Thailand orders Uber to halt taxi services, says operating illegally

[whybother]

the likes of UBER and co are sailing far to close to the westernization image , those pesky foreign ideas don't jive with somchai ok may need adjusting somewhat trouble is there's no extras in it now that is a stumbling block by the way UBER dont trip on the way out

i just put a spell check on somchai it came up with ARMCHAIR a story on its own really

A few western countries are also banning Uber.

The problem here, and elsewhere, isn't the technology, it is the drivers that are not licenced to carry paying passengers. The problem with drivers not licenced to carry paying passengers is that they don't have insurance. Uber states that they insure drivers, but, from what I have been able to find, that is only in some states in the US.

For the Uber driver that has been charged with rape in India, that could happen anywhere with any system, but what has come out of that is that Uber didn't actually do a criminal check on the driver.

[whybother]

<snip>

Uber may not cover me either, but I have my own medical insurance... and at least with Uber I'm in a new Camry with a seat belt, new tires, new brakes, airbags... and they don't drive like <deleted> idiots like the regular taxis do. So the chances of me being seriously injured are substantially reduced.

There are different versions of Uber. UberBlack gives you a camry or similar, and are usually green plate taxis. UberX gives you anything.

[impulse]

Uber states that they insure drivers, but, from what I have been able to find, that is only in some states in the US.

The drivers' insurance is meant to be primary.

Uber has an insurance policy. But I suspect it's to protect Uber from lawsuits, not to pay for hospitalization if there's an accident.

One normal practice of tort law in the USA is for the plaintiff to sue everyone involved, and that will include Uber- for merely setting up the transaction.

I also wonder why a company worth $40B in market cap wouldn't be self insured for $1 million (as I've read they claim to have $1MM insurance)?

Given their reputation, I suspect they go out the the insurance industry just so they can claim they have insurance. Publicity and very little substance...

Edited December 10, 2014 by impulse

[whybother]

Uber states that they insure drivers, but, from what I have been able to find, that is only in some states in the US.

The drivers' insurance is meant to be primary.

Uber has an insurance policy. But I suspect it's to protect Uber from lawsuits, not to pay for hospitalization if there's an accident.

One normal practice of tort law in the USA is for the plaintiff to sue everyone involved, and that will include Uber- for merely setting up the transaction.

I also wonder why a company worth $40B in market cap wouldn't be self insured for $1 million (as I've read they claim to have $1MM insurance)?

Given their reputation, I suspect they go out the the insurance industry just so they can claim they have insurance. Publicity and no substance...

In most countries you can't get insurance to carry paying passengers unless you have the appropriate local licence (ie licenced by the government to carry passengers.

If Uber did insure every driver, they would be broke already. They say they are a technology company and not a taxi company, and the drivers are just "partners" and not employees or contractors, so they "have no responsibility" to insure the drivers.

[raybal5]

Well it seems according to news received that Uber is under pressure in Europe to cease their operations and now India too.

Got to be something adrift somewhwer to pronpt these actions

The thing that is adrift and is prompting these actions is obvious. The government is missing out on the fees that it rips off licenced drivers. Do you really think that paying the government for a piece of paper automatically makes them a better and safer driver? If you ever took a taxi in Melbourne, Sydney or anywhere in Thailand then you'd see my point. Paying money is what the government wants. Uber drivers own their cars and the cars are new so they are less likely to drive in a crazy manner like many licenced taxi drivers do.

[webfact]

related topic:

Uber halts ride sharing service in Bangkok



BANGKOK: -- The Land Transport Department yesterday ordered the US-based Uber ride sharing service operator to stop services after a meeting with three ride sharing operators.

Full story: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/782985-uber-halts-ride-sharing-service-in-bangkok/

[whybother]

Well it seems according to news received that Uber is under pressure in Europe to cease their operations and now India too.

Got to be something adrift somewhwer to pronpt these actions

The thing that is adrift and is prompting these actions is obvious. The government is missing out on the fees that it rips off licenced drivers. Do you really think that paying the government for a piece of paper automatically makes them a better and safer driver? If you ever took a taxi in Melbourne, Sydney or anywhere in Thailand then you'd see my point. Paying money is what the government wants. Uber drivers own their cars and the cars are new so they are less likely to drive in a crazy manner like many licenced taxi drivers do.

Not all Uber drivers own their own cars, since they could be normal or green plate taxis. Some normal taxi drivers own their own cars.

[Benmart]

So a meth-ed up cab driver in a cab with a picture that looks nothing like him careering through the streets of the city in a barely working old Toyota is ok, but Uber isn't? There's a chasm between these regulators and basic common sense,

It's Uber that that broke the camel's back....OK to be on meth and be using a different picture, but throw in use of Uber also well that's just over the top...downright dangerous. Glad the govt is looking out for its citizens....or is it "watching their citizens" now days.

In India, Uber driver raped woman.

As much as I enjoyed my India travels, I believe the discussion is based in Thailand.

[whybother]

As much as I enjoyed my India travels, I believe the discussion is based in Thailand.

The discussion is about Uber and their processes. Apparently Uber didn't do a police check on the guy in India.

[bkkjames]

As much as I enjoyed my India travels, I believe the discussion is based in Thailand.

The discussion is about Uber and their processes. Apparently Uber didn't do a police check on the guy in India.

Again so what. Police checks are now guarantees that the nutcase driving your Bangkok cab is safe?

[whybother]

As much as I enjoyed my India travels, I believe the discussion is based in Thailand.

