TRANSPORT COMMITTEE INQUIRY
Uber has only one operating office in the City of Manchester, which covers the entirety of Greater Manchester and its ten constituent local authorities, including Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Bury, Stockport, and Salford. Furthermore, that same Manchester office also onboards drivers and vehicles licensed by
authorities such as Rossendale,
Wolverhampton, Burnley, Nelson, and others. This can be clearly seen in the lists presented to drivers when selecting the areas covered by the Manchester office.
This practice is fundamentally inconsistent with compliance with the triple lock rule, which requires that the operator, driver and vehicle are all licensed by the same local authority. This principle was clearly tested and upheld in Milton Keynes Council v Skyline Taxis and Private Hire Ltd [2017], which reinforced the fact that the triple lock rule had not been affected or removed by
the Deregulation Act 2015, and
highlighted the requirement for proper alignment between licensing authorities.
Bolt stated that it operates multiple offices and has a large compliance team dealing with each local authority, making it therefore more compliant with the triple lock requirements, while Veezu declared that it maintains offices within all regions in which it operates, demonstrating full compliance with not only the triple lock rule, but also the “sub-contracting” provision of the Deregulation Act 2015.
When questioned by Dr Scott Arthur MP regarding false allegations made against drivers, and whether any compensation is provided for loss of income when such allegations are proven to be false, the app based operators stated that this does not occur. However, available evidence presents a very different picture.
Drivers are frequently accused of serious misconduct, including being the wrong driver, rape, theft, unlawful imprisonment, speeding and dangerous driving. In the overwhelming majority of cases where CCTV evidence is available, these allegations are proven to be false and are made solely to obtain a refund. It is therefore incorrect to suggest that false allegations do not happen.
We have direct experience of police forces and of course drivers, bringing CCTV hard drives to us for evidence review in cases involving extremely serious allegations. In one such case, a driver accused of rape was deactivated for two months pending investigation, only for CCTV review to show that no such incident occurred and that the passenger thanked and tipped the driver before exiting the vehicle.
PHTM FEBRUARY 2026
This is not an isolated incident but a recurring widespread issue that significantly affects drivers’ livelihoods and the continuity of service to the public.
In fairness, the same question must also be asked of local authorities. When drivers are suspended or licences revoked based on allegations that are later proven to be false - often made solely to obtain a refund - there is similarly no mechanism for compensation for lost income or reputational damage.
Mark Robinson of Vokes Taxis made clear that many areas are being inundated with out-of-area licensed vehicles, with little to no enforcement action taken to prevent this. He explained the detrimental impact this has on local communities, including the displacement of local drivers and services, and the erosion of public safety due to a lack of meaningful local oversight.
We remain firm in our belief that significantly more must be done to address this issue. Amending or “tinkering” with the Deregulation Act 2015 will not resolve the problem, as the Act itself is not the cause.
Historically, prior to 2007, the issue of cross-border working predominantly involved hackney carriages operating out of area on private hire circuits. This was effectively addressed through the introduction of Intended Use Policies, which immediately reduced licence shopping by approximately 90% in all regions that adopted them, including Brighton, Rossendale, Newcastle, and others.
In Rossendale for example, the evidence shows that the number of licensed hackney carriage vehicles dropped from 3,196, right down to 157 within one year of adoption of the Intended Use Policy, since drivers became rapidly aware that such a licence was of no use to them if they could use it freely, or permanently, out of Rossendale.
The issue has since migrated to the private hire sector, where it has expanded rapidly due to the growth of large international ride-hailing operators. Given that this is now primarily a private hire issue, the most efficient and effective solution is to introduce primary legislation requiring all local authorities to adopt Intended Use Policies across all licence types.
By making Intended Use a statutory requirement rather than a local policy or licence condition, this approach would remove the risk of legal challenge, as seen in Knowsley, and provide a consistent, enforceable national framework to prevent licence shopping and restore effective local control.
7
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
