
Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing - reubensutton
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50544283
======
neonate
According to the article, the real decision will be made by the courts and the
courts have already returned Uber's license in the past:

 _" When TfL decided not to renew Uber's licence in 2017, the company
addressed some of the issues raised by TfL back then and then a magistrate
later granted Uber a new licence._

 _On the face of it TfL is standing tough against perceived failings by Uber.
But in effect it is letting the courts decide, at a later date, whether Uber
should have a licence, or not. "_

------
gorgoiler
After living for years in London, it’s hard to compare Ubers with black cabs.

In the centre of town during the day black cabs are often ubiquitous,
immediately available, and skilled at getting you the hell out of dodge.
Something for which I’m happy to pay a premium.

Anywhere else they can be capricious and scarce. After 11pm this is the case
with in fact almost all black cabs anywhere in the city, when a very different
type of driver — “borrowing” their license from a friend, card machine with a
“sorry not working” post it taped to it, no chat — starts working the night
shift. Usually these are more often likely to be rental drivers — during the
day it’s owner drivers. The difference between the two classes of driver is,
if you will, day and night.

By contrast, the semi robotic Uber will always come, eventually. They’ll drive
past you. Go the wrong way to pick you up. Stop on the wrong side of the road
and wait for you to cross because they don’t have a tight turning circle. Go
the wrong way on your journey. It’s a fact of life that while not all black
cab drivers meet the highest professional standards, it’s much rarer to find a
good Uber driver.

SF and the Bay Area — I mention them as the root source of Uber’s app and
product culture — certainly aren’t a cakewalk to drive around but it’s not a
patch on London’s warrens. You can absolutely see that in the navigation
skills of those using the big map apps to get around, and those who did The
Knowledge. My subjective viewpoint isn’t some romantic notion based on _the
old ways_ or _traditions_ either: everyone I know in London has pretty much
the same experience.

~~~
BurningFrog
Takeaway: Maybe London should spend some effort becoming more naviagatable,
instead of demanding professional drivers acquire a PhD level education (the
Knowledge) to find their way.

~~~
72deluxe
No offence, and I can see that you've been downvoted but how do you actually
propose solving this "unnavigable" problem? By bulldozing existing property
that is owned by multitudes of private landowners and building new roads or
something else??

Honestly, what's your solution?

~~~
VBprogrammer
I doubt there is a good solution to the problem in general but having ridden a
motorcycle aimlessly around central London on my own little sight-seeing trips
I can certainly get on board with the idea that London has been designed to be
minimally navigable without knowing exactly where you are going (or having a
GPS which does the same). This is at least partially due to one way streets,
turning restrictions, traffic restrictions (bus / cycle only routes), no
entries etc.

~~~
UncleEntity
Probably because its been "designed" over a couple thousand years and they
don't have cars for the majority of that.

~~~
VBprogrammer
I doubt many donkey and cart owners encountered the no right turn onto
Piccadilly! All of the things I mentioned are very much 20th century
additions.

------
harel
I'm not a fan of companies like Uber or AirBnB who attempt a violent takeover
of a market. However, as a consumer who needs to get from A to B, or stay at
some random city, I find those services invaluable. The black cabs in London
are expensive, never around when you need them, and until recently might have
refused card payments (now they just seem unhappy about it). At the very least
I was hoping Uber would make that industry wake up and join the modern world,
but instead they chose to protest and block roads. With Uber, I always have a
car available within minutes and the prices are reasonable. I just hope that
the competition will take their place (and driver mass) if they do end up
leaving.

~~~
thathndude
Yep. I'm always amazed at how quickly people crap on Uber. In hindsight it's
not a particularly revolutionary service. But does everyone remember how much
the Taxi system sucked?

~~~
Joe8Bit
London has had 10,000's of mini-cabs for decades that served a big chunk of
this non-Black cab market. They weren't perfect but they were cheap, pretty
ubiquitous and served most (if not all) of the spaces left in the market by
black cabs.

So Uber as a service hasn't been that revolutionary in London, the things they
HAVE done is improve the ordering UX and making CC's ubiquitous.

~~~
subsaharancoder
`So Uber as a service hasn't been that revolutionary in London, the things
they HAVE done is improve the ordering UX and making CC's ubiquitous.` - the
daily trip volumes tell a different story and clearly show there's an impact.

------
traceroute66
The problem with Black Cabs in London is that the drivers go around like they
are god's gift to Earth.

Sure "The Knowledge" is an impressive feat of learning, but more often than
not the drivers don't make use of it because the best route is not the most
profitable one for the driver.

I have lost count of the number of times I have been subjected to the "tourist
tax" where the driver heads straight for the major artery roads with their
traffic jams (e.g. Kings Road, Strand, Embankment etc.) so you get to sit
there watching the meter clock up whilst you move nowhere. Or the number of
times the quickest and least-traffic route is South of the river but the
driver sticks religiously to the Northen route.

Or the number of times the driver fumbles slowly getting the change, in the
expectation that you say "oh forget it, keep the change" ... even if that
change is £4 or more !

Or when I've been driving around London only for the Black Cab in front of me
to stop on a double-red line to drop off a passenger. Or make a U-Turn in the
middle of a busy street.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not fond of Uber either. Their standard of driving is
pretty poor, and I hate the way they sit at the Heathrow __DROP-OFF __area
waiting for their next job.

