Taxi Driver Online
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

UBER
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=33638		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  grandad [ Thu Dec 06, 2018 3:10 pm ]
Post subject:  UBER
Someone posted on our neighbourhood watch page that UBER were now operating in our town.There was indeed an UBER car available to book on their platform in the town. I checked with licensing and UBER do not have an operators license to operate in our town.
I took a drive to the layby where the car was and asked the driver why he thought it was ok to be parked in our town waiting for work to come on the UBER platform. He replied that he dropped off pupils at a school in the town and logged onto the UBER platform to do work here until the school return in the afternoon. I suggested that this may not be a legal practice.
Firstly the car is licensed in Charnwood and not Melton. Secondly UBER do not have a license to operate in either Melton or Charnwood and thirdly it was a hackney carriage and not a private hire vehicle.
What, if any, offenses were being committed?
Author:  rayggb [ Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
Uber is the new licensing authority,didn't you know?.LA's throughout the land are just laying over and accepting the tickle.
Author:  mancityfan [ Thu Dec 06, 2018 5:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
grandad wrote:
Someone posted on our neighbourhood watch page that UBER were now operating in our town.There was indeed an UBER car available to book on their platform in the town. I checked with licensing and UBER do not have an operators license to operate in our town.
I took a drive to the layby where the car was and asked the driver why he thought it was ok to be parked in our town waiting for work to come on the UBER platform. He replied that he dropped off pupils at a school in the town and logged onto the UBER platform to do work here until the school return in the afternoon. I suggested that this may not be a legal practice.
Firstly the car is licensed in Charnwood and not Melton. Secondly UBER do not have a license to operate in either Melton or Charnwood and thirdly it was a hackney carriage and not a private hire vehicle.
What, if any, offenses were being committed?


Apart from the argument in the York case.
When plying for hire in any street and not actually hired, the driver of a Hackney Carriage must proceed to the nearest available taxi rank.
That’s of course in his own area not yours.
Author:  mancityfan [ Thu Dec 06, 2018 5:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
Here’s the link
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=33561
Author:  wannabeeahack [ Thu Dec 06, 2018 7:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
grandad wrote:
thirdly it was a hackney carriage and not a private hire vehicle.
What, if any, offenses were being committed?



Uber wont allow hackneys as they set a rate and the hack would have a meter set by his licensing

so hes telling porkies
Author:  grandad [ Thu Dec 06, 2018 8:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
wannabeeahack wrote:
grandad wrote:
thirdly it was a hackney carriage and not a private hire vehicle.
What, if any, offenses were being committed?



Uber wont allow hackneys as they set a rate and the hack would have a meter set by his licensing

so hes telling porkies

He may well have access to a private hire vehicle licensed in say Lericester where UBER have a license. He may well have a drivers badge issued by Leicester. However today he was driving a hackney vehicle plated by Charnwood.
Also as it was a Hackney but outside it's licensing district it would not need to use the meter.
Author:  StuartW [ Thu Dec 06, 2018 9:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
grandad wrote:
wannabeeahack wrote:
grandad wrote:
thirdly it was a hackney carriage and not a private hire vehicle.
What, if any, offenses were being committed?



Uber wont allow hackneys as they set a rate and the hack would have a meter set by his licensing

so hes telling porkies

He may well have access to a private hire vehicle licensed in say Lericester where UBER have a license. He may well have a drivers badge issued by Leicester. However today he was driving a hackney vehicle plated by Charnwood.
Also as it was a Hackney but outside it's licensing district it would not need to use the meter.


Can't see anything illegal about it unless he's plying for hire.

Because it's an HC he can do pre-booked work anywhere without the source of the work being licenced as an operator, although in many such cases the source will be a licensed PH operator.

But if Uber now willing to take on HCs that's one way round any op's licence issues, and if they're working out-of-area then no need to use meter.

So unless Charnwood has restricted the use of the HCs they licence then can't see any legal issue.

Uber have historically not taken on HCs, but if they now do then that's up to them, and not really an issue of licensing enforcement. If the driver isn't using Uber in accordance with their policies then again that's an internal issue rather than one for licensing.

