
Uber London loses licence to operate - gadders
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640
======
tomblomfield
I don't think the Mayor of London or TfL really expect to shut down Uber. It
would be a deeply unpopular move. There's an acceptance that Uber has improved
things for riders, albeit at the expense of the Black Cab industry, and London
wants to welcome innovative technology firms.

However, I also suspect that Uber hasn't been as co-operative as TfL would
like on several issues mentioned, and so this feels like a warning shot to get
them to be better corporate citizen. Quote from an MP; "No company, however
big and powerful, will be allowed to flout our laws and regulations."

Uber could have reacted by saying "we acknowledge our shortfallings, and we'll
work closely with TfL and the Mayor of London to ensure we put passenger
safety first. We hope to avoid any interruption in service and continue to
play a valuable part in London's diverse and effective public transportation
system."

Instead, they took a typically Travis-ish stance and said "Screw you, people
love us because we're cheaper, we'll fight this and we'll win," without any
acknowledgment of their failings.

Perhaps new leadership can change this approach.

~~~
vertex-four
They already had a warning shot four months ago, when their license renewal
was denied in favour of a temporary renewal for four months. This one is the
next step in the process.

Uber isn't magic - if there's pent-up demand for a company that fills Uber's
boots, one will pop up. The issues TfL have with Uber aren't to do with the
service they provide, it's failing to comply with TfL's administrative
requirements. You could easily build a company that does what Uber does in
London without the hate for local Government that is ingrained into Uber's
culture - and there already are a number of minicab companies that do what
Uber does, just minus quite as fancy an app.

~~~
UK-AL
There have been few companies that have tried. Some mentioned in thread. They
all had trouble working with tfl.

One company licenced their software with an existing cab company in order to
work with them. TFL started an investigation and unlicensed the previously
legally licenced private taxi company for no stated reason.

Make no mistake they are activity hostile against innovation that could make
taxi travel cheaper and faster.

[https://blog.taxify.eu/2017/09/bringing-fairer-ride-
hailing-...](https://blog.taxify.eu/2017/09/bringing-fairer-ride-hailing-to-
london/)

I suspect anyone who looks like they could be the next uber would simply be
shutdown.

~~~
vertex-four
Reading Taxify's side of the story alone reveals significant bias, and even
that seems to suggest that what happened is that Taxify bought an existing
company for its minicab license - which is practically bound to be a problem.

Why couldn't they find a customer to sell their product to without acquiring
that customer?

The problem wasn't the app - it was the company bypassing the licensing
process.

Interestingly, their link suggesting that hundreds of private hire operators
are in the process of being reviewed does not say what they think it says, and
does not in fact contain any statistics for private hire operators being
reviewed.

~~~
Pyxl101
Buying a company that owns an asset or holds a license is a reasonable way to
obtain said asset or license. Nothing wrong with that.

~~~
twic
If you're talking about a license in the sense of a right, like a copyright or
patent license, or a license to drill for oil somewhere, then yes. But this is
a license in the sense of regulatory approval of a specific organisation,
which is not something it's proper to buy and sell. You can't buy someone's
driving license, gun license, medical license, license, etc.

~~~
ubernostrum
In the insurance field "acqui-license" deals, like "acqui-hire" in tech, are
not impossible or even necessarily discouraged. Every US state has its own set
of regulations for who can be issued a license to sell insurance, and usually
it's easier from a bureaucracy perspective to maintain the license once you
have it than it is to get a new one. So buying and selling of companies solely
for their existing insurance licenses is a thing.

~~~
stuaxo
Sure, though The UK is another regulatory regime again.

------
dalbasal
Uber is such a contentious topic that a decision like this is ipso facto
political.

There are [1] competitors (especially black cabs)that have a very strong
interest to lobby against uber. [2] There are pro labour politicans that see
Uber as workaround for labour laws, and the vanguard of a wider threat to
labour norms. [3] Now, there are feminists and work culture interested people
reacting to all the accusations about Uber's internal cultural issues.

Those aren't the quoted resons for the decisions, but they are a relevant
political context.

The cabs were the first (and obviously self interested) objectors and Uber got
used to fighting them and their politcal influence. This seems to have lead
them down a cultural path. An agressive, ask-forgiveness-not-permission
culture. A embattled rightous self image. " _All the accusations against us
are self serving incumbent bullshit!_ "

 _" Transport for London and the mayor have caved in to a small number of
people who want to restrict consumer choice."_

Disprupting taxis is/was the goal, so that antagonism was inevitable. On-
demand labour is the method. Without that, they couldn't have grown like they
did. The stuff they lost their liscence over,... that was an unforced error.

 _" reporting serious criminal offences, obtaining medical certificates and
driver background checks."_ \- also greyball

There's no good reason for Uber to lose a big market over that. Complying
would not have disrupted their operations one bit.

