Please sign in to post.

UBER getting a rough ride.....

An expansion of the controversial Uber ride sharing service is getting a rough reception in Vancouver, B.C. As might be expected, the Taxi industry is leading the charge.

Based on my knowledge of the way things work here (having lived here all my life), I'll be surprised if this ever gets off the ground in B.C. Whether or not the Mayor of Vancouver has "productive discussions" with Uber doesn't matter in the least, as that sort of industry falls under Provincial motor vehicle branch regulations, and the Minister has already gone on record as stating they will be vigorously prosecuted.

Things are heavily regulated here and I can foresee a few pitfalls in areas such as....

  • Carrying passengers for a fee requires a Class 4 license. Those with a Class 5 will be acting against the law. For example....

"3) A chauffeur, within a municipality that has passed a bylaw under subsection (11), must not drive, operate or be in charge of a motor vehicle carrying passengers for hire unless he or she holds a permit for that purpose issued to him or her by the chief of police of the municipality."

"37 (1) A person must not hire or engage another person to drive or operate a motor vehicle where this Act requires the driver to be licensed, unless the person hired or engaged holds a driver's licence under this Act of a class that entitles him or her to drive and operate that motor vehicle."

However, ICBC does have a category for Uber but drivers which don't meet these requirements will run afoul of the law, and could ultimately have their vehicle seized. There will be a cost (possibly substantial) for potential Uber drivers to be "legal" with the proper licenses.

  • If (heaven forbid) an M.V.I. occurs involving a vehicle that isn't properly licensed and the passenger is injured, ICBC could sue the driver / vehicle owner right into bankruptcy.
  • Carrying passengers for hire is technically a Taxi, and therefore a Taxi license would be required. The Taxi industry pays a fortune in licensing and other regulatory fees, and they're not going to let this pass without a fight! I suspect there will be injunctions or other legal consequences very quickly if Uber sets up shop here.
  • There are no background checks or regulation of drivers, so a criminal offence could be committed against the passenger, such as in THIS case (the woman thought she was flagging down a Cab). That's a "worst case scenario", but you never know....

On a related note, according to a news report I saw yesterday, the hotel industry and government authorities are lining up to take a shot at AirBnB. As AirBnB doesn't pay taxes as a "lodging provider", one government authority estimated that they had lost about $37 million in taxes. THIS incident may be one of many disputes against AirBnB.

Interesting times we live in.....

Posted by
23626 posts

I guess free enterprise is not free.

Posted by
5457 posts

In the UK in the handful of places Uber operates, each driver is required to have a public hire driving licence and vehicle licence from the local authority and Uber itself has a public hire operator licence. This doesnt make them any different in legal status from any other company operating private hire vehicles, although within this they have their own business model. It seems many countries don't have this class of business separate from taxis / hackney carriages.

Posted by
32352 posts

More news on the subject......

According to news reports today, the B.C. government gave Uber another warning. The authorities stated they will be using undercover officers to book rides on Uber, and any drivers found without the proper D.L. or vehicle licensing will face fines of $1100. I suspect that after multiple offences, scofflaws could have their vehicles impounded.

Free enterprise is still "free", but the intent seems to be to have everybody on a level playing field, and all abiding by the same rules.

Posted by
7887 posts

Well, Frank, do you think that someone who wants to set up a restaurant in their home should have to take a food handler class and have their refrigerator tested by the health department? Do they need a fire exit? Or can a for-profit corporation set up a "hospital" without meeting state standards for what a "hospital" is? Just because a certain business is "disruptive" doesn't make disruption a good thing. Should Colorado rafting companies have to meet safety standards, or can anyone with a Walmart inflatable open a business? Believing that any government activity is bad is a slippery slope.

Posted by
2349 posts

Tim-well said.

Marco-Unlike the UK, the US does not usually have minicabs/private hire cars. It's usually cabs, or private limo drivers. Nothing "mini" about those stretch limos!

Posted by
5457 posts

As an incidental point 'minicab' is a London term that isn't used much at all in the rest of the UK and is probably on the decline. Limos are licensed in the same way but the companies avoid calling themselves minicabs for obvious reasons ...

Posted by
19274 posts

As I learned in business school, regulation is often initiated by businesses to keep competition out.

Posted by
32352 posts

It looks like the resistance against Uber is starting to gather steam, as there's now a national campaign starting in several cities across Canada.

@Lee,

Regulation may be initiated by business to reduce competition, but they're likely the same businesses that have been making political contributions for many years, so I think I can see where this situation is heading, and I don't think it's going to be a happy outcome for Uber.