2 men with 2 dogs refused to cancel gojek ride when driver declined the ride

[Guest Piang]

On 3/10/2022 at 7:39 PM, Kimochi said:

It seems like you found them on grinder and wanted to have fun with them but got blocked instead because you are fucking ugly in everything . Did I hit the right spot? I sure hope I did. 

 

what a way to defend!  Haha, need to go below the belt?  LOL, tsk tsk tsk.

[Guest Mochi]

On 3/10/2022 at 7:34 PM, Guest Lol said:

 

He never deny, so must be true lor.

 

If friends, must suckppork till the end! so @Kimochi you got ask them why so stingy? are they bfs?

 

or are you the black or white guy?

 

 

Kimochi's legs are so ugly resembling those of frogs...ooops should be toads, don't think he is either one.

 

[greg01greg]

On 3/10/2022 at 7:27 PM, Kimochi said:

Those 2 guys are not my friends. They did not manipulate the system. They followed the instructions of what Gojek system has provided. This is not call manipulation. They did not change the rules of the Gojek system. Yes. Grab has pets system and Gojek do not have but that's the system and rules of grab. Now are talking about Gojek system and rules. The guys hired Gojek and not grab or any other transport systems so don't go and pull grab or other transport systems into this topic. Grab or other transport system has nothing to do with this topic at all. Gojek rules is as stated but has to inform the driver and the driver must be willing to ferry and that's Gojek rules. Both parties must agree with the rules set by Gojek and come to agreement before the driver come and fetch. 

 

The pet owner already stated they have pets with them. And when the driver did not read the pet owners messages and accepted the ferrying, it already means he accepted the agreement. If the driver had read the messages and rejected their ride would he have come to this stage where he saw the dogs and and kick a big fuss out of it? 

Lol. Mate. I have no clue as to why you’re against the driver. Is it because he raised his voice at the 2 boys and the boys gave a “polite response” 

It is very clear that you refuse to see the driver’s point of view. 
we just leave it as that. 
the boys were trying to become the bigger person and trying to remove themselves in the situation but their smug response and that passive aggressive attitude had rubbed the driver the wrong way. 
They could have just cancel and pay the fee but they were too proud and too cheap to do it. 
i really feel sorry you feel very strongly on going against the driver. 
he is human after all.  He must have had a bad night. 
if I were to be in the boys position, I will take a good look at the situation, my dogs and just say sorry, I will cancel and pay the cancellation fee graciously without the smug attitude. 

Edited March 10, 2022 by greg01greg

[Guest Lol]

On 3/10/2022 at 7:39 PM, Kimochi said:

It seems like you found them on grinder and wanted to have fun with them but got blocked instead because you are fucking ugly in everything . Did I hit the right spot? I sure hope I did. 

 

Omg you are crazy lol. All the more it proves that they are your friends or you are one of them.

 

Who in the right mind will support the 2 guys so much entirely and push all the blame to the driver.

[Kimochi]

On 3/10/2022 at 7:52 PM, greg01greg said:

Lol. Mate. I have no clue as to why you’re against the driver. Is it because he raised his voice at the 2 boys and the boys gave a “polite response” 

It is very clear that you refuse to see the driver’s point of view. 
we just leave it as that. 
the boys were trying to become the bigger person and trying to remove themselves in the situation but their smug response and that passive aggressive attitude was rubbed the driver the wrong way. 
They could have just cancel and pay the fee but they were too proud and too cheap to do it. 
i really feel sorry you feel very strongly on going against the driver. 
he is human after all.  He must have had a bad night. 
 

I watched the video already. The rules is already stated. It has nothing to do with grab or other transport services. Again. If the driver read the message and deem it not agreeable to him he could already have cancelled the guys and this would not happen at all. This is Gojek system. The drivers should also not bring out grab or other transport services into the conversation at all because it is Gojek transport system and their rules. He he working under Gojek rules and not grab or and other transport system rules. 

 

The person who is not sticking to Gojek rules is the driver himself. 