What I am saying is that the London cabbies are in dire need of some stiff
competition. Yes I would rather that competition come from someone of better
quality than Uber.

~~~
mattlondon
Couldn't agree more.

Black Cab drivers seem to think it is somehow their birth right to have a job
that charges outrageous amounts, like they are some sort of vital service like
the police or ambulance service that needs to be protected no matter what.
Bullshit - I bet if they all disappeared tomorrow most non-tourists wouldn't
even notice apart from the lack of traffic and diesel pollution near stations.

And "The Knowledge"? yeah yeah yeah...whatever. Most of us had to study full-
time and/or in evenings & weekends in order to pass exams to get our jobs too,
but that doesn't mean our out-dated and largely obsolete knowledge should be
put on a pedestal and protected against more efficient modern tech (1).

The sad reality is that they have TfL by the balls, and that is why this
action against Uber is happening. Just as a reminder, the UK's most prolific
rapist was a black cab driver who picked people up in his cab then drugged and
raped them - they think he raped up to 100 people (2) so it is clear that the
vetting for black cab drivers does not actually work (3). Yet despite this,
and the obvious parallels of anyone being able to borrow their mates black cab
just the same as anyone can borrow their mate's uber login & car - TfL do
nothing about Black Cabs.

1 - "the knowledge" only memorises fixed routes. It does not provide
information about traffic, road works, accidents etc, but google maps API as
used by Uber et al does, so the knowledge is obsolete there.

2 - "The Blackcab Rapist" \-
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Worboys](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Worboys)

3 - this guy was not just a "one off" that slipped through the vetting process
through a moment of madness or a "who could tell that one day this man would
rape someone?" He was a maniac who raped up to ONE HUNDRED people - the UK's
most prolific serial rapist in fact - yet the vetting process _failed to
detect the worst rapist the UK has ever seen_ and approved him to be a black
cab driver. You have to wonder how many small-time rapists also got through
the vetting...

------
jonplackett
London resident here. I would like to see Uber compared to the existing mini
cab companies and black cabs rather than some perfect vision of a taxi
company.

Uber took off here easily because existing minicabs were all really really
crap. Not just expensive but often rude or incompetent drivers. I would guess
a lot of them were unregistered and uninsured and their cars barely road
legal.

Black cabs are Better but very expensive and still rip off tourists all the
tine by charging without the meter. Even with the meter it was impossible to
get any idea how much a trip would cost before you took it. And you needed
cash.

Example: One time I got a minicab, it took the guy over half an hour to
arrive, then he had to actually find me which took even longer. Then I
realised the back seats of the car were full of vomit and he made me ride up
front with the windows wide open - it was winter and cold. Then he didn’t know
where he was going and got lost and then he charged me £30 for what would have
cost £10 on Uber.

Uber, by comparison is great.

------
eggy
If the concern over rider safety was that somebody could pose as an Uber
driver and update a photo to make it work, why are black cabs not also deemed
unsafe? Couldn't somebody borrow a friend's black cab, slap on a fake photo,
and work the city? Maybe a stretch, and more work, but the same concern is
there, no? I guess the black cabs have some powerful lobbyists in parliment?
Yellow taxis in NYC were a monopoly, and medallions cost a fortune, and
somehow it seems to have settled down a bit. Some latecomers to the medallion
gig lost a lot in the transistion, but isn't that true of any new jump in
technology or service?

~~~
PaulRobinson
> Couldn't somebody borrow a friend's black cab, slap on a fake photo, and
> work the city?

There is concern that this is happened in the past and penalties are extremely
severe: the owner of the original license will lose their badge and may face
criminal charges.

It's a bit hard to describe the taxi market in London to anybody who doesn't
live here, but it's a closed shop only to the extent that if you're prepared
to do the work to get a badge, it won't cost you $1m like New York, but you
will have to put some hours in, and you'll get known by many other black cab
drivers.

If you show up with "Dave's cab" and you're not Dave, you're going to get
asked questions. Do it a couple of times, and they might decide to pull your
badge number up.

A few years ago a genuinely licensed black cab driver was convicted of rape
and sexual assault, and as a result the community was shaken: it was the first
time in over 300 years where a licensed operator had been convicted of such a
crime, and they now look on newcomers with even more suspicion.

There are no lobbyists in parliament, and most black cab drivers I know have
modest incomes. They declare an average of £38k/year, but as a cash business
(until recently), it was assumed they were actually doing about £50k/year.
Good money, but not megabucks.

The system is supported because it's worked for hundreds of years. Their chief
complaint against Uber is whether their drivers have to undergo the same
amount of vetting as they had to (they don't), and whether the fare structure
is fair (it isn't, especially as it's VC-subsidised).

Uber is a great solution in many places that have poor transit and poor taxi
solutions already. London isn't one of those places, and hasn't been for
hundreds of years.

~~~
nerfhammer
> VC-subsidised

This boogeyman trope needs to die. Uber is not funded by VCs anymore.

~~~
frabcus
Technically, it seems to be "post-IPO equity" subsidised, with a $500 million
investment from PayPal in April.

