News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 6.7K     0 
Here’s the text...

An Ontario judge has rejected a $1.7-billion attempt by taxi plate owners to sue Toronto over losses suffered after Uber entered the city.
In a recently released Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision, Justice Paul Perell ruled that Toronto had no legal requirement to shield owners of the plates from financial harm caused by the city’s actions.
“There is no obligation to protect the economic interests of those granted taxi licences,” Justice Perell wrote. “Legislative activities inevitably affect individual citizens; for some the affect is positive, and for others the affect is negative.”


By denying certification, his decision means the case cannot proceed as a class action. However, one of the three plaintiffs said they were mulling their legal options and are planning to consult their fellow members of a taxi industry umbrella group, which has been supporting the suit.
“Number one, we can appeal it, and we have 30 days to do that. Or we can … go at it in another way, as individuals,” said Lawrence Eisenberg, adding that the judge left plate owners “no choice” but to fight on.
“He said basically that the city can do anything it wants.”


Mr. Eisenberg owns three taxi plates while fellow plaintiffs Behrouz Khamza and Sukhvir Thethi have two and one, respectively. They argue that the city, having created the conditions that gave the taxi plates their value, should be held responsible for having changed the rules to allow Uber, thereby damaging their assets.


The plates, which are issued by the city and can be bought and sold on a secondary market, permit the owner to operate a taxi or to have someone do so on their behalf. City-enforced limits on the number of plates had long helped push up their market value, which at one point hit a high of around $380,000.
However, the advent of ride-hailing companies such as Uber Technologies Inc. increased the number of vehicles chasing customers and caused plate values to plummet. According to one industry veteran, they are now trading for $10,000 to $12,000.


Justice Perell’s ruling comes after years of turmoil in the taxi industry, which has been hit hard by the emergence of Uber and other ride-hailing companies. The industry, in many cities accustomed to operating in a protected market, has seen major losses. A number of cases of driver suicide, particularly in New York, have been attributed to financial problems.

Around the world, cities have struggled to manage these new transportation providers.
Canadian jurisdictions have taken different approaches. Vancouver has long been closed to ride-hailing companies, with British Columbia announcing only this month that it would permit them. The Quebec government is ready to compensate taxi plate owners who have lost money, although the industry wants more and has taken the government to court.
In Toronto, which failed in its attempt to get an injunction to stop Uber and eventually rewrote its regulations to allow ride-hailing, there has been no serious talk at city hall about compensation.


The plaintiffs alleged in their statement of claim that the city did not properly enforce its own laws and did not act to protect the value of their plates. They launched their attempted class-action suit last year, specifying damages of $340,000 for each of the 5,500 taxi plates issued by the city, and moved for certification in March.
The lawyer for the plaintiffs declined comment this week. A spokeswoman for the city of Toronto said in an e-mail that staff “will be reviewing the decision and determine next steps as appropriate.”
In his ruling, the judge noted that the plaintiffs had to meet a five-point test for certification. He determined that they had satisfied several of the criteria and he was quite harsh on some of the city’s arguments, calling one feeble and saying another “misses the target by the proverbial country mile.”
But Justice Perell ultimately ruled that the plaintiffs failed the part of the test requiring that there be a legitimate cause of action.

IMO, North American plate owners and their stranglehold on the industry are the very reason Uber exists.
 
Last edited:
Reviving this thread to discuss Mayor Chow's resistance to Waymo in Toronto because it would put taxi drivers out of business.

Waymo reportedly plans to test robo taxis in Ontario. Toronto’s mayor has her doubts about its technology
Any move toward autonomous vehicles must not put people out of work or undermine workers’ livelihoods. The mayor will not support Waymo if it costs jobs, drives down wages for other workers, or contributes to precarious work in our city,” he said. “Waymo must demonstrate this will not happen.”

On the flip side, it would begin to solve the long time scammer system in our taxi industry that hurts Torontonians and visitors to our city. Cabbies refusing short fares is so common and so openly done that you'd think it would be easy for bylaw officers to catch them by simply going to a cabbie and requesting a short fare. They frequently refuse the fare or haggle a higher upfront rate.

Today, outside Union Station, with UP Express out of service, taxi drivers were price gouging desperate stranded people. I heard $90 quoted by one, then $150 by another and one cabbie quoted a family $50 per person (not sure they were including the kids, which would have been $200). All of these are illegal. There's a fixed price to Pearson International: It's $53 from downtown Toronto. The $150 one asked for was 3X that price.

tempImageM5dBV1.png


I say, bring on the robots. They're safer, and they don't scam you.
 
Once they own the market they will almost certainly resort to the same price gouging. Will robot drivers be safer, that's still to be seen.
 
Will robot drivers be safer, that's still to be seen.

It's already been seen. Waymo isn't new. Peer reviewed studies have shown it to be a mind-blowing 90% safer.




tempImage7Iek52.png



gcpi_a_2499887_f0003_c.jpg


It's not hard to understand why, particularly if you're a driver or pedestrian or cyclist. The way human drivers behave accounts for the majority of accidents. Speeding, distraction, fatigue, road rage, failing to observe the rules of the road. You see this daily. Waymos don't speed, they observe the rules of the road, and don't get tired or angry. If you've ridden in a Waymo, the frustration comes from the opposite: they feel like they're slow drivers when they're just following the rules verbatim.

Once they own the market they will almost certainly resort to the same price gouging.

Fair concern but this is solved by fostering a competitive environment and regulating the industry the same way the taxi industry is regulated. Unlike taxi drivers, a fare in an app isn't going to have human reasons to deny a fare or overcharge and would likely get caught with a simple screenshot.
 
I don't much like taxi drivers, but if we bring on the robots to eliminate the jobs of any group we have beef with, it won't be long before no one has any jobs at all. Which is, of course, exactly what the tech dorks want. If you are a person with a job in 2026, the tech firms are working as hard as they possibly can to make sure you don't have it.

We are all going to be very sorry in 15 years.
 
It's already been seen. Waymo isn't new. Peer reviewed studies have shown it to be a mind-blowing 90% safer.
Self reported, peer reviewed studies. In areas where the weather is fairly mild and warm year round. Also in some markets where it doesn't enter the highways at all. Listen, I'm all for the dream of hoping in a car without a driver listening to terrible music, smelling like a gallon of cologne or worse, and talking on the phone the whole trip. But I do not trust our technobro overlords to have our safety or interests at heart. Robotaxis are only at half the distance needed to make a conclusion IMO, and at even less in challenging weather conditions.

Fair concern but this is solved by fostering a competitive environment and regulating the industry the same way the taxi industry is regulated. Unlike taxi drivers, a fare in an app isn't going to have human reasons to deny a fare or overcharge and would likely get caught with a simple screenshot.
The app will just have an algorithmic reason to de-prioritize your trip or "surge" price your trip to make it worth it. We've already abandoned regulating similar issues with Uber, not sure I share your optimism that we'd do so to Waymo.
 

Back
Top