~~~
KaiserPro
> There's no good reason for Uber to lose a big market over that. Complying
> would not have disrupted their operations one bit.

This is the thing, Uber assumes that london is just like NYC, where its a
highly regulated market with a massive barrier to entry. Its simply not the
case.

A minicam license to operate costs ~£500 ([https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-
and-private-hire/licensing...](https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-and-private-
hire/licensing/private-hire-driver-licence)) There is a rich and thriving
minicab market. Uber are really quite late to the party, Addison Lee having an
internet based hailing serivce in 2007, and an app since at least 2010. The
only thing new they bring is "cachet"

------
anilgulecha
Full details:
[https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/911175207871762432](https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/911175207871762432)

Criteria failed on:

1) Criminal reporting

2) Medical certificates

3) something about DBS checks

4) Use of Greyball to identify and block regulators.

Edit: Updated to new tweet.. they deleted the original

~~~
andygates
Hmm, does that mean they used Greyball in London, or just the known sleazy
uses? British regulators, just like CARB, have famously little sense of humour
for stuff like that.

~~~
gsnedders
AIUI, the regulator had evidence that Uber had used Greyball in some markets
(i.e., the known uses), and Uber were unable to convince the regulator that
they had not used Greyball in London.

~~~
dx034
Not even sure how you would convince them. Full code and database audit isn't
easy nor cheap and I doubt Uber wants to pay for that. Apart from that,
there's no way to detect if Uber runs services to detect regulators.

~~~
vkou
Open up your books. The problem is that once you have a history of unethical
behaviour, nobody believes you when you say 'don't worry, trust me'.

~~~
dominotw
were they given a chance to "convince" ? are they banned forever then?

------
iam-TJ
This is after the original (5 year) renewal in May 2017 was not granted and
they only got a 4-month extension which expires Sept 30th.

So Uber have been on-notice since May that they need to comply with the
regulator's requirements for an operators license and haven't done so.

~~~
matthewrudy
This is an important piece of information missing from the article.

Namely this is not out of the blue.

~~~
iand
It's in the article.

~~~
matthewrudy
I think they updated it _a lot_ after my comment.

Apologies that it's no longer correct.

------
sambe
When I have reported black cab drivers misleading passengers, lying about
pricing and regulations or bus drivers driving dangerously and being rude to
everyone, TfL are totally uninterested. They give the impression that they
know the scams operate and don't care. It's an interesting comparison with my
Uber experience, which has been almost flawless and issues are usually fixed
by Uber themselves promptly.

~~~
cjsuk
Same experience here. Nothing done about a virtual mugging where the cabbie
had no idea where he was going, shouted at me and told me I was a cunt because
I wasn’t stupid enough to fall for it and pulled him up on it. I rounded his
fee down to the nearest £10 and told him to sue me.

I’ve seen black cab drivers shouting “Uber scum” and spitting in the windows
of Uber drivers before. This isn’t want I and my wife wanted to experience
when you’re getting into an Uber literally after she’s had a hospital
appointment and surgery.

I’d rather fucking well walk than get in a black cab.

This whole thing is sad. TfL is a total turd bag as well. Constantly getting
overcharged on contactless so I have gone back to prepaid oyster. Customer
services tell me I’m a dumbass but several people I know have the same problem
on the same routes.

~~~
jmkni
This is where prepaid mastercards which sync up to an app on your phone come
in really handy.

