# Los Angeles: Think the cops love us? Think again.



## OriginalGeek (Aug 4, 2014)

*DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer, and what I share here is not intended to be legal advice. I am sharing knowledge I have obtained through my own personal research, and what I believe to be the best practices to evade enforcement by Los Angeles' Bandit Taxicab Enforcement Program. You assume all liability associated with using any information presented herein.
*
To be fair, plenty of LAPD officers show appreciation for Uber drivers. We are mostly welcomed as a solution to the long and previously intractable problem of drunk driving, and that appreciation is expressed in several ways, including being waved through Sobriety Checkpoints with a simple question, if not some humor too. BUT this is not true for a certain elite squad of LAPD, known as The Bandit Taxicab Enforcement Program (BTEP).

Let me first make clear, Transit Network Companies (TNCs) like Uber and Lyft are NOT Bandit Taxicab operations. They have been licensed to operate by the CA Public Utilities Commission. The BTEPs focus is supposed to be on flat out illegal taxicab operators, guys who just have cars and distribute business cards and advertise in niche weekly newspapers to get riders, and are very popular within certain immigrant populations in the city.

But here's the rub. The BTEP is funded by a $0.20/fare levy to taxicab fares. TNCs and black cars don't pay this fee. The BTEP is made up of officers who work bandit taxicab enforcement ONLY on an overtime basis. With certain taxicab operators in L.A. claiming that Uber has taken away 50% of their business, it follows that these officers now enjoy about 50% of the overtime pay they previously earned. And they are coming out gangbusters to defend their overtime pay, and have us in their sights.

Here is a report from LADOT General Manager to the L.A. Board of Taxicab Commissioners on April 17, 2014. You might want to give it a thorough read:

http://ens.lacity.org/ladot/taxicabreports/ladottaxicabreports242487779_05152014.pdf

In a prior thread: California Operating Permits and Proof of Insurance a link was posted to the CA PUC site (thanks @Oc_DriverX) where you can obtain copies of the excess insurance certificates and TCP operating permits. I carry copies of these with me at all times, because you must produce these documents on demand to a peace officer. You may wish to do the same. A Waybill is also required on demand in Los Angeles (and perhaps other localities). The Uber Driver App allows you to display the waybill no problem...and this may result in the phone being confiscated as "evidence", so be polite if asked to show the waybill. The Lyft App has no facility to display a waybill. Lyft leadership has told me the Lyft App is "certified by the PUC", and just showing the ride in progress in the app will be sufficient. L.A. Municipal Code 71.27 does not provide any exception to displaying a waybill, with a requirement of 9 detailed items being displayed on it.

Citations are being issued, and vehicles are being impounded. BTEP impounds have been codified to a minimum of 30 days, to deter Bandit Taxicab operators. There is availability of a hearing early in the 30 days, and you may be able to get your car out early with some contrition and clearly demonstrating you are a legit TNC driver, but who wants to deal with that?

The most stories I have heard revolve around sting operations run by the BTEP that involve trying to trick kind hearted TNC drivers like ourselves into accepting a "street hail". I'm sure all of you have been advised to only take a ride if it comes through the phone, with no explanation about why. So the thing is, picking up a passenger when hailed on the street by someone flagging you down is the EXCLUSIVE DOMAIN of Taxicabs. No TNC nor TCP operator is allowed to do that. TNCs and TCPs have to operate on the basis that the ride is prearranged, with a pickup at a particular time and place. The CA PUC has decided that such prearrangement can be made on demand through a smartphone app.

What the sting looks like is the TNC driver is stopped after a drop off or on a break at <wherever>, and is approached by some undercover officers, who ask the driver to give them a ride. One story I hear of, the undercover officers were hot chicks, and the driver, a young man, parked at the Jack in the Box on Sunset & Cahuenga, was taken away in handcuffs and his car impounded. The women asked for a ride, the driver said "Sorry, I'm off duty, and you have to use the app", "We don't have the app, can you help us install it?". As soon as he started helping, they hooked him up and whisked him off to a mobile command center set up nearby. Not exactly a "street hail", but I think they can make the case. Nevertheless, it doesn't matter if the case sticks or not, they are tracking arrests so they can obtain more funding for BTEP (source: http://ens.lacity.org/cao/cao_budget_memo/caocao_budget_memo292587615_05072014.pdf )

The other story I heard, a woman driver dropped someone off at LA Live, and was approached by an officer and arrested / car impounded when trying to help them get the app.