[Guest guest]

On 3/10/2022 at 4:33 PM, greg01greg said:

emotions were high.. I could feel the driver, we dont know what happened before the driver decide to pull out his phone to record, probably because he didn't like the way he was treated or talked to? yes the driver spoke in broken English, maybe he was having none of it, being a push over. 

yes being the bigger person and move away from the situation that would be the best.. but we would not know what the driver been through and he was having none of it.. 

Even the driver got treated badly by these 2 guys, he should just walk away. What is the use of keeping arguing just to show you can win the other party or make yourself feel better.

[greg01greg]

On 3/10/2022 at 8:18 PM, Kimochi said:

I watched the video already. The rules is already stated. It has nothing to do with grab or other transport services. Again. If the driver read the message and deem it not agreeable to him he could already have cancelled the guys and this would not happen at all. This is Gojek system. The drivers should also not bring out grab or other transport services into the conversation at all because it is Gojek transport system and their rules. He he working under Gojek rules and not grab or and other transport system rules. 

 

The person who is not sticking to Gojek rules is the driver himself. 

you dont get it do you? its not just about the rules... sometimes we as people need to have empathy. do you sometimes get in a situation where you need to have empathy or you just go by the books?

you refuse to look at the drivers point of view by punishing him for not READING. 

look I dont know what really happen but I say again - maybe the driver had a bad night, and he was not going to be a push over. he needed to have his say about unreasonable riders. 

you may not want to see it way, I guess that will make you sleep at night better. 

 

Jesus Christ.. what happen to having a heart.. 

[greg01greg]

On 3/10/2022 at 8:24 PM, Guest guest said:

Even the driver got treated badly by these 2 guys, he should just walk away. What is the use of keeping arguing just to show you can win the other party or make yourself feel better.

sometimes there are ppl had enough being a pushover.. he needed to have his say.. he said clearly in the video - he's just trying to make a living.. 

[Kimochi]

On 3/10/2022 at 8:26 PM, greg01greg said:

you dont get it do you? its not just about the rules... sometimes we as people need to have empathy. do you sometimes get in a situation where you need to have empathy or you just go by the books?

you refuse to look at the drivers point of view by punishing him for not READING. 

look I dont know what really happen but I say again - maybe the driver had a bad night, and he was not going to be a push over. he needed to have his say about unreasonable riders. 

you may not want to see it way, I guess that will make you sleep at night better. 

 

Jesus Christ.. what happen to having a heart.. 

Talking about empathy is not the point here. You want empathy you go and open another topic about empathy to the driver. Now the rule is as such. Grab has grab pet and other transport system has theirs, but Gojek has no hard and fast rule as long as both parties agree. They are now inside Gojek system. And by accepting the ride and not reading the messages they sent he is already at fault for not canceling their ride in the first place and yet still want to create a scene. 

 

 

[Guest guest]

On 3/10/2022 at 8:30 PM, greg01greg said:

sometimes there are ppl had enough being a pushover.. he needed to have his say.. he said clearly in the video - he's just trying to make a living.. 

For me i would just go away after saying what i want to say. No point keep repeating and scolding the other party. Really waste time waste energy. I have seen so many such pushover and bad character people, EQ must be high not to get angered by them, esp if they are just strangers.

[greg01greg]

On 3/10/2022 at 8:34 PM, Kimochi said:

Talking about empathy is not the point here. You want empathy you go and open another topic about empathy to the driver. Now the rule is as such. Grab has grab pet and other transport system has theirs, but Gojek has no hard and fast rule as long as both parties agree. They are now inside Gojek system. And by accepting the ride and not reading the messages they sent he is already at fault for not canceling their ride in the first place and yet still want to create a scene. 

 

 

ok Mr Go By the Books guy.. you want to take this as a winning argument.. take it.. 

yeah driver was wrong for kicking up a fuss.. and the 2 poor boys were victims of abuse.. 

happy? now can you sleep better after this?