[https://www.crunchbase.com/funding_round/uber-post-ipo-
equit...](https://www.crunchbase.com/funding_round/uber-post-ipo-equity--
752f1c50#section-investors)

------
maxehmookau
I'm always amazed at how fatalist about this sort of thing Londoners are. Like
losing Uber will be a massive problem for a huge portion of the population.
London has, by FAR, the best, cheapest and most efficient public transport in
the entire UK. Uber is, yeah, cheaper than a black cab but also why is it
cheaper? Worse working conditions, VC-subsidised, lower standards for vetting
(as we've seen here!) It's not sustainable, and while there's obviously a
market need for a cheaper app-based minicab service in London, Uber has proven
repeatedly that it can't be trusted to do that.

~~~
quest88
I don't know what I'm missing, but why not let customers decide if they want
to use a lower standards for vetting service, and let drivers decide if they
want worse working conditions. Note that I don't completely agree with your
statements, but assuming they're true, my question still stands.

~~~
PaulRobinson
Because the UK - like most of Europe - believes the free market is a poor
mechanism to protect vulnerable people from rape and physical assault.

I'm not being flippant here: customers have routinely shown that for lower
prices they'll suffer almost anything, to the point that safer alternatives
become uncompetitive.

TfL isn't asking for much here: just that drivers are vetted properly and
consistently. Every other firm in London is asked to do it, and complies. If
Uber can put them all out of business by saving money on not doing that, the
market will make the industry less safe for passengers.

We have voted in people to ensure that doesn't happen, because we want
protection from the free market, simple as.

~~~
travisoneill1
Is there actually any data that shows traditional taxis are safer? I bet there
isn't because if there was it would have been used by the taxi companies by
now.

~~~
robocat
"A few years ago a genuinely licensed black cab driver was convicted of rape
and sexual assault, and as a result the community was shaken: it was the first
time in over 300 years where a licensed operator had been convicted of such a
crime" \- PaulRobinson -
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21630846](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21630846)

Do we have any numbers on sexual assaults by Uber drivers in London?

~~~
KaiserPro
[https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/safety-and-security/security-
on...](https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/safety-and-security/security-on-the-
network/tph-related-sexual-offences#on-this-page-1)

------
omarhaneef
Something about this doesn't make sense to me.

I take it for granted that the staff at Uber would do anything not to lose the
license. I am sure that, for 17 months, they've been investing heavily in
security systems, ID verification etc. They must have followed up on every
complaint. If I were them, I would have just manually followed everything that
the Cabs do till I had a technology in place.

It also seems that the city is making some effort to give them space to
improve: 15 months, then 2 months.

So then why didn't the gap close in time? Is this because the technology
platform was so massive that turning it just took more time? Or is there
something about the details that I can't see?

Edit: I start with the assumption that both Uber and the City are trying to do
their best, and don't ascribe nefarious intent to anyone.

~~~
itamarst
You would think Uber Autonomous Vehicles group would do everything they can
not to hit pedestrians. Yet according to the NTSB, previous to killing a
pedestrian in Arizona Uber had a weak safety culture
([https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Documents/2019-HWY18MH010-B...](https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Documents/2019-HWY18MH010-BMG-
presentation4.pdf)).

Even worse, "Pedestrian outside crosswalk not assigned goal of crossing
street", "Tracking history not considered when classification changes",
"Predicted path depended on object’s goal".

Basically they configured it to run over people who crossed outside a
sidewalk.

I would not assume Uber are doing their best. Or, insofar as they define
"best", it's "what can we do as quickly as possible with no consideration to
what is legal".

~~~
kd5bjo
> "Pedestrian outside crosswalk not assigned goal of crossing street",
> "Tracking history not considered when classification changes", "Predicted
> path depended on object’s goal"

To be fair, I could see myself implementing these sort of heuristics to get a
working prototype. On the other hand, I deliberately avoid working on life-
critical software because of how easily it can go wrong.

~~~
wutbrodo
I work in AV eng/research, and reading the details of the Uber crash was
utterly shocking to me in terms of the corners cut. I can get reflexively
frustrated at the slowing of progress and pushing changes induced by our
safety constraints and testing, but I've always been pretty happy with the
choices we've made. Uber made multiple obscenely negligent choices that I
don't think are remotely defensible. There are plenty of hacky heuristics in
the industry, but it's pretty central to industry practice to avoid hacks that
make you _less_ safe.

------
caithrin
"Only in the last few months it has been established that 14,000 Uber journeys
have involved fraudulent drivers uploading their photos to other driver
accounts - with passengers' safety potentially put at risk getting into cars
with unlicensed and suspended drivers."

This seems, from a technical perspective, an easy problem to solve with the
resources of a public company.

Is it the desperation of people who need the money so badly they will
constantly cheat the system? Can you design for that?

~~~
onion2k
_This seems, from a technical perspective, an easy problem to solve with the
resources of a public company.

Is it the desperation of people who need the money so badly they will
constantly cheat the system? Can you design for that?_

I don't think the motivation on the part of the drivers who do this is very
important. They're intentionally deceiving Uber customers, and in some cases
endangering them. That just has to stop, even if the driver is desperate. The
point here is that it's Uber's responsibility to stop it happening, and Uber
has apparently chosen not to (like you, it's not that hard). That will be very
hard to justify, especially as Uber were running TV ads about how they do
background checks on all their drivers here in the UK recently.

