TfL faces legal action over licence delays for Uber and other private hire drivers
TfL has previously apologised for delays in licensing but drivers and their union, the Independent Workers' Union of Great Britain (IWGB), say they are launching the legal action because of systemic and continuing problems with licensing for this group of drivers.
There are 108,000 private hire drivers in London, many of whom work for Uber. The exact number who have experienced problems with delays in their licences being issued is not known, but according to Alex Marshall, the IWGB's president, the union has a WhatsApp group that includes about 1,000 drivers experiencing licensing problems.
Many of these drivers are not high earners and have limited savings, so even a relatively short delay in TfL issuing them with a licence can have a significant financial impact because they require one to legally work in London.
Some drivers have reported losing their homes and having their vehicles repossessed as a result of not being able to drive their taxis because of a licensing delay.
One driver, Robert Dale, 65, died after suffering a heart attack last November. He was waiting for his licence to be renewed at the time of his death. His family say they believe his death was linked to the delay as he was unable to work and was stressed and anxious.
Raifu Akanmu, an Uber driver who applied to renew his licence in January, several months before his previous one was due to expire, is still waiting to receive his new licence and is unable to work as his previous one expired at the end of May.
'I have run out of money to pay my bills,' he said. 'I just keep thinking about how I'm going to survive and support my family. I've been a driver for 17 years but have never experienced problems like this before. I know so many other Uber drivers who are affected. All we want to do is work.'
The union has sent a pre-action letter informing TfL that it is investigating the possibility TfL breached the law in its handling of licence delays.
Union officials say thousands of minicab drivers have been unable to work, sometimes for months at a time.
Another driver, who gave his name as Lee, said: 'The legal side of things has to happen. The word that keeps popping up is 'accountability'. We have fewer legal rights and protections than many other workers. This legal challenge is a case of drivers in London saying 'no' and 'enough'.
'I had to wait eight months for my licence to be renewed. The licensing process is not fit for purpose.'
Marshall said: 'The drivers are predominantly Uber. I have seen so many lives decimated by this, drivers having to move out of their homes and their cars repossessed. We have instructed lawyers to litigate because we need systemic change.'
Ahmed Aydeed of Deighton Pierce Glynn Solicitors, which is bringing the legal challenge against TfL, said: 'TfL is operating an unlawful system by failing to ensure continuity of licensing for private hire drivers. Both IWGB and drivers have bravely teamed up in this unprecedented legal challenge to hold TfL to account. Any public authority and government that strips people of their livelihood is not fit for purpose.'
A TfL spokesperson said: 'We are very sorry to drivers who have experienced issues with our processing times of private hire driver licences.
'We have worked with urgency to take a number of steps to mitigate the impact of these delays, including recruiting and training additional staff and granting short-term private hire vehicle driver licences where appropriate. We continue to take every possible step to rectify the delays quickly and ensure that all drivers who meet licensing requirements are licensed and able to work.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
19 minutes ago
- Reuters
McLaren expect Ferrari to be in the fight at Silverstone
SILVERSTONE, England, July 4 (Reuters) - Runaway leaders McLaren expect old rivals Ferrari to be fighting them for victory at the British Grand Prix after a strong showing by Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton in Friday practice. Lando Norris was top of the timesheets overall but Hamilton, record nine-times winner at Silverstone, was quickest in the first session and both Ferraris beat McLaren's championship leader Oscar Piastri in the second. It is still early in the weekend, and weather conditions can change, but McLaren duly took notice. "They looked good, both in the qualifying runs and the longer runs as well," said Piastri, who leads Norris by 15 points after 11 of 24 races. "I think they're in the fight this weekend which is interesting to see." Ferrari, second overall, are the only top-four team yet to win this season, or take pole position for a regular grand prix rather than a sprint. They were McLaren's closest rivals in Austria last weekend, however, with Leclerc third and Hamilton fourth in a race won by Norris with Piastri second. Silverstone should play to Ferrari's strengths with its high-speed corners and long straights and the team also successfully debuted a new floor in Austria. "In general the Ferraris have been very, very quick today and they shall be tomorrow," Norris told F1 television. "So I think we have a bit of work to do." McLaren boss Zak Brown also highlighted the red cars' speed. "The Ferraris look very strong over one lap and race pace. A little early but Ferrari look very tough," the American told Sky Sports television.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Story of banknotes is full of funny money
