Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Brighton] UBER Licence Revoked in Brighton and Hove
- Thread starter Westdene Seagull
- Start date
mickybha
Well-known member
- Jan 2, 2010
- 515
From the council:
Dear All,
Please find attached the Licensing Panel’s decision letter, dated 1st May 2018, following the licensing sub-committee (Panel) hearing on the 23rd April 2018 to determine UBL’s renewal application of their private hire operators licence. Below is the Council’s press statement.
Uber licence renewal turned down
Following the hearing on Monday 23 April, Brighton & Hove City Council’s licensing panel has decided against renewing Uber Britannia Ltd’s Private Hire Operator Licence in the city.
The unanimous decision was taken as the members of the panel were not satisfied that UBL are a ‘fit and proper person’ to hold an operator’s licence under the terms of Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 and the council’s licensing objectives.
The panel considered all circumstances relating to the application and the factors operating in Brighton & Hove. This included a number of issues raised by those objecting to the application, which they found to carry very little or no evidential weight.
However, the panel do have significant concerns about the company’s data breach and UBL’s lack of commitment to use only Brighton & Hove licensed drivers in the city. These formed the basis of the decision to not renew the licence.
Chair of the licensing panel, Councillor Jackie O’Quinn, said (TBC): “When making Hackney Carriage and Private Hire operator licensing decisions, our priority is the safety of residents and visitors and, due to the data breach and the lack of commitment to using drivers licensed here, we were not satisfied that UBL are a fit and proper person to hold an operator’s licence in the city.
“All Brighton & Hove private hire and Hackney Carriage drivers in the city operate under the same licences and guidelines contained in the Blue Book and undergo the same background checks, whichever company they drive for. In the original application in 2015, UBL gave a firm commitment to adhere to the standards set out in the Blue Book and only to use Brighton & Hove licensed drivers. We do not feel the spirit of this commitment has been kept to. In the panel’s view, large numbers of taxis operating in the city that do not meet our Blue Book standards puts the safety of residents and visitors at potential risk.
“We recognise there are strong feelings on this issue and would like to thank all those who took the time to make submissions to the hearing.”
For more details on the decision, read the full decision letter (attached). see http://www.bhtaxinews.cab/downlo…/2018-0501-uber-refusal.pdf
The hearing was held in public to make the process as open and transparent as possible. As well as representatives from Uber, the panel heard views for and against renewing the licence from interested parties, including residents and the local taxi trade.
If Uber decide to appeal against the decision, their drivers licensed with Brighton & Hove can continue to operate in the city while the appeal is heard. Any appeal must be made to the Magistrates Court (Edward Street, Brighton) within 21 days of notification of this decision
Dear All,
Please find attached the Licensing Panel’s decision letter, dated 1st May 2018, following the licensing sub-committee (Panel) hearing on the 23rd April 2018 to determine UBL’s renewal application of their private hire operators licence. Below is the Council’s press statement.
Uber licence renewal turned down
Following the hearing on Monday 23 April, Brighton & Hove City Council’s licensing panel has decided against renewing Uber Britannia Ltd’s Private Hire Operator Licence in the city.
The unanimous decision was taken as the members of the panel were not satisfied that UBL are a ‘fit and proper person’ to hold an operator’s licence under the terms of Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 and the council’s licensing objectives.
The panel considered all circumstances relating to the application and the factors operating in Brighton & Hove. This included a number of issues raised by those objecting to the application, which they found to carry very little or no evidential weight.
However, the panel do have significant concerns about the company’s data breach and UBL’s lack of commitment to use only Brighton & Hove licensed drivers in the city. These formed the basis of the decision to not renew the licence.
Chair of the licensing panel, Councillor Jackie O’Quinn, said (TBC): “When making Hackney Carriage and Private Hire operator licensing decisions, our priority is the safety of residents and visitors and, due to the data breach and the lack of commitment to using drivers licensed here, we were not satisfied that UBL are a fit and proper person to hold an operator’s licence in the city.
