The London Taxi trade, have a set of laws and regulations in place because of the market we work in.
We do the kowledge because we have to know how to do what someone wants instantly, to get from A to B to c and back.
We have a purpose built vehicle with turning circle to do just that job and are wheelchair accessible plus safety trained to a higher standard. These system has been tried and tested over many years and has made us number one in the world.
Uber has been allowed to enter our market, which their drivers are totally not qualified to be in on all levels. They have no concept of direction or in many cases destination, so how can you be available for instant hire ?
If TFL won't do it surely there is cause for concern, and perhaps our representative orgs should now be turning their attention towards the department for transport and the police.
![]()
![]()
Photos by Mike Calvey
![]()
We do the kowledge because we have to know how to do what someone wants instantly, to get from A to B to c and back.
We have a purpose built vehicle with turning circle to do just that job and are wheelchair accessible plus safety trained to a higher standard. These system has been tried and tested over many years and has made us number one in the world.
Uber has been allowed to enter our market, which their drivers are totally not qualified to be in on all levels. They have no concept of direction or in many cases destination, so how can you be available for instant hire ?
In many cases, their grasp of communication with the customer is zero, frequently going the wrong way, by following instructions from a sat nav, sometimes ending up in one way streets the wrong way, doing u-turns in a car not fit to work in our market.
They where licenced as mini cabs. So they should be banned from working the instant hail market on safety grounds alone. Our licensing authority has a duty of care to the general public and other road users. The way this company and its drivers operate should be deemed not fit for purpose and should be banned when there licence comes up for renewal in 2017, if not sooner.
If TFL won't do it surely there is cause for concern, and perhaps our representative orgs should now be turning their attention towards the department for transport and the police.
This is the avenue that has to be gone down as everyone seems to be forgetting the basics which is the law and safety of the travelling public.
Richard Busby
Editorial Comment:
There has been much talk recently about Plying For Hire not being defined in law, but at present we still have case law. Only recently (10th July) a minicab driver was fined over £405 at Uxbridge Magistrates court for "Plying for Hire".
We must now turn to the question of why TfL show no apatite to enforce the plying for hire law with regards to touting. There needs to be a public inquiry, carried out by Parlimentary transport committee to ascertain if corruption at any level is endemic within TfL.
The Uber and RD2 licensing fiascos also needs investigating by parliamentary committee as it is painfully clear that TfL did not interpret the PH vehicles act 1998 in the manner to which the bill was originally set down. In the case if RD2, TfL lied about the circumstances of the issue of multiple licence variations given to RD2 in disregard to the regulations set out in the act.
The Met's Cab Enforcement Unit is part financed by TfL funds, but under the proceeds of crime act Cab Enforcement teams could be self-financing. In fact, with the amount of touting witnessed nightly in Central London, they may even make a profit.
For many years, the City of London Police have turned a blind eye to cars from RD2, forming an illegal rank and openly plying for hire.
Last night, the Mayfair Mob, aided by the Shorditch Mob flash mobbed the Forge. Backed up by the LTDAs AdVan, they took back the work leaving this popular night venue.
Amazingly, as the AdVan parked outside the bar, traffic wardens, police and a parking enforcement CCTV car turned up. Manpower the CoL police have always claimed unavailable after 10:30pm.
* Why do they only turn up when Taxis park outside this venue?
* Why are RD2 given special treatment in the city?
* Why has this situation been allowed to continue for so long?
Having Plying for Hire set in statuette is fine as insurance for the future. But if the laws are not being enforced, then it's a complete waste of time.
The big question now is:
Do we really need new laws, or do we just need the laws we already have enforced.
Below is an excerpt of just one of many judgements involving private vehicles charged with Plying for hire.
The case Gilbert v McKay 1946 set a precedent in case law. Standing case law can be used to prosecute any driver or operator allowing their cars to be available for immediate hire (Plying for Hire) and there have been many such instances. The MPS Heathrow case shown above, being the most recent.
In summing up, the Lord Chief Justice Lord Goddard stated,
“In my opinion, even if the cars had been standing in a private yard and could not be seen by the public, there could still have been a "plying for hire" if they had been appropriated for immediate hiring”.
The important thing here is the reference to a private yard and not on view to the public at the time of hiring. Even more important is his reference to immediate hire. In the case of the Private Hire Vehicles Act 1998 it clearly states that all jobs allocated to PH drivers must be pre booked through a third party operator. Driver must not be hired directly by the passenger.
This is exactly what's happening in the case of Uber's ehailing. Uber publicly state they do not accept pre bookings.
