other Uber drivers in the pipeline after last year's crackdown, but as this is the first & will probably go through appeals, so they get an "example case", we won't know the "fate" of Uber until 2018 or so if they fast-track the cases. Note: Uber itself isn't illegal, driving people for money without a taxi licence is.
Already a year ago or so I read a quote (some ministery official) that Uber was ok as an operator, but the drivers still need their license.When the tech takes over, the government needs to up their game and embrace the tech as friend but within a framework, here this prosecution shows plain arrogance towards the change instead of trying to opt.
Yes, because applying the law as it is written by the parliament is obvious a sign of corruption...roger_roger wrote:A thorough background check should be done of this judge because of his outcry decision even the prosecutor haven't asked for such harsh measures.
Judge judges according to law. Law says you have to have taxi license to drive taxi. If you commit a crime, the gains can't be left to criminal. Dude in this case got fined for... 150€! Harsh measure indeed.roger_roger wrote:When the tech takes over, the government needs to up their game and embrace the tech as friend but within a framework, here this prosecution shows plain arrogance towards the change instead of trying to opt. I also doubt the judge must have some link(bribe/offshore/retirement plan.. whatever) with the corporate that rents the taxi service and trying to protect his customer by setting a strict example. A thorough background check should be done of this judge because of his outcry decision even the prosecutor haven't asked for such harsh measures.
There's a world of difference between saying "you never know" and implying that a specific official is corrupt for his interpretation of the law, just because you disagree. The later nears defamation.roger_roger wrote:You never know, people think there's no corruption in Finland but if you see some ex-Ministers and ex-PMs as board members of Corporates earning hefty income, then you cannot ignore there might be something behind the door.
It is illegal to offer to share a ride against compensation to the public. If they are 99% paid service, then their legal situation is the same as Uber.roger_roger wrote: He was not riding the Taxi (vehicle imported with Tax exemption) but his own vehicle. Is it illegal to share a ride? If police wants to crackdown on ride sharing then there are hundreds of sites/fb/whatsapp groups offering/providing such services and 99% are paid service. I don't see that being shut down in any ways.
As a site note, offers in closed groups would be ok as long as the payment is only to cover costs.betelgeuse wrote: It is illegal to offer to share a ride against compensation to the public. If they are 99% paid service, then their legal situation is the same as Uber.
12,000 Euro in 3 months is a tiny bit more than just petrol money. As soon as you make a profit with it it is considered to be commercial, and it is illegal. And right so.roger_roger wrote: of course this is what they say, compensation for petrol money.
Didn't know it was illegal...
As I already said, you don't need to make a profit, if you offer to the public, to make it illegal. However personally, I support at least removing the restriction on how many licenses for taxis can be given.wolf80 wrote: 12,000 Euro in 3 months is a tiny bit more than just petrol money. As soon as you make a profit with it it is considered to be commercial, and it is illegal. And right so.
I didn't check the details but I assume The Finnish Motor Insurers' Centre would cover the passenger. However, I do agree about the point on freeloading on the insurance system.wolf80 wrote: Apart from the other issues, what bugs me more is that in case of any accident the insurance company of the driver will not pay anything. The car insurance if for personal and not for commercial use of the car, and they will find out how it was used sooner or later.
So if you are a passenger, and the car driver has an accident and is liable, then he is basically not insured. Loss of income, cost for any kind of treatment or special equipment, etc, will only be covered to the basic minimum by KELA, everything else you now have to pay yourself as there is no insurance to cover it. And we are talking about a sum that can easily go from several thousand to several million Euro.
Those fb/whatsapp etc. people, if they are offering rides for money, breaking the law. And most likely doing it without paying taxes.roger_roger wrote:He was not riding the Taxi (vehicle imported with Tax exemption) but his own vehicle. Is it illegal to share a ride? If police wants to crackdown on ride sharing then there are hundreds of sites/fb/whatsapp groups offering/providing such services and 99% are paid service. I don't see that being shut down in any ways.Upphew wrote:Judge judges according to law. Law says you have to have taxi license to drive taxi. If you commit a crime, the gains can't be left to criminal. Dude in this case got fined for... 150€! Harsh measure indeed.
http://www.trafi.fi/en/road/licences_an ... er_licence
The new discussions about taxi deregulation is getting interesting.
Agreed. But I'd like to see that every driver has license, not just driving one. I'm fine if one can get the license with brief background check (eg no issues with police nor tax office), car to be used is insured and passed MOT and driver (or uber or whatnot) has vat registration.betelgeuse wrote:I support at least removing the restriction on how many licenses for taxis can be given.
Yes, the driver however would be in the !"#¤% house because he/she essentially drove an uninsured vehicle and is liable for the costs accrued to the insurer.betelgeuse wrote: I didn't check the details but I assume The Finnish Motor Insurers' Centre would cover the passenger. However, I do agree about the point on freeloading on the insurance system.
The downside of dropping all regulations on taxi licenses is the they would have to drop obligations on providing service at the same time, conceivably leading to situations where instead of having trouble finding a taxi during peak hours it could become almost impossible to hire one during slower periods. Taxi drivers do have to work for something like 4€ an hour or even less at times, at that sort of pay, no one would bother unless mandated by law.betelgeuse wrote: As I already said, you don't need to make a profit, if you offer to the public, to make it illegal. However personally, I support at least removing the restriction on how many licenses for taxis can be given.