[Guest AITA]

On 3/10/2022 at 1:38 PM, Guest AITA said:

If this was an ‘am I the asshole question’, the answer would be that all three of the people in this situation are the assholes - driver and passengers.
 

The dogs are not, they are the only ones not acting up. 

Driver and riders - they are all acting like assholes and this thread seems to have brought even more assholes to join the party, even including a couple of friends of the riders! 
 

now feeling sorry for the dogs…

[greg01greg]

On 3/10/2022 at 8:36 PM, Guest guest said:

For me i would just go away after saying what i want to say. No point keep repeating and scolding the other party. Really waste time waste energy. I have seen so many such pushover and bad character people, EQ must be high not to get angered by them, esp if they are just strangers.

I applaud the driver for standing up for himself.. 

[Guest Sane]

On 3/10/2022 at 8:18 PM, Kimochi said:

 

and this would not happen at all

 

 

Indeed, you are right to make this statement.  'This would not happen at all' should they have booked the right transport, i.e. Grabpet.  'This would not happen at all' should they have been more thoughtful, pay the extra fare, and not taking the risk to book Gojek.  Maybe on that night, they had checked the price for Gojek vs Comfort (which he claimed he had used before) and found Gojek was cheaper.  Surely, they conveniently did not check Grabpet as the minimum fare was already too expensive for their liking.

 

'This would not happen at all' should they are a responsible pet owner and had used their common sense to do the right thing.  'This would not happen at all' should they take responsibility to think for two adults and two medium/large dogs are cramped in a normal car?  When dogs are cramped in small space, they shed easier.  Have you thought of this where drivers eed to clean the seats after they exited?

 

[Kimochi]

On 3/10/2022 at 8:42 PM, Guest Sane said:

 

Indeed, you are right to make this statement.  'This would not happen at all' should they have booked the right transport, i.e. Grabpet.  'This would not happen at all' should they have been more thoughtful, pay the extra fare, and not taking the risk to book Gojek.  Maybe on that night, they had checked the price for Gojek vs Comfort (which he claimed he had used before) and found Gojek was cheaper.  Surely, they conveniently did not check Grabpet as the minimum fare was already too expensive for their liking.

 

'This would not happen at all' should they are a responsible pet owner and had used their common sense to do the right thing.  'This would not happen at all' should they take responsibility to think for two adults and two medium/large dogs are cramped in a normal car?  When dogs are cramped in small space, they shed easier.  Have you thought of this where drivers eed to clean the seats after they exited?

 

I do agree they should use grab pet BUT they chose Gojek transport system so we have to look at Gojek rules instead of other transport systems rules.

 

I also know the 2 guys should instead choose grab pet or other systems which can better cater to pets. Their dogs shed fur or dirty the owners its their problem. The Gojek driver accepted their booking without reading the messages means he himself did not follow Gojek rules and agreed to ferry the 2 guys and their pets. 

 

If we assume grab and all other transport systems do not have pet systems and all have the same rules as Gojek , now who do you think will be at fault . 

[Guest Strange Thing]

On 3/10/2022 at 8:37 PM, greg01greg said:

ok Mr Go By the Books guy.. you want to take this as a winning argument.. take it.. 

yeah driver was wrong for kicking up a fuss.. and the 2 poor boys were victims of abuse.. 

happy? now can you sleep better after this?

 

If we are to watch the incident, the other guy was pretty quiet throughout.  Perhaps, he felt shameful?  Perhaps in his mind they should have been more thoughtful to book another provider and not Gojek?

 

While keeping quiet can be an act of being indifferent, but it does not make sense not to defend a friend.  Something is just not right.

[greg01greg]

On 3/10/2022 at 8:57 PM, Guest Strange Thing said:

 

 

Edited March 10, 2022 by greg01greg

[Guest Embarrassed Xiasuay]

It’s really bad how ppl go all the way out to defend for the two cheapskates who started this saga. It is worse when @kimochi said “talking about empathy is not the point here” it is really embarrassing that ppl have becoming so unsympathetic. The driver is just simply making an honest living and ppl are finding fault with him. Those 2 cheapskates are obviously not doing this for the first time.

