[sun_king]

Originally Posted by SCORPION

<snip>If 2 people share a ride, there is 1 lesser car on the road. If 5 people share a ride, there are 4 lesser cars on the road. If used correctly, it could be equivalent to sharing the fuel expense, a variant of car pooling.
<snip>

True, but not in the sense you wish to convey. Let's take the case of 5 people sharing a vehicle, four cars are indeed removed from the road. IF, the other four had a vehicle each and had planned to use it at more or less the same time. And the next day, one of the four offers a ride to the other four (including the one who drove you today) and so on. That is car pooling. If that is not the case then it is a just taking away business from legitimate service providers who pay additional tax and has permission to do such business. A big majority of such App users that I know of do not offer rides, they are just using this as a cheaper alternative to cab services. Car pooling should not be mixed with taxi services.

These things are new in India and not many people are aware of the legalities involved. People should first be warned that it is illegal to share a ride before seizing their vehicles.

By that logic we should get one warning for murder, arson and probably two for trying to commit suicide!

No sir, the driver of a motor vehicle should know all the rules and regulations before entering public roads. Ignorance of the law is never an excuse, if in doubt do call up a lawyer or enquire with the authorities. It is our civic responsibility.

Personally I feel that these Apps can help the world if the point system is replaced with a "karma" mode. You get your "points" only if you offer rides and your "points" can't be redeemed for anything other than rides in return. Theoretically this will ensure that actual vehicles are off the road and legitimate operators' livelihood is not seriously impacted. A little far fetched, I admit, but we do need to find ways to better utilize what we have. I always feel guilty go in a five seater with four seats vacant.

[Gansan]

Car pooling or even bike pooling is perfectly legal. Many of my friends and colleagues do it. But normally it is among a known group of employees in an ofice, residents of a residential complex or friends in a neighborhood. There are no issues so long as it works on a barter system and there is no money transaction on record. "We will take my vehicle to go to office today, your vehicle tomorrow and his vehicle the next day". In case of any mishap, one is simply giving a lift to his friends and there is absolutely no issue with insurance. A friend who used to give a lift to a colleague every single day in his bike, used to allow his friend pay for the fuel from time to time and that was it. He will not take money in hand.

Things get tricky when one uses an app to invite all and sundry who may be interested to travel in a particular route. How do you share that particular ride, unless you receive money either by cash or by some other indirect means? Then it becomes a ride for gain. Even if Ola or Uber are behind the crack down, I think they are within their rights to do so.

I personally will not like to take an unknown X in my vehicle for the sake of ride sharing.

[Gansan]

Originally Posted by SCORPION

Agree 100% to what you have said. But you probably did not get the sarcasm in my post as far as the insurance part is concerned.

If 2 people share a ride, there is 1 lesser car on the road. If 5 people share a ride, there are 4 lesser cars on the road. If used correctly, it could be equivalent to sharing the fuel expense, a variant of car pooling.

I am not very clear about this. Is owning a car a prerequisite to download and use the app? Is any proof required? What if I don't own a car at all but have only the app. I share a ride with you. How is that a ride share?

[SCORPION]

Originally Posted by sun_king

By that logic we should get one warning for murder, arson and probably two for trying to commit suicide!

No sir, the driver of a motor vehicle should know all the rules and regulations before entering public roads. Ignorance of the law is never an excuse, if in doubt do call up a lawyer or enquire with the authorities. It is our civic responsibility.

Agree to most of what you have said except this one. You are talking about a country where people still get their driving license without even visiting the RTO office or ever having taken a driving test. A driving test which is still archaic. People pass a driving test merely by driving 100 mts (in many cases, they dont even have to drive) or doing an '8' figure on a 2 wheeler. Many of them don't know the difference between the accelerator pedal and the brake pedal, high beam and low beam, I could just go and on. Every single rule is flouted every second in a million ways. I am sure many of them don't even know an MV Act exists. You expect these people to know the entire MV Act and approach a lawyer if they have a doubt? You are joking about civic responsibility aren't you?

The cops/MVDs/RTOS had to and still do run campaigns and create awareness for things as basic as wearing a helmet or a seatbelt. Deadlines are announced. Once people are made aware, the crack down begins. How many of them do you think know that it is actually a law stated in the MV Act and not just because the cops want you to do so for your safety?

