How backwards does this ruling make Ontario look? I thought the West was supposedly the part of the country with the reputation for being anti-environment?
Internationally used PickupPal has been deemed to be operating illegally in the land of Queens Park. Congratulations Ontario on your new title as Canada’s antiquated law capital.
@hotmail.com
![[EFC Blue Ribbon - Free Speech Online]](http://www.efc.ca/images/efcfreet.gif)
bigcitylib | 16-Nov-08 at 6:38 pm | Permalink
Interesting case, this. If you read the ruling, Pickuppal is in the business of setting up rides which they make money from and yet exert no quality control over. If the guy that takes you to Montreal reveals to you that he’s a cannibal, tough luck. I was more sympathetic towards them until I read the whole ruling.
Eric Dewhirst | 16-Nov-08 at 7:40 pm | Permalink
@ bigcitylib - Quality control is set by both the driver and the passenger making their own decision if they would like to travel together. We are a well organized carpooling/ridesharing matching service that allows people to find each other so that they can travel together. We operate around the world and help people find alternatives for transportation. The site sustains itself by having ads on it - if a driver and a passenger connect or do not connect and for how much has no difference to what we earn or do not earn.
As for the cannibal comment that has a lot of shock value but no substance. We openly discuss safety issues as a community - http://forum.pickuppal.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=30 . If you are interested in knowing more about who we are and how we operate send me a note and I will try and answer your questions - eric@pickuppal.com.
Cheers - Eric
PickupPal.com
sassy | 16-Nov-08 at 8:15 pm | Permalink
I think there also used to be a ride sharing type of service between Montreal and Ottawa which the bus companies objected to and, which no longer runs because of those objections.
Sorry, I don’t recall the details.
Eric Dewhirst | 16-Nov-08 at 8:55 pm | Permalink
I think you might be talking about AlloStop - they still operate in Quebec but yes were shut down in Ontario.
Cheers - Eric
PickupPal.com
sassy | 16-Nov-08 at 9:34 pm | Permalink
Eric - yes it was AlloStop. Thanks.
Louise | 17-Nov-08 at 8:09 am | Permalink
Bigcitylib, that was the first thing that went through my mind. Who wants to trust a nameless, faceless third party? This could be a serial killer’s dream come true. The decision to join forces with a complete stranger should be preceded with some very careful research. Perhaps the company could require its clients/customers to submit to background checks. That would mitigate a lot of the risk.
The idea does have significant merit, if administered in such a manner as to reduce the risk.
The site you link to, Saskboy, contains a statement that is simply incorrect, regardless of the merits of the idea in principle, that being “The problem with the Act is that it makes a lot of ridesharing illegal.” Choosing not to car pool would not be illegal. The criteria listed are policies, not a list of what constitutes legal versus illegal activities.
I agree with this line of reasoning, as it goes towards preventing abuse: “The “logic” of the decision, according to Felix D’Mello of the Ontario Highway Transport Board, who said “If you are transporting passengers beyond a municipal boundary, and getting compensation for it, the only way you can provide that kind of service is with a public transportation license.”
There is nothing there that says people can’t carpool to locations beyond municipal boundaries in a private arrangement between citizens, or even that they can’t arrange among themselves to compensate the driver(s). The issue seems to be making a business out of a third party carpooling service and the need to ensure standards are met. And doesn’t public transportation accomplish the same thing as car pooling?
I would think that most people can be confident that the drivers of public transportation vehicles aren’t serial killers or rapists, and besides public transportation entails crowds of people, not one or two individuals who are strangers to one another.
Eric Dewhirst | 17-Nov-08 at 8:45 am | Permalink
@ Louise - you have a valid point when it comes to background checks - it does seem like a solution taken at face value. The challenge that is faced is that background criminal records checks do not ensure safety. The young man this summer, Tim McLean, was killed on a Greyhound Bus by a fellow traveler who had no criminal record but was visibly distraught. We tell all of our members to practice carpooling safely by following some straightforward safety advice and trust your instincts.
PickupPal is not for everyone, those weary of others might not see PickupPal as an option and that is fine. However for example many women members of PickupPal choose to ride with other women because they feel safer traveling together. They enjoy having a community in which they can find each other and reduce their carbon footprint and save some money.
Your statement regarding private citizens arranging to carpool being still legal is incorrect. The rules are clear what a carpool arrangement is and if you cross municipal boundaries and receive compensation of any kind you are no longer carpooling. The reason they went after us is because we facilitated the matching - however the driver was still breaking the law by crossing municipal boundaries. Even if it had been his neighbour who asked for the ride and as payment received a cup of coffee. The OHTB has ruled in the past that at little as a cup of coffee is considered compensation and therefore illegal.
