Will Uber Be Banned In Chicago (And Will Your Identity Get Stolen)?

[Tugg Speedman]

Since we have a thread about Telsa, I thought one about Uber was in order.

CBS Chicago – Taxi Publication Threatens To Expose ‘Secretly Gay’ Aldermen If City Doesn’t Ban Ride-Sharing
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2014/03/11/taxi-publication-threatens-to-expose-secretly-gay-aldermen-if-city-doesnt-ban-ride-sharing/
A trade newspaper for the city’s taxi industry has threatened to out five aldermen who it claims are “secretly gay,” unless the City Council bans ride-sharing services like Uber, Lyft, and SideCar.  In an editorial in The Chicago Dispatcher, publisher George Lutfallah said the trade publication “has learned that five of the city’s 50 aldermen are closeted homosexuals. In the next issue of this newspaper, set to be published early next month, we will disclose their names unless our demands are met.” Among a list of 10 demands, Lutfallah said he wants the city to ban ride-sharing services, and to “actively enforce” the current regulations for taxis.  “The city is moving forward and will steamroll our industry if we don’t act in earnest. They did it to my grandfather more than a hundred years ago when they destroyed his horse-drawn-carriage business by allowing horseless machines to carry people around the city,” he wrote.

Comment

Taxis are the next in a long line of traditional businesses that are being completely disrupted by new technology. The industry doesn’t know how to handle this new technological disruption and is panicking. If the strategy above doesn’t work, what’s next? Sending Uber drivers to the hospital and smashing windshields?

Unless the industry responds to technological advances being made by companies like Uber or Lyft, taxi drivers are just managing the time of their industry’s death, not fighting for its survival. If taxis want to know what to do, they should consider mimicking these programs. Where are their apps, GPS tracking, better customer service, cleaner cabs and account debit programs (ability to pay without cash or credit cards on hand)?  Instead we get the outrageous behavior mentioned above.



KrebsonSecurity (blog) – Illinois Bank: Use Cash for Chicago Taxis
http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/03/illinois-bank-use-cash-for-chicago-taxis/
First American Bank in Illinois is urging residents and tourists alike to avoid paying for cab rides in Chicago with credit or debit cards, warning that an ongoing data breach seems to be connected with card processing systems used by a large number of taxis in the Windy City. In an unusually blunt and public statement sent to customers on Friday, Elk Grove, Ill.-based First American Bank said, “We are advising you not to use your First American Bank debit cards (or any other cards) in local taxis.” The message, penned by the bank’s chairman Tom Wells, continued:  “We have become aware of a data breach that occurs when a card is used in Chicago taxis, including American United, Checker, Yellow, and Blue Diamond and others that utilize Taxi Affiliation Services and Dispatch Taxi to process card transactions.”

Comment

The story above details another big problems with the taxi industry that is largely being ignored. Every time a credit card is used in a Chicago taxi that card number is pretty much stolen instantly. Taxi companies appear to know they have an ongoing data breach and seem uninterested in doing anything about it. Whether these companies lack the sophistication to fix the problem or simply don’t care, this is yet another reason people currently prefer using services like Uber.

[Tugg Speedman]

Paul Graham @paulg   Banning Tesla is an index of the corruptness of state governments as banning Uber is of city governments. http://bloom.bg/N4eoEz

http://paulgraham.com/

[Tugg Speedman]

Seattle is a corrupt city too ...

Seattle limits access to Uber, Lyft and other ride-sharing vehicles

http://www.engadget.com/2014/03/18/seattle-uber-lyft-cap/

Uber, Lyft, Sidecar and other ride-sharing services just suffered a huge setback in Seattle, and it's way more serious than getting their vehicles' tires slashed by irate competitors. The city's council members have decided to uphold a decision they made in February -- one that caps every platform's active vehicles to a measly 150 each. According to TechCrunch, the decision was a result of various complaints and questions regarding these services, which you can use to summon cars through mobile apps, as they're relatively new. Most of those were concerns for public safety, even though the companies already screen their drivers (in California, at least) and are expanding their insurance coverage. Considering Uber claims to have roughly 1,000 drivers in the city, this move will not only put many of them out of work, but also severely limit each company's capacity to meet demand.

Despite the unanimous vote to stay the cap, a few council members campaigned to abolish it. As GeekWire liveblogged from the voting event, council member Tim Burgess said that limiting ride-sharing services "would be like prohibiting Netflix because [they] wanted to protect Blockbuster." Fellow council member Sally Clark, however, criticized the companies for not communicating with regulators as well as they've pitched to their investors. We may never know if the council upheld the cap because these services didn't collaborate with regulators, or (as Lyft and Uber suggest) for the benefit of the local taxi industry. Whatever the real reason is, Seattle might have set a precedent, and that's certainly bad news for all these companies.

[T-Bone]

Just to be clear about Uber, it's UberX that they are talking about. Uber is largely used by drivers with medallions and chauffer licenses.

Also regarding insurance, UberX provides insurance to all drivers at 1 million from the moment they accept a fare (on the way) to the final destination. There was an incident in SF where an UberX driver was between clients and hit someone.  Don't recall the outcome, but at that point he was just another motorist?

[77ncaachamps]

Just to be clear about Uber, it's UberX that they are talking about. Uber is largely used by drivers with medallions and chauffer licenses.

Also regarding insurance, UberX provides insurance to all drivers at 1 million from the moment they accept a fare (on the way) to the final destination. There was an incident in SF where an UberX driver was between clients and hit someone.  Don't recall the outcome, but at that point he was just another motorist?

All "After-the-Fact" stuff... Problem with the lack of regulation.

http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_25345400/san-francisco-uber-announces-new-insurance-policy-drivers

The change comes after an UberX driver struck and killed 6-year-old Sofia Liu and injured her family members on San Francisco's Polk Street on New Year's Eve.

Uber had initially asserted that the driver, 57-year-old Syed Muzzafar, was an independent contractor who was not responding to a fare and did not have a passenger in his car at the time of the collision.

Attorney Christopher Dolan filed a lawsuit in January against Uber on behalf of Sofia's family alleging that the company should be held responsible for the accident.

Uber officials wrote on their website today, "Since the tragic accident in San Francisco on New Year's Eve, there has been much written about an 'insurance gap.'"

"In order to fully address any ambiguity or uncertainty around insurance coverage for ridesharing services, Uber is becoming the first and only company to have a policy in place that expands the insurance of ridesharing drivers to cover ... accidents that occur while drivers are not providing transportation service for hire but are logged onto the Uber network and available to accept a ride."

Uber wanted to argue that if they're not transporting someone, they're technically not under Uber.
Cabbies argued that whether or not they're with a passenger, they're always in service.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Just as long as the hygiene requirements are applied equally.   Incidentally, the cab business owners here have been fuming about this for about a year.  Screaming about the regulations they are held to and Uber is not.  Will be fun to watch.


Hygiene cabbie requirements   http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2014/03/18/sacramento-cabbies-upset-over-proposed-hygiene-dress-code-requirements/

[warriorchick]

Just as long as the hygiene requirements are applied equally.   Incidentally, the cab business owners here have been fuming about this for about a year. 

LOL I see what you did there.