~~~
lotsofpulp
Other than constant facial recognition via camera pointed at the driver, how
does anyone (not just Uber), guarantee that an approved driver doesn’t get out
of the car and a non approved driver get in and start driving?

Perhaps a selfie with the driver taken by the passengers during the drive
would also suffice.

In my opinion, Uber has done enough. They provide the passenger with the
drivers name and photo. It’s up to the passenger to verify, but Uber should
make violations easy to report.

~~~
JazCE
using the fingerprint reader on a phone to accept any job?

~~~
darkwater
Fingerprint on a phone (either iOS or Android) only authenticates the local
phone user, it doesn't really expose any mean of unique identification to the
app. So, basically even if you enforce fingerprinting to use the app, it would
just authenticate/match whatever fingerprint was registered in the underlying
OS.

------
Traster
It's pretty amazing how consistently Uber fails to abide by even the most
basic regulations. How many times does a billion dollar company get a second
chance? Every time this happens people talk about how the Mayor will get in
trouble for this, but let's face it, ride hailing apps are 10 a penny. Lyft,
Taxify, MyTaxi? No one in London is going to miss Uber.

~~~
saberience
Do you even live in London? I love when people talk about a whole city in
general terms like they can speak for millions of people.

Well get this, I live in London and I love Uber and I would definitely miss
Uber if they stopped operating here. So your statement is wrong. In fact, our
general slack channel at work had a ton of people posting sad faces about this
news. But yeah sure I guess you know what every Londoner thinks...

~~~
98Windows
I live in London, there are plenty of alternatives to Uber, the only downside
is they might be like 5-10% more expensive

~~~
tolqen
What you said was correct a year ago but Kapten and Bolt exist now, they’re
often the same fare or cheaper than Uber.

~~~
user5994461
Bolt is funded by Chinese money. They're heavily subsidizing rides with that
money to capture some of the market and they will have to raise prices
eventually.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Uber is funded by Saudi money, same deal.

~~~
user5994461
Uber is not free, it's way past the free stage.

I saw few acquaintances trying Bolt (in London) and the main argument is the
first rides are free, then the next rides are free too if you refer a friend.

~~~
toomuchtodo
While not free, VC funds are still subsidizing Uber rides and driver
incentives.

------
thinkindie
have you ever wondered what makes services like Uber affordable? 1) underpaid
drivers 2) VC money dropped into an otherwise unsustainable business

I'm pretty sure Uber will raise prices the moment it kills the competition

~~~
ApolloFortyNine
> underpaid drivers

This is and always will be a matter of opinion.

Uber is not putting a gun to anyone's head. If it's not profitable for you to
drive, you don't have to.

~~~
criddell
Since drivers can't set their own rates, I've always felt the government
should regulate the split. Uber's portion should be capped at something like
5%. The marginal cost for them to connect a driver to a rider is close to 0 so
even 5% feels very generous.

~~~
ekianjo
That's not the job of the government to regulate margins of businesses. If you
go by that way, then you might as well regulate every margin of every app
store?

~~~
criddell
At least in the US, they do it all the time. The job of the government is
mostly to do what we tell it to do because the government is just people from
the community.

------
samwillis
The article doesn't really explain... their current temporary license (they
have been on a temp one since last year) expires at 11.59 tonight, TFL won't
give them a new permanent one. This will be in the courts today and they will
probably be granted another temporary one before the day is out.

~~~
pgl
From the TfL press release:

> _Legislation means that Uber now has 21 days to appeal, during which it can
> continue to operate pending any appeal and throughout any potential appeals
> process. Uber may seek to implement changes to demonstrate to a magistrate
> that it is fit and proper by the time of the appeal._

~~~
Jommi
Exactly, so 21 days + how long the appeal process and outcome takes time. And
the end result may as well be them being given a new temp. license.

------
oliwarner
I don't usually use Uber —we live in a place where it just doesn't exist— but
I've been exposed to it a couple of times this last weekend. It's private hire
but worse.

A family member booked. A driver committed. The wait got shorter. Then it got
longer. And longer. And then our trip was cancelled without reason. Another
was booked. Same gig. We had no opportunity to 1-star those drivers for being
dicks. The third arrived but we didn't get the fabled offer of foot massages,
nor were we plied with snacks or drinks. It was just a cab ride with the
awkward "You've been great passengers, I'll rate you five stars!" exchange at
the end. "Err, thanks mate?"

The return trip was pretty similar. It's 1am. Want to go home. One dropped.
It's getting really cold now. Second arrives. Again, an entirely standard
private hire experience with the added convenience of being asked to rate at
the other end.

But this lack of recompense for crappy initial service isn't good. If a real
private hire did that, you'd use another company and would never use that one
again. You'd tell friends and family not to use it. You'd be able to complain
to the council about the company. With Uber, you just huddle up and hope the
next is better.

