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'
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.