Saturday, August 12, 2017

"MINICAB" Passenger Jailed For Raping Fellow "MINICAB" Passenger.

A man who said he had 'the right' to sexually assault a vulnerable woman after paying for her Minicab home has been jailed.

Jeetender Singh, 41 (09.11.85), of West Hill, SW15, was convicted of assault by penetration at Blackfriars Crown Court on Friday, 7 July following a five-day trial.

He was sentenced at the same court on Wednesday, 9 August to five years' imprisonment. He will also remain on the sex offenders register indefinitely.

On 14 February 2015, a 22-year-old woman called the Metropolitan Police to report that she had been sexually assaulted in the early hours of the same day.

The victim had been out with friends in Piccadilly Circus. During the course of the evening she began to feel unwell and decided to order a private hire car to go home.

Whilst she was waiting for her minicab, a man approached her and started chatting to her and said he would look after her. When the Minicab arrived he got in with her.

On the journey back the victim was sick in the car and was told she would have to pay more because of this. The man, who the victim knew as 'Hazim', offered to pay for the fare so they stopped at an ATM to get money. They then continued to the victim's home address in North Kensington. 

When they arrived Hazim followed the victim to her doorstep and again said he would look after her. The victim said she was fine and just wanted to go to bed. As she went through the door and attempted to close it, Hazim pushed passed her into her apartment. The victim kept asking him to leave but he refused.

The victim collapsed into her bed and woke up to find Hazim sexually assaulting her. She told him to get off her to which he replied "it's the least you can do for me, I paid for the mess in your minicab."

The victim then pushed Hazim off her and he left her flat.

When she contacted police, the victim gave a detailed description of the man who had attacked her to police.

Officers spoke with the Uber driver who identified the ATM they stopped at for the cash withdrawal. The suspect was later identified as Singh through CCTV and the bank details obtained from the ATM.

He was arrested on 6 July 2016 at Heathrow Airport after returning to the UK. He was interviewed and denied the offence, but was charged on 10 October 2016. 

Detective Sergeant Paula Hill, from the Met's Child Abuse and Sexual Offences Command, said: 

"This was a serious sexual offence committed with some element of planning by the defendant. Singh completely took advantage of a vulnerable female after a night out in central London. Once inside her home address on the context of helping her he refused to leave. 

"The victim was left distraught by this attack but has showed extreme bravery in attending court to give evidence. She is very pleased with the verdict and feels that she may have prevented Singh committing similar crimes on other women."

Unfortunately, when this was reported by the Met Police on their total policing webpage, they referred to the Minicab as a Private Taxi (1 time ) and Taxi (5 times). 

This is disgraceful from the Met who know the difference between Minicabs and Taxis. 


The problem of sexual assault and rapes in Minicabs is being hidden from the public by TfL and the Met who collude together to water down the statistics that show this problem in London is now at epidemic level. We've seen the evidence in leaked emails, where a special arrangement of tip offs have been set up by TfL, when FOI requests are made. This gives them time to massage the figures. 

Friday, August 11, 2017

Plaza Executive Cars..."Taxi Service"...In Liquidation....Still Operating From Royal National Hotel?

Letter from Greenbadgejohn: 
As the race to the bottom continues to endorse illegality within the private hire systems (licensed or otherwise) 

In the case of the unlicensed car service at the Royal National Hotel, it only goes to show how low corrupted hotel concierge's will stoop to place their own well paid guests into unsafe vehicles for the devils shilling.

As hard as TFL tries to distance its self from illegal activities in reality TFL lost its moral compass the day it originally licensed Uber in London and now the fly by nights circle London with impunity licensed or not as anybody with half a brain knows that a yellow private hire disk holds not one iota of credibility as disclosed in a recent Freedom of Information Request. 

(FOI 0845-1718) 9th July 2017 Disclosed:

Legislation in London Allows licensed PHV's to be used for private purposes; They can therefore also be driven by unlicensed drivers.
It is not a regulatory requirement for vehicle owners, whether individuals or companies,to inform us when a PHV is used by a non licensed driver for private use nor do they need to request special permission to do so.

Melissa Nichols (FOI case officer)
General Council, Transport for London.

So there you have it, An extract from a recent FOI request clearly showing how unimportant a Private hire Yellow disk actually is on a private hire vehicle.