I think 8-[
Author:  Sussex [ Thu Dec 06, 2018 10:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
Quote:
What, if any, offenses were being committed?

Aside from the possible but untested point on mobile plying, no offences have been committed.
Author:  Sussex [ Thu Dec 06, 2018 10:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
Quote:
Uber have historically not taken on HCs,

They have several dozen Lewes hackneys working B&H.
Author:  StuartW [ Tue Dec 11, 2018 12:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
Sussex wrote:
Quote:
Uber have historically not taken on HCs,

They have several dozen Lewes hackneys working B&H.


Which is why I used the word 'historically' :wink:

But in general they've promoted PH licensing and not really mentioned HCs at all*.

Been a couple of years since I've looked on Uber's website, but back then they advised drivers to apply for PH licences in the areas they operated in.

I see they've got more information on the site these days, and either provide information about local licensing requirements, or link directly to LA websites.

Anyway, they've got a page called 'Popular Private Hire Jurisdictions in the UK', which seems to have a section for each of their eight geofenced areas (in England), and there are links to information about individual authorities within each area:

https://www.uber.com/en-GB/drive/resour ... sdictions/

There are about 40 different LAs in total, but while all mention the estimated cost and time to get badged and plated in each area, it's exclusively private hire (or PHDLs and PHVLs as they call them) and no mention at all of HCs.

Even the 'Greater Brighton' entry only includes Brighton and Hove, and no mention of Lewes or HCs.

So a bit strange that Uber obviously taking on HCs where it suits, but not punting that option on its website. Of course, they'll no doubt be aware of the Rossendale-type scenario, so interesting that they're not taking advantage of it more widely. Using HCs avoids any issue with operator licences and, as I said a wee while back, they could potentially run things nationally using one HC plating authority and thus to that extent avoiding ops licence problems entirely.

(Charnwood is specifically listed in the 'Midlands' section, but again all that's referred to is PH, and no mention of HCs, as seen by Grandad.)

* They were taking on HCs in London, for a while at least, but this was promoted as a separate service at TfL tariffs, but I don't think there were many takers.
Author:  StuartW [ Wed Dec 12, 2018 5:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
Quote:
Even the 'Greater Brighton' entry only includes Brighton and Hove, and no mention of Lewes or HCs.


I see from the Brighton judgement that there was previously a reference to Lewes licensing on Uber's 'Popular Jurisdictions in the UK' Brighton page, but this was taken down. This seems to have played a part in the judgement in favour of Uber, and seems to have stemmed from the council's concern regarding Uber's previous commitment to only use B&H licensed cars.

But if it's good enough for Brighton & Hove...

https://www.uber.com/en-GB/drive/resour ... -brighton/
Author:  heathcote [ Wed Dec 12, 2018 8:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
grandad wrote:
Someone posted on our neighbourhood watch page that UBER were now operating in our town.There was indeed an UBER car available to book on their platform in the town. I checked with licensing and UBER do not have an operators license to operate in our town.
I took a drive to the layby where the car was and asked the driver why he thought it was ok to be parked in our town waiting for work to come on the UBER platform. He replied that he dropped off pupils at a school in the town and logged onto the UBER platform to do work here until the school return in the afternoon. I suggested that this may not be a legal practice.
Firstly the car is licensed in Charnwood and not Melton. Secondly UBER do not have a license to operate in either Melton or Charnwood and thirdly it was a hackney carriage and not a private hire vehicle.
What, if any, offenses were being committed?



Wonder if he has informed his insurance company that he is doing the bulk of his work in Melton.
Insurance quotes for hackney carriages are based on there licensing district not on somebody elses licensing district.
Author:  grandad [ Thu Dec 13, 2018 11:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
He seems to have gone now.
Author:  wannabeeahack [ Fri Dec 14, 2018 10:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
an uber passing by seeing a job locally can pickup i suppose...........


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Author:  Sussex [ Tue Dec 18, 2018 8:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: UBER
grandad wrote:
He seems to have gone now.

Maybe it's because no one used him.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/