Shocking news!!!

[ladymuck]

It pisses me off that they keep insisting Uber is a ride sharing app...

It's like the drivers just magic out of nowhere (and it seems they actually do in some cases)

[ladymuck]

It's a long read but I do like London Reconnections for the level of detail they go into in their reporting.

Schrodinger's Cab Firm: Uber's Existential Crisis - London Reconnections

[eek]

It's a long read but I do like London Reconnections for the level of detail they go into in their reporting.

Schrodinger's Cab Firm: Uber's Existential Crisis - London Reconnections

It's not surprising given how good London Reconnections is but they also mention the VAT issue.

It's one thing to claim a taxi driver is working for him/herself when you pay the taxi driver directly. It's a very different claim when the money goes into a central point and an unknown percentage is then passed on to the driver.

[rogerfederer]

About 3 weeks ago when, after getting off a 27 hour flight back from Oz with 3 little kids at Heathrow, 7 (!) black cabs on the trot in the taxi rank outside said, "Nah. Not worth my while mate." As the fair was only £50....

In the end I ended up getting an uber.

This isn't permitted in Scotland, are you sure this is acceptable in England? They can't refuse any journey up here unless the passenger isn't sober enough to travel. Half of me thinks the rules are likely different down there because logic escapes the regulators in England much of the time, whilst the other half thinks it isn't permitted but people don't know and therefore just accept 'no' from the taxi driver.

In the good old days people would film the interaction on their phone and then post it on twitter to attract the black cab federation's PR team.

[original PM]

This isn't permitted in Scotland, are you sure this is acceptable in England? They can't refuse any journey up here unless the passenger isn't sober enough to travel. Half of me thinks the rules are likely different down there because logic escapes the regulators in England much of the time, whilst the other half thinks it isn't permitted but people don't know and therefore just accept 'no' from the taxi driver.

In the good old days people would film the interaction on their phone and then post it on twitter to attract the black cab federation's PR team.

It's not acceptable but it happens..

in the local town there is a taxi rank and if it was raining I would get a cab home - it was only a mile or so but up a steep hill and after a few beers I could not be bothered (was not even close to being drunk talking maybe 2 or 3 pints)

There was always 1 guy who if he was at the front of the rank would peel off so as he did not want my business - was quite annoying when he was the only one on the rank.

The cost was always like £3.70 but I always gave the driver 4 quid so it's not like I was being tight or anything.

[rogerfederer]

The main take away from the various articles seems to be that: Uber is set up as a tax evasion company.

Officially, under international recognition rules of tax havens, the Netherlands and the UK fall under offshore tax haven status. It appears Uber have set up in most countries to utilise a complex arrangement of businesses that rely on it not being seen as a taxi firm or a firm providing rides from point A to B, but rather a lift-sharing entity.

Even under this scenario they're still making a huge loss. I expect there are local companies, many with apps, that can provide a similar level of service without the lack of English skills that some posters here have cited.

Uber have paid next to no corporation tax since they emerged in the UK, so just don't use them. They're clearly a dummy company set up to evade any rightful tax and I'm amazed this is even still seen as permissible given the issues the country has faced since the banking 2008 crisis. If your local taxi firm has to pay reasonable levels of taxation I don't see why some international firm should get away and orchestrate huge losses just to encroach on existing taxi firms - keeping in mind that the losses are likely false in most instances and just a complexity of operating in this multi-company manner between tax havens.

[BrilloPad]

The main take away from the various articles seems to be that: Uber is set up as a tax evasion company.

It would be possible for HMRC to close these loopholes. Or even going after scheme providers. But they far prefer to bully the little contractors.

[BrilloPad]

It's not surprising given how good London Reconnections is but they also mention the VAT issue.

It's one thing to claim a taxi driver is working for him/herself when you pay the taxi driver directly. It's a very different claim when the money goes into a central point and an unknown percentage is then passed on to the driver.

And Uber facing£1.1 billion VAT liability.

[ladymuck]

This isn't permitted in Scotland, are you sure this is acceptable in England? They can't refuse any journey up here unless the passenger isn't sober enough to travel. Half of me thinks the rules are likely different down there because logic escapes the regulators in England much of the time, whilst the other half thinks it isn't permitted but people don't know and therefore just accept 'no' from the taxi driver.

In the good old days people would film the interaction on their phone and then post it on twitter to attract the black cab federation's PR team.

Interestingly, there's a distance limit for refusal but it's not for short journeys, it's for long ones:
http://content.tfl.gov.uk/london-cab...e-distance.pdf

A cab driver can refuse a fare from Heathrow if it's over 20 miles away. Usually, they can refuse fares over 6 miles away.

EDIT: the 6 miles got updated to 12:
http://content.tfl.gov.uk/london-cab...e-distance.pdf