Taxi Driver Online

Posted by the local association for East Fife

Slightly easier to read version of the notice below the image below.

Note that a booking office licence in Scotland is roughly equivalent to an operator's licence down south. But here you need that licence for HCs on a circuit as well.






https://scontent.fgla2-2.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=69901600

The address for the office is in a zone in the far reaches of Fife from the East zone perspective. In fact nearer to Edinburgh than St Andrews

But, to be honest, I haven't the slightest clue about how the whole zoning thing relates to booking offices and the like. Nor how it relates to PHVs, precisely. Or whether, for example, Uber could cover the whole of Fife from an office in one zone.

All I really know about is the plying for hire thing as regards HCs

(The zoning just seems to relate to vehicles - I think the badges can be used anywhere in Fife...)

Anyway, I think there are a fair few PHVs working in some of the other zones, but not a huge number up here in the East zone, where we're mainly HCs.

So whether Uber would maybe use HCs in Fife, I don't know. But, of course, that would constrain the surge-pricing thing. Or whatever it's called these days

Uber will be very much looking forward to working in a university town.

And if London black cabs can work on Uber, can’t see why Fife taxis can’t.

And given you only pay Uber for what they give you, one wonders what Fife taxis have got to lose.

Of course for the booking offices that’s a completely different ball game, they will be f***ed.

_________________
IDFIMH

Not just students, but also a big tourist market in St Andrews, Sussex (and not just golf tourism). So a relatively small potential market for Uber, but the demographic certainly bang on in terms of their target 'riders'

(Although maybe their plan is just to target that part of Fife close to the Forth Bridge (where the booking office in the application is located) which would tie in with their existing significant market share in Edinburgh itself.)

As for the HC angle, not sure that the London thing is a direct comparison, because I think they offer black cabs as a separate product there, whereas in Fife the HCs and PHVs are basically the same thing, and the PHVs normally have meters fitted, I think, and just run alongside HCs on the same circuits and on the same tariffs.

(On the other hand, to that extent maybe the *combined* Fife trade is more, er, Uber-able because there's no real binary here like the black cab trades in Manchester, Birmingham and Edinburgh etc on the one hand, and the totally separate PH trade on the other hand.)

...as for EFTA's and the circuits' case, in their day job recall that they were complaining thus as regards the fare negotiations.



And there's these two posts in the last week alone

https://www.facebook.com/standrewstaxis ... Kzgio3q3bl

https://www.facebook.com/standrewstaxis ... a9ZuQZ9nNl

Somehow I don't think the presence of Uber would help them along much

As for the objection to be lodged by EFTA, it will certainly be interesting to read - these folks are quite clued up, and can certainly string a few words together (even without ChatGPT ).

But I suspect the argument will be more emotional and political as opposed to the hard legals required for any substantive objection to succeed. As, for example, the Southend application made clear, there's no point objecting because Uber is bad for competition and/or that it's financed by Wall Street $billions - licensing committees are bound by law, as opposed to appeals to emotion

And, most obviously, they've been operating in Glasgow and Edinburgh for about a decade now, and have also been granted licenses in Scotland's two other big cities - Aberdeen and Dundee

more fife plates workimg dundee then just when we had the best sat this year,the police were checking taxis on the nethergate rank 12 cabs were taken off the road plus when the word spread lots of taxis decided to take the night off

As always happens

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Thanks for that - sounds like a lot taken off, but of course it would need to be compared with the total checked.

And if they're anything like Fife then they're off the road if the roof sign isn't illuminating, or whatever, therefore...

Can't see any official press release or similar, though...

But saw this on the Dundee City Taxi Drivers' Association Facebook page at the weekend (which I'd guess is the organisation representing mainly some of the, er, newer drivers). I'd guess this is some sort of AI mockup (certainly doesn't look like the Nethergate rank ).

And the association obviously supportive of the checks. I remember thinking likewise myself. But that was a long time ago now

https://scontent.fgla2-2.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=699120C0

Well this is the preamble and letter template that we're being asked to sign.

So it's all impressive enough on one level. But I suspect the basic TfL/fit and proper stuff would be swatted aside by Uber fairly easily, since that was a few years ago now, and obviously they've been granted dozens of licences in England since, and at least four in Scotland, including Edinburgh and Glasgow for around a decade now, and Aberdeen and Dundee granted relatively recently.

The other arguments are also impressive enough, at least at a reasonably superficial level.

But it's all the usual fairly wooly stuff about automation and remoteness and 'corporate entities outside Fife' (as if the company's domicile or whatever was relevant), which hasn't really demonstrated much in the way in sucess as regards recent Uber applications elsewhere.