This is by far one of the more benign complaints you hear about (versus
deliberately slow routes to push the top end of the range, or surge pricing)
but it absolutely undermines the purported convenience factor. Being able to
talk to a manned rank in actual contact with their drivers is _so_ much better
in practice.

~~~
leoedin
It sounds like you had a bad experience. Almost everyone I know uses Uber
regularly and almost every experience is positive. If it's 3am sometimes it
takes longer, if you just got out of a bar and there's 50 other people next to
you trying to get an uber you might have to walk a bit, if you're in a remote
place sometimes they cancel. It's annoying. But mostly I can have a taxi
outside my house in 3 minutes. I know exactly when they'll get there and
there's no cash needed.

It's a hugely better process than the old phone-a-number and hope minicabs and
taxi services. That would take 15 minutes minimum, often much longer, and you
had no idea when it would arrive.

~~~
tim333
I agree it's better than the old way although the

>A driver committed. The wait got shorter. Then it got longer. And longer. And
then our trip was cancelled without reason

has happened to me a lot too. I wish they would fix that some how. I'm not
sure what it's about. You'd think the drivers would either come get you or not
rather than say they are coming and then flake.

~~~
Zach_the_Lizard
I think they get penalized if they cancel, so they try to get passengers to
cancel of they can help it.

Not sure what their penalities are, though.

I've had to be aggressive with drivers sometimes to get them to cancel to
avoid charging me.

This is particularly common around airport trips for me. Not sure why.

------
gorgoiler
Deliveroo should suffer a reckoning too, if there’s any sense in the world.

Have you ever seen a bunch of Deliveroo riders clogging up the public space
outside a restaurant or other public space? Why should one business get to
exploit pavements for profit, without regulation. Private companies shouldn’t
be able to co-opt public space without scrutiny or permission.

Or maybe I’m too ethical and not being enough of a _hustler_ , and I should
move my team into the desk space at the local library?

~~~
miracle2k
That seems like a fairly narrow concern to me, but...

Maybe the restaurant should pay for the use of that public space of they want
to offer delivery?

~~~
gorgoiler
You’re right, I suppose it is a narrow concern and the solution you highlight
would be an appropriate one for that particular problem.

It feels though like the delivery driver loitering problem is a red flag for a
much larger problem of corporate appropriation being acceptable, without being
challenged by those we entrust to look after our public spaces and roads.

It’s why a solution like “delivery drivers shouldn’t loiter in public spaces”
is a poor solution, and why “private business should not be conducted in
public without a license” might be a better and more general message.

------
s0l1dsnak3123
For those of us in London who are totally fed up with bullish companies like
Uber who refuse to play by the rules and systematically tread on workers'
rights, there's a worker's cooperative called TaxiApp
([https://www.taxiapp.uk.com](https://www.taxiapp.uk.com)) which works on a
non-profit basis and attempts to give a similar experience to that of
Uber/Lyft/Hailo etc.

Unlike the others, it's operated and owned by the workers - so you know that
everyone is getting a fair deal.

~~~
rmtech
Is it any good?

Is it price competitive with Uber?

------
tompccs
A few things going on here. This is a continuation of an ongoing battle
between Tfl and Uber. Last year Tfl threatened to revoke Ubers' license unless
it complied with regulations involving basic safety checks and coorporated
with British Transport Police over crimes committed by drivers.

Well, one year on and Uber has not been able to get its house in order. This
move will doubtless be extremely unpopular with Londoners, many of whom will
suspect that the black cab unions are behind it. Uber called Tfl's bluff last
year knowing there would be a public backlash if their services were
withdrawn. It will be interesting to see how it plays out this time.

Regardless of your opinion of Uber and their labour practices, they offer an
incredibly valuable service to millions of people. They have massively
increased the availability of minicabs, made booking them incredibly easy and
safe (not to mentioned with far better coverage than was previously possible)
and affordable to more people. Not only that, thousands of people now make a
living driving Ubers whom before wouldn't have been able to get a job as a
minicab driver at all, as the firms would artificially limit numbers to keep
fares high.

Uber and Tfl are both playing a risky game here.

~~~
Jommi
I think you're overvaluing Uber's footing in the current London market. During
the summer several competitors have been granted licenses, and they are
reporting healthy and fast growth. Those millions of people can just switch
over to one of the other apps and get a nearly identical (and usually cheaper)
service. Same with the drivers, the competitors are offering a hugely better
deal than Uber is.

~~~
tompccs
Problem is if drivers are spread more thinly between them. But just the news
today should have prompted drivers to sign up to other apps.

------
dominotw
>At least 14,000 trips involved drivers who weren’t who the riders thought
they were,

any idea what the source of this info is?

And not sure what the timeframe here is. Is it 14000 since Uber started
operating in london?

~~~
fauigerzigerk
The number comes from Cognizant who were hired to conduct an independent
review [1]. They found that 43 drivers out of 45,000 drivers skirted Uber's
identity checks committing identity fraud.

[1]
[https://www.ft.com/content/78827b06-0f6a-11ea-a225-db2f231cf...](https://www.ft.com/content/78827b06-0f6a-11ea-a225-db2f231cfeae)

~~~
dominotw
ok thank you.