You get a push notification instantly as soon as a contactless transaction
goes through so you know right away if you've been ripped off.

~~~
mino
True, but that does not work for TfL because of how they charge you. Details:

[http://news.revolut.com/post/146212645837/touch-it-tap-it-
re...](http://news.revolut.com/post/146212645837/touch-it-tap-it-rev-it-
welcome-to-revolut)

I've been charged a wrong amount by TfL a few times in the past, I contacted
them (either on the phone or via the webform) and I was always reimbursed.
There are basically two situations where you get charged a wrong amount:

1\. common: the "touch out" did not work. Just log in and click "refund
previous trip".

2\. rare: some weird software exception where your trip is charged via a Zone
that you did not travel through.

The second happened to me a few times but honestly if I think of the massive
amount of complex/arcane/exceptional software rules they must have ...I feel I
cannot blame their software engineers :)

~~~
cjsuk
The option (2) happened to me many times in a row. One of the intermediate
touch stations that you're supposed to whack at Highbury and Islington when
you transition from tube to rail wasn't reporting or not working. This meant I
got mugged every day for a week.

Getting the cash out of them proved very difficult.

Sure there are arcane and complex rules but the nature of those demands that
the liability is on them.

~~~
dx034
You didn't get mugged. Please don't downplay muggings. Getting mugged is much
worse than paying too much because of a software error. Tfl always reimburses
and they pay out to any bank account, you just have to call them for the
details. I can understand that it's annoying but that wasn't mugging.

Did you report the faulty purple reader? Those are used by several thousand
people per day, I've never seen card readers out of service for more than a
day.

~~~
notyourday
Wait. What? In 2017? There are instructions and I have to _report_ broken
equipment? I have to figure out instructions on payment system?! There's no
button to handle it all on my phone?

Cabs should either operate as well as Uber or die. Instead of figuring out how
to become as good or better than Uber they are trying to push Uber out. That
just means someone else would show up.

~~~
walshemj
They do in the uk in my experience I call them up tell them where I want to go
I get a SMS when they dispatch the cab and another when it arrives.

Only problem is during the school run time as many parents don't want "Oliver"
or "Lucinda" to slum it with the poor kids on the school bus

~~~
isostatic
Not in my experience, the cab is always "just round the corner" when it's 10
minutes late and I ring to chase it up. Another 15 minutes and maybe it
arrives, or maybe I ring again and "oh we had to cancel it".

When uber is available it's a glorious system - know exactly where the cab is,
which one it is (when it's busy and there are many outside), no "I don't go
south of the river" type drivers, takes credit card (no "the machine is
broken" at the end of the trip, or try to flag down a black cab that does take
card), always get a receipt, not a scrap of paper you have to fill yourself,
etc etc.

The only problem is it's not available in the town I live in. The local mini
cab firms usually refuse to take bookings for short trips (2 miles), and
usually refuse them even when you want one asap

Phoning for a cab is 1980s technology. I've used uber in a dozen countries on
4 continents, the same experience every time, far better than any mini cab or
taxi (in NYC taxis force adverts down your throat!)

------
Nursie
If they can't or won't reform then excellent, let's be rid of them.

I don't want to give any business to a company that are seeking to become a
worldwide cab monopoly, and squirrel away any profits to the US. We have a
perfectly healthy cab ecosystem in my city, app-driven and with fare
competition and city regulation. Which I suppose is why Uber, though present,
hasn't really taken off here.

That said, talk of profits may be a little early and AFAICT they're losing
money by the fistful. Which kinda says that they're engaging in some dodgy
market distortion to me...

~~~
grecy
> _a company that are seeking to become a worldwide cab monopoly_

Who said anything about them seeking to become a worldwide cab monopoly?

They are a cab company, expanding globally. Any other company can do that too,
if they want.

~~~
Nursie
>> Who said anything about them seeking to become a worldwide cab monopoly?

They behave as if they are attempting this, IMHO.

>> They are a cab company

I believe, depending on which way the wind was blowing, they might dispute
this. Their argument is that they are not a cab company, merely a service for
connecting drivers and potential passengers. This is how they avoid pesky
things like employment laws.

>> Any other company can do that too, if they want.

Few others have the access to VC money that Uber do - I would consider this
reliance on an absolute ton of investment, which allows them to operate at the
prices they do, to be something of a market distortion.

~~~
microcolonel
> _They behave as if they are attempting this, IMHO._

Every rational company should behave as if they're attempting to become a
monopoly, this is a completely meaningless point to argue either way.

~~~
Nursie
This is like the idea that every rational company must skirt the very edges of
the law, regardless of good ethics, to maximise profit.

I don't personally believe either to be true, and I do believe there's a very
real difference between out-competing the competition and using a ton of VC
money to undercut them, or skirting rules and regulations that may add cost.

~~~
conanbatt
Taxis have an ACTUAL monopoly. Are you seriously siding with "banning
potential monopoly" to protect an entrenched centuries old monopoly.

