UBER App, is what they offer illegal?

whodidthat on 25/04/2014 - 13:25
Last edited 26/04/2014 - 20:45

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=7132933987…

UBER App - USING IT COULD LAND YOU MULTIPLE $110,000 FINES
I'd never heard of the 'Uber' app until yesterday.
If you're aware of it, and have registered as a driver, think again.
You risk a $110,000 fine for each trip where you carry a passenger.
It's a phone app that hooks passengers up with motorists / drivers.
Instead of calling a cab or hire car and paying exorbitant taxi or hire car fees, Uber connects passengers with every day drivers. Driver and passenger negotiate a fee and the driver transports the passenger. As long as your car is less than 6 years old you're set…
But not so fast.
If you, the driver, carry a passenger for a fee even as low as 1c you risk a $110,000 fine (NSW) per trip.
What Uber is is promoting is illegal.

***Just to clarify (for those who haven't read the link) the words above are from the link, not my words.

Some seem to think I have a problem with UBER, as I don't (& probably never will as I rarely) use taxi's I have no problem.

I simply asked "UBER App, is what they offer illegal?"

If asking a question is so wrong, then I'm sorry.

Travel

Related Stores

Uber
Uber

Comments

  • Davo1111 on 25/04/2014 - 14:40
    +40

    Uber is private-vehicle hire, not a "public passenger service"

    You shouldn't read Facebook rants, or listen to 2GB… that's the real crime here.

    EDIT: just had a look at the private vehicle hire accreditation standards for NSW. It doesn't look that hard to meet the standards, particularly when the app records the journeys. It wouldn't surprise me if the Uber actually met all the standards required, and are 100% legal. If anything it's just a smear campaign from the butt-hurt taxi industry.

    • stemcell on 25/04/2014 - 18:00
      +2

      2GB now they are a joke :)

      • Food on 25/04/2014 - 18:03
        +121

        It is, you can get over 1TB now

  • Ughhh on 25/04/2014 - 14:48
    +5

    Isnt this basically like carpooling, with passengers paying a little to cover some petrol?
    Unless you're going around, asking people if they want a lift to somewhere as a job, I dont see how this is illegal…

    • altomic on 26/04/2014 - 10:59
      +63

      apparently a uber car was fond in the Burnley tunnel with all 3 passengers freaking out.

      police put it down to - car pool tunnel syndrome

      • alizzan on 26/04/2014 - 17:44
        +38

        You are now ready to be a father, if you aren't already.

  • Baysew on 25/04/2014 - 17:50
    +5

    Well it depends what Uber are actually offering.

    According to NSW Transport Minister and deputy Liberal party leader
    The Age

    Repeating a facebook rant is not really credible news.

    Interesting piece by Michael Pascoe of the Age/SMH

    Maybe it's the sort of thing that the OzBargain community should embrace, rather than crush with "Uber - illegal" style postings, copied from some facebook site.

    • donga100 on 25/04/2014 - 18:16
      +1

      There have been 22 deals posted promoting it so I would say OzB has embraced it.
      https://www.ozbargain.com.au/deals/uber.com

      • Baysew on 25/04/2014 - 18:42
        +2

        Only a few comments on those deals, so not quite as embraced as the McFlurry deal.
        Still early days yet, looks like Victorian Government not warmly embracing UBER just yet the Age

    • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 11:24

      Actually, I didn't say "Uber - illegal" I said "UBER App, is what they offer illegal?"

      A question, rather than a statement.

      • Baysew on 26/04/2014 - 13:29
        +8

        UBER App - USING IT COULD LAND YOU MULTIPLE $110,000 FINES

        You risk a $110,000 fine…

        If you, the driver, carry a passenger for a fee even as low as 1c you risk a $110,000 fine (NSW) per trip.

        What Uber is is promoting is illegal.

      • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 20:16

        So a question is wrong?

        If you care to read the link, what is posted here (apart from title/question) is the opening part of the "rant", not my words.

        • akula on 26/04/2014 - 23:42

          Sorry there is no question mark, so it actually implies that it is illegal.

        • whodidthat on 27/04/2014 - 00:17

          Title says: UBER App, is what they offer illegal?

          I think you're referring to content from the link, which are not my words. Just open the link & you will see.

        • Baysew on 27/04/2014 - 09:49

          UBER App, is whodidthat out to destroy it?

          So a question is wrong?

        • whodidthat on 27/04/2014 - 09:52
          -2

          Have you read everything I've said?

          A question is all well and good, but when question has been answered……..

      • This Guy on 27/04/2014 - 20:48
        +1

        It's called begging the question.