Both of those stories were relayed to me by my wife, and she read them on the Lyft So. Cal Driver's Lounge on Facebook.

I was targeted myself, last weekend. I dropped off at Jumbo's. A guy in a leather jacket was roaming around the parking lot, sort of checking everyone out. I initially made him as a bouncer. I was surprised when he opened my passenger door and asked "Hey can you help us out, we need a ride". Then I knew the authority figure vibe I was reading was because he was a cop. My answer "I'm sorry, I can't". Here's how I know he was undercover: he said "ok, thanks". A person in need of a ride would have at least given me some attitude or asked "why not", especially if they had been drinking. The guy knew I made him, and moved on to find more prey. Many thanks to my wife for telling me all about this BS the night before I encountered the guy, or I would have been kindhearted enough to try to help the guy out.


----------



## Walkersm (Apr 15, 2014)

Thanks OG good write up. Would like to hear the outcome of the case of helping someone download an app. How that can be construed as accepting a hailed ride is beyond me. More like advertising. TCP drivers can walk down the street handing out their business card for people to call the office for a ride, do not see how that is any different than giving out a website to download an app.


----------



## OriginalGeek (Aug 4, 2014)

I think the theory is, once you help someone download the app, you will be the closest driver, and therefore receive the request. I think though, enough people fight these cases, the judges will get fed up with the BTEP. If I get more details on these cases, I will post them.


----------



## ubearx (Jun 29, 2014)

I was waiting for my passenger who got inside that juck in the box on sunset and cahuenga this saturday night. When she got back in the car and I slowly moved, two hispanic chicks approached me and asked if I was an uber. I didn't have the u on my window and didn't answer. Now, that you mentioned...


OriginalGeek said:


> *DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer, and what I share here is not intended to be legal advice. I am sharing knowledge I have obtained through my own personal research, and what I believe to be the best practices to evade enforcement by Los Angeles' Bandit Taxicab Enforcement Program. You assume all liability associated with using any information presented herein.
> *
> To be fair, plenty of LAPD officers show appreciation for Uber drivers. We are mostly welcomed as a solution to the long and previously intractable problem of drunk driving, and that appreciation is expressed in several ways, including being waved through Sobriety Checkpoints with a simple question, if not some humor too. BUT this is not true for a certain elite squad of LAPD, known as The Bandit Taxicab Enforcement Program (BTEP).
> 
> ...


----------



## UberComic (Apr 17, 2014)

A guy I know who has an auto repair shop told me that his friend who drives Uber SUV with a TCP license had his vehicle impounded for thirty days and was fined $2,500 for this very thing. 

Think about it. If someone has a smartphone and knows what Uber is, then they probably either have the app or already know how to download it.

I almost ate at the Jack In The Box at Sunset and Cahuenga last Monday. Glad I went to the Oinkster on Vine instead.


----------



## LAuberX (Jun 3, 2014)

Thanks for the info

NO street hails and NO helping with loading the app on duty!

..... Oinkster on Vine! yum


----------



## Oc_DriverX (Apr 29, 2014)

I think it would be hard to prosecute and win a case for a street hail, if someone just helped a customer load the app.


----------



## TomNashville (Jul 20, 2014)

OriginalGeek said:


> I think the theory is, once you help someone download the app, you will be the closest driver, and therefore receive the request. I think though, enough people fight these cases, the judges will get fed up with the BTEP. If I get more details on these cases, I will post them.


To counter that, I would say something to the effect of, "I'm actually on my break, but I'll give you this card so that your ride will be free, there's probably someone else within 2 minutes of here".


----------



## TomNashville (Jul 20, 2014)

Oc_DriverX said:


> I think it would be hard to prosecute and win a case for a street hail, if someone just helped a customer load the app.


Cops just trying to be relevant, it must suck to be such a ****tard for a living!


----------



## OriginalGeek (Aug 4, 2014)

Oc_DriverX said:


> I think it would be hard to prosecute and win a case for a street hail, if someone just helped a customer load the app.


Not really relevant when you are without a car, and have a new expense in the form of impound fees.


