Fred Flinstone Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 what business is it of the government who I decide to ride in a car with? Seriously f'd up taxi service is the reason Uber exists. Even some parts of the city no taxi will use a meter. Then when you try to get his taxi ID to make a complaint the driver will threaten you with violence. The Land dept obviously are part of the taxi mafia monopoly scam. As in most countries, the law says that to be a taxi you have to be registered as a taxi. This model will go boom the first time someone has an accident and it turns out that the passenger isn't covered because the car is acting as a business vehicle. The Thais are being responsible . The driver is not a commercial carrier. Its silly to think a qualified driver of say a boat (skipper) Can be substituted by some one who isn't a professional and carries people cheaper. Cars are no different . Insurance etc Safety and experienced. Then who knows what your getting into. Its illegal and should remain so 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snig27 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 <script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script> If it is popular with the end user then the most popular PM in the last decade should look at integrating it into society by allowing them to conform to the law. I think it is a great idea. With that said though it is refreshing to see the law actually being applied now and not ignored. "the most popular PM" ???? Meet DjJamie - he's the only person on planet earth who believes those wonderful polls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snig27 Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 The same thing happened to über in Germany, other European cities, as well as in New York City. This is nothing special, or Typical Thailand. Actually no, it almost all those places Uber is operating. It's up against a court injunction in Nevada and Toronto but in both they expected to be overturned. In the Netherlands UberPop (a ridesharing service) is under examination. The same service was briefly stopped in Germany but is now available. In every one of the countries where it has faced opposition it has done so because it faced traditional taxi driver resistance to a popular service who have argued that it is unsafe etc. And, yes, it may be not Typical Thailand as in action has happened elsewhere, but it's typical Thailand in that it has not here been the result of court action but rather corrupt preemptive action by an official on behalf of an interest group. If anyone thinks that riding in a well driven clean, well maintained car that takes you to your destination and then sends you an itemised breakdown of the route and the billing plus the ability to rate the driver and complain (and always get a response) is less safe than a the clapped out old banger that refuses to take you to the destination, barely makes it to the destination at times and as often as not doesn't turn up to phone bookings then they are as deluded as poor old djjamie here with his endless statements about the "popular" PM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 The same thing happened to über in Germany, other European cities, as well as in New York City. This is nothing special, or Typical Thailand. Actually no, it almost all those places Uber is operating. It's up against a court injunction in Nevada and Toronto but in both they expected to be overturned. In the Netherlands UberPop (a ridesharing service) is under examination. The same service was briefly stopped in Germany but is now available. In every one of the countries where it has faced opposition it has done so because it faced traditional taxi driver resistance to a popular service who have argued that it is unsafe etc. And, yes, it may be not Typical Thailand as in action has happened elsewhere, but it's typical Thailand in that it has not here been the result of court action but rather corrupt preemptive action by an official on behalf of an interest group. If anyone thinks that riding in a well driven clean, well maintained car that takes you to your destination and then sends you an itemised breakdown of the route and the billing plus the ability to rate the driver and complain (and always get a response) is less safe than a the clapped out old banger that refuses to take you to the destination, barely makes it to the destination at times and as often as not doesn't turn up to phone bookings then they are as deluded as poor old djjamie here with his endless statements about the "popular" PM. In most states in Australia it's been banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamNoone88 Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 The greater implication of this last desperate attempt by the dinosaurs at the Land Transport Department is that innovative technology will make you extinct. Taxi drivers first ... home delivery......the way you pay your bills ..... even selling or renting a property. You cant stop disruptive tecnology and these folks are living in the dark ages from which they may not survive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 The greater implication of this last desperate attempt by the dinosaurs at the Land Transport Department is that innovative technology will make you extinct. Taxi drivers first ... home delivery......the way you pay your bills ..... even selling or renting a property. You cant stop disruptive tecnology and these folks are living in the dark ages from which they may not survive. The banning of the app isn't about technology. It's about being registered to be a taxi. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanBBK Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Over charge? Should it not be the customer who knows what is fair or not? In a free market Uber should be able to charge anything people are happy to pay. I do agree. There is however slightly more to it. Transport is a public utility. Taxi fares need / were established to protect consumers, who have to use the service. If all Taxis were allowed to set their own rates, such consumer protection would not be necessary, as market forces would regulate the price. Über is just exploiting an opening in the upper segment of the market, customers who do not mind to pay a premium for better service. At the same time I agree that vehicles used for any commercial service should be registered as such (green plates) and drivers should hold appropriate liscense. Don't ban Über, just make sure they follow the rules. Btw I see über as a hired, chauffeur driven car, Not a Taxi. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 You fail at every level, Uber insures its drivers. Think before you open your pie hole Uber doesn't insure their drivers. They're not Uber's drivers. They're contractors. Read before you open your pie hole. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSJ Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 I thought Uber was about car pooling. People going in the same direction and sharing the costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impulse Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 I thought Uber was about car pooling. People going in the same direction and sharing the costs. And Napster and Pirate Bay were all about sharing public domain creative content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard_smith237 Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Following the sale of my car, this week I will face an interim period without a vehicle. I will have no choice but to rely on Taxi's - there are hardly ever seat belts in the rear, thus I have to use the front seat. Something I have no issue with when travelling alone. However, when travelling with Wife and Child I insist on a car seat and seat belts - I was going to rely on Uber to provide me with this service and guarantee of a cleaner, safer car. By making this decision, the DLT is forcing me to use an option I consider to be unsafe (regular taxi's) by removing the safe option. At times those in a position to make decisions which affect 'us' in Thailand trip over their own stupidity - I truly wonder what future and security Thailand can offer. This inherent flaw is magnified when returning to Thailand from more developed nations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Following the sale of my car, this week I will face an interim period without a vehicle. I will have no choice but to rely on Taxi's - there are hardly ever seat belts in the rear, thus I have to use the front seat. Something I have no issue with when travelling alone. However, when travelling with Wife and Child I insist on a car seat and seat belts - I was going to rely on Uber to provide me with this service and guarantee of a cleaner, safer car. By making this decision, the DLT is forcing me to use an option I consider to be unsafe (regular taxi's) by removing the safe option. At times those in a position to make decisions which affect 'us' in Thailand trip over their own stupidity - I truly wonder what future and security Thailand can offer. This inherent flaw is magnified when returning to Thailand from more developed nations. Developed nations like Australia, that have also banned Uber? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seastallion Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 More idiocy. Perhaps too hard to extort money from Uber. THAT, I suspect, is the underlying gripe of the authorities. Mind you, they have a point about no public carriage license. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 The greater implication of this last desperate attempt by the dinosaurs at the Land Transport Department is that innovative technology will make you extinct. Taxi drivers first ... home delivery......the way you pay your bills ..... even selling or renting a property. You cant stop disruptive tecnology and these folks are living in the dark ages from which they may not survive. The banning of the app isn't about technology. It's about being registered to be a taxi. Confirming that it isn't about technology, Easy Taxi and Grab Taxi haven't been banned, because they comply with the taxi regulations. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casualbiker Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Basically Uber will have to ensure their sub contractors vehicles are limousine green plate registered. That would probably be enough to satisfy the authorities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casualbiker Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Like these Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Basically Uber will have to ensure their sub contractors vehicles are limousine green plate registered. That would probably be enough to satisfy the authorities. They could be normal (yellow plated??) taxis too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casualbiker Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Basically Uber will have to ensure their sub contractors vehicles are limousine green plate registered. That would probably be enough to satisfy the authorities. They could be normal (yellow plated??) taxis too. True but to keep the quality (never used them, just going on what people are saying) normal taxis probably don't count! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Basically Uber will have to ensure their sub contractors vehicles are limousine green plate registered. That would probably be enough to satisfy the authorities. They could be normal (yellow plated??) taxis too. True but to keep the quality (never used them, just going on what people are saying) normal taxis probably don't count! It's not just about the quality. It's also about being able to get a taxi to take you. If you're going a bit out of the way, you might get a few rejections before getting a taxi to take you there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casualbiker Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Basically Uber will have to ensure their sub contractors vehicles are limousine green plate registered. That would probably be enough to satisfy the authorities. They could be normal (yellow plated??) taxis too. True but to keep the quality (never used them, just going on what people are saying) normal taxis probably don't count! It's not just about the quality. It's also about being able to get a taxi to take you. If you're going a bit out of the way, you might get a few rejections before getting a taxi to take you there. True enough .. I haven't taken a Taxi in a few years.. if they refused to take me I would just leave the door open and walk away! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickBradford Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Uber is too expensive? I wonder if it is more expensive than taxibangkokservice, which charges between 800 and 1500 baht from Suwannaphuum to downtown. There may be valid reasons to curb Uber, but price surely isn't one of them. As for unlicensed, I've had my sleeve plucked dozens of times in the airport by people offering private rides to various towns and cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snig27 Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 The same thing happened to über in Germany, other European cities, as well as in New York City. This is nothing special, or Typical Thailand. Actually no, it almost all those places Uber is operating. It's up against a court injunction in Nevada and Toronto but in both they expected to be overturned. In the Netherlands UberPop (a ridesharing service) is under examination. The same service was briefly stopped in Germany but is now available. In every one of the countries where it has faced opposition it has done so because it faced traditional taxi driver resistance to a popular service who have argued