“All Brighton & Hove private hire and Hackney Carriage drivers in the city operate under the same licences and guidelines contained in the Blue Book and undergo the same background checks, whichever company they drive for. In the original application in 2015, UBL gave a firm commitment to adhere to the standards set out in the Blue Book and only to use Brighton & Hove licensed drivers. We do not feel the spirit of this commitment has been kept to. In the panel’s view, large numbers of taxis operating in the city that do not meet our Blue Book standards puts the safety of residents and visitors at potential risk.
“We recognise there are strong feelings on this issue and would like to thank all those who took the time to make submissions to the hearing.”
For more details on the decision, read the full decision letter (attached). see http://www.bhtaxinews.cab/downlo…/2018-0501-uber-refusal.pdf
The hearing was held in public to make the process as open and transparent as possible. As well as representatives from Uber, the panel heard views for and against renewing the licence from interested parties, including residents and the local taxi trade.
If Uber decide to appeal against the decision, their drivers licensed with Brighton & Hove can continue to operate in the city while the appeal is heard. Any appeal must be made to the Magistrates Court (Edward Street, Brighton) within 21 days of notification of this decision
The Maharajah of Sydney
Well-known member
Certainly not the case here in Sydney.
Since Uber stared operating here over 5 years ago the number of new competitors has been on a steady increase.
Taxify from Estonia and Ola from India would be viewed as Uber's main rivals - Lyft from U.S.A are also about to enter the marketplace.
I find Taxify quite a good alternative. Whilst their business model prices them at only about 5% below Uber they regularly offer 15- 20% discounted fares on top of that.
The Brighton & Hove City Council PHL application is 6-8 months of hard work for any applicant and in principle sets the bar high for high quality well trained drivers in safe cars..
There is no way many of the drivers I have used in the white and greens have been through the entire process and as for those shitty Peugeot’s being safe? Don’t make me laugh!!!!
Shocking decision!!!!
There is no way many of the drivers I have used in the white and greens have been through the entire process and as for those shitty Peugeot’s being safe? Don’t make me laugh!!!!
Shocking decision!!!!
- Thread starter
- #46
Here's my prediction. HT will mention out of town drivers taking money out of the local economy - despite many drivers living in B&H. Of course HT doesn't use any non-local companies at all. He'll then mention a race to the bottom but will not take into account the appalling service Streamline and co have been running for many years with bone shaking cars, not knowing how to get places, many drivers barely speaking English, over charging and not to mention the flaky app.
I use Uber and Streamline 2-3 times a week and to be frank I’ve never had a bad Uber car, streamline on the other hand are crap cars that often stink of BO and other disgusting smells.
How many of these drivers meet the “blue book” standards is beyond me!
- Thread starter
- #49
How many drivers match the photo on their dashboard
I will never tip a streamline driver again.
This, Streamline’s so-called service is appalling and returning their monopoly re taxi service provision to the city will only result in a further deterioration in their service.
I think [MENTION=230]Rowdey[/MENTION]'s analysis is spot on. If Streamline are pony then I'm all for increased competition putting them out of business, just not the sort of competition that is so blatantly using predatory pricing to undercut existing cabbies and forcing a race to the bottom.
How many drivers match the photo on their dashboard
Agreed, those defending the B+H taxis really need to start using them, especially at a weekend night. There is no way whoever those drivers are have any kind of knowledge and I'd doubt some of them even having driving licenses.
Also try going out of town and you'll be met with probably a fixed fare 50% more than it would be on meter.
My gripe is, like many sectors before, I don’t like the back door deregulation and race-to-the-bottom which the taxi profession is now suffering from this element of the gig economy. Personally I rarely experience the issues you highlight (and I have a lot of experience!), but if taxi standards do need raising then fair enough but do this via other methods.
Quite.
This. There’s plenty of other tools available to raise standards.
No, it will be most interesting to see how high the fares are set by B&H cabbies.
The Spanish
Well-known member
spot on
What is this deregulation you talk of, every Uber driver has to apply for and obtain a PHL, you do get that right?
Wrong, for those who want an efficient effective way of managing transport solutions in clean safe cars with fixed competitive-rates there’s an Uber, anyone who doesn’t like this concept take your chance with everyone else!!!!