Bottom line is PickupPal is not for everyone - however believing that some of our members are “serial killers or rapists” is a bit extreme. I read your blog and seeing that you are from farming roots in Saskatchewan I am pretty sure that you can size someone up before you even say one word. That is our thinking - meet the person you are going to ride with and if you feel comfortable driving with them then go ahead - if not don’t.
Thanks for joining in on this lively debate.
Cheers - Eric
PickupPal.com
Saskboy | 17-Nov-08 at 10:41 am | Permalink
Louise, as Eric mentioned, this is Ontario law, not the Saskatchewan Traffic Act. I don’t know what our act is like in this regard, but I hope it’s not as backwards.
Your idea that ride sharing needs government intervention, and CRCs from police is out of touch with reality. People ride share every day around the world, accepting the risk, and reaping the rewards. I’ve partaken, using Craigslist in the past.
seven star | 17-Nov-08 at 11:32 am | Permalink
Bantario must be the laughing stock of Canada. We have some weird laws and more and more are coming out each week.
Louise | 17-Nov-08 at 12:51 pm | Permalink
“Your statement regarding private citizens arranging to carpool being still legal is incorrect. The rules are clear what a carpool arrangement is and if you cross municipal boundaries and receive compensation of any kind you are no longer carpooling.”
Eric, can you quote the section of the act that supports your statement? I can see such a stipulation being part of a regulation concerning for-profit companies such as yours, but does the Act really forbid Joe Blow and his neighbour from sharing a ride? I highly doubt it.
Saskboy, once again, you have proven that you can’t read. I’m talking about complete strangers being hooked up by a third party for the purpose of car pooling and I made no mention whatsoever of anything that would suggest I thought this legislation was applicable to Saskatchewan. It’s very clear that it applies only in Ontario.
And about the criminal record check, a lot of places of employment now require them. If a private individual wants to car pool with a complete stranger, it would not be unreasonable to ask for a criminal record check.
Louise | 17-Nov-08 at 12:53 pm | Permalink
Or better yet, Ontario likely has their laws posted on the internet, as most provinces do. Can you supply a URL so I can read what it says? I suspect there are details that haven’t been mentioned in this thread that would address some of these issues.
Louise | 17-Nov-08 at 1:05 pm | Permalink
Never mind, Eric. I see there is a link to the Act on the website linked to by Saskboy. I wonder if you could also provide a link to the regulations flowing from the Act? The Act does list the areas that can be regulated and regulations are a lot easier to change than the Act from which they flow.
Saskboy | 17-Nov-08 at 1:52 pm | Permalink
Louise, going by Eric’s statement and the ruling of the court, it’s pretty clear that current Ontario law makes ride sharing technically illegal. It’s not “ride sharing” if it’s a public transit service.
And yes it is unreasonable to ask another ride sharer for their current CRC, and a conservative like yourself should recognize that too. It’d simply be a case of big brother requiring a cut of the savings garnered through ride sharing. CRCs are rarely free, the police make you pay for them.
bigcitylib | 17-Nov-08 at 3:53 pm | Permalink
“People ride share every day around the world, accepting the risk, and reaping the rewards. I’ve partaken, using Craigslist in the past.”
I hope you don’t get yourself cannibalized.
Saskboy | 17-Nov-08 at 4:54 pm | Permalink
How come BCL? If I did, my blog would be more popular than ever, and you’d have lots to write about too ;-)
You sound like my mother…
Besides, don’t cannibals deserve free pick-up and delivery service too?
Eric Dewhirst | 17-Nov-08 at 5:27 pm | Permalink
Hi @Louise - the part that I am referring to is part of previous rulings of the OHTB - http://www.pickuppal.com/save/blog/res/WeirFoulds-Response.pdf. If you go to page 2 and then into other parts of the AlloStop case you will see the references. I must apologize I am not a lawyer so I am not sure if what I am providing you is what you are looking for.
As for the criminal record check - I hear ya and if you need those kinds of assurances then PickupPal is not for you. I use the example of an online dating site and you had to supply a criminal background check prior for looking for a date - I don’t think too many people would sign up. It does not diminish the risk of going out on a date with someone who may harm you. I understand the counter to that of being in a public place and not getting in their car and all that - however I am just trying to illustrate a point.
This brings up an issue of hitching a ride with complete strangers - what we have round is that they are rarely complete strangers. Because the pickup is local we find that most people live in the same community and have friends or neighbours in common or they go to the same university.
