Andy Peters Brighton & Hove Cab Trade Association
info@bhcta.co.uk www.bhcta.co.uk
Knowing that Uber was to be speaking at the government’s second Select Committee Call for Evidence – Taxi and Private Hire panel meeting, I had to force myself to watch it on the basis that with my own experience, Uber reps will say what they think needs to be heard, and I was right.
There was Uber and Bolt, who have similar business models, and also Veezu, who are in between them with a slightly different operation of encompassing/buying up local companies into its operation. Additionally, it was really good to see that a proper traditional local company representative, Mark Robinson of Vokes Taxis from Medway, was there. Notably he made the important points about being locally based and working closing with his local licensing authority and put forward as much as he could under the circum- stances by countering Uber and Bolt. I did sense a touch of his frustration, and if I had been there instead of him I don’t think I would have had as much patience as he showed.
I won’t go through all the many points I picked up on; however, it was very noticeable, and dare I say enjoyable, for me to watch Emma O’Dwyer (EOD), the Uber rep, squirm when being asked by panel member Dr Scot Arthur (DSA) MP as to how many WAVs it had.
DSA: “So, Emma, If I was to call on Uber, how likely is it to be wheelchair accessible vehicle?”
EOD: “Err…I’m actually not sure of the precise numbers so I can take that away…and...”
DSA: “Is it more than 5% likely…more than 50% likely… more than 1% likely?”
EOD: “I…what’s really important for Uber…” DSA: “Is it not shamefully you don’t know?”
EOD: “I have to take that number away and we’ll look to get it to you…but…”
DSA: “Is it not incredible that you don’t know…is that not quite an important…so you’re values as a company you don’t know how much of your fleet is accessible to wheelchair users?”
EOD: “The reality is that will vary quite a lot across the country, and the reason for that is as other panel members touched on is the vehicle requirements locally will be quite significantly different. So in some parts of the country such as Brighton….”
66
DSA: “Again this is about you meeting minimum requirements rather than through leadership for more accessible vehicles on your fleet.”
I will stop there, but I would have liked the Uber rep to have carried on with what she was going to state about Brighton because that would have been extremely interesting to me.
In 2015 I had an operator’s condition of licence put in place, and agreed by all the trade reps and companies here that any fleet of 100+ licensed vehicles must have 20% WAVs. This was pretty much the case anyway due to the local trade working very closely with disability groups and the council, but I considered it important to be in black and white.
Just after that Uber arrived here and was given a short- term licence, and then a further short-term licence. At the time it didn’t have many Brighton & Hove licensed drivers/cars and instead flooded the city with Lewes PHVs, even telling potential drivers to get licensed in Lewes and not to bother with Brighton & Hove much to the dismay of the B&H council.
When Uber reapplied for its operator licence in 2018, it had to go to a Licencing Panel - I was a trade rep at that meeting, along with my now retired colleague, Sean Ridley, who acted for Unite. The charismatic Uber barrister, Philip Kolvin KC, effectively pleaded for the licence to be renewed and spoke about that condition of licence stating it would have more than the required 20% should the licence be renewed. Another example of Uber saying anything to get their own way. Just like five years ago where an Uber rep at a Trade Forum meeting stated that all Uber PHVs in B&H will be fully electric by 2025… yeah right!
The licence wasn’t renewed but Uber appealed and won.
By now Uber had 100 B&H licensed PH drivers/vehicles so had to comply with that condition of licence of 20% WAVs, but actually had to rent out WAVs (locally licensed) to fulfil the requirement. This cost Uber money as it was providing those WAV vehicles. Incidentally... none of the hundreds of out-of-town cars working here under Lewes, Southampton, Chichester, Portsmouth, Havant and so on, were or are WAVs as far as we have seen to date.
This worked fine for the next ten years, but moving on to early 2025, Uber initiated the proposal to get rid of that condition of licence (could Mr Kolvin please take note of that) which unfortunately was accepted by the licensing committee.
So, Uber got its own way, yet again. DECEMBER 2025 PHTM
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76