----------



## tinkgrrrbell (Sep 16, 2014)

I just served on a jury last week for one of these cases. We voted a big NOT GUILTY and I would urge ANYONE who gets stuck on a jury in one of these cases to do the exact same thing. We need to send a message to our "justice" system that this is completely unacceptable. This guy lost his job as an uber driver, had to pay legal fees to fight this in court, AND the transmission on his car was broken when he finally got it back from being impounded. The biggest joke about these "undercover sting" operations is that the cops carry no recording equipment whatsoever. Why? So that the only "evidence" you have in court is the police officer's testimony vs. the driver's testimony. And you'd be sadly surprised how many sheltered people actually believe that cops are more trustworthy than defendants by default. I had to rip apart this whole thing for 2 hours in the jury deliberation room to get 5 people to switch from Guilty to Not Guilty. But I did it, and I'm glad I did it, and if I get stuck on one of these cases in the future I will do it again!!! SHAME on the LA Dept o/ Transportation and the LA Police Dept! SHAME. PS, not sure if you guys know this, but the police make more money catching Uber and Lyft drivers than they do catching terrorists or murderers. Fact. Why? Because the LADOT is paying the police extra to do these stings, in order to stomp out their own competition.


----------



## OriginalGeek (Aug 4, 2014)

@tinkgrrrbell props to you for advocating for and exercising your right to pursue Jury Nullification. Nice to know the added dirty trick of evidence used by the police.


----------



## LAuberX (Jun 3, 2014)

great job tinkgrrrbell!

did the now ex uber driver get paid for his damaged car and legal expenses, or just avoid penalties and jail time?

I would never accept a street hail, I pissed off a lady who wanted to "figure it out in the car" when she wanted a ride to the Ritz-Carlton after a concert last month.... no ping, no ride, simple.


----------



## Russell (Sep 6, 2014)

Taking a street hail? 

If you have some hustle that's how many "good" drivers make the big bucks. No 20% either lol 


Right place. Right time person happy to pay premium...

Door opens before you cansay"cat in ahat"


----------



## The Geek (May 29, 2014)

Russell said:


> Taking a street hail?
> 
> If you have some hustle that's how many "good" drivers make the big bucks. No 20% either lol
> 
> ...


Not in the States pal. No way in hell.


----------



## Walkersm (Apr 15, 2014)

tinkgrrrbell said:


> I just served on a jury last week for one of these cases. We voted a big NOT GUILTY and I would urge ANYONE who gets stuck on a jury in one of these cases to do the exact same thing. We need to send a message to our "justice" system that this is completely unacceptable. This guy lost his job as an uber driver, had to pay legal fees to fight this in court, AND the transmission on his car was broken when he finally got it back from being impounded. The biggest joke about these "undercover sting" operations is that the cops carry no recording equipment whatsoever. Why? So that the only "evidence" you have in court is the police officer's testimony vs. the driver's testimony. And you'd be sadly surprised how many sheltered people actually believe that cops are more trustworthy than defendants by default. I had to rip apart this whole thing for 2 hours in the jury deliberation room to get 5 people to switch from Guilty to Not Guilty. But I did it, and I'm glad I did it, and if I get stuck on one of these cases in the future I will do it again!!! SHAME on the LA Dept o/ Transportation and the LA Police Dept! SHAME. PS, not sure if you guys know this, but the police make more money catching Uber and Lyft drivers than they do catching terrorists or murderers. Fact. Why? Because the LADOT is paying the police extra to do these stings, in order to stomp out their own competition.


One of these cases went to trial?? Murder cases do not even go to trial in LA. What courthouse was this in?


----------



## duggles (Aug 25, 2014)

OriginalGeek said:


> I think the theory is, once you help someone download the app, you will be the closest driver, and therefore receive the request. I think though, enough people fight these cases, the judges will get fed up with the BTEP. If I get more details on these cases, I will post them.


I've had people re-request a ride while IN MY CAR, because they realized they needed to go to another location after the trip ended or whatever, and it would call another Uber. Uber does not always pick the closest available car, for whatever reason.


----------



## Bill Feit (Aug 1, 2014)

Wow, feel for you LA Ubers! I had a rider this am from LA--rode the AM Track down here to Solana Beach and I picked him up to go 15 miles to a business meeting in SD. On the way he mentions he has to pick up some lunch to take to the meeting--would I mind stopping for a few minutes before drop off. I said sure, no problem. Pizza place the company recommended did not open until 11 and his meet started at 11. I gave him several choices from my Garmin when we got in area--he picked a Subway and I waited with him for 35 minutes while they made him three trays of food, he went next door to a 7-11 and bought drinks and then I dropped him. My total trip time was 57:15 (remember 15 miles). Fare was about $36 and NO TIP!!! Keep these guys in LA will you????


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

If you ask her...I bet she would say the DA did not prove their case. Lack of believable evidence. Did not fit the corpus of the crime accused of. 

