Uber licence in London refused

I won't use Uber in Manchester. They flout the licensing system, their drivers are not properly regulated. They register their cabs in boroughs with cheap and lax licensing regimes, then come into Manchester and prowl the streets waiting for trade. Our local cabs with their expensive license with higher standards are losing trade. In addition, the behaviour of some Uber drivers, particularly regarding women travellers, is tarnishing the whole licensed cab trade.

Those petitioning and whining about the decision could try supporting their local minicab firms who Uber have been undermining.

I wish we had the power to stop Uber, but most of their cabs are not even licensed in Manchester, so there is nothing we can do. London is lucky to have the capacity to do it. Wait until Kent, Surrey etc licensed Uber cabs start appearing in London - nothing to stop them at the moment, legally. Don't understand the howls of protest - Uber do not deserve to be licensed when help up against the standard demanded of other mini cab companies, so they are treated like any other would be. Is the upset because they are a big corporate with a shiny mobile app? Is it because people are lazy and selfish and want their app? Or is it stupidity and the blind following of second-rate reporting in assorted media outlets?

It's because it is cheap and easy grumpyoldbat. I instinctively dislike them. I don't like the way they park outside my house with their engine running because it is a permit area. But I understand why they are popular it's the technology. Not to have to fiddle around in purse and watch the clock and figure the tip is merciful...tfl should up its game and offer a similar platform. And elsewhere... catch up with Salt Lake City and stop making thousands of IT workers in this country unemployed by outsourcing to cheaper India. Start using their talents and then they won't end up being drivers for Uber.

My understanding is that TfL do all the checks required of a driver before they are given a licence to drive a taxi, then they are taken on by companies like Uber.

Personally, I am devestated that Uber is not having their licence renewed as I rely on Uber to get me home after babysitting for my daughter, when it is always late.

I feel safe in an Uber cab as I know exactly where they are, when they will arrive, even the name and photo of the driver so I don't get in the wrong car and no money changes hands because it's paid on-line. What's not to like.

Regarding the sexual assault allegation, Uber held it's hands up to that and said they got their response wrong.

Don't stop Uber - help them to improve.

The black cab drivers will be ecstatic.

Surely all Uber have to do is produce documentation to show they have complied with the rules and regulations. If they are unable to do so then doesn't that vindicate TFL?

I am sure many people will be inconvenienced and will complain about it but I would rather know that the cab and driver I was using was properly registered and had complied with all the regulations which are there to protect me.

I am pleased Uber are having their licence withdrawn. Whilst I know that balck cabs are very expensive, what price safety?

I can't help wondering if many of their drivers even have the right to be in the UK and the whole operation IMHO means that the company pays no employers' NI and drivers can evade paying tax and NI.
They are under the radar for HMRC but no doubt benefit from free NHS services when they need them.
We have become a magnet for unscupulous working practices and taxpayers are subsidising Uber.
I wonder how much corporation tax they pay?

www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uber-london-ban-taxi-drivers-lose-job-risk-40000-gig-economy-ride-hailing-tfl-no-licence-a7961556.html

our ex mayor had to resign as he was giving references for taxi drivers - some had been in prison for rape etc - and still council have not made it compulsory for DBS checks - daughter wont get in a taxi by herself -
They should all have to be thoroughly checked

The latest figures I could find on Uber and tax.

Simon Bowers
Monday 10 October 2016 20.05 BST Last modified on Tuesday 21 February 2017 17.13 GMT

Uber’s main British business paid only £411,000 in tax last year while the commission fees from thousands of drivers in the UK disappeared into a controversial tax structure in the Netherlands.

The latest accounts for Uber London Ltd show the UK company’s turnover doubled to £23.3m last year, but all of this income was earned by providing unspecified “support” to other companies within the taxi-app group, and not from driver commissions.

After deducting expenses, this small subsidiary, which employs 105 staff, made a profit of £1.8m and paid tax of £411,000.

Meanwhile, accounts for the company’s international sales hub in the Netherlands reveal that commissions from drivers in London and scores of other cities around the world were booming in 2015, pushing revenues up to $520m (£420m).

This was more than seven times the figure for 2014. Passengers pay their fares directly to drivers, who automatically hand over a commission fee to Uber that ultimately appears in the group’s Dutch accounts.