Anyone can use, borrow, or hire a private hire vehicle irrespective of their previous criminal past (as long as they hold a driving license) and TFL do not involve themselves one bit, so a central London hotel ducking and diving with illegal private hire services (unlicensed by TFL) is only apparently breaking one law..... not paying TFL a licence fee to do so!

The TFL crap continues to rise to the surface like an undigested curry... disgraceful.

Be Lucky, & keep up the good fight against this most corrupted regime.

greenbadgejohn (on twitter)

Comment From Len Martin ex chair of the UCG:

So, if the Hotel isn't a satellite office, it is offering a car service for which it can expect no compensation for providing such a service. 

So if it is offering to be an "arranger" of such a service wouldn't we expect it to offer a range of services from a selection of suppliers?
But it  seems to be an exclusive offering. 

So would it be unreasonable to anticipate some formal of reciprocation? 

Maybe not even cash, but something. This maybe direct or "in kind" it can't legally be a formal activity because we know they are not licensed. 

So is there any form of compensation taking place? 
How does this sit with the bribery act 2010?

UCG Say COs Have No Power To Confiscate Personal Property : TfL Insist Taxi Paper In Rear Is Advertising.

After yesterday's major bus crash, questions were asked about the driver. 
We wanted to know if the bus driver was also working as a PHV driver.

Not hard to check you would think. 
But again this is TfL after all.

As John McEnroe said " You cannot be serious.

It's now become crystal clear, that TfL are positively getting involved to cover up UberRape and also protect the name of this company from any bad publicity.

If this wasn't serious, it would be comical.

So TFL believe this headline is misleading and want it removed from Taxis. Surely they should be over the moon that a frequent predator has been taken out of circulation !

To Comply....Or Not ToComply....That Is The Question:
Compliance officers are still insisting Taxi drivers remove the Taxi news paper from view and in certain cases have entered Taxis (without invitation) and (in our opinion) illegally removed the drivers property from the vehicle.

It's been alleged that officers were told by their managers to say this headline is misleading and must be removed, but as they can't come up with the legislation to back up their actions, they're now saying its a form of advertising.

Isn't it time our Taxi trade representatives challenged the dictatorial actions of these compliance officers??

At least the United Cabbies Group are up to date....

Taxi Leaks have asked TfLTPH via their Twitter account, to be shown the legislated regulation which gives a CO the power to physically remove property (a news paper) from my Taxi. In fact we've asked 65 times.

So far, @TfLTPH have ignored every tweet. 

We would take it then, that no such legislation or regulation is in place and that the COs are acting outside their authority. 

We have now been informed by the Metropolitan police that COs who enter a Taxi uninvited and remove these papers, are libel to a charge of theft from a motor vehicle. 

               Caught on Camera


TfL now believe they've found a way round the lack of legislation and a get out of jail free card, by saying that having a news paper on the parcel shelf of the Taxi constitutes advertising and contravenes the "no advertising regulation". 

Well , 24,000 Cabbies can play at that game.

I've had trade papers and other literature on the back shelf for over 44 years. It's never been a problem..... Till now.
Wonder what their problem is with this issue.

If the Taxi paper is an advert, then so are all the Trade org diaries and so are the Credit Card stickers, as are Kleenex tissue boxes. All these items could be deemed advertisements. 

Taxi Leaks now expects COs to demand the removal of all representative org literature which bears an org or union name, such as stickers and diaries. 
(Just think, no more M&S vouchers) 

Let's now see the orange diary org fight this full on for a change, on behalf of their 10,000 members...instead of taking a back seat and letting TfL walk all over us. 
And it just gets worse...
"Can you take your badge off sir, I need to examine that it's real".
You couldn't make this up, it's pure harassment and the orgs need to step up to the plate and fight for the trade they get paid to represent. 

Taxi Leaks Extra Comment:


The light at the end of the tunnel, has been switched back on...

Thursday, August 10, 2017

Breaking News : Former Uber CEO Travis Kalanick is getting sued for alleged fraud by venture capital firm Benchmark Capital

The battle between Benchmark Capital and Travis Kalanick just went nuclear, with the venture capital firm suing the former Uber CEO for fraud, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty. The complaint was filed earlier today in Delaware Chancery Court.

Key graph, per the suit: "Kalanick, the former CEO of Uber, to entrench himself on Uber's Board of Directors and increase his power over Uber for his own selfish ends. Kalanick's overarching objective is to pack Uber's Board with loyal allies in an effort to insulate his prior conduct from scrutiny and clear the path for his eventual return as CEO—all to the detriment of Uber's stockholders, employees, driver-partners, and customers."