~~~
Nursie
>> Taxis have an ACTUAL monopoly

Not really, there are lots of private-hire firms in London.

>> Are you seriously siding with "banning potential monopoly" to protect an
entrenched centuries old monopoly.

Nope. That's a wilful misreading of what I've been posting and I'm not sure it
warrants much response. I'm siding with protecting a diverse market from an
unethical company who appear to be bending the rules and sinking a ton of
investor money into distorting the market in an effort to capture it.

~~~
conanbatt
> Not really, there are lots of private-hire firms in London.

If thats your definition of monopoly, then UBER is also not a monopoly. Those
still exist and can continue to exist.

> I'm siding with protecting a diverse market

You are not siding with protecting a diverse market because you are
eliminating an option. Its the exact opposite direction. The rules are written
by the same people that invented taxicabs. If the rules are removed, UBER
would not be bending any rules. Its a problem created exclusively by the
government, and uber drivers and passengers are being disregarded. This is
what people want, and you are advocating for restricting those people in favor
of another.

To help one side, you are advocating the attack of another one. That is not an
even standing.

~~~
Nursie
Uber are not a monopoly, never claimed they were. They act like they want to
be though, and are using VC money to undercut AFAICT

The rules are much more than there to protect just black cabs, they are there
to protect consumers and workers too.

Uber are a set of problems all to themselves, and have only their own
attitudes and practices to blame.

I am not advocating helping any one 'side', and to paint my arguments that way
is disingenuous.

------
jjp
The TFL press release summarises the points on why the licence is not being
renewed - [https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-
releases/2017/septem...](https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-
releases/2017/september/licensing-decision-on-uber-london-limited)

    
    
      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.

~~~
dx034
I'm quite certain that the last one is the important point. All the others can
easily be fixed. But that the company had a program to avoid regulation should
be enough to ban it. Unless they do a full code audit, there's no way to know
if they still use these techniques.

~~~
aidos
Interestingly they claimed that technology is to defend themselves against
fraudulent activity (fake accounts, competitors, sting operations).

From what I understand, it works by marking accounts as fake (using credit
card lookups etc) and then showing them fake cars that never pick them up.

Imagine being falsely flagged by that system and just always having a terrible
time getting a cab and not knowing why!

------
PaulRobinson
Londoner here.

The license is not being renewed not because TfL isn't interested in
innovation (they actively encourage it), not to retain power for the black cab
drivers, and not because London isn't interested in companies like Uber
operating here.

It's because of the rapes.

The Metropolitan Police (the part of the UK police force that polices London),
has objected to their license.

In 2015 alone, they had to deal with 32 cases of Uber drivers raping or
sexually assaulting lone female passengers.

In the entire history of the hackney carriage (black cab) license - going back
to 1662 - I know of only one case of a driver having been prosecuted for rape,
about 5 years ago.

Uber is not reporting crimes, not co-operating with the police when they are
reported, is not doing suitable background checks on criminality or medical
suitability for being a private hire driver on its "workforce", and there is
suspicion that they are both price gouging and specifically trying to go
around the private hire regulations they claim to support.

Also from the TfL statement:

> 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.

That means they're not shutting up shop soon, they can appeal in the next 8
days, then continue to operate until the appeals process is over.

That means if they start dealing with driver checks, crime reports and
regulations properly within the time frame of the appeals process (which can
be years), they'll be allowed to continue to operate.

As a Londoner, I'm OK with that. If they aren't interested in conducting
criminal record checks, medical checks, making sure my gf is safe when
travelling alone, etc. I don't want them in my city.

If the regulators bring about these changes, they are doing their job and I'm
happy for them to scare the holy fuck out of Uber and their management team in
the process to make that happen.

In the meantime, other operators have upped their game a lot in recent years
whilst Uber has been operating. Addison Lee (one of the larger private hire
firms) has an app almost as good as Uber's, with fixed cost pricing.