If you hold strong views about the design of Britain's banknotes, your moment has come at last. The Bank of England intends to relaunch the £5, £10, £20 and £50 notes, and in a predictable nod to our populist age, it has appealed to the public for suggestions. Very little, it seems, will be off limits, since the Bank's statement suggests that great historical characters could give way to images of 'food, film, television or sport'. So out will go Winston Churchill, Jane Austen and JMW Turner, and in might come, say, Luke Littler, chicken tikka masala and Adolescence. And to think people doubt the idea of progress in history. • Churchill may be dropped from banknotes for diverse designs As Bank officials are surely aware, though, no conceivable combination will please everybody. Indeed, no less a figure than Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg has already condemned the 'Bank of Wokeness' for its 'supine kowtowing to the gods of political correctness'.(this, remember, before a single image has been chosen). Yet even though this story seems like a gift to the permanently outraged community, no venerable tradition is in danger of being sullied, since pictures on banknotes are a modish innovation. Until the late Queen Elizabeth made her debut on March 17, 1960, no British shopper had ever seen a face on a pound note, unless you count the image of Britannia. Indeed, if Sir Jacob wants to take a properly conservative position, he might argue that banknotes themselves are a dangerous innovation. There are suggestions that the ancient Carthaginians issued promissory notes on scraps of leather or parchment, but most historians agree that the first proper paper money originated, inevitably, in China. This was a note called a jiaozi, issued by private merchants in the city of Chengdu some time around the year 1000. Printed in black ink on an early version of paper, jiaozi often showed images of merchants. Each had a different value, depending on the buyer's needs. Over time they became standardised, and eventually the imperial government took over production, stamping notes with seals to prevent counterfeiting. But the problem with paper money, as the Chinese emperors soon discovered, is that it is very tempting to keep printing it. Inflation inevitably followed; then came the first of innumerable currency reforms. Paper money, however, never went away. 'All these pieces of paper,' marvelled the Venetian traveller Marco Polo at the end of the 13th century, 'are issued with as much solemnity and authority as if they were of pure gold or silver … [and] wherever a person may go throughout the Great Khan's dominions he shall find these pieces of paper in use, and shall be able to transact all sales and purchases of goods by means of them just as well as if they were coins of pure gold.' By contrast, most European countries were slow to embrace the paper revolution. Although late medieval bankers in Florence and Flanders, such as the Medici, issued promissory notes, it wasn't until 1661 that a central bank, Sweden's entertainingly named Stockholms Banco, issued notes known as kreditivsedlar. Alas, when ordinary Swedes tried to cash in their notes, the bank ran out of money, and after just ten years the whole thing collapsed. There was a lesson there in overpromising and overprinting, though we can all think of finance ministers who never learnt it. What, though, of Britain? The new central banks of England and Scotland issued their first notes in the mid-1690s as part of William III's financial mobilisation to fight the French. Neither had a monopoly, though. English private banks had the right to print their own notes well into the Victorian period, and the very last private banknotes were issued as late as 1921 by the little Somerset bank of Fox, Fowler and Company. As for Scottish banknotes, the Royal Bank of Scotland and Clydesdale Bank still print their own notes to this day. (But are they legal tender in England? The short answer is no. I look forward to Scottish readers' letters.) Back, though, to the wider story of paper money. Given the Swedish debacle, many people were deeply suspicious of this flimsy substitute for the real thing. And during the early 1790s they gazed in horror at the economic chaos in France, where revolutionary printers were churning out colossal quantities of notes known as assignats. Within just two years of the fall of the Bastille, almost 2.5 billion assignats