You are not allowed to modify your car in any way without RTO approval. Yet people had to be told bull bars are not allowed and it was widely circulated in the media that bull bars will not be allowed. Similarly, dark sun films. People were first made aware and then the cops started hunting people. There are several others like using RTO approved number plates, illegal headlights, use of high beams, etc where the public were made aware before cracking down on them.

So what makes this different? Something that is new in India. Why is it so difficult for the MVD/RTO/Police to make a statement and circulate in the media that ride sharing is not legal and why it is so. Educate people that these apps are illegal. Then begin the crack down. Is that so difficult?

Originally Posted by Gansan

I am not very clear about this. Is owning a car a prerequisite to download and use the app? Is any proof required? What if I don't own a car at all but have only the app. I share a ride with you. How is that a ride share?

I never thought of it this way. Thanks for enlightening me.

[hserus]

RTOs have been catching drivers offering people paid lifts in their employers cars for decades now - nothing new. So why are drivers surprised they get caught just because they use an app to pick up passengers instead of cruising on the highway?

[binand]

Originally Posted by sun_king

By that logic we should get one warning for murder, arson and probably two for trying to commit suicide!

That is a classical strawman argument. The two are not even comparable. In fact governance machinery has a responsibility to prevent offenses from occuring rather than act post facto.

Originally Posted by hserus

RTOs have been catching drivers offering people paid lifts in their employers cars for decades now - nothing new. So why are drivers surprised they get caught just because they use an app to pick up passengers instead of cruising on the highway?

Earlier - in the pre-app days, the burden of proof was on the RTO staff. They had to prove that offending drivers were ride-sharing for profit. In these instances the information within the app shifts the burden of proof to the driver. That to me is quite the game-changer.

[Gansan]

OT.

This reminds me of another "private cars used for monetary gain" issue!

During the 90's private cars were white board and commercial ones were black board number plates. Those days it was cheaper to hire a white board car from travel agencies for outstation trips because it was cheaper. Lot of people used to hire them to go to Tirupathi, because the charges to go up Tirumala hills were very less or nil. The driver will give us a letter from the owner declaring to whomsoever it concerned, that the occupant of the car was a very close friend of his, and upon his request, the car had been loaned to make a trip to Tirumala!

When my brother's son was one year old, the parents took him to Tirumala in such a car for his first tonsure as per family custom. But upon reaching the foothills of Tirumala, they found the authorities had woken up to this trick!

What they did was simple but elegant! The occupants,if not found to be the owners, were required to swear before a huge picture of Lord Balaji that the car was indeed borrowed and not hired, and then proceed on their way. Hardly anybody did; they quietly paid the fee and proceeded onward!

[silversteed]

Originally Posted by Gansan

...This reminds me of another "private cars used for monetary gain" issue!

During the 90's private cars were white board and commercial ones were black board number plates.

IIRC, commercial vehicles had their number written in black on a white board, and private vehicles had white letters on black background.

[sun_king]

Originally Posted by SCORPION

Agree to most of what you have said except this one. You are talking about a country where people still get their driving license without even visiting the RTO office or ever having taken a driving test. A driving test which is still archaic. People pass a driving test merely by driving 100 mts (in many cases, they dont even have to drive) or doing an '8' figure on a 2 wheeler. Many of them don't know the difference between the accelerator pedal and the brake pedal, high beam and low beam, I could just go and on. Every single rule is flouted every second in a million ways. I am sure many of them don't even know an MV Act exists. You expect these people to know the entire MV Act and approach a lawyer if they have a doubt? You are joking about civic responsibility aren't you? <snip>

I guess I should pursue you to agree on this

Agree our rules are a tad archaic, but still they are reasonable. What we lack is actually the enforcement of the rules and its a massive lacking. Bangalore traffic is a miracle because the traffic police are practically toothless, rules are flouted right in front of them and most of the time they look like bored spectators watching a test match heading to an inevitable draw. So the bull bars and air horns go unpunished, the ignorants and willful violators do what they wish. It would border on fantasy to wish that they realize the error of their ways and become more responsible, but if you and I can do better than them, is that asking for too much? It is always advisable to have a doubt clarified than justify it with ignorance when caught, this is what I meant by civic responsibility. No jokes there!. You don't need to memorize the MVA, but if would always be prudent to know what you are doing before doing it.

So what makes this different? Something that is new in India. Why is it so difficult for the MVD/RTO/Police to make a statement and circulate in the media that ride sharing is not legal and why it is so. Educate people that these apps are illegal. Then begin the crack down. Is that so difficult?

