Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Wed May 06, 2026 6:42 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 7:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
London minicab drivers step up fight against Uber



London’s minicabs have joined black cabbies in questioning the legality of Uber, the cab hailing app.

Taxi drivers, who will stage a protest on Wednesday, allege that Uber is breaking the law by using an app as a taxi meter to determine charges.

Now, the Licensed Private Hire Car Association claims Uber is violating the London regulatory regime to reduce its UK tax bill.

It says Uber is breaching regulations by booking fares through an unlicensed Dutch company, although it acknowledges that the British company, called Uber London, that dispatches the cars is licensed.

The US company denies that it has stepped outside the UK licensing regime by processing payments offshore. “Uber complies with all applicable tax laws, and pays taxes in all jurisdictions, such as corporate income tax, payroll tax, sales and use tax, and VAT.” In a statement, it said: “Uber London Limited is a licensed private hire vehicle operator and recently passed with flying colours the largest inspection of records ever conducted by Transport for London.”

Steve Wright, chair of the LPHCA, said: “Uber has been providing services to passengers through Uber BV – a Dutch entity out of the reach of the UK taxman. Uber BV has effectively been acting as an unlicensed operator.”

Mr Wright said his association believes Uber drivers are also in breach of the regulations “by accepting bookings from Uber BV in their vehicles. It’s not right that a company like Uber can step out of the licensing regime as it pleases whether it’s to avoid tax or for any other purpose – this is exactly the type of corporate greed that is unacceptable to those working hard and contributing to the UK economy.”

The latest claims are likely to focus attention on Uber’s companies and partnerships in Bermuda, Ireland and the Netherlands – a structure often associated with aggressive tax planning.

In a report published last month, the Law Commission recommended reform of the regulations on taxi licensing. It said the definition of an operator should be narrowed to relate solely to the act of dispatching a driver and vehicle to carry out the regulated activity, rather than the fact of merely “inviting or accepting” a booking.

Uber said: “In relation to the recent report from the Law Commission’s, this report provides a number of recommendations for reform of the law in this area that may be debated by parliament at some future point in time.”

source: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/35aa6b8a-eda2 ... z344dLoX2m

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 7:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Very good, the spivs cry about uber avoiding tax whilst they hire serfs and avoid minimum wage :lol:

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 9:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57364
Location: 1066 Country
captain cab wrote:
London minicab drivers step up fight against Uber

Not convinced many actual drivers will be siding with the spivs.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 12:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:22 pm
Posts: 14152
Location: Wirral
Quote:
Mr Wright said his association believes Uber drivers are also in breach of the regulations “by accepting bookings from Uber BV in their vehicles


So if a driver has an operators licence then surely it's much the same as excepting a booking from anybody else not in the country at the time they book their journey :? Much the same as Cabfind do in other countries when booking airport transfers.

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 8998
Location: London
But they don't, therein lays the problem . . .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 8998
Location: London
Spivs and minicab operators hiring cheap labour to one side . . . everyone else complies with the legislation, why should an American tax avoiding silicon valley operation get away with it?

Ubers met its match in many lesser places and has subsequently been banned. :-({|=

Yanks should stick to starting wars, they've excelled in that over the last few years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 8998
Location: London
Section 3 – London operator’s licences

(2) An application under this section shall state
the address of any premises in London which the
applicant proposes to use as an operating centre.

LPHCA: This in our view also makes it absolutely
clear that bookings cannot be accepted in
vehicles and must be taken at operating
centre premises.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 5:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
GBC wrote:
Section 3 – London operator’s licences

(2) An application under this section shall state
the address of any premises in London which the
applicant proposes to use as an operating centre.

LPHCA: This in our view also makes it absolutely
clear that bookings cannot be accepted in
vehicles and must be taken at operating
centre premises.

They will probably argue that the legislation only requires them to state the address of any premises in London which the
applicant proposes to use as an operating centre. Because they don't have one in London, they don't need to state it. :wink:

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 7:24 pm
Posts: 6755
3000 drivers have signed to Uber so far..........................to avoid the parasites and scum known as proprietors in london


see previous thread about demo :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin:

_________________
All posts by this contributor are made in a strictly personal capacity

I AM PROUD TO BE A CITIZEN NOBODY'S SUBJECT http://www.republic.org.u

F88K EM ALL WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND

BOOZE BOOZE BOOZE


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 7:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57364
Location: 1066 Country
GBC wrote:
Section 3 – London operator’s licences

(2) An application under this section shall state
the address of any premises in London which the
applicant proposes to use as an operating centre.

LPHCA: This in our view also makes it absolutely
clear that bookings cannot be accepted in
vehicles and must be taken at operating
centre premises.

I'm certain Uber will argue, and in my view will win out, that the bookings are taken at their London registered base, and then automatically dispatched to the driver/vehicle.

This happen millions of times each week throughout the UK via the auto booking/dispatch functions of all the major booking systems.

Including the ones the spivs have.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 720 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group