        Is it a sleazy way to defame people and companies by adding a question mark after the statement? I don't know, I'm just asking the hard questions :p

  • tonester on 26/04/2014 - 02:08
    +2

    UBER App - USING IT COULD LAND YOU MULTIPLE $110,000 FINES

    not as a passenger :)

    I'd never heard of the 'Uber' app until yesterday.

    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/deals/uber.com

    If you're aware of it, and have registered as a driver, think again.

    you're referring to their new low-cost uberX/Pop service, not uberTaxi/Black/Lux?
    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/140252
    https://partners.uber.com/signup/sydney

    You risk a $110,000 fine for each trip where you carry a passenger.

    not necessarily - there was no problem unless Uber called itself a "taxi service"
    http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/smartphone-apps/nsw-trans…

    Driver and passenger negotiate a fee

    false - rates are fixed or non-existent :)

  • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 10:32
    +1

    I have seen it mentioned here, I haven't used it as I have no need to.
    I saw this post from someone well known and wondered.
    That is all.

    • retiredfeline on 26/04/2014 - 10:37

      He's a cartoonist, not a lawyer or business analyst. The world is full of people who opine beyond their expertise.

      • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 11:22
        -4

        Aren't people of enough value to express opinion, whether right or wrong?

        There may be something in it, there may not be.
        If nothing, all well & good.

        • retiredfeline on 26/04/2014 - 11:31
          +2

          The weight you put on the opinion should depend on its reliability. Otherwise you waste a lot of time on know-nothings for that area. Life's too short for that.

        • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 11:40

          I put question on this issue rather than weigh it up on one opinion, isn't that how debate works?

        • retiredfeline on 26/04/2014 - 11:42

          But it seems there was not much weighing between reading and forwarding. That's how time wastage is multiplied. :)

        • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 11:49
          +1

          I read the "article" and wondered, what is so wrong in that?
          Are you saying for sure there is no doubt?
          If so, all is good.

          I haven't seen anyone post yet to say 100% that the "article" is wrong, and/or offer counter evidence, only slate what was said.

          What was offered said "NSW Transport Minister sends mixed messages over legitimacy of Uber 'ride-sharing' service"

          That isn't a cut & dried answer either.

        • retiredfeline on 26/04/2014 - 11:50

          But why stop at one article, did you go look for other articles that might present a different view?

        • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 11:52

          Did you see "NSW Transport Minister sends mixed messages over legitimacy of Uber 'ride-sharing' service" ?

        • retiredfeline on 26/04/2014 - 11:53

          Sure, but you could have found that yourself without the help of OzB.

        • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 11:56

          Do you have a problem with debating greenpossum?

          You never answered "Are you saying for sure there is no doubt?"

          I really don't know why you are doing this, other than not having the answer - which is fine, someone might.

          Again, I read the "article" and wondered, what is so wrong in that?

        • retiredfeline on 26/04/2014 - 12:03

          I'm not taking a side on this because I have no need for Uber up to now but I think Paul doesn't have all the facts. His cartoons whenever I encountered them always seemed to be black and white. What I'm against is giving weight to an opinion based on how public the figure is. You just cut and pasted his words without comment (except for the title); you didn't even name the source, except with a hyperlink, and it turns out that you reposted it because he's "well-known". I'd give more weight to his opinion if he were qualified.

        • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 12:08

          I asked a question, then posted what I'd read.

          I was asking what others thought.
          Yet, you push this and not even offer an opinion whether it is legal or illegal, but concentrate on the way I posted and another persons credibility……why?

          Do you have the answer? I certainly don't.
          If you do, let me know. If you don't then why not just let it go?

        • retiredfeline on 26/04/2014 - 12:20

          But that's exactly the point. I don't have an answer because I'm not expert in the law. So you shouldn't put much weight on what I say or even ask me for my opinion, except whether or not I like this development, which I do.

          But neither does Paul even if he's a public figure. If I came across something written by him on say computer software, I'd just politely turn the page and move on. Some public figures love to give their opinion on all sorts of things because well it's publicity. But they probably know no more that what you and I can find out on our own.

        • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 12:39

          My point is, you seem to be doing the same as you accuse?

          If you read everything I've said, I haven't put weight on either side, merely ask the question. One you cannot answer yet you continue the attack?

        • retiredfeline on 26/04/2014 - 12:58

          I'm not attacking you, just asking you to be more discriminating about who you quote. Do this thought experiment: Paul Z, your neighbour who has an ordinary job, sends you an email with that content. Would you repost it on OzB? Probably not.

        • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 20:11
          -3

          No, because it is illegal to repost e-mails due to privacy.

