So as I understand you, even if you agree and if others agree that fraud took place, NOTHING can be done? The taxi company is free to ply their wares with no warning to customers? What a terrific introduction to Sydney tourists will receive.
As for letting it go, I will after Ray Hadley on Radio 2GB and Alison Langdon on ACA, Nine Entertainment get my perspective on this. Whether they run with it or not, after I inform them, then I’ll let it go.
Thanks for the feedback. As far as I can see, in Sydney there are no different prices for weekdays and weekends, but 10pm to 6am any night carries a different charge to day time rates, see Rank and hail taxi fares and charges | transportnsw.info
How can it be fraud when the taxi driver followed your instructions…you were asked which way to go, you told them and it happened to be the long way.
I expect that if it was the wrong way, you would have said it was the case and advised the driver at the time. It isn’t the taxi company fault you told them to go the long way, only to find out it cost substantially more than usual (or usual way) at arrival at your destination.
I am surprised that the taxi company offered a refund but they possibly didn’t know this information. I wouldn’t be questioning the payment method as they could withdraw their offer of $20 refund if they read Choice.Community and became enlightened by this information. I would be giving them your banking details ASAP before they cotton on to what actually happened and if you genuinely believe you are entitled to a refund.
And, some of the news and radio stations possibly (well they actually do) read content on this community.
Edit: There was also a increase in NSW taxi rates from the 1 January 2023, the first since 2014. So if the long way was the usual way, and you are comparing a trip last year (or more) with the recent one, it isn’t comparing apples with apples. An increase in the taxi fare may be contributed to by the 1 January rate rises).
And using current taxi rates in an online fare estimator for the Sydney Airport to a location a few kms further out of the City on the other side of the harbour, the estimated rates are $60 to $85 for a trip on a Sunday morning. The fare ($80) which occurred was within this estimated range. Going the long way and if toll roads were taken, one would expect the fare to be in the upper end of the estimated range.
It is also mentioned that the taxi journey occurred on a Sunday, alluding that the fact it should have been cheaper as there was no traffic. It was also mentioned that the journey also included inner city roads. On Sundays (and overnight) in inner city areas, road closures are also scheduled as there are less road users to be inconvenienced. These road closures can occur regularly for things like roadworks, festivals, charity events, movie filming etc etc. There are also many unscheduled incidents which can also occur such as crashes, emergency roadworks, emergency service events etc. Taxi drivers report such constraints on travel and taxi companies push prevailing road conditions to other drivers so they can use the information to make informed decisions about a route to be taken. A competent taxi driver will avoid such constraints as delays can be significant, cause significant inconvenience to paying passengers and not in the interest of the passenger/driver. Avoiding such events increases journey distance to go around them in order to reduce journey times. The disadvantage could be perceived by a paying passenger that the travel cost is higher due to greater distance travelled. It is possible that event avoidance occurred on the day in question. This leads to a driver being ‘between a rock and a hard place’. No matter the decision made, some consumers will complain a longer journey was taken (even though it was significantly quicker) or the journey took a unreasonably long time (and the delay could have been avoided if the driver bypassed the event). This exposes a driver/taxi company to exploitation/claims for compensation/taken advantage of for things outside their control where a consumer sees a potential benefit arguing they have been treated unfavorably.
I think you misread my post. The driver ignored my instructions of going a certain way and went his own way which was far longer than need be.
Also regarding the offer of $19.90 by EFT and not cash, is as I thought and confirmed by NSW Fair Trading a violation of ACL. I am to be refunded in the manner in which I paid unless I choose otherwise. And I am happy to receive cash or a cheque. NSW FT told me to lodge a complaint with them if I am displeased with GM Cabs’ insistence on refunding me a certain way.
You mention UBER. I don’t use UBER but understand that the price is given for a journey before the journey commences, in which case a customer can decline to use that service.
Last Sunday with a friend established the price for the same journey at the approx the same time was $48.23.
A far cry from the $79.90 I was fleeced.
I have a different view.
The refund is a goodwill gesture of the taxi company and does not fall under the Australian Consumer Law. NSW Fair Trading will say that a refund should be using the same method as payment unless otherwise agreed by the business and consumer, but this applies to resolution under the Australian Consumer Law.
Does NSW Fair Trading realise the refund is a goodwill gesture?
So you are saying that you sat where and said nothing when you knew the driver was not going the way you said?
As I indicated above, there can be very reasonable reasons why the shortest distance between two points isn’t taken. If you had said to the driver “this isn’t the way I said to go”, the driver may have been able to say why that particular route was being taken. He might have given you the choice to go the way you said (shortest between two points) but taking considerably longer or to take the route he was proposing to get you ther quicker, albeit a slightly longer route. The cost could have been the same but time significantly different.
It appears that you failed to ask such questions and I wonder if there were other motives/agendas here as you asked for a receipt on dropoff so you could take it further. This indicates that either you knew a different route was being taken but saw it as an opportunity to take it further or only disagreed with the taken route when you saw the cost.
