Re:Lyft, SideCar, and Uber all slapped with $20K fines from ...
by eli on Thursday November 15, 2012 @01:26PM
(#4789946)
The licensing proves to the agency that the drivers are drug tested and insured instead of simply taking Uber's word for it. I think it is unreasonable to expect that regulatory paperwork doesn't apply to you just because you're probably in compliance anyway.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Lyft, SideCar, and Uber all slapped with $20K fines from ...
by viscanti on Friday November 16, 2012 @11:52AM
(#4794594)
This doesn't seem to be an issue of regulatory paperwork though. What does double licensing accomplish and what does it actually mean? I'm all for fines if they're found using unlicensed drivers. I guess I don't know that it's necessary to double drug test the drivers though. I don't think the issue here is filling out a permit, I think it's a matter of "what does that mean". If asked, they should probably be required to show that all their drivers are properly licensed. If their drivers are all properly licensed, I don't see what requiring Uber to be licensed accomplishes.
It's not a question of "probably in compliance". If Uber is using unlicensed drivers (which I haven't heard any evidence of), they should be fined. If they are using 100% properly licensed drivers, I think this is a non-story.