Taxi Driver Online

The Uber London Model is not Lawful

TfL has finally released the full reasons for its refusal to renew Uber’s London licence. In a letter to Uber dated 22 September, which the regulator had not made public until yesterday (19 December), TfL sets out in detail how Uber had misled it, and also misled the High Court, as to the order in which bookings are accepted through the Uber APP. TfL say that Uber’s answers to questions were “materially false and misleading”.

In the same letter, TfL said that it was “currently minded to think” that the Uber model does not comply with the 1998 Act and is unlawful. TfL did not explain why ‘unlawfulness’ was not an express reason for refusal of Uber’s licence, other than to say that Uber’s misleading answers on the issue were “sufficient to undermine [its] fitness to hold a London PHV operator’s licence“.

In September 2017 TfL announced that it had not renewed Uber London’s licence: but the full reasons were not made public. When the LTDA asked to see those reasons TfL replied that the LTDA “was not entitled to them”.

The LTDA made an application to participate in Uber’s appeal to the magistrates’ court: its application was strenuously opposed by Uber. At a hearing on 19 December the Senior District Judge allowed the LTDA’s application and gave it permission to participate in Uber’s appeal. The extent and manner of LTDA participation will be decided by the judge on 30 April.

TfL’s 22 September letter was released on the afternoon before the hearing of LTDA’s application to participate in the appeal, as a direct result of the LTDA’s written submissions to the Court.

The substantive appeal is listed on 25 June 2018, with a provisional time estimate of 5 days. LTDA’s involvement is likely to be dependent on whether or not TfL pursue the point that Uber’s model is unlawful.

_________________
IDFIMH

The above has massive ramifications for the way Uber issue work.

Might be the end of them using non local cars in the UK.

_________________
IDFIMH

It does not comply with the 1976 Act and that is why Councils with bottle do not issue them with a private hire operators license,all Uber drivers in a Licensing District where no operators license is issued are"PLYING FOR HIRE" and Councils must enforce the law,they would prosecute their own licensed PHV for this offence.

Incredibly damming.

Letter from TfL to Uber explaining why their London license application is being rejected.

_________________
IDFIMH

Do you think Cambridge will be regretting giving them a 5 year license this week?

_________________
Grandad,
To support my charity text MAYORWALK to 70085 to donate £5

As the Mayor appears to be a knob, no, but they should.

Lied to the court, lied to TfL, appear to issue every job outside of the 1998 and 1976 acts.

That's all without the other stuff, and without the concealment of the data breaches.

_________________
IDFIMH

Just wondering how today's ECJ ruling that Uber is a transport provider and not a means of putting customer in touch with service provided will affect all this?

No effect.

Uber has by default confirmed they are a transport operator by signing application forms for transport operator licenses in the UK.

_________________
IDFIMH

So perhaps uber should base themselves in Cambridge and set up a national call centre and as long as all the cars are licensed according to the 3 license rule is there any reason why they can't accept a job in Brighton and cover it with a Cambridge licensed car booked via a Cambridge app/call centre even though it would be routed through holland ?

_________________
Taxis Are Public Transport too

Join the campaign to get April fools jokes banned for 364 days a year !

Poober was directing bookings straight to the driver in the first place,they have even admitted it in court,why LA's continue to license them when they are blatantly illegal I don't know !.

Do not think anything is routed through Holland.

Holland are where all their servers are located or so I was led to believe

_________________
Taxis Are Public Transport too

Join the campaign to get April fools jokes banned for 364 days a year !

Any union reps going to write to Cambridge and point out the error of their ways

Maybe Cambridge are being advised by a certain licensing lawyer who takes the view, and shares that view with local authorities, that all is quite legal as long as the operator is contacted first. It doesn't matter according to him who accepts the job first.

For what it's worth I disagree with that view.

_________________
IDFIMH