Thank you for your reply. A PR agent for the taxi company could not do a better job. Your inference that I sat back and agreed to the driver going the wrong way and then asking for a receipt so I could take the matter further, when “further” means what? A potential refund of some of the cost? We are not talking about punitive damages here.
I saw he was driving the wrong way and told him. He argued that there were roadworks near the airport, so that is why he went his way. I discovered there were no roadworks at the time and even if there were, it affected one road. He could still go the route I asked.
He declined to show me the meter when asked.
As to your comment on whether NSW FT knows this is a “goodwill gesture”, I don’t know what they infer. The emails I received from the cab company clearly imply they are offering a refund for the overcharging.
I thought roadworks would have been mentioned earlier, along with your in vehicle discussions with the driver. This is important information. I hope you also were comprehensive in the information/circumstances with the taxi company.
While roadworks might be limited to one road as you suggest, traffic impacts can extend to surrounding areas. This is very common particularly in urban area near high traffic generator such as airports, footy fields, etc.
I assume that you must have driven back on the route after your return home to ‘discover’ there were no roadworks. Even if you did, it doesn’t prove roadworks didn’t occur at the time of your travel. They could have been gone by the time you returned. If you relied on websites providing planned roadworks, this isn’t the full picture of roadworks which may have occurred. There are often emergency roadworks which aren’t reported on such websites. There are also other works such as in traffic lights, street lights which are also not recorded but can significantly impact of traffic flows.
You also appear to be unwilling to give them your bank details, but want to give them your credit/debit card to allow them to provide a refund to you. Giving credit card details over the phone is likely to be a greater risk than bank details for an EFT. It is your choice though as they won’t have your card details to issue a refund. If they did, I would be concerned they are storing every customer details gathered by their drivers.
If I told a cabbie which route I wanted him to take I would expect him to take it. If he told me there were road works I might or might not agree to his alternate routing. If I later found out roadworks created a massive traffic snarl he avoided using ‘his route’ I would be retrospectively grateful.
OTOH if the cabbie went off on ‘his route’ without that discussion I would be seriously unhappy. If I directed him into a road works traffic jam he would be making mileage as well as time all at my own cost and responsibility. Would the cabbie be out of pocket? Those of us not there could never know but cabbies get some profitable fares and some less so, all part of their jobs.
I’m not a frequent user of taxis, but when I do use them it’s usually to/from an airport.
At the taxi rank outside the international terminal at Kingsford Smith there is usually a ‘dispatcher’ or taxi wrangler - the person who directs you from the head of the queue to one of the numbered taxi bays. Use this person to your advantage ! When you get into the taxi, make sure that you can see the meter and that it has been activated. If not, ask for it to be. If the driver refuses, tries to negotiate a fixed price, or gives a lame excuse such as “it is broken”, get out of the taxi and call over the dispatcher, and ask for another taxi.
I’ve even seen drivers refusing fares from the rank based on destination. If the dispatcher is made aware of this, the driver is ordered to leave the bay, and return to the end of the queue. They hate that.
There is some misunderstanding. I did not offer to give the company my card details. I did write to them that I would accept a cheque in place of cash.
At a local leagues club last night I met a taxi driver - who I met some years ago through a friend - and quizzed him about my experience.
He indicated that there were no roadworks for the last few weeks including when I caught a taxi; that I was indeed overcharged some $25; that the taxi company involved bases its business model on fares from the airport and that while he heard good things about the owner of that taxi company, he heard the opposite about the drivers.
When I told him I read 13 pages of negative reviews
Scott, as to your point on the taxi rank at the airport, maybe GM Cabs should be prohibited from operating, because in the absence of a warning sign or similar, GM like all other taxis will line up and travelers are none the wiser.
So you paid the taxi by cheque?
You indicated above that
Lets assume the refund isn’t goodwill payment and comes under the ACL. This statement isn’t correct. The ACCC states:
Refunds should be provided in the same form as the original payment, unless the business and consumer agree otherwise.
The business hasn’t agreed to your alternative payment method (cheque) but has offered to EFT to your bank account. Since you refuse this option, the only alternative is to receive a refund using the method used for payment of the fare. I assume for the fare a cheque wasn’t used (long time since they accepted cheques) and either cash or card was used. A cabcharge is the other option but seems unlikely unless you travelled for business/work.
If a card was used, you will need to give them your card details so they can meet their ACL obligations. This could be over the phone or in person at their head office (see next paragraph). They have given you an alternative (EFT is possibly more secure and less likely subject to abuse compared to providing card details) which you refuse to accept.
If you paid by cash, you will most likely need to travel to their head office so they can give you a cash refund of $20 - this option seems very inconvenient and possibly will cost more than the refund amount just because you don’t want to accept the EFT option.
Edit: Refusing to provide a refund by cheque is reasonable as many businesses no longer have facilities or means to issue cheques-since cheques are being phased out.
