
Taxi industry lawsuit against Uber transferred from state to US court - ilamont
http://www.universalhub.com/2013/taxi-lawsuit-uber-crime-syndicate-hates-poor-peopl
======
kyro
I felt I got burned by Uber the first time I used them during Hurricane Sandy
when I was charged a hefty fee because of their dynamic pricing. I gave them
another try a month back and now find myself using the service no fewer than 5
times a week. It literally eliminates every thing I hate about calling a cab.
I love it now and almost rely on it at times.

I make sure to ask every single new driver about their experience with Uber
and I have heard positive things across the board, save for a few minor
complaints (usually about how the cut drivers get aren't _that_ much higher
than what they'd get at a traditional cab company). Most say they love it,
many say they make extra cash using it on their off-times, and some say they
have entire fleets running on Uber. Overall, from my experience, the drivers
love and rely on it too.

I think the secret to their success is that they've simplified and streamlined
the process elegantly for both drivers and passengers. A few taps and I'm on
my way without worry of if I'll even get a cab (although, to be fair, it is at
times difficult to find Uber cabs in Brooklyn), and whether I brought
cash/credit. But what's really interesting is how they've seemed to simplify
the process just enough for drivers. They tell me that _everything_ is
provided for them, down to the dashboard mount for the included iPhone. The
software itself is simple enough to work and isn't wrought with rules and
requirements, and that let's drivers find their own way to make the most out
of the software in ways I'm sure the creators didn't expect. For example, one
driver actually ended my trip early while I was still in the car, meaning I
got charged less, because he didn't want to miss any potential pickups waiting
for him at my destination, which I thought was a clever trick.

My point is that Uber is providing a service that both drivers and passengers
seem to universally love. No one, as to my knowledge, is getting screwed for
the benefit of another. That's why all these lawsuits seem like desperate
attempts to take down a company whose service they know is better on all
fronts.

~~~
sqs
Yes, I've also gotten universally positive feedback from all of the Uber
drivers I've talked to (Uber Taxi, UberX, and Uber Black in SF). Whenever I
take non-Uber cabs, I ask about Uber, and the response is also usually
positive. Some of them say they have already applied to Uber and are waiting
to hear back.

The one negative thing about Uber that I've heard is from a non-Uber cab
driver who said that Uber is bad because it cannot be anonymous. He then told
me about all of the people he has driven who are committing crimes and marital
infidelity, which are not the best examples to use. To be fair, I can think of
much better examples where anonymity is valuable.

I am a HUGE Uber fan and regular user, but he did make a good point about the
loss of an anonymous travel option for those who need it.

~~~
eridius
Unless Uber manages to actually kill off the taxi industry, which seems
extremely unlikely, then the anonymous travel option has not been lost.

------
ShabbyDoo
One thing of many in Uber's favor is that its customers are of relatively high
socio-economic status, and the company treats them well. When they hear that
the company is being sued by the taxi industry, they take note. It's personal.
Taxi service has been bad for years, and everyone's been a victim of the
absurd regulations which have lead to this sorry state. Elected officials have
been accustomed to taking advantage of regulated industries through corrupt
actions (anything related to building or zoning permits as an example) without
significant blow-back via news coverage or loss of reputation. This time, it's
different. Look at how Washington DC's attempt to draft anti-Uber legislation
lead to a national response via phone calls and emails. The proposed
legislation was dropped. I suspect Uber will eventually prevail in most of its
markets, but the politicians will take awhile to realize that the public is
taking interest in seemingly esoteric taxi regulations -- the sorts of laws
which have been used for years to transfer money from the pockets of the
electorate into the hands of those close to power. I feel like I'm supporting
democracy and freedom when I hit the "request taxi" button in the morning --
it's an action more powerful than my vote.

~~~
adrr
Umm i think regulations came because the of the sorry state of taxis. I don't
know how many times i've been ripped off in a taxi. I assume people complained
and the taxi industry got heavily regulated. Just look outside the US for
comparison.

~~~
newbie12
Nope, the medallion systems exist to block new competition. Sure there are
some regulations that seem to favor consumers-- such as price controls-- but
these are a short-term benefit, and at the cost of reduced innovation. Far
better to allow competition, and customer service will improve through market
action rather than government rule-making.

~~~
pifflesnort
Unregulated innovation often innovates fraud and crime when you're talking
about unmarked, unregulated cars driven by unknown people, picking people up
off the street.

If you go anywhere in the world with less strict taxi regulation, you'll run
into this. In Prague, my wife and I hopped into a cab only to find that the
meter seemed to exist in a time bubble that ran 10x faster than the rest of
the known universe.

I appreciate being able to _hail a random car on the street_ and know
_exactly_ what I'm going to get. Safety and fraud issues are exactly why the
industry was regulated in the first place.

