wrote:
In article , (Someone
Somewhere) wrote:

On 22/09/2017 16:27, wrote:
In article , (Someone
Somewhere) wrote:

"Fairly comprehensive" - they've made a list of things they don't
like as grounds to refuse a license under "fit and proper". That
sounds more tenuous than comprehensive.

As I've commented elsewhere in this thread, those are very serious
matters, especially the fourth which appears to amount to criminal
behaviour.

Yet you choose to not debate the points with me, particularly the
fourth which was "failure to explain" rather than an actual
allegation of use of such software.

I agree there could be an innocent explanation for blocking regulators use
of the app. I'm sure the courts will be very interested to hear what it
might be.


The plot thickens:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tfl-inspectors-gave-uber-green-light-10-times-flbp7tqxs?shareToken=f14d27cfb9669def03c9774bbe7ba 501

Uber was repeatedly given a clean bill of health by transport bosses before
the sudden decision to ban it from London, The Times has learnt.

Inspections carried out by Transport for London between 2013 and the middle
of this year failed to find any major fault with the company, it emerged,
leading to claims that the cancellation of its licence smacked of
“political opportunism�.

Data released under the Freedom of Information Act showed that TfL
conducted ten inspections at Uber’s London headquarters and ruled that it
“satisfied regulatory requirements�.

In April Uber also successfully passed its annual compliance audit, which
is thought to have involved 20 officials from TfL’s licensing department
reviewing thousands of documents over two days.

Uber, which is used by 3.5 million people in the capital, was told on
Friday that its licence to operate would not be renewed when it runs out at
the end of this week.

Yesterday it emerged that Uber’s biggest competitor may be aiming to set up
in London. Lyft, which operates only in the US, has spoken with TfL five
times since last November.

This morning, Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, accused Uber of deploying an
“army� of PR experts and lawyers in an “aggressive� move to take TfL to
court to appeal against its suspension. He said the move contradicted
statements in the press saying Uber was ready to negotiate compromises to
get its licence back.

“You can’t have it both ways,� he told the BBC from the Labour Party
conference. “On the one hand, acting in an aggressive manor throwing all
sorts of things around, and on the other hand briefing journalists that
they want to do a deal.�

A public backlash against the licence decision was mounting with about
700,000 people signing a petition calling on Mr Khan to reinstate Uber.

Criticism has been made of the mayor for appearing to side with black cab
drivers and the GMB union, which has campaigned heavily against Uber.

TfL, which is chaired by Mr Khan, said on Friday that Uber was no longer a
“fit and proper� operator. It failed the company on four areas, including
its slack approach to reporting serious criminal offences and failing to
complete criminal record checks properly.

Uber, which will appeal against the decision at Westminster magistrates’
court, was given no warning of the concerns and only notified of the
decision five minutes before Friday’s announcement. It has had only one
previous meeting with senior management at TfL this year and bosses refused
to discuss the licensing process. A series of other meetings, including
some with Mr Khan, were cancelled.

TfL was asked yesterday to provide further information about the ruling,
including the basis on which it was made, but declined. A spokesman said:
“We have nothing further to add.�

Data released by TfL at the end of July showed that ten compliance
inspections had taken place at Uber in the past four years, the last of
which was in April.

Only one, in August 2016, showed that Uber was failing to comply fully with
its licence. However, in that instance TfL later said that Uber took “all
reasonable steps� and the breach was deemed outside its control.

Uber’s conduct has been criticised by others. Last year it was reported
that the Metropolitan Police investigated 32 drivers for the alleged rape
or sexual assault of passengers in 12 months.

In August, Inspector Neil Billany wrote to TfL warning that Uber was
failing properly to investigate allegations against its drivers.

Uber sources said that TfL had never relayed any concerns to the company.
It was given a temporary six-month licence when its previous five-year
licence expired at the end of May.

Tom Elvidge, general manager of Uber in London, said: “We’re always willing
to talk to Transport for London and the mayor. While we haven’t been asked
to make any changes, we’d like to know what we can do. But that requires a
dialogue we sadly haven’t been able to have recently.�

Uber has hired Thomas de la Mare, QC, to lead its appeal. It also drafted
in the law firm Hogan Lovells, The Daily Telegraph said. In a case this
year Mr de la Mare prevented two out of three restrictions being imposed on
Uber by TfL.

On 25/09/2017 10:47, Recliner wrote:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tfl-inspectors-gave-uber-green-light-10-times-flbp7tqxs?shareToken=f14d27cfb9669def03c9774bbe7ba 501


Uber has hired Thomas de la Mare, QC, to lead its appeal.

But was he hired using the cab-rank rule?



--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

"Arthur Figgis" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 25/09/2017 10:47, Recliner wrote:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tfl-inspectors-gave-uber-green-light-10-times-flbp7tqxs?shareToken=f14d27cfb9669def03c9774bbe7ba 501


Uber has hired Thomas de la Mare, QC, to lead its appeal.

But was he hired using the cab-rank rule?

is there any other way