Two points come to mind:
Yes, I paid cash and yes, if I need to travel to pick up the cash I will, when I am going that way, which I do twice a month. So stopping by the cab company’s office is doable; and
You mention that if I paid by card I would have to give them my CC number to obtain a refund. I see things differently. If I paid my CC I would ask my bank for a charge back for part or the whole amount (the latter as I consider the price charged to be exthortive). Either way, all tha would happen is that a credit would be applied by my bank to the debit in place. I see no need to share my CC number with the cab company.
I don’t believe CC chargebacks work that way. The entire original transaction is reversed, and then a dispute process occurs.
However, I doubt a chargeback would suceed anyway, since you would have received the service and agreed to pay if by card. But let’s suppose the chargeback was successful.
If the taxi company agreed that the original charge was excessive, then a new CC transaction would be initiated at the reduced amount, and that would need your card details.
Likewise, a refund or rebate via CC would require your card details.
What @Gregr says about credit card chargebacks is right.
Even if a chargeback was instigated in this situation, it would be denied as it was paid in person, when payment was made it wasn’t disputed/payment was accepted for the service provided (otherwise it wouldn’t have been paid), the service subject of the payment was received in full and the taxi company has offered a goodwill payment to resolve your complaint.
It is goodwill payment as it payment for the service was accepted after the service provision was completed, and at a later time a complaint was lodged. It is a bit like accepting and paying the bill at a restaurant and then on returning home, contacting the restaurant as one was unhappy with the restaurant experience for some reason. In such circumstances, the restaurant doesn’t need to resolve the complaint, but may chose to out of their own goodwill to keep a customer happy.
Being a goodwill payment, it sits outside the Australian Consumer Law and the business can determine how they would like payment to be made. To accept the goodwill payment, one also needs to accept the businesses method of payment as well.
is not the right comparison.
The right comparison is my experience last year with a medical specialist whose consultation cost $490.
I was suspicious of his methods (he did not examine me, but relied on historical data) and a fortnight later when I received his report via my GP, his diagnosis was not based my situation and the symptoms he listed could not be attributed to me.
He was unable to prove that his comments indeed related to me.
I asked for a refund of all that m/care left me out of pocket. He provided this after NSW Fair Trading gave him a call. I also complained to the HCCC, which in my experience is a shield for badly behaving doctors.
Of course I should have reported him to m/care for billing for a service he did not provide.
So, yes, I did accept the consultation but it was not fit for purpose and yes, after the consultation I made my complaint.
Your medical example isn’t a good comparison. The taxi service was fit for purpose…it got you to your destination safely and it is only your belief that you paid too much which is the complaint.
Summing up what has been posted…
It is believed there was intentional and deliberate overchargng as the driver took a different route to that you suggested. The driver indicated that a different route was taken due to roadworks, but you dispute this without any evidence to the contrary. A driver will have access to current road conditions to provide the quickest travel time to the passenger destination. A passenger is unlikely to have access to similar information.
The fare was within the fare range, albeit at the upper end, from a taxi fare estimator. It is alleged that since the meter couldn’t be easily seen this allowed the driver to successful overcharge somehow. There is no evidence that this occurred.
Taxi fares rose earlier this year and possibly since last taking the same journey which was cheaper.
On arrival, the higher fare wasn’t argued and the meter amount was paid in full. The fare was also metered, not a negotiated fare before departure. Meter fares can vary between trips, even with same route taken.
After reading reviews and after arriving home it was then believed that overcharging occurred, even though the amount of the fare could be reasonably expected due to roadworks diversion and fare increases. The amount is within an expected fare range and could be seen as being reasonable based on the circumstances.
Contact was made with the taxi company which as a goodwill gesture offered $20. Payment offered was EFT using the passenger’s bank account details (noting EFT is a well accepted and safe payment method). There is a reluctance to provide bank account details to receive the $20, but it is believed that the taxi company can be instructed to make the payment in a matter (cheque) which possibly most businesses can no longer provide. As it is a goodwill payment, it falls outside the Australian Consumer Law. Even if it was, the ACL indicates that the $20 should be done using payment methods or alternative methods agreed to be both parties - agreement hasn’t been reached and the taxi company as offered a convenient method for making the goodwill payment.
For some unknown reasons, there appears reluctance to obtain an outcome in relation to the goodwill payment, and confrontation is preferred. The taxi has offered a more than reasonable resolution to the complaint/allegation, but for some reason this isn’t being accepted.
It is likely that if the $20 goodwill payment isn’t agreed to by EFT, the taxi company will withdraw the offer which they could reasonably be expected to do.
One can chose to be confrontational, but my own experience suggest that this is only likely to cause angst to all those involved, when a reasonable person could agree to accept the EFT transfer to close the matter quickly and while the offer remains open.
It is possible that as some time has passed and because a path of dispute has been chosen for some reason, the offer may have been permanently withdrawn.
Related to this, there were complaints last Australian Open tennis about taxi drivers not using metering and instead using a quoted price. Often way over reasonable fare.
This weekend, we have the Australian GP, and the taxi industry has been warned.
There are some reports today that the VIC Gov may step in and ban non-metered fares in taxis.
I accept your points.
