# Press Release: Licensing decision on Uber London Limited 22 September 2017 Transport for London (TfL



## lespaul (May 19, 2017)

Interesting reading.

TechCrunch: Uber loses its license to operate in London. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIwp92JjDY


----------



## Hugh G (Sep 22, 2016)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-...te-in-london-after-transport-decision/8977008

London has stripped Uber of its licence to operate from the end of this month in a huge blow to the ride-booking app that will affect more than 40,000 drivers in one of the world's biggest cities.

Transport for London (TfL) said the ride-sharing app was not "fit and proper to hold a private hire operator license".

"TfL considers that Uber's approach and conduct demonstrate a lack of corporate responsibility in relation to a number of issues which have potential public safety and security implications," TfL said in a statement.

Uber, which is used by 3.5 million passengers in London, will see its current license expire on September 30.

It has 21 days to lodge an appeal and can continue to operate until the appeals process is exhausted.

In its decision, TfL cited the company's approach to handling serious criminal offences and how it conducts background checks on its drivers.

TfL also took issue with software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and "preventing officials from undertaking regulator or law enforcement duties".

*London is closed to innovative companies: Uber*
London Mayor Sadiq Khan said he supported the decision, saying any operator of taxi services in the city "needs to play by the rules".

"Providing an innovative service must not be at the expense of customer safety and security," he said.

"I fully support TfL's decision - it would be wrong if TfL continued to license Uber if there is any way that this could pose a threat to Londoners' safety and security."

Uber shot back quickly in response.

In a statement, it said the decision would "show the world that, far from being open, London is closed to innovative companies".

The decision does not effect Uber's associated food delivery service, UberEATS, a spokesperson confirmed, but shares in rival company Just Eat shot up on the back of the regulator's decision

From the Guardian... the Pommy paper

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/sep/22/uber-licence-transport-for-london-tfl

*Uber stripped of London licence due to lack of corporate responsibility*
US ride-hailing company to appeal after Transport for London says it is not a 'fit and proper' operator


How will you be affected?


TfL has told Uber it will lose its licence in London. Photograph: Blooberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images
*Shares*
10,724
*Comments*
2,305
Sarah Butler and Gwyn Topham

Friday 22 September 2017 21.36 AESTFirst published on Friday 22 September 2017 20.11 AEST

Uber's application for a new licence in London has been rejected on the basis that the company is not a "fit and proper" private car hire operator.

Uber said it planned to challenge the ruling by London's transport authority in the courts immediately.

The current licence expires on 30 September but Uber has 21 days to appeal and can continue to operate until that process expires.

The decision by Transport for London was backed by London mayor Sadiq Khan and the trade body for the capital's black cab drivers, who have been staunch opponents of the US ride-hailing app.

However, it drew immediate criticism from Uber drivers' representatives and Conservative politicians.

TfL said that it had rejected the company's application to renew its licence because "Uber's approach and conduct demonstrate a lack of corporate responsibility" in relation to reporting serious criminal offences, obtaining medical certificates and driver background checks.

The licensing body also said it was concerned by Uber's use of Greyball, software that can be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to its app and undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.

Khan said he fully supported the decision to revoke Uber's licence, saying all companies needed to "play by the rules".

He said: "I want London to be at the forefront of innovation and new technology and to be a natural home for exciting new companies that help Londoners by providing a better and more affordable service.

"However, all companies in London must play by the rules and adhere to the high standards we expect -particularly when it comes to the safety of customers. Providing an innovative service must not be at the expense of customer safety and security.""I fully support TfL's decision - it would be wrong if TfL continued to license Uber if there is any way that this could pose a threat to Londoners' safety and security."

Steve McNamara, general secretary of the Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association, which represents black cab drivers, said the mayor had made the right decision.

"Since it first came onto our streets Uber has broken the law, exploited its drivers and refused to take responsibility for the safety of passengers. This immoral company has no place on London's streets," he said.

Uber said in a statement that the decision would "show the world that, far from being open, London is closed to innovative companies".

Advertisement
"3.5 million Londoners who use our app, and more than 40,000 licensed drivers who rely on Uber to make a living, will be astounded by this decision," the company added.