that it is unsafe etc. And, yes, it may be not Typical Thailand as in action has happened elsewhere, but it's typical Thailand in that it has not here been the result of court action but rather corrupt preemptive action by an official on behalf of an interest group. If anyone thinks that riding in a well driven clean, well maintained car that takes you to your destination and then sends you an itemised breakdown of the route and the billing plus the ability to rate the driver and complain (and always get a response) is less safe than a the clapped out old banger that refuses to take you to the destination, barely makes it to the destination at times and as often as not doesn't turn up to phone bookings then they are as deluded as poor old djjamie here with his endless statements about the "popular" PM. In most states in Australia it's been banned. Only the ridesharing part of the app as far as I know - in NSW and Victoria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snig27 Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 (edited) Following the sale of my car, this week I will face an interim period without a vehicle. I will have no choice but to rely on Taxi's - there are hardly ever seat belts in the rear, thus I have to use the front seat. Something I have no issue with when travelling alone. However, when travelling with Wife and Child I insist on a car seat and seat belts - I was going to rely on Uber to provide me with this service and guarantee of a cleaner, safer car. By making this decision, the DLT is forcing me to use an option I consider to be unsafe (regular taxi's) by removing the safe option. At times those in a position to make decisions which affect 'us' in Thailand trip over their own stupidity - I truly wonder what future and security Thailand can offer. This inherent flaw is magnified when returning to Thailand from more developed nations. Developed nations like Australia, that have also banned Uber? I took Ubers in Sydney and Melbourne last week. It's not banned, part of the system is barred. https://www.uber.com/cities/adelaide https://www.uber.com/cities/melbourne https://www.uber.com/cities/sydney https://www.uber.com/cities/brisbane Edited November 30, 2014 by Snig27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaffyDuck Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Splitting hairs - uber has run into resistance in many European and American cities as well, so this is not particularly special, to reiterate the "duh" point, here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaffyDuck Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 then they are as deluded as poor old djjamie here with his endless statements about the "popular" PM. ... Who has absolutely nothing to do with this issue, I might add... But don't let facts distract you. Again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Following the sale of my car, this week I will face an interim period without a vehicle. I will have no choice but to rely on Taxi's - there are hardly ever seat belts in the rear, thus I have to use the front seat. Something I have no issue with when travelling alone. However, when travelling with Wife and Child I insist on a car seat and seat belts - I was going to rely on Uber to provide me with this service and guarantee of a cleaner, safer car. By making this decision, the DLT is forcing me to use an option I consider to be unsafe (regular taxi's) by removing the safe option. At times those in a position to make decisions which affect 'us' in Thailand trip over their own stupidity - I truly wonder what future and security Thailand can offer. This inherent flaw is magnified when returning to Thailand from more developed nations. Developed nations like Australia, that have also banned Uber? I took Ubers in Sydney and Melbourne last week. It's not banned, part of the system is barred. https://www.uber.com/cities/adelaide https://www.uber.com/cities/melbourne https://www.uber.com/cities/sydney https://www.uber.com/cities/brisbane The unlicensed taxi drivers are the issue here and in other places that it has been "banned". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai at Heart Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 what business is it of the government who I decide to ride in a car with? Seriously f'd up taxi service is the reason Uber exists. Even some parts of the city no taxi will use a meter. Then when you try to get his taxi ID to make a complaint the driver will threaten you with violence. The Land dept obviously are part of the taxi mafia monopoly scam. As in most countries, the law says that to be a taxi you have to be registered as a taxi. This model will go boom the first time someone has an accident and it turns out that the passenger isn't covered because the car is acting as a business vehicle. You fail at every level, Uber insures its drivers. Think before you open your pie hole Well that would be hard to achieve in a legal way since the car would need to have the correct permit and plate in thailand. You are driving in a private car. You sure he has insurance. Go read how uber works. If the private driver has no minimal insurance, uber won't pay. Why so aggressive anyway. This is a discussion, not an arguement. http://m.laweekly.com/informer/2014/06/19/uber-lyft-riders-might-not-be-covered-by-insurance-industry-claims The National Insurance Association says no. While firms such as Uber and Lyft say they maintain $1 million coverage in "excess insurance" per incident, the devil's in the details: The companies say the driver's own personal insurance is the coverage of first resort. Now **** *** with your cheap insult and go and do some reading yourself. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brfsa2 Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Uber dont respect or even try to follow local regulations and licenses, they deserve to be banned and fined, even thou they provide a good service. they were doing it the wrong way, ilegaly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinhead Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 After 30 minutes of trying to secure that second driver, speaking to over twenty drivers with directions in succession and being refused this afternoon, opened the Uber app and promptly got a car in six minutes. Stop another taxi? Preposterous. Taxi union and mafia prevail. lol Bangkok taxi fares are between the cheapest in the world and most of the drivers are nice if the driver refuses to use the meter, just stop an other taxi Uber should understand the situation and limit the presence in expensive places 2 or 2.5 us dollars from Pra Ram 9 to RCA come on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emster23 Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Much safer to take overloaded vans with spare gas tanks under seats, driven by maniac high on ya baa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now