I don't have FT subscription. But 43 out of 45k drivers seems like a pretty
good number, certainly not a ban worthy number.

~~~
VBprogrammer
Yes, you can tell that someone is trying to make it sound bad by using the
inflated 'trips' figure rather than number of drivers. This is mostly the fall
out of political pressure from black cab drivers and their associations.

I'm certainly not keen on Ubers business practices, it's lacklustre approach
to safety and poor record when it comes to employment regulations. However I
think acceptance that the taxi industry has been changed forever will come
eventually, these luddite challenges will eventually be forgotten and we'll
all move on with our lives.

If we're lucky Uber will crash and burn and someone will pickup the baton,
ideally in a more fair and sustainable way.

------
TorKlingberg
Last time Uber lost their license in London they got to keep operating while
they appealed, so it didn't really have any effect.

~~~
adwi
This time too, as per the sub headline of the article.

------
JazCE
It's from 2017, but this is still relevant:
[https://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/understanding-
uber-...](https://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/understanding-uber-not-
app/)

------
pgl
Here is the announcement from Transport for London:

* [https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2019/novemb...](https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2019/november/uber-london-limited-found-to-be-not-fit-and-proper-to-hold-a-private-hire-operator-licence)

------
phreack
Uber was a good service for me until for some reason it appeared to have
flagged me internally as a sort of driver beta tester, and from then on would
only give me drivers with less than 2 weeks on the app. The experience was
awful and dangerous so I abandoned it for good, but the good thing out of it
all is that it sprung up competition and it was easy for me to jump to another
app with better drivers (for me).

------
Cougher
My favorite cab experiences have been in London, but I'm not gonna lie: my
favoritest favorite experience was a cabbie in Tijuana forty years ago who
pulled out a bottle of tequila, took a long swig from it and offered the
bottle to my mother, father, aunt, and uncle, while driving like he was in a
Dukes of Hazard screen test.

------
kkwak
got an email from uber saying they'll fight. not sure, but seems like a big
win for kapten now.

~~~
Masterkraft
Do not forget Bolt (a.k.a Taxify)

------
user5994461
>>> Uber initially lost its licence in 2017 but was granted two extensions,
the most recent of which expired on Sunday. The firm will appeal and can
continue to operate during that process.

What a time to be alive. Don't have and don't need a license.

------
ben_jones
Damning comment from /u/caldos4 on reddit:

> Tons of breaches documented here [1], at least 14 000 trips with unlicensed
> (uninsured) drivers. Drivers with suspended licences were allowed to re-
> register with Uber, drivers were allowed to drive without insurance on their
> vehicle.

I genuinely wonder if Uber could keep enough drivers if they stopped allowing
uninsured or suspended drivers.

[1]: [https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-
releases/2019/novemb...](https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-
releases/2019/november/uber-london-limited-found-to-be-not-fit-and-proper-to-
hold-a-private-hire-operator-licence)

------
kerng
It seems that 43 out of 45000 drivers were able to drive illegally - it's bad,
but not a horrific. Is there a time line available? Was this is in one year or
overall since Uber's existance?

~~~
PaulRobinson
43 unlicensed drivers managed to put 14,000 passengers at risk.

London is not an easy place to drive, and many of those passengers would have
been vulnerable: lone females, people who had too much to drink, etc.

You might not consider it horrific, but by London standards it is completely
unacceptable.

~~~
kerng
How would this compare to the old school taxi industry? Are there any numbers
available that London publishes for comparison?

------
n_ary
Interesting though, same incident, same news from 2017:
hxxps://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-41358640

I'd assume, this will be resolved like the last time, just a minor hitch.

~~~
Jommi
Yep, they will challenge it in court, keep running while it happens and then
fix the problems and continue their license.

At worst (for Uber) it's just some free organic traffic for their competitors.

------
happppy
Uber banned one of my friend, he was driving with Uber with rating 4.91 and
great reviews. Uber stupid AI (or that stupid developer whoever developed that
stupid AI) thought user ratings and reviews are wrong and they are right,
blocked him and he lost his income. I will never ever use Uber anymore.

------
FpUser
_Private transporting is not sustainable and it is not something that has to
be affordable for everyone_

I am curious how you get to decide on what should be affordable? And what if
somebody disagrees?

------
FpUser
_Taxi regulations gives us passengers safety and fair prices._

Do not know about London. In my location all the money go to paying license
fees and to the actual owners of Cabs (any entity with the money but the taxi
driver). And how exactly exploiting taxi drivers makes us safer I have no
idea.

Failure to do criminal background check is also pathetic lame excuse. I really
doubt that said former criminal got into taxi driving job and paid all those
fees in order to rob/assault passengers.

------
gerardnll
I know this opinion is not popular but I'm so happy everytime I see bad news
for Uber and all these companies that only exist thanks to basically
exploiting THEIR workers.

Private transporting is not sustainable and it is not something that has to be
affordable for everyone, even less by lowering workers wages or playing with
the tariffs by demand. Taxi regulations gives us passengers safety and fair
prices. There are taxi apps that work exactly like Uber's like 'Free-now'
where you can see your trip, its aproximate cost, the driver's rating...

We have to promote governments that support affordable and good quality public
transport, even though I love driving alone in my car.

I hope Deliveroo, Glovo and other companies are also punished for their labour
rights abuses. Make sure your delivery guy is payed fairly or either go to the
restaurant yourself.

