Nouvelles
Recours collectif contre Uber
Agence Qmi
2015-07-24 09:09:00
La cabale contre les taxis Uber prend la voie juridique. Un propriétaire de taxis a déposé une poursuite de 400 millions $ en dommages et intérêts devant la Cour supérieure de l’Ontario, jeudi…
Dominik Konjevic agit comme plaignant dans ce recours. Il allègue que Uber a violé à de multiples reprises le Code de la route et que l’entreprise a contribué à faire émerger un énorme marché lié au transport illégal à Toronto.
En plus des 400 millions de dollars, une somme de 10 millions de dollars s’ajoute à la poursuite à titre de dommages punitifs.
Uber poursuit son développement
Alors que la poursuite était déposée à la Cour, Uber annonçait jeudi sur son site internet une nouvelle expansion dans le sud-ouest ontarien. Les villes de London, Hamilton, Guelph et la région de Waterloo sont desservies depuis 14 h.
«Uber offre des prix jusqu’à 25 % moins cher qu’une course de taxi traditionnelle. Et vos quatre premières courses seront gratuites jusqu’à dimanche», peut-on lire sur le fil de nouvelles de Uber.
L’entreprise poursuit aussi son opération charme pour susciter l’intérêt de ses clients et de futurs utilisateurs. Ce vendredi, Uber se transformera en livreur de crème glacée dans un peu plus de 250 villes. À Montréal et Québec, par exemple, pour 20 dollars, Uber enverra cinq portions aux personnes qui commanderont à l’aide de l’application suivie du code #UberIceCream.
2505
DSG
il y a 9 ansIt's just awful what the taxis are doing. They are trying to block free enterprise at the detriment of what's best for the consumer. This, and their price fixing across the industry, is primitive and amounts to collusion. It costs me 3 times more to get around this business wasteland that we call Montreal than it does in Manhattan. Where are the consumer advocacy groups in all this? Why are they not getting involved on behalf of consumers?
Anonyme
il y a 9 ansDSG:
Uber is available so that you can get around our lovely city and is cheaper than taxis. I hope you use it and save money.
Best regards,
La Fée de Montréal
Anonyme
il y a 9 ansParce que "cheap" c'est exactement ce qui nous vient à l'esprit quand on parle de Manhattan.
DSG
il y a 9 ansYou've obviously don't spend time in New York. You can get from Manhattan to Laguardia Airport for roughly 20$. In Montreal the flat fee from downtown to PET is 48$.
Anonyme
il y a 9 ansI usually tend to agree with you, but I have to disagree on your last point. I live in Manhattan and LaGuardia to Midtown is around 40-45$ US.
DSG
il y a 9 ansI don't remember ever paying more than 30$. But even if it is 40$, it's quite a drive from Manhattan to LaGuardia. I remember one time I got back to Montreal at 11:30 on a weeknight, the streets were deserted and the ride from the airport home cost me 54$.
Anonyme
il y a 9 ansAu contraire de l'interlocuteur ici haut, j'ai plutôt l'habitude d'être en désaccord avec vous DSG. Par contre, sur celle-là, vous avez entièrement raison.
Anonyme
il y a 9 ansAm always surprised by when comments like those of DSG come from lawyers as they should know that Taxis are heavily regulated and to get a permit costs the same than a house. Then comes Uber who do not follow regulation.
It's not the taxis the problem it's the regulations. Know your facts.
DSG
il y a 9 ansIs it the regulators taking Uber to court or is it the Taxis? Here's an idea; if you think that the permits cost too much, then don't buy it. But don't expect the consumers to pay for it with universal jacked up rates and taking away their ability to chose an alternative. If I don't know what I'm talking about then you never heard of free market.
MC
il y a 9 ansDSG, with all due respect, you often come off as a hothead in this forum.
There's no free market in transportation of human beings anywhere in Canada (or the US).
You can't fly passenger planes for profit without a dozen permits. The same goes for buses. And the same goes for taxis.