Uber International BV is one of a handful of companies in the Netherlands that together form the core of the group’s complex tax planning arrangements, helping minimise its tax bills around the world.

Details about Uber’s aggressive tax planning come as the group separately fights claims that it is aggressively exploiting UK employment laws. The US corporation is being sued by a group of UK drivers who say they should be classified as employees of Uber, which would allow them to receive a range of benefits. A court judgment in the case is expected to be release this month.

Alex Cobham, research director at campaign group Tax Justice Network, said: “Uber’s UK accounts confirm the extent to which major multinationals are impervious to policymakers’ rhetoric, and willing to take full advantage of both the weaknesses of international tax rules and of the absence of transparency.”

Wonderful news, and that's all I have to say on the matter.

holly100 my thoughts exactly.

I'm genuinely concerned for the thousands of drivers who may lose their jobs, but outside of the largest U.K. cities, and especially London, does this hold any implications for those of us in the rest of the country? I have no idea how Uber works or even heard of them until comparatively recently. I mean this in no snide way at all - I just feel personally completely outside the furore.

The drivers are individually licensed so some may be able to get work elsewhere with mini cab companies. But this will only become necessary if Uber don't comply with TfL regulations and/or lose the appeal. Since Uber came on the scene, lots of local mini cab companies have gone under and that has resulted in many job losses but they aren't collated because each firm closing or contracting is an individual event. It's always the workers who pay the price of corporate failures - BHS another fairly recent example.

I'd prefer people to have a choice. No one is forced to work at Uber or use their services. 3.5 million Londoners chose to use them and 40,000 chose to work as drivers.

If people perceive their service to be better, which many do, and the city wants the service (over half a million signatures now on the petition) then I think Transport for London and the mayor should work with Uber to resolve the issues.

I expect my mayor to be able to build relationships with the businesses needed to run the city efficiently and deliver the outcomes the residents want.

If the residents want London to be turned into a tax haven, do you expect the mayor to deliver that outcome, too?

The mayor has to work within the law.
I expect the mayor of any city to be able to uphold the law.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/23/over-uber-london-driver-fares-rivals-work

I rather thought they had been working with them but that Uber won't play ball - well we'll see won't we in the coming days. Incidentally app based company starts petition and contacts all its customers and gets lots of signatures - hardly surprising is it?

Maybe if the black cabs in London didn't charge so much & have become complacent there might not have needed to have Ubet in the first place

Have you read the Guardian link, shazmo?
It's by a Uber driver who is pleased they have had their licence revoked.

"Half a million halfwits supporting a petition to reinstate a company who disregards regulation and doesn't pay tax, exploits its own workers and has a CEO who had to leave his post due to gross misconduct. You couldn't make it up. Literally couldn't. "

One of the comments.

The rates Uber charges are artificially low - it's impossible for a company to pay its proper tax, pay its workers properly and keep up with regulations with those sorts of rates

If there are problems with this company, why only London that is revoking licenses, surely it would be a countrywide thing?
I expect Uber will put their house in order as it is big business they won't want to lose out on.

This is what they do.

"Uber’s strategy was always to dominate the London market by undercutting competitors, such as black cabs, Addison Lee and smaller local operators. Its overheads were low, as it was not paying VAT in the UK, and did not have a call centre. Backers including Goldman Sachs, BlackRock and other multibillion-dollar companies were happy for it to lose money in the short term, knowing that once it had crushed the competition it would be able to jack up its prices. After all, where else could customers turn?"

www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/did-uber-deserved-banned-london-license-transport-for-london-scandals-a7961756.html

More details about Uber's work practices. They were told last year that those who work for them are employees, and are appealing the case. Obviously their backers have expensive lawyers to go to appeal.
If they lose, they will have to pay sick pay and pensions contributions, etc., to their employees.

If they lose, Uber can probably afford to pay it.

Every other minicab and private hire company in the UK may be in trouble though, as most cab services have self-employed drivers, and that ruling will apply to them too.

Well there are world wide cities and countries that have banned/ had problems with them. As for the other U.K. Cities - no idea but didn't a PP mention problems in Manchester?