So many years of labour rights fights being attacked by these startups that do
not invent anything but base their business model on lower wages.

~~~
xorcist
> you can see your trip, its aproximate cost, the driver's rating

Here's the thing: I don't _want_ to rate my driver. I want to be able to rely
on a third party that all available drivers are punctual and competent. It is
not a choice I want to make.

Too much responsibility is already dumped on consumers under the guise of
choice. Quality control of services I utilize is something I expect to pay
for.

~~~
Terretta
> _I don’t want to rate my driver. I want to be able to rely on a third
> party..._

You sure can’t rely on the Uber, Lyft, Juno ratings. It’s 5 stars or bust. The
social pressure on 5 stars is enormous.

Netflix moved to thumbs up, thumbs down. YouTube did the same, after showing a
graph of the 5s and 1s:

[https://techcrunch.com/2009/09/22/youtube-comes-
to-a-5-star-...](https://techcrunch.com/2009/09/22/youtube-comes-to-a-5-star-
realization-its-ratings-are-useless/)

I relentlessly give an average delivery or ride 3 stars, but feel bad every
time. When the ride is quite good, 4 stars, and exceptional, 5 stars.
Exceptional is the exception.

Three stars doesn’t make you a bad rider or a bad driver, just average. If
it’s not the bulk of the ratings you give, you’re an unreliable rater and not
helping the ratings anyway.

~~~
dangus
Your inability to follow the cultural norm is actually at fault here, not the
rating system. What you’re doing is akin to tipping 5% in restaurants in the
US and only tipping 15% when you have an outstanding experience. In reality,
restaurants workers in the USA would expect 15% to 20% unless they
dramatically fucked up. I don’t like the tipping system either, but I’m also
not going to be that asshole who tries to change the system all on my own
without anyone else agreeing to it.

Just use the rating system like everyone else and get over it:

If the driver was great it’s 5 stars with all the “what did I do great”
options checked and a note for the driver.

If the driver didn’t fuck up it’s five stars.

If you don’t want to be matched with the same driver again but they didn’t do
anything egregious it’s three stars.

If you were outright disgusted at your ride it’s 1 Star.

That’s it. It’s simple. Your own personal usage of the ratings system is not
helpful.

Actually, for another example of why your ratings method is bad, let’s compare
three stars to grades in school. Three out of five stars would be 60%, which
is a D- in most schools. That’s not an average grade. Someone who completes
all the homework and does an average job would expect a B, which would be 4
stars. Someone who didn’t get any questions wrong would get an A, 5 stars.

If your Uber driver took you to your destination with a reasonably clean car
that’s an A. There’s no such thing as exceptional. It’s a car ride not a
physics exam, what do you want exactly?

Uber wants a driver to maintain over a 4 rating, something like 4.5 or 4.2.
When you give that driver a 3 rating you’re not saying “thanks, you were
acceptable and average.” You are saying “you kind of suck” and Uber won’t
actually even match the driver with you again. So if you continue to give all
your drivers 3 stars just because you wish the rating system worked a
different way than it does, you’re even screwing yourself by reducing the
number of drivers that can match with you.

~~~
gjulianm
From what I have heard from drivers, anything less than 5 stars is bad. Not
only with Uber, but with all those companies pushing customers to review their
employees. The system is counterintuitive and most people get it wrong at the
beginning. Compare what makes you rate 5 stars when you buy a product to your
Uber rating system.

However, the think that irks me the most is that rating everyday experiences
is just dumb. Most taxi drives will be average and that's it, because we all
just want it to be good enough. It's as if my local supermarket made me rate
the cashier with 1 to 5 stars. I don't want to do that, because that person
just needs to do their job. Anything above "good enough" is unnecessary.
Significantly bad experiences should be a "reported to the manager" (or any
similar mechanism), filtering out trivial complaints that you'd get in a
5-star scale and getting actual useful information on how to improve the
system.

The US restaurant example is funny because the problem is the same. Instead of
paying by default fair wages and paying attention to customers that complain
about workers, they delegate the 'rating' part to customers, which means that
there's no feedback on which they can improve and that their salary is
determined by arbitrary people judgements.

------
alkonaut
You can't hail a regular taxi in London with your phone _still_? Why? How do
you get them? Call? Or do you have to wave your arms?

It's been 10 years since you could first do it in e.g. Stockholm with normal
licensed taxis.

Edit what I mean are regular taxis, not "black cabs", "minicabs" etc. I mean
the iconic taxis. If you can't hail those, why not?

~~~
Bworkbwork
There's multiple apps that let people hail cabs: Gett, Taxiapp, etc.

~~~
alkonaut
Gett looks like it offers its own services though (i.e. its own cars?)

I'm talking about hailing a regular London Taxi, not any car.

~~~
vertex-four
Gett gets you an actual taxi (regulated fare and all) in most of the UK, not
certain about London.

------
reubeniv
hopefully it gets resolved, Uber is much more convenient than traditional
taxis, I love that you pay via the app and know the route you're taking,
however the issue around unauthorised drivers using regular drivers' profiles
is worrying

------
Normal_gaussian
I'd be very happy to see uber kicked out of London long enough for a
competitor to take hold.

I simply do not trust the company.

I accept that the market pressure uber has brought has improved
transportation. I do not accept that uber and its repeated atrocious behaviors
required for this.

Its a shame that uber can so easily bypass tfl with appeals and minor changes.