We will not miss Uber if they go, they are going to need to show that they are
worthy of being a part of the diverse and amazing London community if they
wish to remain.

~~~
mattlondon
> In the entire history of the hackney carriage (black cab) license - going
> back to 1662 - I know of only one case of a driver having been prosecuted
> for rape, about 5 years ago.

Pardon?

John Warboys - a registered black cab driver - was convicted of 12 rapes in
2009, and was thought to have carried out over 100.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Worboys](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Worboys)

David perry - a registered black cab driver - was convicted of 2 rapes in
2010. [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-
london-32118391](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32118391)

Edward Chapman - a registered black cab driver - was convicted of rape in
2012. [http://www.romfordrecorder.co.uk/news/crime-court/black-
cabb...](http://www.romfordrecorder.co.uk/news/crime-court/black-cabbie-from-
romford-jailed-for-raping-passenger-1-1340559)

Musie Asgodom - a registered black cab driver in Sheffield (not all black cabs
are in London) - was convicted of 2 rapes in 2012 and failed to overturn his
conviction. [http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/rapist-sheffield-cab-driver-
fa...](http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/rapist-sheffield-cab-driver-fails-in-
legal-bid-over-conviction-1-4705520)

I could go on but those were the first 3 or 4 links I found, and even those
are in the past 5-8 years.

I dont see how some background checks are going to prevent people from raping
someone if the opportunity presents itself. _Rapists are rapists_ regardless
of what license they have been given by filling in some forms.

~~~
Nursie
Presumably a background check might catch priors?

~~~
gjjrfcbugxbhf
Except that in UK approx 95% of such offences are carried out be people with
no prior convictions - so you don't weed out that many attackers this way.

~~~
mining
If that 95% assumes that people undergo background checks, my assumption is
that number might decrease.

~~~
bdcravens
I'm not certain that crime is one where the perps are logically weighing the
pros and cons.

------
eadz
While I don't particularly feel good about the business model and lack of
employee rights etc, one thing I prefer Uber for over Black Cabs is the
pollution.

Many Ubers are Toyota Purises. Black cabs have 2.7L Diesel engines which
contribute to London's terrible air quality.

Especially as I often see black cabs without passengers driving around - not
sure if the're looking for rides or not, but there is no reason for an Uber
driver do be doing the same - I see them waiting with the engine off.

~~~
PaulRobinson
Priuses can't take wheelchairs, have a wider turning circle and have other
drawbacks that make them unsuitable for black cab workloads.

That said, the UK is committed to eradicating all petrol and diesel cars over
the next 22 years, and the black cab drivers are looking at what you're
talking about: [https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jul/11/black-
cab-t...](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jul/11/black-cab-turns-
green-new-electric-london-taxi-levc-tx)

~~~
gsnedders
Yes, from 1 Jan 2018 all new registered taxis are required to be all-electric
or petrol-electric hybrids. There's going to be a £5k grant for taxis over 10
years old (note there is a maximum age of 15 years that has long been in
force), which will hopefully push the oldest third of taxis to get replaced
more quickly than normally.

------
k-mcgrady
I don't understand why Uber can't get their shit together. In the US they have
competition from Lyft and I can almost understand why they have to push the
boundaries. In London they have very little competition and therefore don't
need to engage is controversial business practices. Personally I don't see
what my alternative will be if their service ceases, they have that little
competition.

Although I am kind of annoyed at the decision it's understandable. I hope with
Kalanick out Uber will quickly become a better corporate citizen and get this
license renewed.

NB: I'm aware of black cabs, Hailo, etc. but none of these are as convenient
or cost effective as Uber. I can see the night tube getting a lot more use but
I know quite a few people who don't like to take it after having more than a
few drinks for safety reasons.

~~~
scaryclam
To be honest, few people here in London bother with taxis. Public transport is
very good, can be faster than sitting in traffic, and is cheaper. Most folks
ordering taxis either don't know where they are going, missed the last train
or are wealthy enough to not care about the cost. Uber literally made no
impact on the quality if life to your average Londoner and won't be missed.

~~~
zimablue
Public transport isn't great - often cramped and with delays. It's expensive -
if anything involves bus then tube then for two people Uber Pool is often
cheaper. Uber is often faster, and it's widely used and supports a massive
amount of employment.

Most people don't order taxis much daily true, but they do widely order Ubers
because there's a massive price difference. And on nights out, taxis are often
used because until recently we had no night tubes and now we only have a few
lines and only on weekends.

I don't want to flame but this post is so wrong it makes me wonder if you're
living in a different London.

~~~
Angostura
uberX from East London to Heathrow is £45-60.

The equivalent adult single fair is £5.10 or £3.10 offpeak.

> this post is so wrong it makes me wonder if you're living in a different
> London.