 

Someone said that they are not shouting etc like the driver, isn’t it obvious that they knew that they were being recorded and they have to look cool to make the driver look bad??” They are so obviously manipulating the situation.

[greg01greg]

On 3/10/2022 at 9:13 PM, Guest Embarrassed Xiasuay said:

It’s really bad how ppl go all the way out to defend for the two cheapskates who started this saga. It is worse when @kimochi said “talking about empathy is not the point here” it is really embarrassing that ppl have becoming so unsympathetic. The driver is just simply making an honest living and ppl are finding fault with him. Those 2 cheapskates are obviously not doing this for the first time.

 

Someone said that they are not shouting etc like the driver, isn’t it obvious that they knew that they were being recorded and they have to look cool to make the driver look bad??” They are so obviously manipulating the situation.

sadly someone just look at things in black and white.. no grey in between.. 

[greg01greg]

For the record, I am for the driver, I feel his sentiments, I do not know the driver personally 

I always hire Grab tada and gojek for transport.. I talk to drivers, asking how their night going.. 

These drivers are human too.. 

 

[Guest not poor]

On 3/8/2022 at 6:53 PM, cutejack said:

When I was young during my childhood,as what I know, only those rich ones with landed property, running own business, those really rich ones keep pet dogs. Nowadays, those working class , still worrying about retirement n cpf money are keeping dogs. Y ar? To feed own mouth need to work yet wanna feed the dog. My toes are tired of laughing.

 

Well, obviously not everyone is as poor as you.

My bank account is laughing.

[Guest Bravo]

On 3/10/2022 at 9:13 PM, Guest Embarrassed Xiasuay said:

It’s really bad how ppl go all the way out to defend for the two cheapskates who started this saga. It is worse when @kimochi said “talking about empathy is not the point here” it is really embarrassing that ppl have becoming so unsympathetic. The driver is just simply making an honest living and ppl are finding fault with him. Those 2 cheapskates are obviously not doing this for the first time.

 

Someone said that they are not shouting etc like the driver, isn’t it obvious that they knew that they were being recorded and they have to look cool to make the driver look bad??” They are so obviously manipulating the situation.

 

Thank you for being a human.

 

I salute you with this statement - " It is worse when @Kimochi said “talking about empathy is not the point here” it is really embarrassing that ppl have becoming so unsympathetic."

 

You are very right to make this observation - "isn’t it obvious that they knew that they were being recorded and they have to look cool to make the driver look bad??"

[Guest Malu balu]

On 3/10/2022 at 8:57 PM, Guest Strange Thing said:

 

If we are to watch the incident, the other guy was pretty quiet throughout.  Perhaps, he felt shameful?  Perhaps in his mind they should have been more thoughtful to book another provider and not Gojek?

 

While keeping quiet can be an act of being indifferent, but it does not make sense not to defend a friend.  Something is just not right.

 

Cos he know he is being recorded and it will be uploaded to social media mah, and he know they are in the wrong - being cheapskate kena exposed, so stingy and somemore die die dun wanna cancel cos need to pay $4, so malu now, thought they can get away with it but backfired now, so better to just look down and keep quiet.

 

I think at one point he even took a pic of his dog while looking down, really for fuk sia. He must also be thinking luckily he is wearing mask so no one can recognise him.

[Guest Truth]

Aiyoh... Someone in this forum know the pet owners or driver is it. 以和为贵！！

[Guest Guest]

 

 

On 3/10/2022 at 7:52 PM, greg01greg said:

Lol. Mate. I have no clue as to why you’re against the driver. Is it because he raised his voice at the 2 boys and the boys gave a “polite response” 

It is very clear that you refuse to see the driver’s point of view. 
we just leave it as that. 
the boys were trying to become the bigger person and trying to remove themselves in the situation but their smug response and that passive aggressive attitude had rubbed the driver the wrong way. 
They could have just cancel and pay the fee but they were too proud and too cheap to do it. 
i really feel sorry you feel very strongly on going against the driver. 
he is human after all.  He must have had a bad night. 
if I were to be in the boys position, I will take a good look at the situation, my dogs and just say sorry, I will cancel and pay the cancellation fee graciously without the smug attitude. 