~~~
lucasvo
I can agree with what you're saying though I want to share an anecdote from
Moscow where there is pretty much no regulation and pricing varies by car
company. Instead of having a meter you negotiate the price in the beginning.

To help users out with ordering cabs Yandex released an app that actually
let's you order cabs and shows you pre-negotiated prices, you can pick
whichever one you like (economy, premium, luxury). They include user ratings
and some sort of due-diligence for taxis to get accepted to their network.

But apart from that, a Lyft-like system has existed in many cities for years.
In Moscow just holding up your hand on the side of the street prompts anyone
to just drive over to the side of the street and offer you a ride. Most of
these are full-time or part-time drivers, but also people getting home from
work who don't mind a small detour for a bit of extra cash. At a fraction of
the price this is the most popular way for people to get around, although some
cars look like they date back into the USSR era.

This is a perfectly acceptable scenario and I think with modern technology the
market will start to regulate itself.

~~~
pifflesnort
I can share an anecdote from the reverse perspective. When traveling in
Morocco, I didn't speak any local languages (eg, French or Arabic). I also was
entirely unfamiliar with the city, the distances between points, or even how
much something should cost. If there was a Yandex app, I wouldn't have known
about it (... although the last time I was in Morocco predated smart phones by
about 10 years).

This meant that negotiating a price was pretty much out -- I paid what they
asked, and had no real way to gauge whether that was reasonable other than
asking a local. I also had no recourse if they overcharged -- what was I going
to do?

Information asymmetry is a potent weapon for taking advantage of people,
whether it involves taxi rates, or just how clean the restaurant's kitchen is,
or how fresh the ingredients are. This is why we have regulations that attempt
to provide some of the symmetry required for fair exchange.

~~~
ShabbyDoo
"This is why we have regulations that attempt to provide some of the symmetry
required for fair exchange."

In the case of Ebay, Uber, Airbnb, etc., technology can replace regulation as
a means of providing power to the previously disadvantaged party. And,
technological solutions almost always are more efficient than the regulation
they replace.

------
joubert
In New York, cabbies are not allowed to refuse you ride a particular
neighborhood either.

I never announce where I want to go before I get in (I have some friends in
BKLN).

One time I did get a driver who bitched about having to take me somewhere. So
I made an overt stretch to look at his details posted inside the car, and then
pretended to be taking a note of it. He VERY quickly complied. I didn't have
to say a word.

~~~
rada
This kind of sentiment comes up a lot, and I am sorry, I find it kind of
revolting.

There is this notion that cabbies are discriminating against the downtrodden,
but in reality, they _are_ the downtrodden. They are low-income, immigrant
people who, unlike you, actually live in those outer boroughs. People who need
money so badly that they will drive a cab for a living.

You, on the other hand, are a wealthy dude. A dude with so much disposable
income that you can throw $20-$40 at a cab instead of taking the subway for
free. (Free as in, you already have an unlimited metro card, yes? And $20-$40
is just one way, yes? And you do this every weekend, yes?).

So you, the wealthy dude, have the law on your side. Apparently, your need for
low-cost on-demand, luxury transportation trumps the basic human right to free
will. Apparently, mostly white, wealthy people need to be protected from being
discriminated against by mostly brown, poor people. Apparently, when a laborer
refuses to take on dangerous work or insufficiently compensated work ^, we
must bring in the government guns and show him who's boss.

(^) It's always money or personal safety. Discrimination has nothing to do
with it and I find it rather humorous that cab takers project their own racist
attitudes onto cab drivers, seeing as I don't recall a while cabbie _once_
during my 15 years in NYC.

~~~
rdouble
Cabbies used to routinely discriminate against whomever they felt like, mostly
black and brown people who needed to get uptown. That is why the laws
prohibiting refusal to take you were you want to go were instated in the first
place.

~~~
rada
Your point that there is a historic basis for the law is well taken. However,
history is not an excuse, _especially_ when it comes to forced labor (cough,
slavery, cough).

Also, when you say "used to routinely", you are projecting. The press made it
into a banner issue, but really, think about it. "Uptown" used to be very,
very poor, and poor people don't take cabs.