Why it matters: If Benchmark's suit is successful, Kalanick would be kicked off Uber's board of directors -- thus eliminating any faint hopes of him returning to the company in a substantial role.

What to know: Benchmark was an early investor in Uber, and has a seat on its board of directors. It also helped spearhead the move to have Kalanick resign in June, and tensions between the two have contributed, in part, to the slow pace of finding a replacement. Oh, and venture capital firms don't usually sue fellow board members of their single most valuable investment.

Complaint: The suit revolves around the June 2016 decision to expand the size of Uber's board of voting directors from eight to 11, with Kalanick having the sole right to designate those seats. Kalanick would later name himself to one of those seats following his resignation, since his prior board seat was reserved for the company's CEO. 

The other two seats remain unfilled. Benchmark argues that it never would have granted Kalanick those three extra seats had it known about his "gross mismanagement and other misconduct at Uber" — which Benchmark claims included "pervasive gender discrimination and sexual harassment," and the existence of confidential findings (a.k.a. The Stroz Report) that recently-acquired self-driving startup Otto had "allegedly harbored trade secrets stolen from a competitor." Benchmark argues that this alleged nondisclosure of material information invalidates Benchmark's vote to enlarge the board.

Moreover, Benchmark alleges that Kalanick pledged in writing -- as part of his resignation agreement -- that the two empty board seats would be independent and subject to approval by the entire board (something Benchmark says was the reason it didn't sue for fraud at the time). But, according to the complaint, Kalanick has not been willing to codify those changes via an amended voting agreement. 

What Benchmark wants: An invalidation of the June 2016 stockholder vote and related actions, which would effectively eliminate the three board seats. And, in so doing, remove Kalanick from Uber's board of directors. It also is asking the court for a preliminary injunction against Kalanick's ongoing involvement in Uber board matters which, if granted, would remove him from the CEO search process.

Stakes: Per the complaint, Kalanick currently holds around a 10% equity stake in Uber, which most recently was valued at around $70 billion. Benchmark holds approximately 13 percent.

Source : Axios 

Royal National Hotel Alleged To Be Offering Guests An Illegal, Unlicensed Car Service.

A London Taxi Driver picking up a Passenger at the Royal National Hotel, overheard the concierge taking a booking for their car service.

The driver spotted this list on the counter of the reception desk, giving prices from the hotel, to destinations around London. 

The price list also states, it's car service is licensed by TfL and gives a licence number. We checked the number with the TfL website licence checker and found no such licence exists. 

TfL TPH Twitter account was asked to confirm if this was a legal car service and was the Hotel in possession of a PHV operators licence or licence variation for a third party operator. 

The TfL TPH Twitter account then came back with this reply. 

We also checked out Plaza Executive Cars Ltd and found that if this company exists, it's not licence by TfL 

So there you have it.
The Hotel has no such licence which makes this car service illegal. As all journeys are taken illegally, the passengers will be in the same position as if they had been touted in the street. 

We will be expecting TfL to visit the Royal National Hotel and take action to get them to stop illegally touting customers. We would also expect a prosecution in this case where the Hotel is allowing the public to be put in danger by their concierge use of an unlicensed service .... We expect this but, but going on TfL's poor performance in the area,we won't be holding our breath. 

Taxi Drivers Get TfL To Admit Uber Are Acting Illegally. Blue Touch Paper Lit, Next Comes The Fireworks.

On Monday, a group of Taxi drivers from Dads Defending Daughters and also trade reps from the LCDC, met at a prearranged location just off the M25. Their mission was to drive into Brighton and make themselves available for job offers from online Taxi apps. 

The main Brighton Taxi association had been informed and agreed to join with the action. This wasn't to be a predatory take on regular Brighton licensed Taxi work, the aim was to show Uber -who have been using London licensed vehicles and London licensed drivers- are working illegally in disregard of the Hackney Carriage acts and the Private Hire act of 1998.


The procession of Taxis, paraded outside Brighton and Hove's Town Hall were drivers on London Taxi apps, switched on and made themselves available for hire.

To most drivers amazement, job offers came through... and some were accepted. 

Screen shots were then sent to TfL to seek conformation on whether any laws/regulations was being contravened. 

Then TfL TPH dropped his little bomb shell

Now perhaps TfL TPH could explain why TfL registered Ubers are allowed to wait for App work, in a high street car park in Reigate and Banstead.