And looks like there could be maybe a couple of hundred of these identical objection letters submitted to Fife Council. Which is certainly one angle that the council won't (or at least shouldn't) consider in terms of the application - it's not a popularity contest. In licensing law, Uber is either fit and proper etc, or it isn't.

A couple of local press articles today, but this is the Courier's one, which has a bit more detail than Fife Today's version

And, yes, the same heading is repeated twice in the ariticle...


Uber applies for Fife booking office as local taxi drivers hit out

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/54 ... ence-fife/

The East Fife Taxi Association has objected to the ridesharing giant's plans.

Uber has applied for a licence to operate a booking office in Fife.

Uber Scot Limited applied for a 24/7 licence in Unit 18 at Rosyth Business Centre on January 23.

The taxi firm has said it will provide opportunities to local drivers and that it will follow the same regulations as private hire companies if it is granted a licence in Fife.

However, the East Fife Taxi Association (EFTA) has raised “serious concerns” about Uber’s plans.

The Pittenweem-based group has submitted a formal objection to Uber’s proposals.

This claims Uber fails to meet the “fit and proper person test required under licensing law”.

It has also criticised Fife Council for “extremely poor communication” with local drivers.

Fife taxi group has ‘significant concerns’ about Uber

In its formal objection, EFTA claimed the firm has a history of not complying with regulations, undergoing enforcement action by licensing authorities, “operational failings”, driver verification issues, and account misuse.

Spokesperson Linda Holt said: “Our members operate to the high standards set and enforced by Fife Council and are part of the communities they serve.

“We have significant concerns about the impact this application could have on local drivers’ livelihoods, passenger safety, regulatory fairness and the long-term sustainability of the trade.

“We will be submitting a formal objection and asking Fife Council to fully and transparently examine the wider implications before any licence is granted.”

Uber see ‘strong demand’ in Fife

Ms Holt added: “Fife Council recently held a meeting with taxi operators across Fife to improve communication and engagement with the trade.

“Many operators are surprised and disappointed that members of the licensing department and the committee did not mention the Uber application, despite it having been lodged on January 23.

“Publicity appears to have been limited to a single pinned notice at the premises requiring objections to be submitted by post.”

Users are still unable to request Uber rides in Dundee.

EFTA also raised concerns about the named manager of the booking office being based in York.

It has claimed that this could mean the site is operated as a “remote dispatch hub” and that there would be “public safety issues”.

Uber has been operating in Edinburgh and Glasgow since 2015, and launched in Aberdeen in October 2024.

In June 2024, it gained a licence to operate in Dundee, but it is understood the firm is still not operating in the city.

According to the Uber website, it also currently offers taxi services to Dunfermline.

Uber ‘sees strong demand in Fife’

An Uber spokesperson said: “We see strong demand for Uber in Fife and hope to offer people a safe, affordable and easy option to get where they need to go.

“If our application is granted, our services will offer new earning opportunities for local drivers.

“On Uber, all drivers have access to industry-leading worker rights such as holiday pay and a pension, as well as formal representation through GMB Union.

“We look forward to having constructive conversations with local stakeholders ”

Uber application to be considered by Fife Council ‘in due course’

Steven Paterson, legal team manager at Fife Council, said: “Uber have formally applied for a booking office licence.

“The application will be considered by the council’s Regulation & Licensing Committee in due course.”

I haven't a clue who else is part of EFTA and are 'members'. But, considering that Ms Holt has spent her first few years in the trade complaining via the press that a lot of drivers in the area don't operate to high standards, and aren't part of the communities they serve, then the word 'members' there is doing a lot of heavy lifting


Yet another reason I generally don't go to stuff like that unless I'm required to do so in pain of suspension...

But, apart from everything else, I'm not turning up to be gaslit and demonised by people about the small print in a document (for example) that no-one at the council seem to have read properly themselves

Anyway, usual boilerplate from everyone else quoted above.

Could say a lot more, for example, but again Ms Holt and others others have spent the last few years complaining about lots of micro-firms in the trade working remotely from Dundee and using fake addresses in St Andrews etc

So as usual the evidence and arguments being presented here seem a tad selective.

And more than a hint of the pot calling the kettle black as well

But other than waffling into the void on here, think I'll sit this one out. As usual

A lot of huffing and puffing that will come to nothing.

That boat sailed many years ago.

_________________
IDFIMH

This is the EFTA press release here and *full* objection, for what it's worth. This would have been preferable to the press stuff posted yesterday, but obviously doesn't include the quotes from Uber and the council. For what they're worth

But a wee bit more detail in both...


