O in unction for B.C. ta i industry against Uber, yft pending udicialreview

Vancouver: The taxi industry is promising to continue its fight against Uber and Lyft after a judge rejected a bid to grant an injunction against the companies pending a legal challenge of the approval process that allowed them to operate in Metro Vancouver. B.C. Supreme Court Justice Veronica Jackson said the Vancouver Taxi Association failed to establish that an independent regulator used an uneven playing field in allowing the two companies to operate as of Jan. 23. “The launch of Uber and Lyft in Vancouver did not arrive unannounced,” Jack said Thursday. Virtually all municipalities have had trouble providing an adequate number of taxis at bar-closing time, rush hour and for sporting events, while smaller communities have faced challenges in attracting the industry, Jackson said. “The public interest favours the status quo,” she said, adding consultations and discussions over ride-hailing services have gone on for seven years in B.C. Half a million people have registered for an app with Uber, which has 800 drivers.

Lyft has also provided thousands of rides, Jackson said.

A judicial review, which could be months away, would not be in the taxi industry’s favour, she suggested.

The association’s evidence over irreparable harm to the industry was “scant at best,” Jackson said, suggesting cab company shareholders would suffer any losses, not the companies.

“The affidavit is anecdotal evidence from one taxi driver about a decrease of earnings over the course of six days,” she said, adding it contained no information about how many hours he’d worked during that time.

Carolyn Bauer, a spokeswoman for the taxi association, said drivers have to shell out much more money to operate cabs and that’s financially affecting their families. “Our taxis are being parked right now,” she said. “Our accessible vans cost $65,000 to put on a road and cost approximately $67,000 a year to maintain for maintenance and fuel costs and that doesn’t include insurance,” she said outside court. “We’re not just standing here saying ‘no’ to Uber and ‘no’ to Lyft. We’re not saying that. We’re saying bring it on fairly, just bring it on equally for us so that we stand a chance.”

Bauer said Uber and Lyft started operating six days before the association went to court without enough evidence about their potential impact on the taxi industry.

“We’re fighting a tough battle to show where the losses are but I can promise you I will be showing where the losses are,” Bauer said, adding some taxi drivers have chosen to work for ride-hailing services because that’s a cheaper option.

“The public has always been against the taxi industry,” Bauer said in response to the judge’s views about the public-interest aspect of her decision. “They can’t get a taxi, they can’t get home from a location, there are taxi refusals,” Bauer said, adding ride-hailing apps are popular only because the industry is “new and it’s tasty and it’s kind of sexy.”

Kulwant Sahota, who drives for Yellow Cab, said a shortage of cabs is a problem that’s been created by governments not issuing enough licences. Overall, the industry may have to adapt to allow passengers and drivers to rate each other, the same as ride-hailing services, he said.

Michael van Hemmen, Uber’s spokesman for Western Canada, called the judge’s decision great news for drivers and passengers across Metro Vancouver.

“The Government of British Columbia has been clear: Uber has all the provincial approvals and licences needed to operate in Metro Vancouver,” he said in a statement. Lyft spokeswoman Alicia Smart said the judge’s decision reaffirms the benefits of ride-hailing in B.C. “We appreciate the Passenger Transportation Board’s independent data-based decision-making process, which led to Lyft’s approval,” she said.

The same judge is scheduled to announce her decision Friday in another ride-hailing case involving Uber, which sought an injunction against the City of Surrey for fining drivers and the company $500 a day for operating without a business licence while refusing to provide licences.