~~~
rdouble
I'm not sure what you are talking about at this point. You are mad because
taxi drivers are supposed to follow the law, because of slavery? Seems a bit
incoherent.

~~~
rada
Slavery bad. Law bad when law say slavery good. Rich man make slave work
because bad law, very bad.

Is that better? I tried to use shorter sentences.

~~~
rdouble
Yes, much clearer now.

------
alexose
Boston cabs have been refusing rides to other neighborhoods forever-- drivers
just keep their doors locked and ask you where you're going. If they don't
like the answer, they drive off. Blatantly illegal, but it happens all the
time.

Funny that they didn't seem to have a big problem with this behavior until
Uber got involved.

~~~
jcampbell1
In New York, you can file a complaint online in about 10 seconds. Then you
have to phone into a hearing scheduled at your convenience. The driver rarely
shows up, and they hand out $200 fines like candy.

~~~
apaprocki
When I've tried to do this in the past, it required appearing in person. Have
you actually phoned in?

~~~
andrewjshults
I filed an online claim and didn't have to do either (the driver pled guilty).
I imagine that the requirement cuts both ways (i.e., the driver has to
actually appear to contest the claim, in which case they require testimony -
if they can't/won't appear they have to pled guilty).

------
readme
This is just a side note, but on april 2 _every cab_ in my city was suspended
from service for safety violations.

[http://www.wmur.com/news/nh-news/All-Manchester-taxis-
suspen...](http://www.wmur.com/news/nh-news/All-Manchester-taxis-suspended-
after-failed-inspections/-/9857858/19564702/-/i0ya2az/-/index.html)

The taxi industry is not a good thing to leave unregulated. If you think uber
wouldn't operate just like the rest of them because they're a trendy startup,
you're delusional.

I acknowledge the call for regulation is over travel destination, but in
general I sense some free market idealism here that needs to be squashed.

~~~
driverdan
Your example is a clear case of regulation failure. The cab companies knew of
the inspection but took no action to comply with the regulations.

In smaller cities like Manchester where there are only 19 cabs there is very
little market pressure. Competition in large cities will put more pressure on
companies. The risk of a significant lawsuit is also significant pressure to
maintain vehicles.

~~~
readme
How is it a case of regulation failure? If there were no regulation, all the
defective cabs would still be on the road right now.

------
bernardom
I love the comments in the article: people from East Boston saying that it's
the only way they can get a cab.

I took an Uber in Boston today. I never call cabs any other way. It's faster,
more convenient, they're more accountable, and when I'm in Cambridge it allows
me to get a Boston cab as opposed to the horrible, horrible Cambridge cabbies.

The drivers seem to like it too- every Boston cabbie I've taken an Uber with
has told me they get lots of money from Uber rides and that it's way better
than Dispatch. Some even stopped paying for dispatch and rely entirely on Uber
and driving around.

~~~
untog
I think this is the core of why everyone disagrees about Uber. In certain
cities (Boston, SF) it is a lifesaver. Here in NYC it's a waste of money-
yellow cabs really aren't that bad or scarce. There are times of day when it's
difficult to get a yellow cab, but that's the exact same time that it's
difficult to get an Uber cab- either that or you're paying 2.5x the already
expensive price because they switched on surge pricing.

------
saosebastiao
So much cheaper than a medallion...no wonder they are mad. Everybody gets mad
when they have to pay a bribe and then find out they are the only ones that
paid.

------
Selfcommit
These guys are making some serious disruption in a terrible market. Good for
them.

I wonder what this lawsuit would look like 10 years from now, when Uber
Drivers are replaced by Uber leased "Google Cars" that pick you up?

------
modeless
People talking about the dangers of completely unregulated cabs are missing
the point. Unregulated cabs that you hail randomly on the street are dangerous
because you have no way to verify that the cab is actually from the company it
claims to be, and no way to punish the driver if he lies to you (or worse).
You are completely at the mercy of the driver.

Uber is completely different from randomly hailing a cab on the street,
because you can verify that the cab is from Uber and you can punish bad
drivers with bad ratings. If you have a bad experience in an Uber cab, it
reflects badly on Uber's brand, so Uber has a strong incentive to punish bad
drivers. That's why services like Uber don't need the same regulation that
regular cabs do.

