garykung

The needed penalty is in fact the revocation of taxi endorsement on the license. This is the only way to deter drivers from violating the taxi law.

Steve M

IIRC, the Uber app the driver uses doesn't display your destination until the ride starts. This prevents them from ignoring the short trips.

Cabbies will do this as well, especially if there's more than one person. At two people, it's not much more for the cab, and for 3 people a cab is cheaper than the train.

At the very least, a 30-day revocation upon first offence. If you make the suspension penalty only for repeat offenders, that gives every driver a "get of jail free" card for their first offence, considering that the typical fine is small in relation to what they make by cheating. That, combined with the low likelihood of getting caught and prosecuted, would mean that the status quo would continue, since most drivers never get a first conviction.

evergrn

I have this happen almost every single time at Conrad.
I really resent Conrad's attitude about this. Bellmen really don't put up any fight with the cab drivers to secure a ride for you. I've gone into the lobby to ask concierge for help a couple of times. They tell me they recognize it's a problem but they can't do anything about it. They acknowledge that what the cab drivers are doing is illegal but they say the hotel is not going to report taxi drivers because that just creates more problems. One time the concierge guy had the audacity to laugh in my face when I told him no one would take me to HK Station. He said arrogantly that there's no chance I'd find any taxi to take me there at that hour (~4pm) and completely dissed me when I was desperate with multiple suitcases and small kids in tow.
On the other hand, Intercontinental bellmen really seem to fight these cab drivers on your behalf.

percysmith

I'm wondering what the fighting will achieve.
In cities like HCMC or Siem Reap, taxis outnumber customers so bellmen can discriminate.

What can you do in Hong Kong, where customers outnumber cabbies?

wco81

Looks like HK will allow apps. which hail taxis, including one backed by Uber, but not the Uber app. itself.

Two new apps. launching there this month, including the eTaxi app supposedly backed by Uber?:

https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/...-rivalries-set


The comments are interesting. Widespread hate for taxis and a reported 16% drop in ridership.

No wonder the govt. will do anything to protect them. HK is held up as the model of capitalism but it's obviously motivated by medallions to suppress competition.

percysmith

DragonSoul

4pm... well 4:30pm. It's taxi-change-over time when the drivers go back to "base" for the next shift. I used to live by one of these change-over places; it was easy to get a taxi there (and to there at 4:30) but a pain otherwise.

The taxi "world" in Hong Kong is small. The drivers could easily boycott the hotel if it made too many complaints. It sucks, but at least you don't have to deal with it on a regular basis.

christep

People, AGAIN. Don't you or the bellboy say anything until you get in the cab. Shut the door. Tell the driver where you want to go. If he declines then punch 999 into your phone and ask him if he would like you to hit "Call".

And in 20 years here and, I guess, well over 2000 taxi rides I have had an issue and had to use this tactic maybe twice.

This week I (a big white, non-Cantonese-speaking guy) have taken 6 taxi rides. 3 of them were $24 minimum fare rides, 1 of them not much more (from LKF up to Robinson Road at about 00:30 - no issue). 2 were just shy of $100 (mid-levels to/from Sai Wan Ho). Absolutely no issues at all.

The VAST majority of HK taxi rides are fine, but in this internet age a few noisy complainers with a tiny dataset can create a grossly misleading impression.

The only issue I have with HK taxis is that at certain times and places there simply aren't enough of them.

wco81

The articles say complaints have grown every year. About 30 a day now.

Obviously a corrupt system and the bureaucrats and politicians don't care because they get driven around in chauffeured cars, according to some of the commenters in the SCMP articles.

Sure with 40,000 drivers and over 18,000 taxis, it's only takes 10% misbehaving drivers, maybe even less, to generate thousands of formal complaints a year and several times as many online complaints.

Clearly the HK govt. politics are anti-competitive. Working HKers express preference for the reliability, transparency and cleanliness of Uber but they're not legally allowed to use Uber. Or rather those Uber drivers are not allowed to operate.

Look at the eTaxi app. that they touted. One innovation is suppose to be being allowed to pay with Octopus cards, another antiquated, anti-competitive system? But presumably not credit cards or mobile wallets. Yes I know HK is not a credit card culture. But that's an excuse.

MTR alone can greatly increase the use of NFC payments in general but for whoever reason, they want to protect Octopus.

Still mobile wallets, led by Apple Pay, are growing in use in HK, even though HK lags behind China and Singapore in adoption:

http://fintechnews.hk/8457/mobilepay...ng-kong-study/

Seems like too much inertia or resistance to change, some of which is owing to preserving certain protected business interests. Certainly doesn't accord with the perception of HK as being forged by meritocratic competition.

evergrn

I realize that 4-5pm is the changeover time. So it's funny that they're still willing to take me if it's HKIA instead of HK Station.

889

"MTR alone can greatly increase the use of NFC payments in general but for whoever reason, they want to protect Octopus."

"Whatever reason" is probably the fact that MTR/KCR own 79.5 percent of Octopus.

Corporate Structure - Octopus Hong Kong

wco81

889

Octopus has a big bodyguard: the HK Government, which effectively controls it through the MTR/KCR. It's the heavy interest of the government in what should be a competitive commercial environment that is Hong Kong's real shame.

percysmith

wco81