Uber licence in London refused

But they're OK to operate everywhere else in the UK though! 39 other UK cities (I think, according to Uber anyway) have no issue with them. I would hope other large cities like Manchester and Brighton have suitably safe cab regulations.
That's why people are upset with TfL and Sadiq Khan.

I would not want to use a service that does not have proper safeguards for women on their own.

Nor me. Its always been a safety net for women on their own. Just get in a taxi and you'll be safe. I know that's not been the case always, but checks need to be in place.

Wow - this is going to cause a storm
You were quite right! Storm Uber seems to have swept through London today. Over 200,000 signatures now on the petition.

Just because they may or may not be operating fine in other cities, doesn't mean that all is well in London. BUPA have care homes all over the country - if the CQC went into one and said there were problems they had to put right would you say ' Everything's fine in the BUPA homes in Manchester and Brighton' ? And London is a totally fifferent market anyway in cabs.

I would hope that Uber are looked into in all the other cities
As well.

A different market with different regulations. The CQC judges care homes against the same yardstick so I think your analogy is confusing. A closer one would be exactly the same care home is judged OK by 39 local authority inspectors but one says it has to close down as it's unsafe. This one authority has been lobbied extensively by a competitor.
I'm sure this is all academic. People are already boycotting black cabs. However this is resolved, there's no way Sadiq Khan will be elected again in London. Over a quarter of a million signatures now.

My analogy is not confused - because the market is different in London it's entirely possible that regulations are not being followed as properly as they should be in London. If Uber had been doing what it should, TFL wouldn't have been able to do this. But either way, the courts will decide or Uber will put its house in order in the next 21 days. I think the latter is far the most likely, Uber were just hoping TFL would blink first and good for them that they haven't. As for lobbying, well Uber did plenty of that with Dave and George in the first place. Who is boycotting black cabs? If they are Uber users, they don't use them anyway and can continue to use Uber. I think it's a bit premature and blinkered to see this as the end of SK - more wishful thinking perhaps? There'll be far more important issues in the next Mayoral election when this will all be a distant dream.

Or nightmare

Perhaps Uber will provide evidence that they are indeed reporting sexual harassment claims and checking their drivers, then they can apply for their licence back.

I've found a bit more out about the issues around the obtaining of medical certificates- clearly there are issues if you want to drive and have epilepsy, T1 diabetes, have had black outs etc. To get a medical certificate to be a taxi driver, you have to get one of these completed by your own GP who will have your records. However, I have found at least two online sires/ forums aimed at would be Uber drivers that give advice on how to get a doctor who doesn't know you to sign one of these certificates. I've no idea of course about how widespread all this is but it's scarey I think that this information is so easily available if you search for it. Why on earth are there apparently no checks on who exactly has signed the form and whether that doctor has access to your medical records? This applies across the board and not just Uber drivers, it's just that I was searching under Uber. It makes you think about DBS checks as well, especially if you haven't lived here all that long.

I voted for Sadiq Khan maryeliza!
I also travel around London almost every day and have an idea of how removing a well-used form of transport will impact the millions of journeys made each day.
It's part of his job to build good working relationships with the large businesses operating in the city - simply saying TfL is the judge is not acceptable. He's sending out a message that he is without influence at best.

I'm well aware of the millions of journeys made every day by various cabs/ taxis etc and use black cabs regularly ( having tried AL) and I'm also absolutelty sure that Uber will pull their socks up - they don't want to lose the large market that is London and their 25% cut ( as it is now) from their drivers. That's why all this breast beating is so silly - it ain't going to happen and anyone with any sense knows that. The ball is in Uber's court and they'll deal with it to serve their own best interests which are only profit driven. It's not SK's job to send a message that some businesses are too important to bother themselves with regulation and speak out against the regulators. As I recall BJ himself had some pretty trenchant things to say about the growth of minivans etc

Or minicabs

So let me get this straight - Uber have had their licence refused because they are not putting passenger safety ahead of their own profits- and some people are complaining about this?

All the drivers go through the same checks as black cab drivers and minicab drivers, they are administered by TfL. They issue the licences to the drivers, not Uber.
I have no idea where this DBS check or medical check issue came from, but that's TfLs department.
Why do you think Uber is putting their profits before passenger safety? Do you really think 3.5 million Londoners would use Uber if it was not safe? (Admittedly we have bombs on the tube but you understand my point)

Well, yes, I think they would, most of them will be safe, as most of the drivers will be decent people, but many people are willing to take a chance after a night out.

Most bin drivers are safe but one in Glasgow wasn't - proper systems are based on identifying the rare problem

And I for one didn't realise that it was possible to fiddle a medical certificate and that the doctors credentials weren't checked properly

I would imagine that passengers use any type of cab on the assumption that it's safe, that checks have been done and that the drivers are medically fit.

Yes Miss and that's why a proper system of regulation, properly enforced is so crucial - as individuals we can't do these checks for ourselves and so have to have a regulatory process in place to reduce ( not eliminate) the risk of harm.

Their employees were paid and treated badly. They did not pay appropriate taxes. That is why they could undercut other companies. We taxpayers were supporting them by paying benefits to underpaid drivers. Is this the sort of company we want to encourage? And as to the drivers all being out of work ..well surely they can drive for other companies?

Interesting,Primrose then if TFL issue these licences to Uber drivers, what they have done doesn't make sense?

Because it isn't as simple as that lemon.

Care to explain?