First 4 Registration Numbers We Checked, All Registered With TfL, Licensed For PH Work In London!!!

Extra Comment from Dads Defending Daughters' Lenny Etheridge: 

I believe the UCG's proposed demo is a direct response to Brighton.

All this Human Rights tosh about magazines on show, is deflecting from the most significant move against TfL (and Uber) in five years!

I am of the opinion, most drivers don't understand the significance of Monday's action.

On Monday, the Dads Defending Daughters along with the LCDC, lit the blue touch paper... but the fireworks are only just about to start. 

Wednesday, August 09, 2017

U.S. card firm Vantiv clinches $10 billion deal to buy Worldpay

U.S. credit card processing company Vantiv moved closer to creating a $29 billion global payments powerhouse on Wednesday with a formal offer to buy Britain's Worldpay for 8 billion pounds ($10 billion).

Vantiv's (VNTV.N) move is part of a wave of payments company mergers around the world as consumers are moving away from cash transactions to smartphone or mobile payments and the industry, once a backwater of banking, faces growing competition from newcomers trying to disrupt the way merchants are paid.

Recent deals have included British payment firm Paysafe Group (PAYS.L) backing a 3 billion pound takeover offer from a consortium of Blackstone BX. and CVC Capital Partners and French payments specialist Ingenico making a 1.5 billion euro swoop on Swedish rival Bambora.

Although Vantiv's deal was first announced on July 5, it has taken several weeks to conclude, with the deadline for a formal offer extended twice as Vantiv and Worldpay (WPG.L) haggled over governance and safeguarding British jobs.

The combined Worldpay and Vantiv, which were both spun out of banks and have thrived in their home markets, will be called "Worldpay" and headquartered in Cincinnati, with a primary listing in New York and a secondary one in London.

Worldpay said that Vantiv has offered 55 pence in cash, 0.0672 of a new Vantiv share, an interim dividend of 0.8 pence per Worldpay share and a special 4.2 pence dividend, valuing the former RBS (RBS.L) business at 397 pence per share. 

"Our combined company will have unparalleled scale, a comprehensive suite of solutions, and the worldwide reach to make us the payments industry global partner of choice," Vantiv's president and CEO Charles Drucker said, adding that the deal will bring benefits in terms of size and technology.

Worldpay shareholders will own around 43 percent, while Vantiv investors will have 57 percent of the combined group whose pro forma enterprise value is more than 22 billion pounds.

Vantiv is paying a premium of 22.7 percent to the closing Worldpay share price of 320 pence on July 3, the last business day before the offer period started, and has proposed a "mix and match" facility which allows Worldpay shareholders to vary the proportion of shares and cash they receive.

The company's international operations will be run from London, but there will be no formal guarantees for jobs in Britain where Worldpay's UK division employs about 1,200 of its roughly 5,000 total. Worldpay is Britain's biggest payment provider, processing about 31 million mobile, online and in-store transactions each day.


The combined company will process some $1.5 trillion in payments and 40 billion transactions through more than 300 payment methods in 146 countries and 126 currencies, with a combined net revenue of over $3.2 billion.

"We're creating a truly global platform for expansion," said Worldpay CEO Philip Jansen, adding the business will rank as the top payment firm in the U.S. and in Europe and sees scope for additional growth in Latin America and the Asia Pacific region.

The new Worldpay will be led by Vantiv boss Charles Drucker as executive chairman and co-CEO while Worldpay's Jansen will report to Drucker and act as co-CEO.

Vantiv chief financial officer Stephanie Ferris will become the group's CFO and report to Drucker.

The combined group will see five Worldpay directors sitting on the board with Sir Mike Rake, who is Worldpay's non-executive chairman, becoming lead director of the new board.

The deal, which has been unanimously recommended by Worldpay directors, is expected to close early next year at the latest with no major regulatory concerns, Worldpay and Vantiv executives told analysts.


Goldman Sachs and Barclays acted for Worldpay, while Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse worked with Vantiv on the deal, which gives Worldpay an enterprise value of about 9.3 billion pounds and will result in annual recurring pre-tax cost synergies of about $200 million.

These synergies are expected to be fully realized by the end of the third year following completion of the merger.

But the combined group is also expected to incur one-off restructuring and integration costs of around $330 million.

