"Uber loses its licence to operate in London"

[theageofthetra]

London Reconnections can always be relied on to throw light on whichever subject it writes about without, as you say, any sensationalist slant.

Excellent article as ever from them. The key point is that the initial trigger to not renew the licence was from the Met police back in April whuch was backed up by the London Assembly a couple of months later.

The way they did everything to cover up the sexual assault and blocked the police obtaining data which lead to a further attack is appalling behaviour.

 

[radamfi]

Can someone confirm this? As far as I can tell, London minicabs are allowed to operate anywhere in the country. So places near London that have rejected Uber's application for a licence, such as Crawley, can still be served by Uber London vehicles.

If that's the case, then places outside London could lose their Uber service if Uber London ceases to operate.

 

[Antman]

Excellent article as ever from them. The key point is that the initial trigger to not renew the licence was from the Met police back in April whuch was backed up by the London Assembly a couple of months later.

The way they did everything to cover up the sexual assault and blocked the police obtaining data which lead to a further attack is appalling behaviour.

I find it a bit odd that despite these allegations of sexual assaults it seems to be mostly women that want uber to stay in London.

 

[Antman]

It's a shame Uber has lost, and hopefully they will return.

I live in Plumstead and I vary rarely if at all see other forms of cabs (black or other) as being in Zone 4 is less attractive to them.

Sent from my MHA-L09 using Tapatalk

I've heard a few people saying similar to that, basically black cabs are too selective about where they'll go.

 

[jon0844]

I find it a bit odd that despite these allegations of sexual assaults it seems to be mostly women that want uber to stay in London.

I wonder how much is down to perception. A booked cab, which you can track and share the location with a friend certainly sounds safer than taking a bus, tube or train.

And there seems to be a strong belief, although on social media you never know how to take it (could Uber or its supporters be helping spread such rumours that then become fact?) that black cabs and minicabs, even if booked, are somehow much more dangerous.

The thing is, if Uber cleans up its act then it should be a very safe method of travel for men and women alike. The risks today might be small, but if there is an attempt to cover things up then clearly there IS a problem.

 

[MCR247]

I've heard a few people saying similar to that, basically black cabs are too selective about where they'll go.

And who they'll take, when they'll take them. Ridiculous

 

[deltic]

I find it a bit odd that despite these allegations of sexual assaults it seems to be mostly women that want uber to stay in London.

Possibly because they are still safer than a "standard" mini-cab? Evening Standard reported that in 2015, charges were brought against 413 taxi and minicab drivers, with 126 accused of violent or sexual offences. Unfortunately, they are not split out between black cab and mini-cab drivers.

 

[Antman]

Possibly because they are still safer than a "standard" mini-cab? Evening Standard reported that in 2015, charges were brought against 413 taxi and minicab drivers, with 126 accused of violent or sexual offences. Unfortunately, they are not split out between black cab and mini-cab drivers.

There seems to be an awful lot of statistics being thrown around and obviously being accused of something isn't the same as being convicted.

My sister uses uber quite regularly for work and has never had a problem, my partner has used them occasionally and she's found them very good as well and never had any safety concerns at all. Have they just been lucky or is that the norm?

 

[MCR247]

I don't the issue is that you're unsafe getting in an uber as such, more that Uber was failing to report matters to the police when they should've

 

[Tetchytyke]

You're no more or less likely to be attacked in an Uber, it is a very rare occurrence. The issue is that Uber hid it when they should have reported it, and the police think it was because of reputational damage.

In some ways Uber, with the live tracking, is safer. But only if the operator takes allegations seriously, rather than trying to hide.

 

[baz962]

Excellent article as ever from them. The key point is that the initial trigger to not renew the licence was from the Met police back in April whuch was backed up by the London Assembly a couple of months later.

The way they did everything to cover up the sexual assault and blocked the police obtaining data which lead to a further attack is appalling behaviour.

Just reading these posts and the link to London connections and was wondering if the police, tfl etc were so worried about serious allegations not being reported, did they have to wait until licence up for renewal and not just revoke it and also did uber not get a slight extension. Makes you wonder how serious the police/tfl really are about these allegations.

 

[theageofthetra]

Possibly because they are still safer than a "standard" mini-cab? Evening Standard reported that in 2015, charges were brought against 413 taxi and minicab drivers, with 126 accused of violent or sexual offences. Unfortunately, they are not split out between black cab and mini-cab drivers.

Appalling statistics. 413 CHARGED, can't wait for this years figures.

 

[Antman]

Appalling statistics. 413 CHARGED, can't wait for this years figures.

As I understand it, and I'm happy to be corrected if anybody knows otherwise, the figure of 413 covers a variety of offences and are not necessarily directly related to their job.

In an industry employing tens of thousands of drivers it doesn't actually sound that bad to me and how many of those 413 were actually convicted?

 

[bussnapperwm]

I use Uber to commute daily to and from work and I've found them much safer than the local private hire firms as the Uber drivers are more concerned with driving safely as opposed to the private hire firms who are addicted to breaking speed limits and hard breaking

 

[ModernRailways]

I use Uber to commute daily to and from work and I've found them much safer than the local private hire firms as the Uber drivers are more concerned with driving safely as opposed to the private hire firms who are addicted to breaking speed limits and hard breaking

Uber drivers get paid on distance, hence why there is a few cases where drivers will 'accidently' (or in some cases deliberately if the passenger is drunk/sleepy) take a longer route, because it means they get paid more. Since they're tracked you can go back and check the route and if it's not the most optimal and the driver looks to have taken the wee then you complain and get a refund (or some money back) - I've always been given a full refund when I've had an issue.

The time taken works out at around 1 minute equals 10p. So a 5 minute journey would add 50p on. A 30 minute journey would add £3 etc. So there is no incentive for them to be quick and speeding around other than to free up the cab quicker which will likely just mean they'll be waiting for a job for longer.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Does Uber somehow change the traditional balance in that respect?

With metered minicabs, hackney carriages, or flat-fared minicabs, it's generally in the driver's interest to be going flat out as much as possible. Squeezing in even one extra job, let alone how many they actually will, will more than cover the extra fuel expenditure and lost time-element of the fares. An hour stood at the side of any city radial route at 05:00 on a Saturday/Sunday will not show you any taxis (of any variety) being driven slowly...

 

[Bletchleyite]

An hour stood at the side of any city radial route at 05:00 on a Saturday/Sunday will not show you any taxis (of any variety) being driven slowly...

Oddly, I've found that in recent years taxis (of all kinds) in MK don't do the 60/70mph permitted on the main roads, but typically 50mph or lower. I assume we have reached the point where the fuel cost of going faster balances any extra takings.

 

[Mojo]

Uber drivers get paid on distance, hence why there is a few cases where drivers will 'accidently' (or in some cases deliberately if the passenger is drunk/sleepy) take a longer route, because it means they get paid more. Since they're tracked you can go back and check the route and if it's not the most optimal and the driver looks to have taken the wee then you complain and get a refund (or some money back) - I've always been given a full refund when I've had an issue.

Does Uber somehow change the traditional balance in that respect?

With metered minicabs, hackney carriages, or flat-fared minicabs, it's generally in the driver's interest to be going flat out as much as possible. Squeezing in even one extra job, let alone how many they actually will, will more than cover the extra fuel expenditure and lost time-element of the fares. An hour stood at the side of any city radial route at 05:00 on a Saturday/Sunday will not show you any taxis (of any variety) being driven slowly...

Uber London isn't really any difference from a hackney carriage in that respect; there is a base fare of £2.50 on top of their 15p/minute and £1.25/mile charge (minimum fare £5).