 

 

I am with @Kimochi on this one. If you think about it, did you realize your own words can be used against the driver? 

 

"Lol. Mate. I have no clue as to why you’re against the driver riders. Is it because he the driver raised his voice at the 2 boys and the boys gave a “polite response” ?

It is very clear that you refuse to see the driver's riders' point of view. 
we just leave it as that. 
the boys were trying to become the bigger person and trying to remove themselves in the situation but their smug response and that passive aggressive attitude had rubbed the driver the wrong way. 
They The driver could have just cancel and he (didn't even need to pay) any penalty but they were too proud and he was too cheap to do it (and he just wants to be rewarded with the $4 cancellation fee without giving the ride)  
i really feel sorry you feel very strongly on going against the driver riders. 
he is They are human after all.  He They must have had a bad night. 
if I were to be in the boy's   drivers' position, I will take a good look at the situation, my dogs and just say sorry give the trip and earn the fare which the boys were willing to pay for, (if not) I will cancel and (didn't even need to pay) any penalty pay the cancellation fee graciously without the smug attitude."

 

 

 

On 3/10/2022 at 8:26 PM, greg01greg said:

you dont get it do you? its not just about the rules... sometimes we as people need to have empathy. do you sometimes get in a situation where you need to have empathy or you just go by the books?

you refuse to look at the drivers point of view by punishing him for not READING. 

look I dont know what really happen but I say again - maybe the driver had a bad night, and he was not going to be a push over. he needed to have his say about unreasonable riders. 

you may not want to see it way, I guess that will make you sleep at night better. 

 

Jesus Christ.. what happen to having a heart.. 

 

I do not have a heart for people for people who do not want to earn the proper fare just because of (what??) dog hairs on the car seat???? It's not even a religious thing! It's just pure laziness and someone doesn't even want to clean his car and use some sticky tape to stick the hairs away! Why should the driver be getting any empathy from us? He had all the options opened for him: 

(1) To take up the ride to earn the full fare

(2) To cancel the ride without penalty

But yet he chose to

(1) insist on having the riders cancel the ride, perhaps just to earn that additional $4 without any drivers' cancellation penalty

(2) create a scene (which is the bigger crime here)!

 

And no, the trip to the pickup point has never been considered into the fare by any transport company. So don't tell me that he incurred expenses for the drive there. This is part of the opportunity costs that the driver need to bear, especially since the distance wasn't that far away, and the riders were waiting for him, and the riders have already informed him of the presence of the dogs.

 

The driver merely wanted to earn the cancellation fees, and this had been a very common tactic overseas by unethical drivers.    Read : https://thepointsguy.com/news/uber-drivers-cancellation-fee-scam/

 

If I have any empathy and any heart, they goes out to those pets, and not the driver. As a matter of fact, I have this suspicion that the driver will still opt to pick up pets in the future, even if he is given the choice to OPT OUT of picking up any riders with pets in any future upgraded Gojek app. And he will do that just so that he can earn more money from those pet-carrying clientele in the future, even if they are at the same basic fare. 

 

On 3/10/2022 at 8:42 PM, Guest Sane said:

Indeed, you are right to make this statement.  'This would not happen at all' should they have booked the right transport, i.e. Grabpet.  'This would not happen at all' should they have been more thoughtful, pay the extra fare, and not taking the risk to book Gojek. 

 

You kept saying that " 'This would not happen at all' should they have booked the right transport, i.e. Grabpet." If that is the case, were the riders even wrong in any way to select Gojek instead of GrabPet?

