TAXIS v PRIVATE HIRE
Black Cabs v Uber
LTDA objection
Taxis v Minicabs. The London Taxi Drivers’ Association (LTDA) has formally objected to the renewal by TfL of Uber’s London operator’s licence. TfL has given Uber a holding renewal of four months only (instead of the usual five years) while it investigates the London taxi drivers' complaints. One of the many live issues is whether Uber’s drivers are unlawfully plying for hire. If plying for hire is inherent in the Uber platform, that could be fatal to the Uber model.
See also: TfL revoke Taxify Licence
Prosecutions
Prosecutions, however, have been successfully brought against Uber drivers in magistrates’ courts for plying for hire without a hackney carriage (taxi) licence. And there is speculation that what has to date been a trickle of such prosecutions may soon become a steady flow. Whether Uber will (or have done already) themselves step in to provide lawyers for their drivers is a burning question. The answer may become clearer if and when operators begin to be prosecuted, as well as drivers.
Uber is under attack. In early June 2017 the London Assembly voted unanimously to ask Sadiq Khan not to renew Uber’s licence. And on June 11 Labour’s business spokeswoman, Rebecca Long-Bailey, told Sky Television: “Using Uber is not morally acceptable”.
In the appeal by Uber against Transport for London's refusal to renew Uber's London PHV operator's licence, TfL revealed that their provisional view is that the Uber model is unlawful: see Uber Model Unlawful
To paraphrase ‘Hamlet’ – When troubles come, they come not single spies, but in battalions.
For s summary of Uber's troubles ...
