Im amazed at this decision, the Mayors days are numbered
Ive been using Uber for about 2 years now, never had a problem, in fact a lot of the drivers are very interesting people
Its great to see exactly how long the cab is gonna be and tracking it instead of just waiting, also great that no money changes hands, the cars are a lot nicer also.
A triumph of politically motivated interference over free enterprise.
Private hire vehicles aren't licensed to ply for hire which is inextricably linked with flagging cabs down in the street. If they aren't licensed, or are carrying out driving otherwise than in accordance with a licence, any insurance attaching to that activity (taxi driving) is invalidated.I don't understand the 'not insured unless booked in advance' stickers you see on taxis.
Surely every taxi you ride in has to have insurance, otherwise they can't have a licence?
Is it the case that if you ride in a taxi after flagging one down and it's involved in a crash leaving you a gibbering wreck, you have no recourse to compensation?
I have no idea, but why, if the driver is insured, wouldn't you be covered as a passenger?
Are there any precedents in case law that support the warning?
I don't understand the 'not insured unless booked in advance' stickers you see on taxis.
Surely every taxi you ride in has to have insurance, otherwise they can't have a licence?
Is it the case that if you ride in a taxi after flagging one down and it's involved in a crash leaving you a gibbering wreck, you have no recourse to compensation?
I have no idea, but why, if the driver is insured, wouldn't you be covered as a passenger?
Are there any precedents in case law that support the warning?
Private hire vehicles aren't licensed to ply for hire which is inextricably linked with flagging cabs down in the street. If they aren't licensed, or are carrying out driving otherwise than in accordance with a licence, any insurance attaching to that activity (taxi driving) is invalidated.
Footnote: as @Taxi has said, be aware of out of town plates, plying for hire in a borough other than their own, even if they've got a hackney carriage licence. They can only be private hire vehicles in other districts.
There's the case:
http://www.national-taxi-associatio...e-CC-vs.-Berwick-Upon-Tweed-BC-and-others.pdf
They are only insured if they are driving within the terms of their license. If a Private Hire (or Hackney Carriage outside its area - I.e. a 'Rossendale cab') picks you up of the street WITHOUT being booked through their operator, then they are outside the terms of their license and therefore not insured for the journey. Only Hackney Carriages working within their area can be hailed on the street or pick-up from ranks.
Most insurance policies on cars state that you are not covered if the journey is 'for hire or reward' which is why cabs of all types need specialised insurance that includes this cover.
I think we can all agree that insurance companies think of profit over ethics so if you get in an unlicensed cab and suffer life changing injuries, I think the insurance company will try their best to avoid paying out. You might be able to make a claim against the driver but I think the chance of getting the money you may need out of them is negligible.
I understand that, but is there actually a case where someone has hailed a private hire cab in the street, suffered life changing injuries following a serious accident, and not been able to claim compensation from the drivers insurance?
It would have been a claim in common law.
Has that been established yet?
Forget all the rights and wrongs and mumbo jumbo of legal arguments, is there a case in common law of a passenger being in an illegally hailed private hire vehicle receiving life changing injuries that hasn't received appropriate compensation for their injuries from the insurance of the driver or company involved?