 

Did it occur to you that Gojek might have gone into such non-pet discriminatory service just so that they can steal GrabPet's businesses? How many Gojek's drivers have benefited from this group of clientele who moved out from GrabPet into Gojek? The drivers' action has not only harmed the riders, but it has also harmed all those people, including other drivers, who are using Gojek's non-pet discriminatory service. 

 

The only people who benefitted from this saga are those people who are drivers for the GrabPets. 

 

And no, I don't own any pets, and I am neither a friend of the riders. 

 

 

[Guest Guest Bystander]

Pet owners sent message but no acknowledgment or agreement by driver, is it fair to infer driver agreed?

Rider can only send message after driver accept ride, correct?

[Guest Guest]

On 3/10/2022 at 11:04 PM, Guest Guest Bystander said:

Pet owners sent message but no acknowledgment or agreement by driver, is it fair to infer driver agreed?

Rider can only send message after driver accept ride, correct?

 

Long long time ago, when I take Grab etc, riders can put in their comments at the time WHEN they request for the ride, and NOT after.  Nowadays, I drive my own car so I have not taken (or given) Grab or Gojek in ages. But I would think that practice of allowing riders to put in their comments at the time WHEN they request for the ride still stands. 

[Guest Guest Bystander]

On 3/10/2022 at 11:10 PM, Guest Guest said:

 

Long long time ago, when I take Grab etc, riders can put in their comments at the time WHEN they request for the ride, and NOT after.  Nowadays, I drive my own car so I have not taken (or given) Grab or Gojek in ages. But I would think that practice of allowing riders to put in their comments at the time WHEN they request for the ride still stands. 

How you know if they sent the message at point of request? What if the message was sent when driver was on the way to pick up?

[Kimochi]

On 3/10/2022 at 11:43 PM, Guest Guest Bystander said:

How you know if they sent the message at point of request? What if the message was sent when driver was on the way to pick up?

How you know if they did not send the message at point of request? 

[Guest Guest Bystander]

On 3/10/2022 at 11:48 PM, Kimochi said:

How you know if they did not send the message at point of request? 

I don't know but you speak like you are god damn sure that the driver's at fault. Maybe you know?

[Kimochi]

On 3/10/2022 at 11:52 PM, Guest Guest Bystander said:

I don't know but you speak like you are god damn sure that the driver's at fault. Maybe you know?

I know that you will test positive for covid (an even newer strain than variant 2)

 

Hows that for now? 

[Guest Guest new COVID]

On 3/10/2022 at 11:58 PM, Kimochi said:

I know that you will test positive for covid (an even newer strain than variant 2)

 

Hows that for now? 

You are losing your cool, this is no fun. =]

[Kimochi]

On 3/11/2022 at 12:01 AM, Guest Guest new COVID said:

You are losing your cool, this is no fun. =]

Same usual guest trolls. Nothing new at all. 

[Guest Guest Trolls Again]

On 3/11/2022 at 12:08 AM, Kimochi said:

Same usual guest trolls. Nothing new at all. 

Not trolling. Casting reasonable doubt on how you apply GoJek's rules and so confident driver is at fault here. 

[Guest Guest]

On 3/10/2022 at 11:43 PM, Guest Guest Bystander said:

How you know if they sent the message at point of request? What if the message was sent when driver was on the way to pick up?

 

Even if the message was sent together with the request, will the driver have read it? If he had, don't you think the driver would have said so by now, since he is so keen on creating so big a scene? I think you are just trying to find  excuses for the driver, where none can be found. 

 

What would you say if someone here on this forum questioned you, challenging if you know the riders didn't speak to the driver on the phone and the driver accepted the request knowing fully well of the presence of the dog? I guess you will say the same: If they had done so, they would have mentioned it, right? 

[Guest Neutral]

On 3/11/2022 at 12:24 AM, Guest Guest said:

 

Even if the message was sent together with the request, will the driver have read it? If he had, don't you think the driver would have said so by now, since he is so keen on creating so big a scene? I think you are just trying to find  excuses for the driver, where none can be found. 