------
gcmazza
Hmmm... Industry disruption met with resistance is solid evidence that you are
on the right track. The biggest innovation was the move from Checker Cabs to
Prius ! Ha. I was a brand manager at Chevrolet and teamed up with Joe Boxer to
run van taxis in NYC with a portion of fare going to charity. Chevy didnt want
to go beyond test even though the customers LOVED it. Sort of TOMs of taxis.
That could be a next innovation in the space...social give back or "free" Uber
rides where the passenger could add on an amount that goes into a pool for low
income folks to get to the store, etc. Anyway - NONE of that coming from the
traditional taxis....

------
jmomarty
Coming from Paris, I know that dealing with cab companies is a huge pain. And
that's why there are a lot of initiatives that try to deal with what we call
"la petite remise" which are private cars. The legislation is far less strict
with them. The only problem is that up to now, there's a numerus clausus for
them. But it is said that they're going to increase this number in the few
next years, so it's still a big opportunity.

Still, taxi drivers hold a strong negociation power against governement:
they're strongly unionized and they don't hesitate blocking trafic in case a
new law might harm their business...

------
lifeisstillgood
Can someone explain uber to a UK reader who does not understand what the fuss
is?

I can see its some sort of aggregation service for taxi cabs, but I generally
like using one particular firm, that I know vets its drivers well. Some (men &
women) I know stick to women only driver firms and so forth.

A nice UI is good but I dont get it?

~~~
patio11
The attactiveness of Uber varies with regards to locality in the United
States. Many cities have taxi systems which are _deeply_ non-functional:

a) So few taxis on the roads (because the laws forbid anyone from adding more)
that it is virtually impossible to hail one, like San Francisco.

b) Drivers who habitually discriminate against customers by race, desired
travel location, etc.

c) Routine fraud conducted by drivers over e.g. whether a payments mechanism
which is legally required such as, say, the credit card machine is actually
functioning or not. (Taxi drivers in the US prefer to be paid in cash because
it makes fraud easier.)

By comparison, Uber is "You push a button. A car picks you up and drives you
to your destination. You do not get cheated." This is a _severe competitive
threat_ to taxis in many US cities, even at a hefty premium to what taxis are
charging.

~~~
lifeisstillgood
Hmmm, I am a big fan of Addison-Lee cabs, a firm that runs its own fleet, and
well, just turns up. You can have an account or pay cash, they turn up, will
drive my dad 30 miles into town or me 2 miles across.

They basically have been a severe competitive threat to local mini cab firms
in London, and, well, no-one sued, they just upped the game or got out. I have
not got into a cab recently that I did not book on the phone and where cabbies
have a sat nav, a smartphone and never use the radio, just get jobs from their
dashboard.

Is it just me being a bit astonished that it seems only one firm in the
continental USA has thought "I know lets be better"

P.S.

An (ex-) Londoners perspective on your other points are amusing - _every_
cabbie wants to be paid in cash, they are _famous_ for racisim and and you
will _never_ get a taxi south of the river at this time on a Friday mate)

But the system works. As an infrequent New Yorker it seemed to work there.

------
viraptor
> The companies also charge the company discriminates against cancer patients
> because it does not accept city coupons for discount rides for them.

Wow... nice play on cancer issue there. Very dirty too. One could argue that
city discriminates against non-cancer patients by discounting only on specific
illness. Since city is not controlling Uber, they are not forced to honour any
city-issued coupons.

------
Fizzadar
I find it so depressing that traditional taxi company's wish to stifle
inovation (which, as far as I can tell, is much loved), simply because they
have failed to innovate themselves. IMO this is similar to the music industry
and hollywood, where companies are 'stuck in their ways' and will desperately
try to keep the status quo at the expense of the consumer. Where's the love?.

~~~
rhizome
And cable companies and garbage collection and all the other industries that
have been captured by organized crime, fraud, and cry like little babies
whenever their comfy fiefdom is encroached upon. They're like siblings who
whine, "Mommmmm!! Billy's on my side of the back seat!" Sheer territorial
corruption.

------
gavinlynch
The only downside of Uber? Hailing a normal cab and walking out as if it's
already paid for. I've done that twice since I started using Uber a few months
ago. Embarrassing but funny stories :)

------
zimbatm
Uber must be doing something right to get this kind of trouble.

~~~
watsonc73
The taxi regulators were always going to put up a fight and use whatever
lobbying they could to nip them in the bud. The reality is that Uber have done
a great job of ploughing on regardless. In Ireland and the UK, Hailo have
managed to keep the taxi regulators on side and the taxi drivers love them. A
bit like Spotify vs Napsters approach to the labels. Seems like the carrot
works better than the stick!

------
venomsnake
Why RICO? That is the part I don't quite get ...