          But, if it's a quote on the internet (ie newspaper, etc.,) and a topic on here, yes I possibly would.

      • Rel63 on 27/04/2014 - 03:54

        By reading the linked article, Paul says he was involved in the hire car industry so as that is driver for payment he had to comply with current laws. I would say that makes him qualified to oppose on this issue.

  • hello007 on 26/04/2014 - 11:46
    +27

    Anything that kneecaps the fat cat middle men in the ridiculously overprotected taxi industry is fantastic.

    Go Uber!

    In Sydney - Why do we have the ongoing scam of a $12 gate fee at Sydney Airport?

    1. Because the rail system is owned by Macquarie Bank.

    2. Macquarie also has big interests in taxis.

    3. The $12 fee acts as a deterrent for people to use rail and keep using taxis.

    4. The bank and the controllers of the taxi industry make the big $$$ and we pay. The drivers get the chicken feed scraps that might fall off the table.

    If Uber can break this nexus and give people cheaper more reasonably priced rides with reasonable service levels then I'm all for it.

    As long as drivers are screened and safety standards maintained.

    Can't wait to see the big taxi bosses screaming blue murder because their overpriced taxi plates have plummeted in value because of Apps like Uber.

    The protected species of the taxi bosses need to be exposed to real competition.

    • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 11:51
      +1

      Totally agree, if all above board.

      I rarely use taxi's as they are outrageously expensive.
      In the last 15 years, I've used them once and only because I had no other choice.

    • JepunK on 26/04/2014 - 13:10
      +1

      and Macquarie bank will buy a massive chunk in Uber shares…the whole thing will go around in circles…

    • compound on 26/04/2014 - 18:32
      +1

      Don't forget that Macquarie bank funded speed cameras in NSW.

    • neonlight on 26/04/2014 - 20:20
      +8

      True ozbargainer would take bus from burwood to mascot then walk 20mins to airport

      • cloudy on 27/04/2014 - 08:43
        +9

        Mascot to airport took me 10 mins, ozbargain speed walk.

        • MrLeE on 28/04/2014 - 10:57

          I'm lucky to live close to the airport.

          I just cycle to the airport with my backpack (Interstate weekend trips).

          Lock my bike up and be on my way!

  • jto00 on 26/04/2014 - 13:11
    +4

    as far as i know you are charged a set fee, you're not supposed to 'agree' on a price with the driver.

    And as much as you claim you're asking a question your summation at the end is clearly a statement.

    Uber is good for the people, i don't quite know why you have a problem with it. Are you a cabby?

    • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 20:12

      Who said I have a problem with it?

      • pat_mac on 28/04/2014 - 14:23
        -1

        Are you avoiding saying if you're a cabby or not?

        • whodidthat on 28/04/2014 - 14:39
          +1

          How many times do I have to say I am not.
          Would you prefer I fill a stat dec out?

        • pat_mac on 28/04/2014 - 14:55

          Here you go: http://goo.gl/L1grm9

        • whodidthat on 28/04/2014 - 17:43
          +1

          Gee thanks, is that a link to a stat dec form? Thanks anyway but I already know where to find them. Where would you like it sent?

        • supersabroso on 29/04/2014 - 22:38

          lol bro, if you actually clicked the link, nobody would neg that comment :)

  • grasstown on 26/04/2014 - 16:55

    Wow should taxi plate owners sell their plates now or will it be illegal eventually? Those plates are worth hundreds of thousands each aren't they?

    • t_c on 26/04/2014 - 17:30
      +3

      Considering google has bank rolled uber to the tune of 250 mil, I would definitely sell if you can still find anyone dumb enough to buy them.

  • galapogos01 on 26/04/2014 - 17:43
    +1

    Does the OP work in the taxi industry?

    • whodidthat on 26/04/2014 - 20:14
      +1

      No, see post above………..I rarely use taxi's as they are outrageously expensive.
      In the last 15 years, I've used them once and only because I had no other choice.

  • chaosmaster on 26/04/2014 - 18:28
    +6

    Farewell crappy taxi companies.

  • nephilim on 26/04/2014 - 18:40
    +8

    Those facebook comments are terrible, when ordering a uber taxi is shows you the drivers face, name, car and number plate. If anything Uber is safer then a normal taxi as you have all there details before you get in the car. Much better then a id card sticktaped to the dashboard.

    • neonlight on 26/04/2014 - 20:22
      +1

      You never know if those details are real. After all its just a sales pitch telling you beforehand who the driver is etc.

      • imcold on 26/04/2014 - 21:26

        well as long as we got a picture of their face, and their online presence, ie they signed up to uber from a computer or phone.