Because ride sharing (the barter one that is, today I offer you a ride, tomorrow you offer me a ride) is not illegal. The App is not illegal either, there is nothing unlawful if a person uses an App to accept a ride. If that be the case the Ola, Uber etc. are illegal too! As for the owner, you don't need to go into the MVA, here it is from my current Insurance Policy, Page 1 of 1, bold typeface as actual: "Limitations as to use: The Policy covers use of the vehicle for any purpose other than: (1) Hire or Reward (2) Carriage of goods (other than samples or personal luggage) (3) Organised Racing (4) Pace Making (5) Speed Testing (6) Reliability Trials (7) Any purpose in connection with motor trade." Pointing to (1) I rest my case, in the event of a mishap, try telling the insurance company that you did not read this clause before offering a ride using the App for "x points". And the App is evidence that you made your insurance void, do you really want the government's advice to wisen up?.

[SCORPION]

Originally Posted by sun_king

I guess I should pursue you to agree on this

I don't see this going anywhere but round and round, or down hill. Therefore, let as agree to disagree. See you in some other thread.

[Nalin1]

What is car pooling without an App?

A known group of people within the same apartment complex or in the same company decide to use one car a day rather than each one filling up the roads.
Now this above practice typically does not involve any sharing of costs as each one gets his/her car every other day and it all evens out. This is what has been known as car pooling all these days and very much encouraged by all concerned until Quickride made its entry.

All that Quickride has done is that it has enlarged this group by connecting people either from the same tech park or surrounding offices from the same area or along the same route. Now this will involve not just neighbors and colleagues but also employees commuting to office from a much larger group.
And to encourage people (both parties) to use Quickride, they have come up with a points system which can be redeemed for fuel. Absolutely nothing wrong with that!

Now the small catch is that these points can also be redeemed to Paytm which in turn we all know can be used for many other purposes.

All Quickride needs to do is make that small tweak in this whole system so that points can only be redeemed for fuel. That is it! Employees are sharing rides and sharing fuel costs, what is wrong with that?
Then there is no way the authorities can say that private vehicles are used for commercial purposes.

[rkg]

Ideal car pooling app should allow only car owners to register and use the app. In such scenario, the main objective of car pooling apps to reduce number of vehicles ( in this case cars) can be achieved

At present what's happening is, people with out cars can also register the app and use. The fare either in points or cost (Sride)is almost one third of regular cab fare or even Volvo bus fare. Because of that most of the cab/bus customers are coming into car pooling stuff.

In such cases, there is actually no reduction in number of cars on road. Rather cab/bus business is shifting from commercial operators with valid license to private car owners

it's like another UBER or OLA without being labelled as taxi aggregator

[deep_bang]

Originally Posted by Nalin1

All Quickride needs to do is make that small tweak in this whole system so that points can only be redeemed for fuel. That is it! Employees are sharing rides and sharing fuel costs, what is wrong with that?
Then there is no way the authorities can say that private vehicles are used for commercial purposes.

Absolutely. That's very well summarized.

[Hayek]

Classic case of regulations failing to keep pace with technological changes that are good for society. Car pooling is an unadulterated good - but society does have a legitimate need to restrict the number of for hire cars on roads (through taxes). Hence there is a need to promote car pooling and differentiating it from ride sharing. To my mind, there is a relatively easy way to distinguish between car pooling and ride sharing apps. Car pooling can be permitted (for cash, points or any other credit) as long as the owner or a close relative is a passenger in the car. If the owner is not a passenger, it can be treated as a example of ride sharing rather than car pooling. I don’t think that car pooling when the owner is in a car amounts to use of the car for reward or hire. Yes, this opens the door to owner operators of taxis using private cars for that purpose. But in an unequal society like India, you are not likely to see substantial abuse of this provision - all it does is utilise resources more efficiently.

[madhavgpai]

Originally Posted by Nalin1

Now the small catch is that these points can also be redeemed to Paytm which in turn we all know can be used for many other purposes.

All Quickride needs to do is make that small tweak in this whole system so that points can only be redeemed for fuel. That is it! Employees are sharing rides and sharing fuel costs, what is wrong with that?
Then there is no way the authorities can say that private vehicles are used for commercial purposes.

A friend has started offering rides and has some points on his account. He intends to only use these points on the same app and not redeem it to Paytm or any other cash/fuel wallets. He has never redeemed any points. He is in the clear. right?