If you want free market in those transportation industries, feel free to lobby the three levels of government that regulate them.
In the meantime, I suggest you show a little more compassion for the thousands of workers whp have invested their life savings to provide a service to you at a rate that is imposed on them by the government.
L'aveuglement volontaire à ses limites, tsé...
Me Daniel Atudorei
il y a 9 ansJe crois qu'il est éminemment évocateur (quant aux priorités de l'État et du gouvernement) de penser qu'on vit dans une juridiction où il est interdit sous peine d'amende de revendre des billets de spectacle au-délà de leur prix indiqué mais que l'enflure des prix des permis de taxis a été permise, sans encadrement aucun, pendant les vingt dernières années. La mafia des taxis avec leur commerce de licences n'ont qu'à se blâmer eux-mêmes...
DSG
il y a 9 ansVous avez entièrement raison. Les prix des permis ont été gonflés car l’accès à l’industrie était restreint. Maintenant que leur investissements ont mal tournés ils veulent que les consommateurs paient pour leurs erreurs. C’est comme si je tenterais d’empêcher la sortie du Iphone car j’ai investi dans un Blackberry.
Anonyme
il y a 9 ansYour example is not appropriate.
Uber is not respecting the laws of the province. It's that simple. This is creating a loss of income for those who followed the laws.
Otherwise, I assume that you agree that liquor licenses are not important, right? So anyone can open a bar or a restaurant. To hades with the rules "Hey, but customers like my bar, so I shouldn't have to play by the same rules or pay".
Heard about the new app for plumbers? Anyone can register, they don't run background checks. Let's face it, most of us can unclog a toilet or install a new faucet. Why would you need to be a member of a guild?
While we are at it, why not let anyone provide legal representation? After all,this is a restriction on free enterprise! "My neighbour did a bang-up job drafting a hypotheque, why should I not be allowed to pay him to represent me in court?" Your investment in a law degree? Too bad!
DSG
il y a 9 ansExcept for hypothecs which are required to be notorized by law, unless it affects the safety of others nothing in law forces you to hire a licensed plumber to unclog a toilet or a member of the bar for legal representation or to unclog a toilet. If you do hire someone who is unlicensed, you run your own risk and you are not protected by the codes of conduct of the order or by any liability insurance. According to your argument, I am authorized to drive around in my car except if I'm giving someone a lift.
Grow up man. Everybody knows that the taxi industry is a big racket.
Anonyme
il y a 9 ans"According to your argument, I am authorized to drive around in my car except if I'm giving someone a lift."
Exactly, like you are authorized to represent yourself but not someone else...what's wrong with that ?
But in fact...you are right..."taxi industry is a big racket"...it doesn't take a master degree to drive a cab in a city...the whole industry need to change...it doesn't cost 200000$ to be a plumber...but it's the price for a taxi licence...it's crazy...
DSG
il y a 9 ansI agree, it needs to change. I have any idea to bring about change. They should allow the industry to open up to competition. New companies should be allowed to compete. That would automatically correct the rates, which will be based on the laws of supply and demand.
In other words, lets bring in Uber.
Anonyme
il y a 9 ans"nothing in law forces you to hire a licensed plumber to unclog a toilet or a member of the bar for legal representation (...)"
I now understand why my insurance is so expensive. You really believe that? Here's a hint: actes réservés, pratique illégal de la profession d'avocat.
I could also talk about permits from the RBQ for plumbers and electricians etc. There are even inspectors that prevent plumbers from doing the work (and give out tickets) unless they are licensed!
But hey, ignorance is bliss!
Anonyme
il y a 9 ansDifficile de croire que la première phrase a été écrite par un avocat.
Honteux!
Anonyme
il y a 9 ans"Except for hypothecs which are required to be notorized by law, unless it affects the safety of others nothing in law forces you to hire a licensed plumber to unclog a toilet or a member of the bar for legal representation or to unclog a toilet"
Un étudiant de 1ère année devrait être capable de reconnaître les erreurs de cet énoncé!