Curious - Since you don't visit London (haven't in years) - why on earth do you care?

Me personally (who does actually go to London several times a year) - I will only (ever) get in a licensed black cab or occasionally a car service.

Have used uber a few times at home (though I much prefer Lyft) but will never use it in London.

janis as a lifelong travel writer (retired) specializing in European travel I retain a keen interest in things and staying well versed in them and enjoy participating in discussing on such topics - especially London which I visited annually for decades, often spending weeks in it and really love it and that's why I care. I do plan to visit London again soon so it is also relevant.

- I will feel free to comment here with or without your approbation!

Cheers!

Even if you don't visit London, it matters. I'm sure other countries are watching to see how it turns out. Uber has problems globally, and London is one of the few markets in which it actually makes money. If London does succeed in banning uber, it'll be a significant blow to the company and possibly other cities will follow suit.

Several articles I read all made the same point that Uber's success against cases like this is largely due to community support. Cities back down when they see a swell of support from consumers.

I myself would prefer a cab if we have a lot of luggage. Criminal background checks, driver training etc. all sound good to me.

But I must say that the Hailo app for London taxis was not well-run when we were there last summer. That only confirmed my own kids' bias that Uber was better.

"Apparently you didn't look very hard . . ."

Geez. Snarky much?

I've used Uber a couple of times in the west London suburbs. Response was so quick, the driver showed up by the time I got out the door. If the TfL ruling results in improved security, that will be a good thing for everyone.

I will only (ever) get in a licensed black cab or occasionally a car service

And if you never use Uber in London why do you care???

As I've said on another thread, I use Uber and Black Cabs each trip to London. Each has it's advantages. Uber is always less expensive. I've never had any problem with it. I can't say the same with Black Cabs. Once I was in a Black Cab that had a minor accident; cabbie's fault. I'll be in London next week and I imagine I'll use both.

Each has it's advantages. Uber is always less expensive>

Are there any other advantages to Uber and to Black Cabs? Maybe on the other thread?

And I agree with what Belinda said on other thread (after hours of searching for it!):

<I think the reason the TfL was successful in this case is because of a really strong Black Cab union. It's the consumer and the 40,000 Uber drivers who are going to pay the price in this case.>

Seems what Theresa May may think maybe too.

That ridiculous exam janis gives as a reason gives she don't take Uber - Wiki below:

>>The London taxicab driver is required to be able to decide routes immediately in response to a passenger's request or traffic conditions, rather than stopping to look at a map, relying on satellite navigation or asking a controller by radio. Consequently, the "Knowledge of London" is the in-depth study of a number of pre-set London street routes and all places of interest that taxicab drivers in that city must complete to obtain a licence to operate a black cab. It was initiated in 1865, and has changed little since. It is claimed that the training involved ensures that London taxi drivers are experts on London, and have an intimate knowledge of the city and are the safest form of transport.

It is the world's most demanding training course for taxicab drivers,[citation needed] and applicants will usually need to pass at least twelve 'appearances' (periodical one-on-one oral examinations undertaken throughout the qualification process), with the whole process usually averaging 34 months, to pass.>

<It was initiated in 1865, and has changed little since> says a lot and that it takes tons of hours of studying and average of 34 months to pass means that Uber's oft part-time and retired or redundant drivers who are not out to make it their life's work perhaps - would be forced off the road for at least 3 years! And that seems yes the goal as belinda says. And probably why May is against it - against unions.

I normally support unions but not monopolies acting like unions. Let the free market decide and have some sensible and attainable licene requirements -background checks, etc. -that could be done in a more timely fasion.

and vehicular safety exams too.

Well, it's not entirely the cab drivers. I would be in support of uber if it was a responsible company. It's not. I'm not particularily sympathetic to the cabbies' cause, I just think Uber is ran by cheating jerks. They go out of their way to duck responsibility and hinder investigations. They're never sorry they operate with unsafe conditions- they're sorry they get caught. If they want the right to operate like cabs, like at airports, they can pay the same fees and follow the same regulations as cabs. If the new guy can fix the problems and turn uber into an ethical company, then awesome. I doubt it.

Another benefit to apps such as uber is that drivers may do trips that a cabbie will refuse because they want to stay where they can get a fare easily. I think it was Jamikins who mentioned that in the other thread. One of the reasons I'm not particularily sympathetic towards the cabbies complaining about uber is that those are probably the same cabbies who give customers attitude about their destination. That happens here a lot and it even happened once to me in London. Or maybe you can't find a cab and dispatch gives you an absurd estimate.

I don't think it's always a competition. Most people use multiple forms of transportation. Rideshare, bike, transit, personal vehicle, cab. Because each one works best in certain situations.

>>It was initiated in 1865, and has changed little since> says a lot <<

You're not imagining that the knowledge doesn't take account of new developments?

https://tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/do...ons-system.pdf

>>and that it takes tons of hours of studying and average of 34 months to pass means that Uber's oft part-time and retired or redundant drivers who are not out to make it their life's work perhaps - would be forced off the road for at least 3 years!<<

You're confusing two different things. Minicab drivers don't have to pass the knowledge. That's only required for taxi drivers to have the right to pick up passengers off the street.

This issue is about whether Uber is conforming to the rules for companies running minicab/private hire services.

What's the diff between mini-cabs and Uber?

This issue is about whether Uber is conforming to the rules for companies running minicab/private hire services.>

OK - got it.

Interestingly the international press partially sees it as Uber or Black Cabs not mentioning that mini-cabs are also in the mix. In fact many mini-cabs are also Uber cabs.

Summary from yesterday's paper about Uber's troubles with other countries:
https://www.theguardian.com/business...ound-the-world

Commercially, as the black-cab drivers' initial reactions showed, Uber could be a threat to them, since the software aims to match customers to nearby Uber cabs in real time, but the black cabs couldn't stop them getting a minicab licence from TfL. Their model does threaten to undercut a lot of local minicab companies and freelance minicab drivers - until of course they've driven them either out of business or into the fold, in which case, it's anybody's guess as to where Uber prices would go.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/w...ondon-cab.html

Some interesting aspects.

But drivers for existing minicab firms, and independent minicab drivers, take a less rosy view of Uber:
https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...isabled-people

Of course it's self-interests that are key.