James Farrar, a co-claimant in a landmark employment tribunal decision against Uber and chair of the Independent Workers' Union of Great Britain's private hire drivers' branch, said TfL's decision would be a "devastating blow" for the company's drivers.

"To strip Uber of its licence after five years of laissez-faire regulation is a testament to a systemic failure at TfL," Farrar said.

"Rather than banish Uber, TfL should have strengthened its regulatory oversight, curbed runaway licensing and protected the worker rights of drivers. The mayor must call for an urgent independent review of TfL to identify the causes of failure and prevent something like this from ever happening again."

Conservative London Assembly member Andrew Boff said Khan was backing a "hugely damaging decision" that would put thousands of people out of work.

"The mayor consistently tells us London is open but in shutting down the operations of an innovative market leader like Uber he has caused immense reputational damage to our city as a global business hub.

"With 3.5million registered users - almost half the city's adult population - Uber has shown to be providing a hugely beneficial service to Londoners," he said.

Tom Tugendhat, Tory MP for Tonbridge and South Malling, accused Khan of being a "luddite" who wants to "switch off the internet".

"By banning Uber, Sadiq Khan is showing that socialism is about control when the internet is pushing for freedom of choice," he said.

"True, Uber has problems but Sadiq Khan banning them is a vote against choice using last century controls to order how we choose to live."

Advertisement
Unions including the IWGB and GMB called on TfL to insist Uber guaranteed basic employment rights under the terms of its new five-year licence.

The GMB union said 72% of Londoners believed TfL should require Uber to safeguard minimum pay and holiday pay for its drivers.

Farrer will be in court next week when Uber is appealing against an employment tribunal ruling that would give its drivers access to the minimum wage, sick pay and paid holidays.

Maria Ludkin, the GMB legal director, said: "No company can behave like it's above the law, and that includes Uber. No doubt other major cities will be looking at this decision and considering Uber's future on their own streets."

The blow to Uber in the UK comes after a tumultuous few months for the company, which has faced a string of scandals involving allegations of sexism and bullying. Investor pressure forced out former chief executive and co-founder Travis Kalanick this summer.

In the US, Uber is facing a federal investigation after the New York Times reported that the company had been using the Greyball software.

The company has been forced to quit several countries including Denmark and Hungary, and has faced regulatory battles in multiple US states and countries around the world.


----------



## Jack Malarkey (Jan 11, 2016)

Also follow this important story on the London forum: https://uberpeople.net/threads/licenced-refused.204214/.


----------



## Hugh G (Sep 22, 2016)

*Licensing decision on Uber London Limited*
22 September 2017

https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/p...ber/licensing-decision-on-uber-london-limited

Transport for London (TfL) has today (Friday 22 September) informed Uber London Limited that it will not be issued with a private hire operator licence after expiry of its current licence on 30 September.

TfL's regulation of London's taxi and private hire trades is designed to ensure passenger safety. Private hire operators must meet rigorous regulations, and demonstrate to TfL that they do so, in order to operate. TfL must also be satisfied that an operator is fit and proper to hold a licence.

TfL has concluded that Uber London Limited is not fit and proper to hold a private hire operator licence.

TfL considers that Uber's approach and conduct demonstrate a lack of corporate responsibility in relation to a number of issues which have potential public safety and security implications. These include:


Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.
Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.
The Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998 includes provision to appeal a licensing decision within 21 days of it being communicated to the applicant. Uber London Limited can continue to operate until any appeal processes have been exhausted.

No further comment will be made by TfL pending any appeal of this decision


----------



## DH_uber (Aug 20, 2017)

Hoping for a speedy death.


----------



## MyRedUber (Dec 28, 2015)

DH_uber said:


> Hoping for a speedy death.


If you're an Uber driver, why are you hoping for a speedy death for Uber, but continue driving for Uber?


----------



## george manousaridis (Jan 27, 2017)

MyRedUber said:


> If you're an Uber driver, why are you hoping for a speedy death for Uber, but continue driving for Uber?


I do it as a hobby it it fails i dont care


----------



## george manousaridis (Jan 27, 2017)

MyRedUber said:


> If you're an Uber driver, why are you hoping for a speedy death for Uber, but continue driving for Uber?


