Slashdot Mirror
'Legacy' London Car Hire Companies Lawyer Up Against Uber
An anonymous reader writes with The Stack's report that: The London Private Hire Car Association (LPHCA) has engaged a major firm of lawyers to present its case against Uber in the UK capital, citing lack of continuous insurance checks, Uber's tax avoidance practices and even 'loitering' Uber drivers as reasons to impose regulations which would eliminate Uber's competitive advantage in London. A lot of Londoners like to have that competition around, though.
It isn't a monopoly, since all the black cabs are not owned by one company. Try again.
Because you said so, right?
Since the courts have said so. Unless you're saying that you don't believe in the rule of law.
Uber provides additional insurance while carrying a fare, and insurance premiums are already assessed for mileage which accounts for the additional mileage between fares.
And that isn't legal in many places of the world. The vehicle itself has to have the insurance coverage directly on it. Which isn't happening.
A worthless thing which does none of the things it is claimed to do.
Except it has a higher level of testing, requires the person to know and understand local laws before passing, and it's a prerequisite in many cases for carriage insurance for taxis. And in many places is the requirement to waive liability in the case where a passenger refuses to use a seatbelt and so on.
It's easy to do people for taxes. But there's plenty of unjust fees and taxes.
Really? I guess that explains why uber drivers aren't paying their taxes as required by law. And why uber is refusing to pay taxes like a taxi company.
False. You're a liar.
Well, I suppose that makes you an idiot who doesn't understand law.
Om, nomnomnom...