were in circulation, and all the time the value was plummeting. As food prices rocketed, Jacobin radicals blamed the royal family, aristocratic exiles and British politicians — all implicated, they claimed, in a nefarious conspiracy to debauch France's currency. The chief printer was arrested and executed, while the finance minister, Étienne Clavière, took his own life before he could be dragged to the guillotine. Yet although the assignats were economically disastrous, they did at least look good, with illustrations interweaving eagles, Roman iconography and revolutionary bonnets. By contrast, British banknotes were remarkably plain until the 20th century. Clearly the Bank of England felt no need to show off, preferring to project an image of sobriety, simplicity and solidity. As a result, it was not until 1960 that Bank of England notes displayed the monarch's face, while the first commoner, William Shakespeare, didn't appear until 1970. He was followed by the Duke of Wellington, Florence Nightingale, Sir Isaac Newton and Sir Christopher Wren … and so the faces have changed over the years, leaving us with Churchill, Turner, Austen and Alan Turing today. But who comes next? Most readers will surely agree that the sane choices would be Harold Godwinson, Horatio Nelson, General Gordon and Agatha Christie. Alas, we live in strange times, so who knows whom the Bank will choose? Even the prospect of a John Lennon banknote, which would mark the lowest moment in our history, can't be ruled out. But if the Bank does make such a terrible choice, there is one consolation. Since cash payments now account for barely a tenth of all transactions, most of us will only rarely have to gaze upon the consequences. And if the alternative is to hand over a little portrait of the man who wrote Imagine, the ding of a contactless payment will sound sweeter than ever.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Swinney's high tax boast ‘offensive' to Scots, say Tories
John Swinney has been criticised for arguing that the UK Government could have avoided a 'fiscal nightmare' by emulating his party's tax assault on higher earners. Opposition politicians described the SNP leader's claim as 'deluded' and 'offensive' to many families in Scotland who pay more income tax than those south of the border. Mr Swinney responded after Sir Keir Starmer was forced into a U-turn on his flagship welfare reform programme following a rebellion by backbench Labour MPs. Writing for The Scotsman on Friday, the First Minister said: 'Labour could have avoided the fiscal nightmare currently tearing them apart if Keir Starmer had the courage to do what the SNP have done, and ask high earners to pay more tax.' It prompted a backlash from the Scottish Conservatives, who described Mr Swinney's position as 'astonishing' and accused him of 'contempt for hard-working, over-taxed Scots'. The party also highlighted that the SNP had presided over sluggish economic growth north of the border. 'To boast that hiking taxes is an act of courage by the SNP is deluded and offensive,' said Craig Hoy, the Scottish Conservative shadow finance secretary. 'The brave thing to do would be to reduce Scotland's unaffordable benefits bill and bloated public sector, as the Scottish Conservatives are committed to doing. 'But John Swinney repeatedly ducks that challenge in favour of yet more tax hikes which are choking economic growth and squeezing household budgets to breaking point. 'Keir Starmer is deeply unpopular precisely because he has clobbered the public and businesses with a series of tax rises which broke Labour's pre-election promises. 'It beggars belief that the SNP leader, who has made Scotland the highest taxed part of the UK, thinks the Prime Minister should actually be raising taxes further still on hard-working households.' At present, workers in Scotland who earn more than £30,300 pay more into the state than their English and Welsh counterparts. The tax differential rises with earnings, with a taxpayer on a £50,000 annual salary paying £1,528 more a year in Scotland than in the rest of the UK. An individual on £100,000 pays £3,332 more and those earning at least £125,000 pay £5,221 more, equivalent to a 7 per cent reduction in their after-tax income. Earlier in the week, Mr Swinney accused the UK government of taking an 'absolutely appalling' approach to reform. Labour ministers were forced to U-turn on some cuts to Universal Credit and plans to introduce stricter eligibility rules for personal independence payment (Pip) claimants. The changes to Pip would not have directly applied in Scotland, where the benefit is being phased out for a devolved alternative but could have affected the amount of money allocated to Holyrood. Ian Murray, the Scottish Secretary, has said that failure to reform the welfare system will see it 'explode in terms of [it] being unsustainable financially for the taxpayer, but also we're writing hundreds of thousands of people out of the workforce.'
