Taxi Driver Online

To TfL

27th October 2016

Dear Sirs

Yesterday afternoon someone pointed out an Uber private hire Toyota Prius registration LL15HXE parked in the passenger pick up bay in Guildford Station. I approached the driver and asked him whether he knew that it was illegal for a private hire vehicle or driver to work in Guildford unless they were both licenced by Guildford Borough Council. He replied that he had arrived in Guildford by means of a pre booked job given to him by Uber, and that he now had a pre booked job from Guildford Station.

On looking at the Local Government Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1976 (subsequently referred to as the LGMPA) I noticed that:

46Vehicle, drivers’ and operators’ licences.
(1)Except as authorised by this Part of this Act—
(a)no person being the proprietor of any vehicle, not being a hackney carriage [F1or London cab] in respect of which a vehicle licence is in force, shall use or permit the same to be used in a controlled district as a private hire vehicle without having for such a vehicle a current licence under section 48 of this Act;
(b)no person shall in a controlled district act as driver of any private hire vehicle without having a current licence under section 51 of this Act;
(c)no person being the proprietor of a private hire vehicle licensed under this Part of this Act shall employ as the driver thereof for the purpose of any hiring any person who does not have a current licence under the said section 51;
(d)no person shall in a controlled district operate any vehicle as a private hire vehicle without having a current licence under section 55 of this Act;
(e)no person licensed under the said section 55 shall in a controlled district operate any vehicle as a private hire vehicle—
(i)if for the vehicle a current licence under the said section 48 is not in force; or
(ii)if the driver does not have a current licence under the said section 51.
(2)If any person knowingly contravenes the provisions of this section, he shall be guilty of an offence.
 
And that:

80Interpretation of Part II.
(1)In this Part of this Act, unless the subject or context otherwise requires—
• “operate” means in the course of business to make provision for the invitation or acceptance of bookings for a private hire vehicle;
(2)In this Part of this Act references to a licence, in connection with a controlled district, are references to a licence issued by the council whose area consists of or includes that district, and “licensed” shall be construed accordingly.

Further:

75Saving for certain vehicles etc.
(1)Nothing in this Part of this Act shall—
(a)apply to a vehicle used for bringing passengers or goods within a controlled district in pursuance of a contract for the hire of the vehicle made outside the district if the vehicle is not made available for hire within the district;

It appears that the driver and Uber were acting unlawfully in the second of the drivers transactions. The driver can arrive in Guildford with a pre booked job, but he cannot be available for hire in Guildford.

I understand that many Uber drivers are accepting pre booked jobs in Guildford and that the Uber app allows anyone to book an unlicenced private hire vehicle and driver for fares starting and ending in Guildford Borough. If those drivers did arrive in Guildford either as a result of a pre booked job, or without a pre booked job and make themselves available for hire, they and Uber appear to be operating illegally, and offences are committed on each occasion.

To rectify matters, could you instruct Uber to stop taking bookings after they have arrived in Guildford or in any controlled district for which they don’t have the requisite operators licence, and stop abetting Uber drivers making themselves available for hire unlawfully in controlled districts for which they do not have the relevant vehicle and driver licence.

As it appears that both Uber and its drivers have been profiting for unlawful hire activities at the expense of drivers in the affected areas, I request that Uber and their drivers profits are calculated for each controlled area where they have acted illegally, and arrangements made for the sum total to be distributed evenly amongst the licenced private hire and hackney carriage drivers in those areas.

I expect that as Uber appear to have breached the taxi licencing law wholesale and acted against the interests of many law abiding licencees, Uber should have its operators licences revoked. I am copying this letter to, the Minister for Transport, the Metropolitan Police, Surrey Police and British Transport Police in the and that those involved in operating or driving any private hire vehicles illegally be prosecuted.

I look forward to hearing what action is being taken on these matters by email.

Yours truly

So, if an operator from say Guildford takes a fare to Heathrow and has a pre-booked back working, is that illegal? I think not. Of course it is possible to accept a pre-booked job from anywhere in the country, the emphasis being pre-booked, even if it is booked when the driver is on the way to another job.

Otherwise none of us would be able to accept returns from airport runs!

The key bit is "making himself available for hire." By virtue of having a booking from the station he was not available for hire. He was already hired.

_________________
Grandad,

Must of been asleep.

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

Correct. You can't do return runs from the airport. You are supposed to return to base empty.

Wrong. The Act makes working out of your area illegal with two exceptions. One of which is s75 if you take someone into an area not your own, but with the proviso that you can't be available for another hire in that area.

If you say so.

_________________
Grandad,

TFL operate under the London Private Hire act, not the 1976 act.

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

If I take someone to the airport, and the office sends me another pickup co-incidentally from the same airport what is the problem? As a private hire driver I'm not making myself for hire. the booking is made through the office.

Only a taxi can make itself "available for hire", and NOT outside its own licencing area. Here is where you are getting mixed up. an out-of-area taxi cannot sit on the airport taxi rank and "make himself available" or "ply" for hire. If someone has pre-booked a return trip with him, what is the problem? It's then classed as a private hire. What's the problem? Have you caught up with the latest amendments to the taxi and private hire laws? there's been enough discussion on here about such matters.

FFS

_________________
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

Just checking, is that the s75 tht was repealed a few years ago?

_________________
Grandad,

10 to be precise.

_________________
IDFIMH

only parts of s75 were repealed.

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

The thing is most of us know what the Uber car was doing is legally fine and dandy.

It doesn't matter where a driver and vehicle is, it doesn't matter where a driver or vehicle is dropping, all that matters is that the booking originated from an office in the area where the driver and vehicle are licensed.

Not saying it's morally good, but morals count for nothing in our trade.

_________________
IDFIMH

Is that true for Uber though ? Don't the bookings go through the servers in Holland can we say for certain that when the passenger activated the app the information went to the "base" in the licensing area

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