Press Release: East Fife Taxi Association to Object to Uber Licence Application in Fife – Criticises Council’s Poor Communication

https://eastfife.scot/2026/02/press-rel ... VNjvhFIbTg

The East Fife Taxi Association (EFTA) has confirmed it will formally object to Uber Scot Limited’s application for a Booking Office Licence in Fife, while criticising Fife Council for what it describes as “extremely poor communication” with the local taxi trade.

A public notice issued by Fife Council under the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 states that Uber Scot Limited applied on 23 January 2026 for a Booking Office Licence in respect of premises at Rosyth Business Centre, Unit 18, 16 Cromarty Campus, KY11 2WX, with proposed operating hours of 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

EFTA says the application raises serious concerns for locally licensed taxi and private hire drivers operating across East Fife and the wider Fife area.

EFTA spokesperson Linda Holt said:

“Our members operate to the high standards set and enforced by Fife Council and are part of the communities they serve.

"We have significant concerns about the impact this application could have on local drivers’ livelihoods, passenger safety, regulatory fairness and the long-term sustainability of the trade.

"We will be submitting a formal objection and asking Fife Council to fully and transparently examine the wider implications before any licence is granted.”

EFTA’s formal objection (forwarded in a separate email including annexes), submitted on strictly legal grounds, argues that Uber does not meet the “fit and proper person” test required under licensing law. The Association also highlights concerns that:

• The named day-to-day manager resides in York,

• Corporate control and operational systems are centralised outside Fife,

• The Rosyth premises appear to be a nominal administrative address rather than a genuine operational base,

• These factors raise enforceability and public safety concerns,

• The application does not comply with Fife Council’s Booking Office conditions

While EFTA supports fair and lawful competition, the Association maintains that any operator entering the Fife market must be subject to meaningful local accountability, effective oversight, and a genuinely level playing field.

The Association has also expressed disappointment at what it describes as a failure by Fife Council to properly communicate the application to the licensed trade.

Linda Holt added:

“Fife Council recently held a meeting with taxi operators across Fife to improve communication and engagement with the trade. Many operators are surprised and disappointed that members of the Licensing Department and Committee did not mention the Uber application, despite it having been lodged on 23 January.

"Publicity appears to have been limited to a single pinned notice at the premises requiring objections to be submitted by post.

"We have since confirmed with Fife Council that objections can in fact be submitted by email to Misc.Licensing@fife.gov.uk. That information should have been made clear from the outset.”

EFTA is encouraging members of the public and the licensed trade to engage with the statutory consultation process and submit representations before the deadline of 19 February 2026.

A petition enabling members of the public to object to the Uber application is available at: http://www.eastfife.scot

The Association remains committed to protecting high standards, supporting local drivers, and ensuring that transport services across East Fife remain safe, accountable, and community-focused.

For media enquiries, please contact:

East Fife Taxi Association (EFTA)
Linda Holt
admin@eastfife.scot
07759 509 884



EFTA: Formal Objection to Uber Booking Office Application

https://eastfife.scot/2026/02/efta-form ... 0gD5Z2yn5g

Applicant: Uber Scot Limited
Premises: Rosyth Business Centre, Unit 18, 16 Cromarty Campus, KY11 2WX
Application Date: 23 January 2026

Objection by: James Glen on behalf of East Fife Taxi Association (EFTA)

1. Statutory Framework

This objection is made in terms of:

• Schedule 1, paragraph 3 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 (the “1982 Act”)
• Paragraph 5(3) of Schedule 1 (grounds for refusal)
• The Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 (Licensing of Booking Offices) Order 2009

By virtue of Article 3 and the Schedule to the 2009 Order, Part I of the 1982 Act applies to booking offices, including the refusal grounds in paragraph 5(3) of Schedule 1.

The Licensing Authority must refuse the application if satisfied that any of the statutory grounds are met.

2. Grounds of Objection

EFTA submits that this application should be refused under Schedule 1 paragraph 5(3) on the following grounds:

(a) Fit and Proper Person – Paragraph 5(3)(a)(ii)
The Licensing Authority must refuse an application if, in its opinion, the applicant is not a fit and proper person to be the holder of the licence.

Uber Scot Limited is part of a corporate structure with a documented history across the UK of:

• Regulatory non-compliance findings
• Enforcement action by licensing authorities
• Findings by courts regarding operational failings
• Issues concerning driver verification and account misuse

The question for this Committee is not whether Uber holds licences elsewhere, but whether this applicant satisfies the fit and proper test in this licensing area, under this Authority’s standards and enforcement regime.

