Nicola Horne (Service Manager for Children, YP & Environmental Protection) introduced the report and reminded the Committee that for Private Hire bookings to be taken, the following licenses needed to have been issued by Plymouth City Council:

i)             Private Hire Operator Licence;

ii)            Private Hire Driver Licence;

iii)           Private Hire Vehicle Licence.

The Committee heard representations by Uber Britannia Ltd:

a)    Uber had Private Hire Operators Licensed in 82 towns and cities in the United Kingdom and was owned by a multi-national parent company;

b)    Uber had 100,000 drivers on its platform in the UK and were looking to recruit 160 drivers in Plymouth;

c)    Uber rides were booked via the Uber app, and there were various levels of service and facilities (pets/wheelchairs) offered by Uber;

d)    The passengers were informed of the pricing of the ride, confirmation of the trip details, name and photograph of the driver, car details and registration plate;

e)    There was a facility on the app for a four digit pin to be sent to the passenger which linked the journey they had booked to the specific Private Hire taxi;

f)     Estimated times of arrival were shared with the passenger;

g)    Uber had the facility to record the trips via GPS;

h)    The Uber app monitored when the taxi is in motion and if the taxi was still for a certain period of time, the app requested an update from the driver;

i)     Uber enabled the passenger to rate the driver, and if the passenger awarded one star then the driver would not be allocated to that passenger in the future;

j)     The passengers could report safety issues to Uber and these would be investigated and, if necessary, the driver would be suspended from the Uber platform;

k)    There was a policy for the return of lost luggage/personal items via the app;

l)     The office in Plymouth was not accessible to the public. If passengers had an issue or complaint about a driver, there were call centres where complaints could be logged and an investigation process. The waiting time for a response was short;

m)  Uber had a stringent process before accepting young drivers onto the Uber platform. The driver would be required to attend the local office to check the river documentation and photographs were taken for use on the app. The documents (insurance/logbook and DVLA) would undergo further verification from a third party;

n)    Uber had a dedicated email/phone line available 24/7 for police and licensing officers to obtain electronic records. If documents were required to be inspected by authorities at the local office, this could be done by pre-arranged appointment. The opening hours of the office would be dependent on need and there were no set hours;

o)    Uber ensured drivers are paid above the minimum wage, had holiday pay and there was a provision for a pension. Drivers could also join a trade union;

p)    The sole Directors of Uber Britannia Ltd had completed the safeguarding courses which included an awareness of monitoring potential ‘county lines’ use and their DBS checks were up to date;

q)    Uber Britannia Ltd had £5 million Public Liability Insurance;

r)    Uber used ‘geo fencing’ on the booking system to ensure there were no cross-border bookings;

s)     Uber confirmed they were applying for a five-year licence.

The Committee disregarded the following:

t)     The effect the granting of the application on other Private Hire Operators/Private Hire drivers in the City.

The Committee considered the Fit and Proper Test and agreed the current Directors of Uber Britannia Ltd were fit and proper persons as required under S13 Plymouth City Council Act 1975.

The Committee agreed:

1.    To grant Uber Britannia Ltd a Private Hire Operators Licence;

2.    To grant the Licence for five years;
 

3.    The Licence would not be subject to additional Private Hire Operators Licence conditions.