        There is no way in the world they can get away with anything. Just ask Paul Douglas Peters.

      • akula on 26/04/2014 - 23:48

        You'll never be satisfied unless your mom drives you around.

  • stringbean402 on 27/04/2014 - 15:51
    +3

    I see this is the same realm as AirBNB. Businesses are shitting themselves because they have continued to overcharge and failed to evolve into the modern era.

    Now the populous as said fudge that… we'll solve this little problem ourselves and wipe out the greed.

    The taxi industry and its current structure is a joke. $440,000 for a QLD taxi license.. and we wonder why they are expensive

    Good riddance, evolve or die !

    • compound on 27/04/2014 - 17:27
      +2

      Word. Greedy mongrels. Final Boss is BS tax system.

    • johnno07 on 28/04/2014 - 10:28

      Better than a million for a NYC cab medallion!

  • Shwayne on 27/04/2014 - 16:57

    All the "Uber" drivers are hired as drivers in Sydney, they are not random people.

  • tech9trading on 28/04/2014 - 10:46
    +22

    Hi Guys, friend at work brought this post to my attention, being a long time customer of their black service I was invited to trial the new Uber ride share over the weekend.

    As a regular cab user my main gripes are: cars in generally bad shape (either unclean or in a questionable mechanical condition), drivers wanting not taking direct routes (normally happens when I go out with friends from overseas) and drivers shopping for big fares or refusing to take smaller trips.

    I live in the city and had to travel to a party on Saturday night in the southern suburbs, the total trip was about 15km and took 30mins.

    The total cost using Uber rideshare was $18 one way compared to estimated $30 quoted for a regular cab.

    On the way there I was picked up by a young student in a relatively new Toyota corolla, the car was clean and although he did admit that he was not sure exactly where he was going, he of course had a GPS which made things easy.

    On the way home I had a brand new Holden Captiva pick me up with leather seats with rear DVD screens.

    Both drivers were polite and professional as any that I have experienced in the past.

    My friend who I traveled with also commented that they actually felt safer with an Uber driver, because they knew who would be driving them, what car they had and exactly when they would arrive, they also loved the fact that they could rate the driver via Uber app and wished that they could do this for normal taxi drivers.

    While I know that the relevant taxi authorities are now talking about having this service banned one should keep in mind that Uber have a lot of money/backing behind them and are currently fighting similar battles with cab providers in the US.

    I seriously doubt that they have launched this service without first getting legal advice as having a driver getting fined $100k is definitely going to hurt their business model.

    These cab companies should be scared because as far as I can see Uber now offer a cheaper service with a much better customer experience.

    • whodidthat on 28/04/2014 - 14:42
      +2

      AT LAST!

      Someone willing & able to post a perfectly reasonable comment without looking for motives and/or assigning blame, attacking or otherwise.

      Thank you tech9trading, excellent information.

  • grasstown on 28/04/2014 - 18:06

    People's livelihood is invested in taxi plates. Some people own two or three. Very sad for them. A good reminder of how life works. Valuable land can become useless and useless land valuable once Westfield Move in, once roads are closed, parking removed etc. or service industries deregulated and that once protected profession becomes worthless.

    • [Deactivated] on 28/04/2014 - 21:41
      +7

      Exactly. Be cautious of investing in anthing that is reliant on Gov policy (home insulation/novate vehicle service, etc)

      • stringbean402 on 29/04/2014 - 00:08
        +2

        Exactly right. Never rely on Gov't policy for financial security. It can literally change overnight.

      • jv on 09/05/2014 - 10:50
        +1

        Exactly. Be cautious of investing in anthing that is reliant on Gov policy

        Which includes shares, bonds, bank deposits, property etc. etc. etc.

    • pegasusx on 29/04/2014 - 15:18

      Going to destroy my neighbors investment. He just bought another taxi plate for his son. Very hard working people. Dont know if i should be telling him about this or not. :(

      • grasstown on 29/04/2014 - 18:10

        That's really upsetting, you should let him know . I would presume memos are going out to all in the industry though but I could be wrong

      • compound on 29/04/2014 - 23:46

        In this world it doesn't matter if your hard-working. Unfortunately.

  • scotty on 30/04/2014 - 13:04
    +4

    Just saw this on the Sydney Morning Herald — Ride-sharing apps ruled out by NSW government.

    Transport for NSW appears to have ruled out smartphone apps that allow motorists who are not taxi or hire car drivers to receive money for offering lifts.

    This would rule out Uber's ride-sharing service, though not apps that make it easier for taxi customers to book an authorised cab or hire car.