Given the scale, remote management structure, and reliance on app-based dispatch without direct local supervisory infrastructure, there are legitimate concerns regarding effective oversight and accountability within Fife.

(b) Management for the Benefit of Another – Paragraph 5(3)(b)
The Committee must refuse where the activity would be managed by or carried on for the benefit of a person who would be refused the licence if they made the application themselves.

The application names a day-to-day manager residing in York. The corporate control and operational systems are centralised outside Fife.

There is a real question as to whether the booking office would in practice be operated locally, or whether it is effectively a remote dispatch hub controlled elsewhere, with nominal premises within Fife.

If operational control is exercised by persons or corporate entities not subject to direct scrutiny by this Authority, paragraph 5(3)(b) is engaged.

(c) Premises Not Suitable or Convenient – Paragraph 5(3)(c)
Under paragraph 5(3)(c), refusal is mandatory where premises are not suitable or convenient for the conduct of the activity, having regard to:

• The location, character or condition of the premises
• The nature and extent of the proposed activity
• The kind of persons likely to be involved
• Public order or public safety

The proposed premises are a unit within a business centre. The application proposes operation 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.

Key concerns:

1 Whether the premises are genuinely operational dispatch premises or merely an administrative address.
2 Whether any staff will be physically present.
3 Whether the premises are equipped for regulatory inspection and supervision.
4 Whether complaint handling, record keeping and booking traceability will be locally accessible.

If the booking operation is effectively digital and controlled outside Fife, the premises may not meet the statutory test of suitability and convenience.

(d) Public Safety and Public Order – Paragraph 5(3)(c)(iv) and (v)
The Authority is expressly entitled to consider public safety. A booking office is not a passive administrative function. It is the gateway to licensed vehicle deployment.

Concerns include:

• Adequacy of driver identity verification
• Control of account sharing
• Prevention of unlicensed vehicle dispatch
• Effective compliance with local licensing conditions

Given the scale and automated nature of the applicant’s dispatch model, the Committee must be satisfied that:

• Only Fife-licensed vehicles will be dispatched within Fife
• Drivers cannot circumvent local licensing controls
• There is effective real-time oversight

Absent clear evidence of enforceable local controls, the public safety limb of paragraph 5(3)(c) is engaged.

3. Immigration Compliance
The 1982 Act, as amended, and the 2009 Order (as further amended) embed immigration compliance requirements into booking office licensing

The Committee must be satisfied that:

• Proper right-to-work checks are embedded in the applicant’s processes
• Ongoing monitoring mechanisms exist
• Systems prevent unlawful working

Given the scale and remote onboarding model used by the applicant nationally, robust local scrutiny is essential.

4. Compliance with Fife Council Booking Office Conditions (BO5)
Without rehearsing the full text, Conditions 1–4 of the Fife Council Booking Office Conditions require, in summary:

• Proper maintenance of booking records
• Accurate retention of dispatch details
• Production of records on request
• Effective management and supervision

EFTA submits that the Committee must examine whether:

• Records will be stored locally or offshore
• The Council will have immediate access
• A named, accountable manager is physically present within Fife
• There is a meaningful local complaints process

If compliance depends entirely on remote systems outside the jurisdiction, enforcement becomes materially more difficult, undermining the licensing regime.

5. Conclusion
Under Schedule 1 paragraph 5(3) of the 1982 Act, the Licensing Authority shall refuse the application if any of the statutory grounds are made out.

EFTA submits that serious and legitimate concerns arise under:

• Paragraph 5(3)(a) – Fit and proper person
• Paragraph 5(3)(b) – Management for the benefit of others
• Paragraph 5(3)(c) – Unsuitable premises and public safety
• Paragraph 5(3)(d) – Other good reason

This is not a routine application. It is a large-scale, algorithmically controlled dispatch platform seeking entry into a tightly regulated local licensing regime.

The Committee must be satisfied — not hopeful — that:

• The booking office will be genuinely based and accountable within Fife
• Public safety safeguards are demonstrably robust
• Local enforcement will not be rendered impractical

Unless and until those matters are fully evidenced, EFTA respectfully requests that the application be refused.

EFTA also respectively seeks the opportunity to address the Regulation & Licensing Committee should the application proceed to determination.

Yours sincerely

James Glen (on behalf of East Fife Taxi Association)

Associated Documents:

• Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 (PDF)
• The Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 (Licensing of Booking Offices) Order 2009 (PDF)
• SCHEDULE 1 LICENSING—FURTHER PROVISIONS AS TO THE GENERAL SYSTEM (PDF)
• Booking Office Guidance Conds C of C 2024 (docx)
• ANNEX1 (docx)