My thoughts exactly

~~~
zimablue
Yeah if you cherry pick a long journey that's possible to do in one go on the
tube you can obviously find situations where public transport is cheaper. Most
of the time it is. But there also exist journeys for which Uber is faster and
cheaper, especially with two or more people, and especially at night.

Or journeys where Uber is marginally more expensive but people are willing to
pay £1 for convenience.

I'm not sure what we're arguing about, the fact that it's 40k drivers and the
everybody's phones just received several messages about it proves that there's
demand.

------
rdl
Uber is worse than random minicab businesses in London? This seems like a real
stretch.

~~~
kuschku
Random minicab businesses do not use Uber’s Greyball to avoid regulatory
inspections.

------
osrec
Uber as a company is immoral from time to time, however their service is
great, and I'd be sad to see it go from London. TfL operates one of the most
expensive public transport systems in the world, and is happy to license black
cab drivers (who in my experience, can be rude and are an absolute rip off a
lot of the time). Not only that, black cab drivers in my area regularly drive
through zebra crossings while people are on them, but I am yet to see an Uber
driver do this (I'm sure they do as well, but black cabs drive around London
with a sense of arrogance and entitlement that I find most irritating).

~~~
dx034
Did you try Taxify? Started in London recently, could imagine many drivers
will sign up there now. Haven't tried it yet (didn't take an uber over the
past weeks) but their offering appears very similar.

~~~
jnsaff2
They've been shut down as well: [https://blog.taxify.eu/2017/09/bringing-
fairer-ride-hailing-...](https://blog.taxify.eu/2017/09/bringing-fairer-ride-
hailing-to-london/)

------
xedarius
Is this the first domino? Will France (and other European countries) then turn
around and say, ah oui we too don't think Uber is fit to operate.

Uber is pretty crappy in London, I had one the other night and the guy wasn't
even the guy who's picture was on the app (yes the driver did not match the
registered uber driver). This is before we even get onto the fact that he
didn't know where he was going.

~~~
w4tson
This happens all the time in black cabs. My wife and I rely on uber all the
time. It feels right for a city like London. This is a step backwards in my
opinion

I’d like to add that most black cab drivers make out like their card machine
doesn’t work. It’s a total cash scam to avoid VAT. I’ve had a black cab deny
picking me up before because I didn’t want taking very far (I had a twisted
ankle and just wanted to shorten my walk home)

~~~
tallanvor
They're required to accept cards and can't make you pay with cash. Just tell
them you don't have cash, and they'll make sure their card reader starts
working.

~~~
SamColes
Try that at 3am and see if the cab driver cares.

~~~
Nursie
If they want any paying at all, presumably they will.

They are required by TFL to have a working contactless and Chip'n'Pin device
mounted in the customer compartment. I have a feeling we're talking about
things that happened in the past.

~~~
poooogles
What's required and reality are sometimes very different. I know I've been
told the card machine doesn't work, then magically after saying I have no cash
it'll start working a minute later...

------
jnsaff2
Here's a little perspective from another company trying to bring Uberesque
services to London.

Not trying to defend Uber but the motives of british establishment might be a
bit more selfish then they want you to know.

[https://blog.taxify.eu/2017/09/bringing-fairer-ride-
hailing-...](https://blog.taxify.eu/2017/09/bringing-fairer-ride-hailing-to-
london/)

~~~
UK-AL
Black cab drivers are very active, and quite violent lobbyists towards tfl.

I have literally seen black cab drivers spit at uber drivers.

------
velox_io
The same week I read about the Gett-Blackcab bus partnership (woohoo one
route, that will make a difference..). £20 for a hour's drive in a Mercedes E
class (with a driver) is hurting the protection racket?

Other news, the government is offering huge subsidies/ grants for
conglomerates working on driverless cars and lorries.

Btw: I trust a computer more than most London drivers.

------
overcast
Uber needs to license their software to existing companies. Stop trying to
push cab companies out of business, and start trying to be cabOS. The user
experience is why we use the thing, I don't give a rats ass who is picking me
up, as long as they are safe and courteous. And they come pick me up with a
few taps of a phone app.

~~~
cityzen
I've been thinking about this as well and not only for Uber. Airbnb and other
similar companies could create platforms to allow people to do this on their
own. The sad reality, though, is you don't make billions by enabling people,
you make billions by controlling people.