The discussion is about Uber and their processes. Apparently Uber didn't do a police check on the guy in India.

Again so what. Police checks are now guarantees that the nutcase driving your Bangkok cab is safe?

It's relevant when Uber say they do police checks but don't. They're the ones spouting about their safety, so they need to make sure they get it right.

[rjcampbe]

Uber states that they insure drivers, but, from what I have been able to find, that is only in some states in the US.

The drivers' insurance is meant to be primary.

Uber has an insurance policy. But I suspect it's to protect Uber from lawsuits, not to pay for hospitalization if there's an accident.

One normal practice of tort law in the USA is for the plaintiff to sue everyone involved, and that will include Uber- for merely setting up the transaction.

I also wonder why a company worth $40B in market cap wouldn't be self insured for $1 million (as I've read they claim to have $1MM insurance)?

Given their reputation, I suspect they go out the the insurance industry just so they can claim they have insurance. Publicity and no substance...

In most countries you can't get insurance to carry paying passengers unless you have the appropriate local licence (ie licenced by the government to carry passengers.

If Uber did insure every driver, they would be broke already. They say they are a technology company and not a taxi company, and the drivers are just "partners" and not employees or contractors, so they "have no responsibility" to insure the drivers.

This "independent contractor" policy that Uber uses is no different from driving your own vehicle to deliver pizza for Dominoes in the states. Or the drivers who used to run deliveries for the small freight company I used to work for...

We were covered by our personal auto insurance and not a policy from the company. The company did require that you had insurance, but they didn't provide it.

(And I will admit that my info on this is 30 years old so it is possible things have changed... but that's how it worked when I did it....)

[whybother]

Uber states that they insure drivers, but, from what I have been able to find, that is only in some states in the US.

The drivers' insurance is meant to be primary.

Uber has an insurance policy. But I suspect it's to protect Uber from lawsuits, not to pay for hospitalization if there's an accident.

One normal practice of tort law in the USA is for the plaintiff to sue everyone involved, and that will include Uber- for merely setting up the transaction.

I also wonder why a company worth $40B in market cap wouldn't be self insured for $1 million (as I've read they claim to have $1MM insurance)?

Given their reputation, I suspect they go out the the insurance industry just so they can claim they have insurance. Publicity and no substance...

In most countries you can't get insurance to carry paying passengers unless you have the appropriate local licence (ie licenced by the government to carry passengers.

If Uber did insure every driver, they would be broke already. They say they are a technology company and not a taxi company, and the drivers are just "partners" and not employees or contractors, so they "have no responsibility" to insure the drivers.

This "independent contractor" policy that Uber uses is no different from driving your own vehicle to deliver pizza for Dominoes in the states. Or the drivers who used to run deliveries for the small freight company I used to work for...

We were covered by our personal auto insurance and not a policy from the company. The company did require that you had insurance, but they didn't provide it.

(And I will admit that my info on this is 30 years old so it is possible things have changed... but that's how it worked when I did it....)

Carrying passengers is different. Many of the articles talking about banning Uber (from lots of countries) state that drivers that don't have proper "taxi" licences aren't insured.

[Jackie66]

Well every Uber car that picked me up so far was with Green plates so these are not private cars but limousine service cars. Even some hotel cars picked me up a few times.

So not really a private whoever wants can be a driver like everyone is saying.

[ctrunfree]

So a meth-ed up cab driver in a cab with a picture that looks nothing like him careering through the streets of the city in a barely working old Toyota is ok, but Uber isn't? There's a chasm between these regulators and basic common sense,

It's Uber that that broke the camel's back....OK to be on meth and be using a different picture, but throw in use of Uber also well that's just over the top...downright dangerous. Glad the govt is looking out for its citizens....or is it "watching their citizens" now days.

In India, Uber driver raped woman.

Several licensed taxi drivers (usually from the Indian sub continent) have also been arrested for raping passengers in Australia. Whatever the issues are with Uber, passenger safety isn't one of the biggies.

[Thai at Heart]

Uber's not the problem.

It's the fact that the guy that shows up will probably be an unlicensed commercial driver, driving a car that hasn't paid to be a taxi, with insurance that isn't valid when carrying you for hire.

Uber just puts together people who have something (a ride) with people who want it. Just like Napster.

Insurance particularly in the 3rd world is a big problem for Uber.

[whybother]

Several licensed taxi drivers (usually from the Indian sub continent) have also been arrested for raping passengers in Australia. Whatever the issues are with Uber, passenger safety isn't one of the biggies.

The issue wasn't that the Indian driver raped someone (as bad as that is). The issue was that Uber hadn't done a criminal check on this driver.

[Andreas2]

Just read about Uber (San Francisco) in LRC.com:

Government Cartels Lose to The Free Market

Big Time. Uber is the free market’s answer to the government cartelized and protected taxi service. I travel a lot for work, and hated taking taxis for a few reasons. First, if you ever need to take a taxi to the airport for an early morning flight talking to the taxi dispatcher the night before is hit or miss. The cab shows up within 5 minutes of the appointed time about half of the time. Same thing if you’re trying to hail a cab – “did they see me?” Uber solves this problem with an app that shows your driver’s position on the map and an ETA.

You can read the rest of the short, interesting article here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/government-cartels-lose-to-the-free-market/

Hint: Here in Thailand, it also never was about "Bringing back happiness to the (Thai) customers" and especially not about "Thailand's shame about overpricing". Anyway, who the heck is "Thailand"? Ok, I get it, they must mean the government. Yeah, that's exactly the same entity that bans the Uber service in Thailand.