 

What would you say if someone here on this forum questioned you, challenging if you know the riders didn't speak to the driver on the phone and the driver accepted the request knowing fully well of the presence of the dog? I guess you will say the same: If they had done so, they would have mentioned it, right? 

Am neutral here, only curious how some of you are so sure it is driver's fault and pet owner is "compliant" to the rules. 

 

Isn't it an important detail if the driver accepted the request with or without knowledge of the dogs?

[Guest Guest]

On 3/11/2022 at 12:19 AM, Guest Guest Trolls Again said:

Not trolling. Casting reasonable doubt on how you apply GoJek's rules and so confident driver is at fault here. 

 

There's no reasonable doubt that has been casted here at all. After all facts are considered, the logical conclusion must be that the driver didn't even read the message at all, even if the message were to be sent together with the request. So this is nothing more than a distraction, and not a reasonable doubt.  

[Guest Logic?]

On 3/11/2022 at 12:37 AM, Guest Guest said:

 

There's no reasonable doubt that has been casted here at all. After all facts are considered, the logical conclusion must be that the driver didn't even read the message at all, even if the message were to be sent together with the request. So this is nothing more than a distraction, and not a reasonable doubt.  

HAHA what logic? What facts? Who are you?

[Guest Guest]

On 3/11/2022 at 12:36 AM, Guest Neutral said:

Am neutral here, only curious how some of you are so sure it is driver's fault and pet owner is "compliant" to the rules. 

 

Isn't it an important detail if the driver accepted the request with or without knowledge of the dogs?

 

It depends on what "fault" you are talking about:

Fault for taking dogs on a regular GoJek ride? Sorry, GoJek rules allows that.

Fault for not cancelling? Rider could have cancelled since Gojek rules says so, but driver also did not ask courteously since the very same Gojek rules also say so. And furthermore, driver could also cancel without penalty. . 

Or fault for creating the scene.... ? This is obviously ....

[Guest Guest]

On 3/11/2022 at 12:45 AM, Guest Logic? said:

HAHA what logic? What facts? Who are you?

 

You can always address limpeh as "Daddy". 

[Guest Lmao]

On 3/10/2022 at 11:52 PM, Guest Guest Bystander said:

I don't know but you speak like you are god damn sure that the driver's at fault. Maybe you know?

Because you are speaking to one of the guys himself! Lol

[Guest Guest]

To be frank,  don't compare the services between private hire car and hire taxi .

 

A very good example... My office is located on the 9th floor in an industrial building. When I booked Grab or GoJek,  non of the driver are willing to drive up to 9th floor to pick me even I gave them a text asking them to drive up 9th floor. Many replied me "I don't drive up, you come down! " and nasty one didn't even reply me after reading the text. They left after 3-4mins when not seeing me below. 

When I booked Comfort DelGro, they drove up to 9th floor. They don't mind because they are on meter. 

 

An old saying... Good things don't come cheap and cheap things don't come good. 

[Guest Errrr]

On 3/11/2022 at 1:19 AM, Guest Guest said:

To be frank,  don't compare the services between private hire car and hire taxi .

 

A very good example... My office is located on the 9th floor in an industrial building. When I booked Grab or GoJek,  non of the driver are willing to drive up to 9th floor to pick me even I gave them a text asking them to drive up 9th floor. Many replied me "I don't drive up, you come down! " and nasty one didn't even reply me after reading the text. They left after 3-4mins when not seeing me below. 

When I booked Comfort DelGro, they drove up to 9th floor. They don't mind because they are on meter. 

 

An old saying... Good things don't come cheap and cheap things don't come good. 

my god, you are so self entitled. drive to 9th floor? Siao!

[singalion]

On 3/10/2022 at 4:24 PM, greg01greg said:

have you seen the video.. have you seen one of the dogs.. were the dogs in carriers? but never mind all that.. 

as a rider - you need to have a sense of responsibility to get the right service - its not like there's none. there is a pet service for PVH. 