Craig Bonthron, a fund manager at Kames Capital, said that the deal was a sensible transaction which allowed UK investors to participate in the upside and would help consolidate "what is a fragmented market and diversify Vantiv's revenues away from struggling 'big box' retailers in the U.S."

But a top 20 Worldpay investor told Reuters he wanted to speak to Worldpay's directors because he felt Vantiv's bid undervalued the business, although he welcomed a secondary listing in London.

"The tweaks (to the initial bid) have been beneficial but the fundamental questions around valuation persist," he said.

Worldpay said on Wednesday its first-half underlying earnings rose 13.6 percent, driven by strong growth across all its businesses and tightened costs at its UK unit.


Source : Rueters 

Stop the fake taxis: warning as hundreds sign-up to illegal cab services on Facebook

YOUNGSTERS have been warned not to accept lifts from strangers after it emerged that hundreds of people had signed up an illegal taxi service on a social networking website.

The Daily Echo has been made aware of two Facebook groups offering lifts around Bournemouth and Poole.

The groups, one of which has more than 2,000 members, encourage people to offer lifts and helps those looking for transport get in touch with drivers.

Members are able to post in the group either offering or asking for a lift at certain times. All the details are then finalised through private messages.

Messages insinuate a fee would need to be paid, although there is no mention of money changing hands in either of the groups' descriptions.

Some of the messages include, "doing lifts for £3 to most areas", "anyone needing lifts cheap?!££", "doing lifts all night ££", "lift in 20 minutes from Cameo?" and "bored so doing lifts".

Offering lifts is not a crime in itself, but becomes so when the driver asks for a fee above petrol costs.

Dorset Police and both Bournemouth and Poole councils have been made aware of the groups - but it is up to the local authorities to prosecute should any of the users be found to be operating illegally.

Peter Haikin, head of regulatory services for Bournemouth and Poole councils, said: "Anyone acting as a taxi operator or driving a taxi without a licence is in breach of the law and could face prosecution, with fines of up to £2,500.

"We are aware of both Facebook groups and are investigating to ascertain whether any users are operating illegally.

"If they are, we will take action to prevent further operations, which would include requesting Facebook to have the groups closed down.

"In the interests of safety and security, we would advise people not to use unlicensed taxis.”

Former Borough of Poole licensing committee chair Cllr Judy Butt has expressed her concerns about the groups and has warned that it is not just illegal but that people could be compromising their safety.

Cllr Butt added: "Unlike taxis these drivers are not regulated, not insured and have not been through the strict checks that those who have taxi licences have to go through.

"It remains to be seen what the intention is but there are definitely some concerns.

"I wouldn't want my children getting into a car with strangers that was unlicensed."

A Dorset Police spokesman added: "Our advice would be get a bus or licensed taxi and you’ll get home safely. Trust in what you know, not who you don’t."

Concerns about 'fake taxis' have been highlighted recently since a woman was allegedly sexually assaulted in Southampton after she got into a car believing it was a taxi

Tuesday, August 08, 2017

Council Scraps Plan To Force All St Albans Taxis To Become Fully Electric As Drivers Condemn Plan

Proposals to force all taxis registered in St Albans to be fully electric within five years have been scrapped after they were condemned by cab drivers. 

Between March and June this year, St Albans district council (SADC) consulted approximately 1,000 drivers on the plans to write off petrol or diesel cars in licencing regulation. 

Existing taxi drivers would have five years from January 1 2018 to convert to a suitable model - in a voluntary trial conducted by 17 cabbies between March 2015 and October 2016, carbon emissions dropped by 29 tonnes and £17,100 was saved in fuel costs. 

Seventy-five per cent of drivers in the trial said they would use an electric car but all those who participated wanted more charging points - there is only one on Adelaide Street which is dedicated to taxis.

There were 136 responses to the consultation, with about a quarter of comments concerning the price of electric cars and about another quarter on the constraints on battery life. 

Some others noted competition from Uber drivers not constrained by the same rules and on the limited options for electric cars, many of which are potentially not big enough for wheelchairs. 

The consultation concluded that although St Albans residents were in favour of the proposal, taxi drivers were not. 

SADC’s licensing and regulatory committee have now decided not to make the eco-friendly cars compulsory, but to incentivise cabbies to make the switch with a licensing discount for electric cars.

Chair of the committee, Cllr Richard Curthoys, said the idea has not been completely scrapped but he is focussing on installing new charging points before the proposal is revisited: “The main thing is we need to do is get the infrastructure in place [before it is made compulsory], once we have that we have start to look at changing it. 

