high horse about standards seems rather hypocritical. Likewise those Brummie examples."
So, what are you saying? The checks don't work, so they shouldn't do them? In which case, I would ask do you lock your front door? I ask because people who lock their doors are still burgled from time to time, so surely locks don't work.
Clearly, of course you should lock your door. Door locks do stop a lot of burglaries, and I wager that checks do stop a lot of potential attacks.
"Checks and balances that Uber have been caught deliberately delaying, avoiding and ignoring"
Another untruth spread by taxi drivers via Facebook..
The truth is TFL are responsible for background checks and all private hire companies, Uber included check the TFL documents which have already been TFL vetted..
Uber have been at the heart of a very focused hate campaign by taxi firms along with very smart social media brainwashing. In the same way trump got in, we ended up thinking not being part of EU would be a good plan, Uber being evil beyond all else was very similar Viral PR campaigns behind it. Are Uber whiter than white, of course not, they aren't perfect, but I would prefer my daughter was in a tracked, non fakeable Uber than an untracked, potentially bought second hand and not even real black cab
You might want to read and digest.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/uber-london-ban-driver-employee-rights-money-passenger-safety-women-a7969516.html
Lie, Cheat, Rape and Murder the customers ?
Those are just sidelines, the actual business model is simply to use predatory pricing to drive established taxi firms to the wall.
This is illegal under EU law:
"Under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pricing below cost is prohibited where the seller has a dominant market position and the pricing will have an anti-competitive effect."
It's badly worded legislation because currently Uber does not have a "dominant market position" but is seeking to attain one.
It's also against the anti-trust laws in the USA.
Under new CEO Dara Khosrowshahi, who came on board after last year's big scandal about the mass data breach and subsequent cover-up, has made efforts to spruce up its image.
I'm fairly sure he came on board *before* that big scandal hit. Okay, sure, the actual breach and cover-up occurred before he came on board, but the scandal itself was triggered when they finally did come clean about it, which was some months after the start of his tenure.
Coming clean about it was in fact one of the things he's done to try to fix the company's image. It didn't achieve that, although once he found out about it, it was a certainly a better idea to go public with it than to continue covering it up, because it would have leaked out eventually one way or another.
(personally, I'm kinda sad that the GDPR regs hadn't already kicked in by then, because however much pain all the lawsuits around that scandal are causing for Uber, they're nothing compared to what the EU would have been able to do to them under GDPR.
There are a great number of examples where "it would have leaked out eventually one way or another" failed to be an important argument when the decision of covering up the blunder was made.
Because, generally speaking, multinational companies are not very quick in admitting any failure whatsoever.
Maybe the fact that an Uber representative did admit it is a sign of the times.
Maybe.
It would be refreshing to know that those high-level CEOs are finally aware that the Internet is a place where failure is always exposed.
When Uber has destroyed the competition it raises its prices and then turns into the 'whining black cab' company complaining about neo-uber that pops up to undercut it. Unless it bribes lots of politicians to prevent any competition. It really is an evil corrupt business model.
They are just taxi's that don't need to have the extra vehicle safety checks, or special insurance, or local knowledge tests, or any form of check really, face it they are nothing more than a taxi you order with an app instead of a telephone call. unless they are sending out registered taxi drivers they should be fined and stopped from trading in the UK or the regulations on insurance and vehicle safety tests should be dropped for taxi drivers.
Black Cabs - all wheel chair accessible by law.
Mini Cabs - competitive rates, 7 seaters and accessible vehicles available on request.
Uber - Sleazy, illegal, loss making, gig economy BS that's eroding society and employment law, a pariah that needs to be eradicated.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
