As we all know, Transport for London is woefully inadequate and failing to carry out its licensing and enforcement functions. Senior management are allowing PHVs to operate within the “immediate hire” market. This is primarily due to the absence of a statutory definition of plying for hire

Earlier this month, the RMT’s parliamentary group secured sponsorship of Early Day Motion 762. The motion calls for a statutory definition of “Plying for Hire”.

As we all know, Transport for London is woefully inadequate and failing to carry out its licensing and enforcement functions. Senior management are allowing PHVs to operate within the “immediate hire” market. This is primarily due to the absence of a statutory definition of plying for hire.

Earlier this month, the RMT’s parliamentary group secured sponsorship of Early Day Motion 762. The motion calls for a statutory definition of “Plying for Hire”.

We now now need YOU to give as much support as possible, to encourage other MPs to get the motion to the next stage.

It is now up to every Taxi driver, green badge/yellow badge, irrespective of Org or Union, to show support for this action, by writing to MPs and asking them to support the Motion. As this is a nation issue, it doesn’t matter if you live outside London. 
 
Below is a template letter which you can cut and paste (on pen your own). 
 
TEMPLATE LETTER

Dear XXXX

Need for a statutory definition of “plying for hire”
Under existing regulations, private hire vehicles (PHVs) may only pick up passengers when pre-booked, rather than from a rank or in response to being hailed. Such regulations provide passengers with important safety protections against unregulated drivers who have not undergone extensive criminal record and medical checks, or had to pass a formal taxi driving assessment like licensed taxi drivers.
However, Smartphone apps such as Über are circumventing the law governing the taxi and minicab industry.
Transport for London’s stated position is that the distinction between the two services must be maintained. However, in spite of this, TfL is failing to carry out its licensing and enforcement functions  Specifically, TfL is allowing PHVs to operate within the immediate hire market.
This situation can only be addressed by introducing a statutory definition of plying for hire.
A failure to introduce a statutory definition of plying for hire will undermine public confidence in a safe and secure licensing regime. It would also ultimately undermine the viability of the current taxi service.
I request that you call on the Government to bring forward urgent legislation which provides a clear statutory definition to protect the distinction between taxis and PHVs.
Please sign EDM Number 762.
Yours sincerely XXXX
 
ENDS:
 
Place your post code in the box provided beneath and then click “go”, to find your MP. 
Use the facility provided on this site to send an email direct. 
 
If you already have your MP’s email address, then use that.
Contact Your Politician
Enter your Postcode below:
 

EDITORIAL COMMENT:

 
At present, the trade is still dangerously fragmented.
But we now have an opportunity for individual drivers, regardless of Org or Union, to actually pull together and fight on a united front.
Plying for hire as way know it today, is not defined in the act of 1984 and has only been allowed through case law. The Law commission intends to repeal all Hackney Carriage acts and scrap case law. A one tier system by stealth.
Defining “Plying For Hire” in Law won’t miraculously solve all our problems, but it will assure the future of the “Best Taxi Service In The World” for decades to come.