~~~
nottorp
If uber gets kicked out, the rest of its modern competitors will follow (Uber
is big enough to litigate succesfully, but not all are), and you'll be back to
the black cabs.

90% of the time, uber is being kicked not because of any concern for safety,
but because of traditional taxi company lobbying.

Source: personal experience in 2 cities.

~~~
Jommi
This is actually completely wrong. TFL in the summer granted several licenses
for Uber competitors which have now been growing fast inside the city. It's
definitely not a take against ridehailing, just against Uber.

------
browsermostly
TFL should actually provide a reliable service if they want to start pointing
fingers. They talk about security and safety but it's not safe to have to wait
around hoping for the off chance a scammy black cab will spot you after your
TFL train gets cancelled for whatever reason.

~~~
Brakenshire
It sounds like you've never been to London? Who says 'TFL train'?

~~~
browsermostly
I live in London mate, I was making a distinction between a train that is
operated by TFL and a train that is not. I also didn't call it a tube because
I was referring more to the overground.

~~~
Brakenshire
Ah, fair enough, you’re making the distinction for others to understand.

The Overground has always worked well for me, it’s unreliable for you?

------
naveen99
uber is not getting kicked out just yet... they can continue operating while
appealing... apparently have been operating without a license for a couple of
years already using the appeals process.

------
gerbilly
The only thing these disruptive companies (Uber, Deliveroo) are providing is
unregulated access to cheap labour in first world countries.

I don't know why on earth that even technical people praise them so much.

The technical innovations to delivering this cheap labour are just an
afterthought.

------
known
Uber should focus on running Electric Cars

~~~
peristeronic
Uber wouldn't do that, the drivers that use their own vehicles would.

------
matthewfelgate
We have a solution for which companies should operate: it's called the free
market.

~~~
yaa_minu
The fact that you're being downvoted shows how much of a socialist hell-hole
HN has become.

No one is forcing people to drive for uber and no one is forcing the rider to
use uber. In my city, Accra, Taxis were so expensive until uber came to the
market and forced down the price.

The only system that puts the consumer (read: common man) first is the free
market (if and only if politicians would allow it to work).

~~~
lidHanteyk
Let's see how much of a capitalist you are. Why do you believe in the
Efficient Market Hypothesis? What evidence do you have in its favor?

I humbly suggest to you that, if P!=NP, then the Efficient Market Hypothesis
(any flavor!) cannot be true, as otherwise we could program markets to solve
NP-complete problems in P time.

Edit: Remember, downvote means "you are right and I must hide your argument
lest it show others my folly". That's how the free marketplace of comments
works.

~~~
yaa_minu
No, let's look at it from a more philosophically objective point of view.

Why do you think that the millions of Londoners who voluntarily chose Uber
over traditional taxi services should be denied the freedom to choose what
taxi services to use?

~~~
Jommi
If tfl sees Uber not operating by the same standards as others do, then of
course they should be punished. Londoners are ofcourse free to use any other
other app based ridehailing companies that so comply with tfls regulations.

------
zxcvbn4038
I tried to use Uber three times in my life, including once in London, and
every time I get all the way to try the point where it is looking for nearby
cars then it stops and says my phone number is invalid. Contacted their
support, sent them a screen shot of my iPhone screen showing my number, they
said it was fixed. A few months later I tried to book a car again and exact
same thing happened. So I don’t have a lot of sympathy when they fall on hard
times. I eventually gave up on Uber and tried Lyft, works painlessly and
reliably, a little extra comfort when I’m in a unfamiliar city.

~~~
jki275
Same exact problem for me. I use Lyft also as a result.

------
readhn
On one hand i am glad that a transnational company is getting stopped like
that, especially when breaking the rules. they are basically a giant money
hoover that comes in and sucks the money offshore with offshore interests as
#1 priority.

on the other hand, often it often takes an outsider to disrupt a well
established and corrupt market in order to move it forward.

~~~
pen2l
I share your feelings exactly.

When I was in London, the ease of ordering a ride with your smartphone was a
reliable comfort in a foreign land.

Maybe if I hadn't undergone shitty experiences in Paris et al. being swindled
by the train operations, I wouldn't be taking Uber's side, but it just is that
Uber has just worked for me so many times when other options failed.

~~~
ourlordcaffeine
Same here. Most of the taxi drivers in the city where I live only take cash,
and every time I have ridden with one, they have cheated and taken a detour.

Uber, automatic payment by card and no cheating on the route.

~~~
oefrha
Wow, care to share where you live? I’ve hardly ever heard stories of taxi
drivers cheating locals (needless to say tourists are cheated all the time).

~~~
thathndude
This was common in Chicago when I lived there from 2011-2013.

"I'd like to pay with credit card" "Machine is broken." "It's all I have."
"Fine."

~~~
oefrha
That’s cheating their company (and/or setting up for tax evasion), which in my
experience is far more common than cheating the customer with a detour, at
least when the customer is local (you can show your localness through verbal
cues implying or simply indicating you know the route).

