Taxi Driver Online

Joe Anderson drops biggest hint yet that he could move to BAN Uber from Liverpool

Joe Anderson has dropped his strongest hint yet that he could move to BAN Uber from operating in Liverpool. The Mayor of Liverpool has regularly voiced his concerns about the app-based taxi firm, arguing that its drivers are pouring into the city, taking work off local drivers and failing to contribute to Liverpool’s economy.

But now he has suggested that he could follow in the footsteps of fellow Labour Mayor Sadiq Khan and make moves to take away the firm’s licence in Liverpool.

Mayor Anderson said: “We are looking at doing even more spot checks and undercover operations to tackle rogue drivers and those who are coming to the city from elsewhere. “If we continue to see Uber drivers doing this then we will look legally at taking the Uber licence away, because they are not contributing. “We will continue to monitor it - but we are getting lots of complaints about drivers coming in from other parts of the country and having no knowledge of Liverpool.”

The city leader said that while he has used Uber and found it useful in other countries - he believes there are problems in the UK. In September Uber lost its licence to operate in London after Transport for London declared that the company was not “fit and proper” and accused it of a series of failures over passenger safety.

But the firm has appealed that decision and is still currently operating on the streets of the capital until a hearing is held at the end of April. Uber has also faced difficulties in other major UK cities, with a ban in Sheffield being recently overturned followed by a decision by York City Council not to renew the firm’s licence in the city.

Mayor Anderson has previously been critical of government deregulation laws which mean that private hire drivers - including many from Uber - can arrive in the city from elsewhere and pick up trade, without contributing to the economy. He said this is a particular problem on days when Liverpool or Everton are playing at home. He said: “At the moment their drivers are coming here when football matches are on and picking up fares and then heading back out of the city.”

Uber currently has four years left of its licence with Liverpool, having signed a five-year-deal in 2016.

After the shock Transport for London decision in September, Uber defended its practices stating that its drivers go through the same “enhanced DBS background checks as black cab drivers” and arguing that its “pioneering technology has gone further to enhance safety with every trip tracked and recorded by GPS.”

_________________
IDFIMH

Does not matter what U*** claim they are operating illegally,driver accepts job before the operator end of story,Councils who license U*** and their Officers should be ashamed of themselves for being complicit in encouraging an illegal operation and turning their backs on the people they are supposed to be protecting under the licensing regime(GENERAL PUBLIC)

These people who claim they are allowed to operate under appeal must not know their ar** from their elbow,you cannot appeal against something that is illegal,and they should close down U*** immediately.

So the mayor hasn't actually specified any legal grounds under which Uber would be banned in Liverpool, instead simply saying that it's threatening the local trade and little more than that he doesn't like the company.

Thus basically his case is political rather than legal, therefore a hostage to fortune for Uber's lawyers if any ban was forthcoming.

Who advises these people?

Unite.

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

But it is for the court to decide if it is illegal. So they have the right to appeal. Although there is yhe clause, I can't remember the number, that allows immediate suspension in the interest of public safety.

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

I'm not 100% convinced of that, I wish I was.

I don't have an operator's license, but say someone asks me if I'm availbele to take them to the airport on Sunday and I check my diary and I can, I then say either they contact the operator I work with, or I do it myself on their behalf. Whichever option is taken a licensed operator takes that booking and dispatches it to me.

What is the difference (other than the time it takes to book and dispatch) to that scenario to the Uber way of doing things?

_________________
IDFIMH

The passenger has to make the booking with the operator,driver cannot do it on their behalf otherwise they can fall foul of plying for hire.

The passenger has to make the booking with the operator,driver cannot do it on their behalf otherwise they can fall foul of plying for hire.

But the passenger doesn't, IMO, make the booking with the driver, the driver just makes the operator aware he is available to take a booking, should the operator accept said booking.

As much as I wish this was Uber's Achilles heel, sadly it's not.

_________________
IDFIMH

Uber driver accepts booking before operator according to their own admission.

But so do many other PH drivers, me included.

People ask me if I'm available for a job at a certain time, if I am they then book me via a licensed operator.

The Uber way is also similar to what happens when someone wants a WAV.

Customer rings up asks if their is one available for a certain time, the operator then asks WAV drivers if any will be out at that time.

If yes the booking is taken, if no the customer is told they cannot take that booking. Same with 8 seaters or low saloon cars for old dears.

The above happens 1000s of times each day throughout the country.

_________________
IDFIMH

Lawbreaker.

I don’t think he’s a lawbreaker because his example is not the same as Uber’s.

Whilst your example is clearly common sense Mr Sussex, and probably happens many times a day as you say, I feel it is illegal in the eyes of the law. A private hire driver can only accept bookings from an operator licensed in the same district as themselves. As a PH driver you should not be allowed to accept a booking direct from a customer, no matter what actions you take to makeit look lawful.

I seem to remember court cases about a driver ringing his office and handing the phone to the customer to request a booking.

For many years I have felt that there needs to be another 'operator licence' for a single operator, this would help the 'self-employed' debate for sure.

_________________
A member of the Hire or Reward Industry

There is only one private hire operator license in law,applies to whether you operate one vehicle or numerous vehicles,Council attach conditions to license as applicable.