What makes the word of a cop any more credible than the word of the accused? That's why EVIDENCE is required. You do know the police have a financial motive to write as many of these citations as possible right? Only a small percentage will fight these charges and a small percentage of those will win. They get money directly from the money collected from these cites.

Want another shocker? They will tell you the fine is X$ but if you fight it the fine could be more. Wow really? Why is that? You have the audacity to not only assert your rights but you may be punished additionally for doing so? Yea.....

Did you know the police do t have quotas? It's true. They don't. But they do have performance standards for their specified assignments. Those stats are kept closely and used in their performance evaluations.

Has it occurred to anyone that these citation are blatant violations of your 1st amendment right? Freedom to associate? People are dropping the ball on this and it is costing drivers dearly.


----------



## driveLA (Aug 15, 2014)

It's true that the app doesn't always pick the closest driver 

I've had riders try to request me again while sitting in my car and the ping goes to another driver 

So it's pointless to have them download the. app then and there . And I would think it would take more than helping them download the app to arrest you since you might not even have received the ping. 

Why is getting someone from point A to B so complicated. And why do so many losers have their hands in the pot.


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

driveLA said:


> It's true that the app doesn't always pick the closest driver
> 
> I've had riders try to request me again while sitting in my car and the ping goes to another driver
> 
> ...


Fact is any citation for helping someone download an app should be fought by users lawyers. No matter how you try to twist it...it doesn't fall under the definition of a street hail.

Hey! You drive for uber? Cool! I suck at tech could you help me find the app? Thanks!

Where is the crime? There isn't one. But that is how case law is made. Don't fight it and it goes down as a stat.

Could you be considered working for the city if you helped a person download the parking meter app? Are any of the companies now including a direct link to users app facilitating a street hail? Is the mere question...do you work for uber a street hail?

This is easy to fight...but it is time intensive and attys are not cheap.

What drivers should be doing is filing suit in small claims courts over this against the dept abusing their power.


----------



## Oc_DriverX (Apr 29, 2014)

UL Driver SF said:


> ...
> Has it occurred to anyone that these citation are blatant violations of your 1st amendment right? Freedom to associate? People are dropping the ball on this and it is costing drivers dearly.


The freedom to associate argument is strongest when the association is for political purposes. It is not as strong in a commercial setting. I don't think that loading an app is equivalent to a street hail, but I don't think looking at a First Amendment defense is the way to go.


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

Oc_DriverX said:


> The freedom to associate argument is strongest when the association is for political purposes. It is not as strong in a commercial setting. I don't think that loading an app is equivalent to a street hail, but I don't think looking at a First Amendment defense is the way to go.


You could be right.
is someone asking you a question on the street a commercial setting? Is someone asking you to help them with their phone a commercial transaction?

There are a lot of questions. The first id like answered is what is the code section they were charged with?


----------



## Silens (Nov 2, 2014)

Hmmm....
Wow, sometimes my brothers mock me for trying to obey the rules as much as I can.

I think I unknowingly avoided one of these stings Halloween night, I was approached by two guys who asked for a ride, I told them that they had to use the App to request a 'Lyft', then drove off.

Oh, and if a guy I made as a Cop just walked up and opened my car door I would have gone ballistic (Shouting things like 'unlawful entry' 'attempt to search without a warrant/P.C.' and 'Lawsuit') prolly would have spent the night in jail too.

Glad it was you and not me.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

OriginalGeek said:


> I think the theory is, once you help someone download the app, you will be the closest driver, and therefore receive the request.


The police evidently have no practical hands-on experience using the driver app.


----------



## MiamiFlyer (Sep 22, 2014)

tinkgrrrbell said:


> I just served on a jury last week for one of these cases. We voted a big NOT GUILTY and I would urge ANYONE who gets stuck on a jury in one of these cases to do the exact same thing. We need to send a message to our "justice" system that this is completely unacceptable. This guy lost his job as an uber driver, had to pay legal fees to fight this in court, AND the transmission on his car was broken when he finally got it back from being impounded. The biggest joke about these "undercover sting" operations is that the cops carry no recording equipment whatsoever. Why? So that the only "evidence" you have in court is the police officer's testimony vs. the driver's testimony. And you'd be sadly surprised how many sheltered people actually believe that cops are more trustworthy than defendants by default. I had to rip apart this whole thing for 2 hours in the jury deliberation room to get 5 people to switch from Guilty to Not Guilty. But I did it, and I'm glad I did it, and if I get stuck on one of these cases in the future I will do it again!!! SHAME on the LA Dept o/ Transportation and the LA Police Dept! SHAME. PS, not sure if you guys know this, but the police make more money catching Uber and Lyft drivers than they do catching terrorists or murderers. Fact. Why? Because the LADOT is paying the police extra to do these stings, in order to stomp out their own competition.