Obviously it would be so unfair to say ‘you have got to go electric’, and when taxi drivers ask ‘where are we going to charge?’, to say, ‘it’s not our problem’.

“The taxi drivers saw this as some kind of attack on them and no how many times we said ‘it’s a consultation’, they thought we weren’t listening, but we were listening.”

He described pollution in the city centre as a “problem” that he would like to tackle while in office.

Source : The Herts Advertiser


TfL announce that the new electric TXe will be subject to the standing Taxi15 year age limit. 

As the age limit was bought in to (in Boris' own words) "Take the dirty older Taxis off the road and replace them with new less polluting vehicles" (in fact newer Taxis turned out to be more polluting than the ones they replaced)...

TfL were asked why the new zero emission Taxi only has a 15 year life span while LPG conversions have 20 years??? 

This is their reply below:

This was the Twitter pole carried out amongst London Cabbies : 

Monday, August 07, 2017

Come here, There's gets worse.... By Jim Thomas

Although TfLTPH have still refused to answer my question about which legislated regulation gives their COs the power to remove a news paper from a Taxi...

Even after being asked 35 times (so far but ongoing) ....They couldn't answer quick enough when drivers reported this sign, which has had appeared over the weekend on Marshgate Lane at the Olympic Stadium.

So we complained to TfL. 

This time, they were extremley quick to respond over the signage, (which allegedly gives the game away) at the Olympic Stadium. 

If this is not a TfL sign, then as its giving directions to an Uber rank (only Black Cabs can legally form a rank) then it should be removed as the signage is illegal....unlike the Taxi news paper headline. 

And so, back to that old chestnut :

It was reported earlier on Twitter, TfL compliance officers were taking the numbers of Taxis with the Taxi newspaper on the back window shelf. 

So I sent this complaint to TfL via their Twitter account.

It has been bought to our attention that your compliance officers are taking details of Taxis who have the Taxi news paper in their vehicle.

Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, your officers need an authorisation document called a RIPA. 

If they don't have one, drivers have the right to take their details and report them to the police under the Act.

We await their reply. In the unlikely event that they do....we will post on Taxi Leaks alongside the breaking news that Hell has frozen over.

          Is the tide finally turning 


London cabbies are calling on Uber to let the public know how their app stays on the right side of the law – people have a right to know.

Dads Defending Daughters along with the LCDC, organised a demonstration today (Monday 7 August) calling on Uber to provide greater transparency.

Around 30 London taxis will descend on Brighton city centre to challenge the workings of the ride-sharing app.

The demonstration will take place at 13:00 at Hove Town Hall, Norton Rd, Hove BN3 3BQ

The workings of Uber have been shrouded in mystery - with the San Francisco-based company refusing to fully reveal how it functions.

At a Trade Forum meeting last week, Mr Fred Jones of Uber would not discuss how the app functions.

Meanwhile reps from Streamline Taxis, City Cabs and Radio Cabs were fully willing to discuss their apps and booking systems.

Uber uses private hire cars (not Hackney Carriages) and as such, private hire cars are not allowed to be ‘hailed’ in the street. This is what the law states.

The Uber app connects the customer to the driver which is effectively a street hail.

Apps used by other cab companies in the city do not use ‘direct hailing’ and any customer ordering via those apps have their bookings properly booked into their systems first and correctly recorded on their systems and only then dispatches the job to the nearest appropriate car.

Steve Garelick, GMB Private Hire Drivers' Branch, said:

“Taxis are descending on Brighton to call on Uber to reveal how their app works under the bonnet.

“The company seems to think they can carry on as they wish, without proving that they operate within the boundaries of the law.

“Only Hackney Carriages are allowed to ‘ply for hire’ on the street – but to all intents and purposes that is what the Uber app allows users to do.

“We call on Uber to let the public know how their app stays on the right side of the law – people have a right to know.”

Andrew Peters, Secretary of the GMB Brighton & Hove Taxi Section said:

“We have questioned the council and Uber on how the Uber app works but this remains a mystery and we are looking forward to what the Demo can do in calling to examine exactly how that app works and we welcome the support of the London Metropolitan Taxi Trade”

Grant Davies, London Cab Drivers Club, said:

"The fact that licensing officers are unable to use enforcement causes damage to local trade, as we have seen in London.

"This cannot go unchallenged."