On 04/10/2015 15:41, Recliner wrote:

JNugent wrote:
On 03/10/2015 02:13, Recliner wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 01/10/2015 18:46, tim..... wrote:
"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 30/09/2015 17:49, tim..... wrote:

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tph...hire-proposals

so what does the team think?

The law is clear.
"Services" such as Über cannot operate lawfully unless:
(a) each vehicle is tested and licensed before commencing operations,
(b) each driver applies for a licence, is investigated and not found
ineligible, before commencing operations, and

Uber will claim that they do do (a) and (b)
(I have no idea if they are right or not)

*If* they do, there's no problem.
At least, not with those aspects.

(c) the operator (presumably Über) establishes a base within Greater
London and submits to the appropriate licensing regime, thereafter
complying with the requirements for record-keeping, etc.

and whilst this does seem unnecessarily nanny state, complying with it
isn't impossible for them

The record keeping requirement is there in order to help settle
allegations of unlicensed plying for hire, among other things such as
being able to trace a particular driver who did a particular booked job.
It's a more than reasonable requirement. The location requirement is
designed to keep the operator within the jurisdiction of the licensing
authority and to make them accountable to that licensing authority and
the courts within its boundaries.

Uber appears to have much better record keeping for every journey than back
cabs. Maybe it's the latter who should have the rules tightened up?

There is not, and never has been, any requirement for a licensed
taxi-driver to keep a record of the names, addresses, starting point,
destination points of passengers, or of the fare charged.

I wasn't suggesting that they were not complying with the existing rules,
just that the rules for black cabs seem more lax than for Uber.

The record-keeping rules for pirate car operators in general are an
attempt to limit their capacity for making false statements in an effort
to "backdate" unlicensed plying for hire to make it look legal.

It isn't aimed at any one firm. When sorting the sheep from the goats,
it's as well to bear in mind that they are almost all goats.

Next...

[ ... ]

Why makes Uber cabs "pirate cars"?

Unlicensed plying-for-hire, of course.

But they don't. They can only come when a registered customer books one. So
they're not pirate cars.

That's funny.