    "A person who carries on a public passenger service in breach of the Act may face prosecution and fines of up to $110,000.

    So it looks like UberX / ride-sharing app has been ruled to be illegal in NSW.

    • Davo1111 on 30/04/2014 - 14:14

      sounds like a sketchy clickbait headline to me

      Transport for NSW has ruled out smartphone apps that allow motorists who are not taxi or hire car drivers to receive money for offering lifts.

      AFAIK uber drivers ARE hire car drivers. It costs $100 according to this

      • retiredfeline on 30/04/2014 - 14:59

        I think it's the X part that's illegal now. The private hire is still ok.

      • [Deactivated] on 03/06/2014 - 07:58

        A hire car driver is someone who has a Driver Authority issued by TMR. The application includes police checks.
        Uber drivers don't have them, so passenger safety is compromised.

    • tonester on 01/05/2014 - 23:58
      +2

      Transport for NSW appears to have ruled out smartphone apps that allow motorists who are not taxi or hire car drivers to receive money for offering lifts.

      Uber gives free rides in snub to authorities
      http://www.news.com.au/technology/gadgets/uber-gives-free-ri…

      :)

      • compound on 02/05/2014 - 00:36
        -1

        I hope the taxi industry dies a horrible death. Rorting Australians long enough…

        • jv on 09/05/2014 - 11:16
          +1

          Rorting Australians long enough…

          How exactly are they rorting Australians ?

        • compound on 09/05/2014 - 15:24

          180 for a 55 minute cab ride is a rort. My airfares across the China Seas are cheaper.

          Australian taxi prices are ridiculous compared to the rest of the world and I'm not even bringing into service into the equation.

        • grasstown on 09/05/2014 - 18:39
          +1

          Private jet?
          Shouldn't you be comparing your scheduled flight to china with a scheduled bus?

        • compound on 10/05/2014 - 09:45

          Jet life man, jet life…

  • branners on 03/05/2014 - 18:03

    I note that the clearly pro-taxi NSW government has brought passenger safety into the equation.
    My understanding is that Uber requires its drivers to be licenced to the same standard as anyone else who is past their P-plates, and drive an up-to-date vehicle. So that means, anti lock braking, stability control, multiple airbags and other safety features that modern cars must have.
    My last ride in a Sydney cab was a nightmare. It was an ageing Ford Falcon, with stuffed suspension that rattled over bumps, and the driver had little idea where he was going. He also used one of his mobile phones without a hands-free during the trip.
    I do not see printing companies complaining about the onset of smart phone technology putting them out of business. Why should the taxi industry be any different?

  • webbj on 05/05/2014 - 21:41
    +4

    Uber should add an extra feature to their app, to rate "regular" taxi drivers and vehicles.

    It could offer a true comparison of the competition. If you catch a regular taxi, punch in the rego/plate number/driver ID etc and put in your review.

    Uber would then own an effective and modern system, as well as an enormous amount of data about the existing industry to prove their point!

  • tonester on 09/05/2014 - 01:39

    Victoria government issues $1700 fines to Uber ride-sharing drivers as media gaffe surfaces
    http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/smartphone-apps/victor…

    http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=2253674&p…

  • whodidthat on 09/05/2014 - 09:52
    -1

    So I was right to ask then?

    Maybe those that attacked could think again.

    • retiredfeline on 09/05/2014 - 10:59

      AFAICT you didn't distinguish between the hire car service and the X service. Of course you could retroactively claim that you (and Paul) knew the difference all along.

      • whodidthat on 09/05/2014 - 15:32

        Whatever makes you happy.

        • retiredfeline on 09/05/2014 - 16:06

          I find it amusing that you fret about being attacked. Suppose it had gone the other way and Paul's assertions had been invalidated would you feel worse? Not worth losing sleep over, IMO.

          It's an ongoing saga between the riders, the taxis, Uber, and the governments and there'll be more drama, just stay tuned.

        • whodidthat on 09/05/2014 - 17:47

          I'll accept admission, thank you.

        • retiredfeline on 09/05/2014 - 18:01

          Relax man, just sit back and enjoy the show.

        • whodidthat on 09/05/2014 - 18:05

          I am!

        • tonester on 13/05/2014 - 09:55

          Relax man, just sit back and enjoy the show ride.

          fixed :)

          Just got picked up by an UberX driving a BMW X5 and a lovely British gentlemen inside!
          https://twitter.com/zzap/status/464713037518090241

  • dannyhc on 28/06/2014 - 18:55

    Uber doesn't provide public liability insurance, not a bad business model considering they take 20% of the fee. Makes eBay look like amateurs.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join