Jury Trial? On an Uber/Lyft case?
Hours of deliberation on a minor misdemeanor citation?
Not buying it, especially with all the anti-police rhetoric. With Uber/Lyft providing a lawyer, they are looking for a quick plea agreement and moving on, not hours and days of lawyer fees fighting a citation.

The cab companies fund the bandit cab operations in LA with a monthly fee imposed per cab. Those officers on the detail, are still paid by the hour, not by the ticket.
Homicide and the Anti-terrorism squads typically see plenty of overtime themselves. No need for those Officers to sign up for Bandit duty.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

tinkgrrrbell said:


> I just served on a jury last week for one of these cases. We voted a big NOT GUILTY and I would urge ANYONE who gets stuck on a jury in one of these cases to do the exact same thing. We need to send a message to our "justice" system that this is completely unacceptable. This guy lost his job as an uber driver, had to pay legal fees to fight this in court, AND the transmission on his car was broken when he finally got it back from being impounded. The biggest joke about these "undercover sting" operations is that the cops carry no recording equipment whatsoever. Why? So that the only "evidence" you have in court is the police officer's testimony vs. the driver's testimony. And you'd be sadly surprised how many sheltered people actually believe that cops are more trustworthy than defendants by default. I had to rip apart this whole thing for 2 hours in the jury deliberation room to get 5 people to switch from Guilty to Not Guilty. But I did it, and I'm glad I did it, and if I get stuck on one of these cases in the future I will do it again!!! SHAME on the LA Dept o/ Transportation and the LA Police Dept! SHAME. PS, not sure if you guys know this, but the police make more money catching Uber and Lyft drivers than they do catching terrorists or murderers. Fact. Why? Because the LADOT is paying the police extra to do these stings, in order to stomp out their own competition.


Interesting that this person was a completely new member, posted just this message and dissapeared.

Do Uber sting cases even go to jury trial????


----------



## 20yearsdriving (Dec 14, 2014)

Russell said:


> Taking a street hail?
> 
> If you have some hustle that's how many "good" drivers make the big bucks. No 20% either lol
> 
> ...


You are correct but it takes many years to perfect this act know how to smell the scene , park across the action walk in to the crowd overhear conversation voilah walk away with the 600 pound fish , not the undercover cop , big bucks for the expert hustler !!!!!!


----------



## 20yearsdriving (Dec 14, 2014)

observer said:


> Interesting that this person was a completely new member, posted just this message and dissapeared.
> 
> Do Uber sting cases even go to jury trial????


These cases do go to trial I was give a ticket for bandit cab 2 pages long , my cop dismissed me in court he didn't want to fight it in court , he was a regular cop does not know all the laws , but there are some D.O.T. COPS KNOW THE BOOK IN & OUT , these will prosecute you all the way , the court case was probably escalated by the defendant to a trial by jury 90 % of first timers are won by defendant , many times D.A. Will not even prosecute for lack of evidence , 
These cops live out of drivers who fear and just pay the fine 
Always fight to the end , I was willing to take mine to the Supreme Court (maybe )
The cop said to me just pay the fine 800.00 I answered I rather spend 10,000 fighting you in court I have a war chest for this event , I won


----------



## Bart McCoy (Nov 4, 2014)

OriginalGeek said:


> I was targeted myself, last weekend. I dropped off at Jumbo's. A guy in a leather jacket was roaming around the parking lot, sort of checking everyone out. I initially made him as a bouncer. I was surprised when he opened my passenger door and asked "Hey can you help us out, we need a ride". Then I knew the authority figure vibe I was reading was because he was a cop. My answer "I'm sorry, I can't". Here's how I know he was undercover: he said "ok, thanks". A person in need of a ride would have at least given me some attitude or asked "why not", especially if they had been drinking. The guy knew I made him, and moved on to find more prey. Many thanks to my wife for telling me all about this BS the night before I encountered the guy, or I would have been kindhearted enough to try to help the guy out.


Well he really didnt say enough to fully conclude that he was a cop,other than brazenly opening your door.
If you had said "well request a ride with the app",we could then at least see where he was going with it
At this point, he could just want a free ride, who knows,because absolutely no money was mentioned on either side,from what you wrote
"no thanks", certainly isnt conclusive he's a cop either, thats for sure


----------