~~~
overcast
You mean like Oracle, and Microsoft? Taking a small % of every cab
transaction, sounds like a billion dollar business to me. Right now the only
thing Uber is doing is spending more money than it makes.

~~~
gberger
Right now they take a large % of every cab transaction (done on their
platform).

~~~
overcast
Right now they take nothing, since all they are doing is subsidizing the
majority of the fare with VC money.

------
tim333
As one of the 3,500,000 users I hope they sort it out. I've not heard any
demands from us fellow Uber users to have the service banned for our own
protection. The assaults and muggings which happen are usually because
someones walking sometime's because they can't afford a cab.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
I think you'll find sexual assault happens because an assailant sexually
assaults someone, not because someone can't afford a black cab.

Do you really consider it acceptable for Uber not to do legally required
background checks (DBD, health)?

~~~
tim333
I think Uber should do background checks. I think the chances of sexual
assault are considerably higher walking down the street than getting a
cab/Uber the same distance.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
I'm not so sure, we'd need to look at statistics for that.

Regardless background checks should be done; just like cleaning checks in
commercial kitchens, you may be more likely to get sick from home cooking,
that seems largely irrelevant.

Another analogue: Most child sexual abuse is by family members, I don't see
that as a reason not to do background checks on care workers.

------
dipthegeezer
Uber will appeal no doubt and probably promise to sort out their problems, say
they are reforming etc.. and then get the license back

------
Stranger43
Did gett do to Uber in London what HailO/mytaxi did to them in Ireland?

This could simply be a case of Uber not adding enough value for independent
drivers who don’t need Uber’s regulatory avoidance scheme to get on the road
in the first place.

------
shamas
Uber's response to the assault claims.
[https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/vv598m/uber-
drivers-a...](https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/vv598m/uber-drivers-are-
at-the-center-of-another-rape-allegation-storm)

I suspect that this is actually behind doors shenanigans by the hands of
incumbents.

Uber is big... They have many more rides than anyone else (outside of Central
Central London), and there doesn't appear to be any evidence that more crime
proportionally is happening with them than any other company.

------
Haydos585x2
Big news. I'm sure there's a few parties working to make this happen and Uber
sure doesn't help themselves with the way they act. I suspect there'll be
enough community backlash along with very good lawyers working to get this
fixed very quickly. I suppose if it doesn't get solved it could be the first
of a series of moves that take out Uber. I bet there's a lot of cities looking
at this. Personally, I really don't want to have to use my local taxis and
love the alternative whether it's called Uber or not.

~~~
Angostura
> to get this fixed very quickly

Uber could fix this quickly by amending some of it's businesses processes that
effect safety.

------
randomsearch
Anecdotal evidence, but I can confirm black cabs are pretty rubbish and
extremely expensive in London. Broken card machines ("broken"?) are a thing.
Friends complain similarly.

Uber experiences all good so far.

Not an Uber lover here, just astounded by people reporting that black cabs
offer a decent service. I really like the design of black cabs, but since
those bad experiences I have avoided them completely.

------
Angostura
This would be an interesting tine for Lyft to launch in London if it can meet
the regulatory requirements

------
dagaci
Regardless of the merits of losing the London licence - which will almost
certainly be temporary. I hope there will be some other group to take
advantage and bring competition.

London Black cabs complain too much... about _everything_ .. yet I have not
heard about them modernising.

~~~
dx034
If they just lose it for a week this could be fatal. I can imagine most
drivers will now start signing up for competitors. As soon as the license is
gone, people will switch to a competitor. If they offer similar service and
price, there's no reason to come back to Uber. The only way then is to start
giving away free rides again.

------
Tycho
Is there clear evidence that Uber is less safe for drivers and passengers than
competing services? They've been operating for a while with millions of users,
so I expect any shortcomings would be evident in the statistics by now.

------
thepratt
There is a mention of the taxi association being a major opponent. The black
cabs have had numerous strikes regarding uber for their own wrong doing, it
just seems like another tirade from them. There was legislation passed that
required all black cabs to hold card readers, the overwhelming majority
refused to allow you to use them, install them, or acknowledge the legislation
~2 years after the fact. They only have themselves to blame.

At a point in the past black cabs used to be good, this is no longer true. Not
having uber (or an alternative - black cabs are not) will be more a problem
than most realize.

------
bentossell
Launched this off the back of this news:
[http://uberdrivers.london/](http://uberdrivers.london/) \- crowdsourced
thoughts from Uber drivers and users in London

------
2T1Qka0rEiPr
Thinking it through - Uber (indirectly) leads to 40,000 drivers being employed
(if I read correctly). I suspect this is just TfL flexing their muscles and
Uber will use these 21 days to find a compromise...

