Toronto court to ban Uber's operations in the city

[Himanshu Arora]

Toronto is seeking a court injunction to halt Uber's operations, saying that the San Francisco-based ride-sharing service has been operating in the city since 2012 without a proper license.

Specifically, the city is concerned about Uber's operations including lack of driver training and vehicle inspections, inadequate insurance, as well as increased traffic. “Uber’s operations pose a serious risk to the public, including those who are signing on as drivers”, city officials said in the statement.

Price surge -- the service sometimes charges more based on demand -- was also cited as one of the reasons behind the city's move.

For its part, Uber blames the local taxi companies for the situation, saying that they are trying to protect their profit margins by pressuring city council to stifle competition. The company has refused to make any changes to its operations, and is asking its customers to sign a petition against the city.

Uber has been embroiled in similar legal battles around the world. Back in August this year, a German court imposed a preliminary injunction on the ride-sharing service, saying that it was operating illegally because its drivers do not carry the appropriate permits and insurance.

This isn't the only controversy the company has faced in recent days. Last week, Uber's senior vice president of business Emil Michael, stirred up a hornet's nest by saying that the company should consider hiring a team of researchers to "dig up dirt" on journalists who were critical of the company. However, he later apologized for his remarks.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/58882-toronto-ban-uber.html

 

[Rippleman]

Different kind of company, different kind of rules. The same shouldn't apply to the taxi industry to this type of service. Example: does greyhound have the same rules as post office?

 

[m4a4]

I keep hearing Uber plays dirty and not by the rules. At this point, I don't even care if they get banned. Heck, I would find it amusing if this sets a precedence and it happens in more cities...

If other companies (like Lyft) have all their stuff together, then all-the-better. Means people shouldn't miss this...

 

[Ranger1st]

Still need to have properly insured drivers and vehicles as well as the right training to drive the public around, ( eg: they may be required to stop at all rail crossings and not function on days deemed to be unsafe by the police, winter driving conditions. )... This applies to everything from airport limos to privately owned school minivans, all have to be identified as to what they are on the vehicle as well.

 

[Ranger1st]

To follow the latter up; since these people will be dealing with people that are drunk . Ins. alone will require then to have CPR and first aid as well the government will require a police background check with a vulnerable sector check.

 

[davislane1]

Company provides service that people like > companies that provide an inferior service sue > people who don't use the service complain it needs more regulation > the unemployed wonder why they can't find jobs in America.

 

[Adhmuz]

"Uber's operations including lack of driver training and vehicle inspections" I'm sorry, but the Taxi drivers around Montreal don't have any more training then the standard drivers license, and if anything most of which drive like complete *****s. Vehicle inspection are a scam anyways and can be bought too easily. The only valid argument is insurance, needing to know CPR should not be required by Taxi drivers. The people complaining are the Taxi drivers, what a surprise, they're loosing business to a more convenient service.

 

[Lionvibez]

Both Davislane1 and Admuz have a point.

But this is the way of the world now.

You don't compete you litigate.

 

[captaincranky]

Both Davislane1 and Admuz have a point.

But this is the way of the world now.

You don't compete you litigate.

Which is why all state wildlife agencies and the Department of the Interior should get together and ban lawyers as an invasive species.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

Different kind of company, different kind of rules. The same shouldn't apply to the taxi industry to this type of service. Example: does greyhound have the same rules as post office?

If you discover your post is being delivered by a Greyhound bus then I think you'll find your answer.

 

[captaincranky]

If you discover your post is being delivered by a Greyhound bus then I think you'll find your answer.

The postman never uses Uber or Greyhound, to complete his appointed rounds, just the cutest little trucks with the steering wheel on the wrong side. (for American roads). Although, more often that not, he has to hoof it....

 

[Rippleman]

If you discover your post is being delivered by a Greyhound bus then I think you'll find your answer.

100% exactly my point. They are a shipping company too. You can send parcels but not letters. So should the same rules apply?

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

100% exactly my point. They are a shipping company too. You can send parcels but not letters. So should the same rules apply?

I never knew they were a shipping company as well, they used to be just a luxury passenger transport bus service when I last used them yonks ago, at least that was the case here in South Africa.

 

[Rippleman]

I never knew they were a shipping company as well, they used to be just a luxury passenger transport bus service when I last used them yonks ago, at least that was the case here in South Africa.

oh they are there? I thought it was a USA/Canada only company. Here they are a shipping company as well as passenger carrier.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

oh they are there? I thought it was a USA/Canada only company. Here they are a shipping company as well as passenger carrier.

I think they've been here since the 50's. I remember them from the 60's and I last used their service in the 90's.

 

[Lionvibez]

Wow that is news to me also I always thought they were USA/Canada Passenger service only.