Threat to Uber !

When Uber suddenly thrust itself on the taxi market with a competing fleet of privately owned cars most people were astonished.  It was thought that the taxi industry was a closed shop.  The government carefully controlled the number of license plates it allowed and owning a plate to operate a taxi was a very valuable commodity.  Taxi plates changed hands for thousands of dollars.

Suddenly, Uber crashed onto the market and appeared to totally ignore the law that applied to the taxi industry.  Their effrontery brought them the free publicity they craved as they sought ordinary motorists and their cars to create a competing taxi service that would undercut the regulated fares charged by the  regulated taxi industry.

The carefully constructed regimen that applied to taxis was discarded.  Cab drivers could be fined for failing to wear the approved uniform and cabs needed to be fitted with a fare meter that charged on a mixed combination of distance travelled and time elapsed.   Uber passengers had their fare charged to their credit card and the rate varied according to the time of day and demand for cabs.  If it started to rain - and cab use increased - the fare was immediately hiked.

These cheaper fares brought immediate public support.  No longer were cabs identifiable by their livery and signage.   The car that arrived in response to a phone call could be any make or model, and the driver could be of either gender - and any age.  Passengers were often later quizzed on their ride satisfaction.   Was the driver courteous ?   Did the trip meet expectations ?

Naturally, the regulated industry protested loudly.  The competition decreased the income of licensed taxi drivers sharply and the value of taxi plates immediately dropped.  The regulated industry warned that children and young adults were being placed in the hands of drivers who had not undergone security checks and were at risk, but cheaper fares were resulting in a steady custom on the Uber network.

It looked like Uber was unstoppable.  Despite legal action to enforce the taxi laws Uber became established in world cities, despite mayhem in its operating inner circle.   There were claims of sexist behaviour and cronyism and its founder was forced to resign.  The company was accepting operating losses as it gained strength in the market and there was the expectation that a more regulated approach would be forthcoming shortly.

All that changed with the news that the mighty city of London had announced that Uber's license to operate would not be renewed when it expired on September 30.  Despite the Uber bravado that it was a " pirate " operator it seems it did need a license.  World city authorities had simply caved in under pressure - and  now this Achillies heel law has been revealed.

London's transport regulator found that Uber's approach and conduct was not fit and proper to hold a private vehicle hire license.  It said Uber had demonstrated a " lack of corporate responsibility " and cited " potential public safety and security implications ".

No doubt this will go to appeal to the highest court but the ability to ignore the law and operate freely in London has been curbed - and other world cities will be watching with interest.  What may emerge is a more regulated Uber forced to operate more in keeping with the traditional industry.  It is quite possible that those very appealing cheap fares may move closer to those of the traditional cab fleets if this concept of private cars being used for hire is allowed to continue.

Whenever a new concept emerges in defiance of the government it is not an equal contest.  The government has reserve powers - and in the end the government usually wins !