Having said all this you have brought up valid points and I guess I will just leave it by saying PickupPal is an option - not for everyone but for some who care to use it.
Cheers,
Eric
Louise | 17-Nov-08 at 6:57 pm | Permalink
“And yes it is unreasonable to ask another ride sharer for their current CRC, and a conservative like yourself should recognize that too.”
Saskboy, Saskboy, Saskboy. Again I have to shake my head in disbelief. Your naivete astounds me. If I choose to hook up with a complete stranger whose name was given to me by a service such as the one we are talking about here, I should expect to be able to take steps to ensure my own safety. That is not an unreasonable position to hold. I’m not saying that a CRC should be mandatory, just that people who want to use the service ought to be advised that a CRC may be requested by the person wanting to car pool with him or her.
Thanks for your reasoned response, Eric. As far as avoiding perverts is concerned, I think there is much less risk in hitch hiking, than there is in this sort of service, and I wouldn’t recommend hitch hiking either.
The reason I say that, is that a service such as the one you offer would be a place where pervs actually prefer to prowl, simply because it provides them with a perfect method of connecting with their next victim, kind of like child molesters hang outside schools or are attracted to rolls such as coaching kids teams. Do you remember Sheldon Kennedy, the junior hockey league player?
Perhaps being a woman makes me think about these things a little differently than men would. I’d want to check out the background of the person really carefully before going anywhere alone with him or her.
Now, if we’re talking about a crowd of people, such as a group going to a rock concert or a big sporting event or something, then I wouldn’t be so cautious.
Saskboy | 17-Nov-08 at 9:12 pm | Permalink
Louise, I think someone is entitled to require that their ride share partner provide a CRC. I don’t think the government needs to require a ride sharing website REQUIRE that participants exchange CRCs. And I think you’re entitled to the level of use that you’d see from requesting CRCs - near 0.
Louise | 18-Nov-08 at 7:01 am | Permalink
Who in hells bells said anything about the government??? Learn to read, my boy. It really helps.
Saskboy | 18-Nov-08 at 8:17 am | Permalink
Louise, this is a discussion about how the GOVERNMENT is requiring a ride share service to discontinue service to the jurisdiction of Ontario because ‘their’ drivers and vehicles don’t meet the requirements of public transportation. You indicated that you thought users would want CRCs, which means a rubber stamp from the GOVERNMENT. It was an easy inference.
Eric Dewhirst | 18-Nov-08 at 10:38 am | Permalink
@ Louise - We spent some time researching this whole online perv thing and found that outside of the hype, online is not a good place for a perv to hang out. When you are a member of PickupPal all actions can be tracked and should the authorities contact us we have policies and procedures in place to deal with that. We know the I.P. address which in most cases can be traced back to a specific location, all communications that they have had, and when they logged in and who they viewed. You cite Sheldon Kennedy but that was a coach taking advantage of an athlete - betraying trust - this is the most prevalent pattern for pervs.
You are right - as a woman your perspective on this issue of safety is much different than mine. I have a background in Transportation Planning and have done quite a lot of research into gender related transportation issues - like in Mexico city they have “ladies only” buses because the women are constantly harassed on the bus (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-01-24-mexicpcity-buses_N.htm). Or the effect of street lighting and bus stops and ways to provide safer environments for women in particular. That is why in PickupPal you have the option that as a woman you can specify that you only want to travel with other women and so you are not matched up with a man. Because the statistics are clear that women pervs are in the minority. Sure a man could go on and create a fake profile and pretend to be a woman - however the gig is up when he shows up and that is why we always suggest that you meet in a public place - http://forum.pickuppal.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=30.
In any event I am not here to convince you to use PickupPal - clearly it does not appeal to you and that is 100% cool with me. It is like couchsurfing.com - to some people it blows their mind having a stranger stay at your house - but then again it is not that different then staying at a bed and breakfast. Some people see couchsurfing as CRAZY! while bed and breakfast - ohh that is just a lot of charm. If you run a bed and breakfast you have to be careful with who you let in your house - because while you sleep ….. It is like getting out of a bar and jumping in a cab waiting outside - how hard would it be for a crazy to stick a light on the top of their car and pickup drunks and bonk them on the head? I am not saying in any way that trouble is out there - however common sense and using your instincts can help combat a lot of that.
Sorry for the digression - just it is nice to have these kinds of dialogues because you bring up valid points and it makes me review what we are doing and make sure we are on track.
Cheers,
Eric