Hobby,passing timr


----------



## lespaul (May 19, 2017)

on the flipside, could this be a perfect example of how a mayor picks a fight with 3.5 million voters


----------



## Icecool (Feb 8, 2016)

MyRedUber said:


> If you're an Uber driver, why are you hoping for a speedy death for Uber, but continue driving for Uber?


I assume he's a ex cab driver now driving for uber unhappily Waiting to go back to driving a taxi


----------



## DH_uber (Aug 20, 2017)

MyRedUber said:


> If you're an Uber driver, why are you hoping for a speedy death for Uber, but continue driving for Uber?


I wish Uber a speedy death because it is the most vile unethical exploitative scumbag company ever created. And I hardly drive for them anymore. What's the point when they have ensured that doing so is an unsustainable way to earn a living that benefits only them and the riders ?


----------



## MyRedUber (Dec 28, 2015)

DH_uber said:


> And I hardly drive for them anymore.


If they really are as bad as you say, then surely you should not be driving for them at all, nor using them as a passenger. You should even delete the apps from all of your devices.
Otherwise, it's just hot air.


----------



## Icecool (Feb 8, 2016)

DH_uber said:


> And if you are defending such an unethical morally bankrupt scumbag company then you are no doubt just another Uber mole. There are a few on this site.


Are you aware this is an uber forum ?


----------



## MyRedUber (Dec 28, 2015)

DH_uber said:


> And if you are defending such an unethical morally bankrupt scumbag company then you are no doubt just another Uber mole. There are a few on this site.


You are simply not aware of how logically false your posts are.
Demonstrate to me where I've defended "such an unethical morally bankrupt scumbag company".

If you want to debate, then learn how to do it.
If you want to insult, then learn how to do it.


----------



## DH_uber (Aug 20, 2017)

MyRedUber said:


> You are simply not aware of how logically false your posts are.


And nor are you. "If you don't like driving for Uber get another job " The same simplistic banal response I see so many times from drivers who are too dumb to realise they are exploited , part timers or moles. Any real driver with a modicum of experience and intelligence knows what's going on.



Icecool said:


> Are you aware this is an uber forum ?


So ?


----------



## george manousaridis (Jan 27, 2017)

DH_uber said:


> And nor are you. "If you don't like driving for Uber get another job " The same simplistic banal response I see so many times from drivers who are too dumb to realise they are exploited , part timers or moles. Any real driver with a modicum of experience and intelligence knows what's going on.


Is the reason why i dictate not Uber.


----------



## Icecool (Feb 8, 2016)

DH_uber said:


> And nor are you. "If you don't like driving for Uber get another job " The same simplistic banal response I see so many times from drivers who are too dumb to realise they are exploited , part timers or moles. Any real driver with a modicum of experience and intelligence knows what's going on.
> 
> So ?


So you don't get ? You said there are uber moles on this site I wouldn't call them moles . Of course there is this is a forum all about uber . There alot of people drive for uber to make a living unlike you don't want uber to fail .


----------



## Icecool (Feb 8, 2016)

DH_uber said:


> No it's you who doesn't get it. You and your Sydney mates might be able to make a living driving Uber in Sydney with your much higher rates; but the rest of us outside of Sydney *cannot*. That's what you don't get, because you're concerned only for yourself.


Ok if that the case just deleted the uber app and forget about uber . Or you move to Sydney if you think we are doing good and see if you like our rents and housing prices. If you do get our rate the question is can you guys afford the fares as the wages where you are are lower than Sydney .


----------



## MyRedUber (Dec 28, 2015)

DH_uber said:


> No it's you who doesn't get it. You and your Sydney mates might be able to make a living driving Uber in Sydney with your much higher rates; but the rest of us outside of Sydney *cannot*. That's what you don't get, because you're concerned only for yourself.


I have said many times in this forum and elsewhere that Sydney rates make it worthwhile to continue driving UberX, but that I don't believe that rates in other cities are fair to drivers nor sustainable for drivers. I don't understand why Uber haven't dropped rates in Sydney as they have in every other city worldwide.

BUT, the question remains, why do you, at Perth rates, continue to drive for UberX? After all costs are considered, you are effectively paying Uber for the privilege of driving their customers around.
We do "get it". There is no way that I'd be driving UberX at Perth rates.

BUT, Why do you keep doing it?
And why do you keep whinging about it?


----------

