Saturday, September 21, 2019

UTAG Statement : FOI Request To TfL On Uber Complaints



TfL have responded to our recent FOI request about Uber.

There have been 822 complaints since June 26 2018: 30% of which were Inappropriate Behaviour!

Its important to note the questions TfL REFUSED to answer:

Why?

Just what are they hiding?

UTAG will now appeal to the ICO 

See UTAG’s FOI below:

Dear Ms Clarkson

Our Ref: FOI-1513-1920

Thank you for your request received on 20 August 2019 asking for information about Uber London Ltd (ULL).

Your request has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and our information access policy. I can confirm we do hold the information you require. You asked:

1.    Since June 26th 2018 
(a) how many complaints have Transport for London received about Uber 
(b) what was the nature of those complaints?

With more than 100,000 licensed private hire drivers and more than 23,000 licensed taxi drivers in London, millions of taxi and private hire journeys are made every year. 

The vast majority pass without incident but where a complaint is made we will investigate and take action as appropriate.

We have had 822 complaints logged relating to Uber between 26 June 2018 – 20 August 2019 (date of request). 

Please note that the majority of these complaints relate to Uber drivers, and not the company itself. 

Please see the table below showing the categorisation assigned by our agents when recording the cases.

Contact reason
Complaints
Driver, Inappropriate Behaviour
242
Driver, Knowledge/Information
142
Driver, Overcharge
94
Driver, Dangerous driving
89
Driver, Intimidating/Threatening Behaviour
48
Driver, Devious/Unplanned Route
24
Driver, Fare Refusal
22
Driver, Fail to complete hiring
22
Driver, Touting
18
Lost Property, Left item (Lost Property)
12
Driver, Disability Discrimination (DDA)
11
Driver, Assault
10
Driver, Compliance with TFL Procedures
9
Driver, Offensive Behaviour
9
Driver, Attitude/Rude Behaviour
8
Driver, Racial/Homophobic Abuse
7
Driver, Guide Dog Refusal
5
Driver, Poor/Dangerous Driving
5
Driver, Other
5
Driver, Refuse Pick Up
3
Driver, Illegal parking / parking obstruction
3
Customer Service Centre, Complaint Handling
3
Driver, Plying for Hire Outside Area
3
Other service issues, Compliance with TFL Procedures
2
Driver, Violent Behaviour
2
TfL Policy, Other
2
Driver, Fares Issue
2
Other service issues, Other
2
Customer Service Centre, Knowledge/Information
1
Driver, Sexual Harassment
1
Safety support from TfL, Interventions
1
On-board: Built Environment, Ambience
1
Billing / Charging Issue, Other
1
Driver, Refusal to Admit Wheelchair
1
Revenue Inspector, Other
1
Other service issues, Failure to Arrive
1
TfL Policy, Compliance with TFL Procedures
1
Accidents, Other
1
Customer Service Centre, Offensive Behaviour
1
Driver, Smoking
1
Driver, Passenger behaviour
1
Billing / Charging Issue, Dispute Journey Fare
1
Refunds, Overcharge
1
Driver, Vehicle Compliance
1
Other, Other
1
Penalty Fares, Penalty Fares
1
Grand Total
822

Month
Complaints
Jun 18
22
Jul 18
100
Aug 18
51
Sep 18
50
Oct 18
68
Nov 18
72
Dec 18
89
Jan 19
53
Feb 19
40
Mar 19
48
Apr 19
43
May 19
44
Jun 19
63
Jul 19
54
Aug 19
25
Grand Total
822

2.    What action has Transport for London taken to scrutinise Uber's adherence to the conditions laid down in the granting of a 15-month licence?

3.    How many Breaches of Conditions laid down in the granting of Uber's 15-month licence have been reported, become apparent to, or investigated by Transport for London?

4.    What was the nature of any breach?

5.    What action was taken by TfL (if any) of any breach of the conditions of the probationary licence or the complaints (see question1)?

In accordance with the FOI Act, we are not obliged to supply the information requested as it is subject to a statutory exemption to the right of access to information under section 31(1)(g), which relates to information where disclosure would be likely to prejudice the exercise by any public authority of its functions for any of the purposes listed in subsection 31(2) of the FOI Act, specifically, ‘(2)(c)the purpose of ascertaining whether circumstances which would justify regulatory action in pursuance of any enactment exist or may arise’.

In this instance the exemption has been applied as the information is held only for the purposes of ascertaining whether a Private Hire operator is complying with the regulations, in accordance with our responsibility for regulating the private hire trade in London. 

This information contains details which otherwise would not have been made available to us and the exemption applies to protect our ability to clarify and confirm details on specific issues regarding general licensing concerns. 

The prejudice would be caused by disclosure because it would affect our ability to engage with the taxi and private hire trade and would inhibit the free flow of information, particularly where there is disclosure of information about confidential and commercially sensitive data. 

Effective working between the trade and the regulator relies on a safe space where information can be shared at a sufficiently early stage to avoid the need for formal enforcement action.

This benefits the public as it enables greater oversight of private hire operators and better scrutiny of services by the regulator and our benefit because proactive discussion avoids costly enforcement activity, delayed access to information and increased bureaucracy.

The use of this exemption is subject to an assessment of the public interest in relation to the disclosure of the information concerned. We recognise that there is a public interest in understanding the scope of regulatory activity, and whether concerns have been sufficiently addressed. However we feel the balance of the public interest supports the exemption in order to enable the effective and timely sharing of information between ourselves and the taxi and private hire trade.

If this is not the information you are looking for please feel free to contact me.

Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal.

Yours sincerely

Gemma Jacob
Senior FOI Case Officer
FOI Case Management Team
General Counsel
Transport for London

TAXI LEAKS EXTRA BIT :
Here again we see TfL protecting Uber and it’s drivers, not only in the questions they’ve refused to answer but also in the questions they have answered. 

In the response above TfL take the trouble to point out that the majority of complaints they’ve reported refer to the drivers and not the company. 

They say: “Please note that the majority of these complaints relate to Uber drivers, and not the company itself”. 

But as we all know, a majority of 822 could still mean that there have been 412 complaints against Uber the company, as TfL haven’t specified who did what ! 

   

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

If anyone thinks TFL will create a legal argument in a bid to remove its biggest financial provider.... like a turkey voting for christmas, forget it!

TFL are not simply a transportation provider, they are a left sided political entity who like all its lefty brothers need huge financial supply to pay for its lefty agendas and if that stops....so does the lefty masterplans we all see and complain about week in and out.

Anonymous said...

Boris will sort out those lefties, in Boris we trust, out means out!