~~~
TomK32
I think they are self-employed, and not employed by Uber.

~~~
bencollier49
I think that is the situation that Uber would prefer, but sadly (for them)
not: [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/28/uber-
uk-t...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/28/uber-uk-tribunal-
self-employed-status)

------
Viper007Bond
Some existing discussion here:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15310631](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15310631)

------
superpope99
So, what does this actually mean? Will Uber not be able to operate in London,
or will it just not be sanctioned by TFL?

~~~
k-mcgrady
Supposedly they can't operate legally after 30th Sept unless some temporary
transitional agreement is put in place.

~~~
alexfoo
If they don't appeal their license expires on 30th September.

"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."

So they will leave it to late September to launch an appeal, and whilst the
appeal process is ongoing they can continue to operate.

How long they can push it after the 30th September isn't known as I've no idea
what the TfL appeal process involves.

Alongside the reasons in the link (crime reporting, medical certificates, DBS
checks, greyball) it's probably also got something to do with the huge
increase in license fee: [https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/uber-
licensing-cos...](https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/uber-licensing-
costs-in-london-to-rise-from-3000-to-3m-in-next-five-years-a3637866.html)

------
irpapakons
I have switched to using black cabs with Gett, I find it a much better
experience. I like knowing what to expect, lots of space, the drivers are
professionals and there's no pressure to chat. For me that's a good thing, I
prefer to have a bit of free time instead of a social interaction with a
stranger.

------
dx034
Not a lawyer but I find it interesting that they say to "immediately
challenge" the decision. Since they can operate in the meantime, shouldn't
they file it on the 21st day? They can already announce to appeal but
challenging it now could just shorten their life span?

------
retube
There are loads of alternative private minicab firms in London. Addison Lee
has excellent mobile site. No need to sign up or install an app. And in my
experience has always been excellent service and keenly priced.

------
joering2
Wait I thought they already operated above the law and didnt care about any
licensing stuff. Thats how they were able to offer low fees. What changed
here? Why would they care about some licensing all of sudden??

------
bogomipz
Does anyone know how much time is left for them to operate in London on the
current license then?

~~~
chillydawg
30th Sep

------
orloffm
So, can they become a mere client for black taxis, as they are in Berlin, for
example?

~~~
tim333
It probably wouldn't work well. There's already a well established one -
Hailo. Cabbies would probably use that rather than Uber who they don't like
much.

Edit- now it's become mytaxi app.

------
vvvv
So, what are the best alternatives to Uber in London right now?

------
billphipps
Black taxis in London are a 150+ year old institution also. As a Londoner I
found it sad seeing the drivers looking unhappy waiting for passengers at
Paddington....not getting so many. Black taxis just seem to me to be as much
of a part of London as Big Ben, Red Telephone Boxes and Red Double Decker
busses.

------
billphipps
w.t.f.? does this mean no more uber in London?

------
beedogs
Can they get rid of those dreadful oBikes next?

------
alva
40,000 jobs..

No coincidence this comes a day before Labour Party conference.

~~~
oneeyedpigeon
40,000 _drivers_. "40,000 jobs" is a misleading figure when those jobs can
vary enormously in terms of hours worked.

------
pavlakoos
I cannot understand why you need a license to ride other people from A to B...

~~~
aw4y
for the same reason you need a license to drive: regulations.

~~~
pavlakoos
But there is a license for that: a driving license. And the one which is given
allows to drive a car with passengers inside. It should be enough...

~~~
k-mcgrady
There's a difference between driving another person from A to B and charging
that person. As a comparison you can invite a friend to your house and cook
for them. If you start charging people for that there will be food safety
regulations etc. you need to comply with.

~~~
pavlakoos
So perhaps adding the insurance for Uber drivers would solve the issue? I
really don't see other reason. Except for the governments fighting with
concepts which disrupt current, inconvenient and outdated state of things.

~~~
Symbiote
"Criteria failed: 2) Medical certificates"

That seems an a obvious requirement for the insurance, but Uber aren't
complying.

Not everything needs to be seen with a negative (American?) view of
government. Uber's competitors, including those with apps, have licenses.