 

A) At no point Gojek says that pets must be in a carrier. 

 

B) If Gojek doesn't want to carry pets then they should write clearly "We do not permit any pets!" instead of giving an instruction what to do if you have pets. 

 

The fact that Grab has a special pet service doesn't change anything that Gojek covers pet transportation in their Help section. 

 

C) Gojek Drivers should be fully aware of the different instructions and guidelines. 

 

D) the main fact is that the particular driver did not read messages. 

 

What if I have a 2 year old child and message the info and then the driver didn't read the message and doesn't have a child seat? 

The start of the issue with the customers with the dogs boils down to the problem that the driver didn't read the message...

 

 

[singalion]

On 3/10/2022 at 7:00 PM, greg01greg said:

grab was the first to introduce pet service and im sure as a pet owner

You always ignore that Gojek caters for transporting pets also. 

Gojek does not disallow carrying pets per se but leaves it at the discretion of the driver. 

 

Only because Grab has a special pet service doesn't mean anyone necessarily has to take that service exclusively. 

 

If I booked a flight with SQ I wouldn't look at Air Asia's regulations or fees if I have excess luggage but only SQ terms & conditions.

 

 

Edited March 11, 2022 by singalion

[greg01greg]

I can't believe this is still going on.. 

this is pretty much simple for me... 

2 guys with pets without carriers looking for cheap alternative to hitch a ride.. thinking they can get away with it but the driver call them out for it.  

 

lesson to learn here.. dont be cheap, stop taking advantage..

rule books aside  - USE COMMON SENSE 

 

 

 

 

[greg01greg]

On 3/11/2022 at 3:38 AM, singalion said:

You always ignore that Gojek caters for transporting pets also. 

Gojek does not disallow carrying pets per se but leaves it at the discretion of the driver. 

 

Only because Grab has a special pet service doesn't mean anyone necessarily has to take that service exclusively. 

 

If I booked a flight with SQ I wouldn't look at Air Asia's regulations or fees if I have excess luggage but only SQ terms & conditions.

 

 

again - rule book aside... just use common sense. theres a good reason why we are given good old fashion common sense 

[Kimochi]

On 3/11/2022 at 11:52 AM, greg01greg said:

again - rule book aside... just use common sense. theres a good reason why we are given good old fashion common sense 

Yeah yeah brush aside. Sounds like your forte. Akin sweeping things under carpet. Giving excuses when lost the logic. Using common sense and pushing blame to others then slowly disappearing from the crime scene. Rule book aside, set your own rules as if you own the whole company right? 

Edited March 11, 2022 by Kimochi

[Guest Guest SingleLion]

On 3/11/2022 at 3:25 AM, singalion said:

 

A) At no point Gojek says that pets must be in a carrier. 

 

B) If Gojek doesn't want to carry pets then they should write clearly "We do not permit any pets!" instead of giving an instruction what to do if you have pets. 

 

The fact that Grab has a special pet service doesn't change anything that Gojek covers pet transportation in their Help section. 

 

C) Gojek Drivers should be fully aware of the different instructions and guidelines. 

 

D) the main fact is that the particular driver did not read messages. 

 

What if I have a 2 year old child and message the info and then the driver didn't read the message and doesn't have a child seat? 

The start of the issue with the customers with the dogs boils down to the problem that the driver didn't read the message...

 

 

Issue is not if driver read the message, rather when driver accepted the ride request was the message there and was the driver expected reasonably to read before accepting.

 

If the message was sent after driver accepted the request, you cannot fault him for not reading.

 

Rawrrrrr

[greg01greg]

On 3/11/2022 at 12:10 PM, Kimochi said:

Yeah yeah brush aside. Sounds like your forte. Akin sweeping things under carpet. Giving excuses when lost the logic. Using common sense and pushing blame to others then slowly disappearing from the crime scene. Rule book aside, set your own rules as if you own the whole company right? 

lol mate - you're such a drama queen.. with you I have nothing else to add... we all get it.. you blame the driver.. fine..