Uber's Expansion to Include London Black Cabs Sparks Industry Doubts in London Assembly Discussion

Taxi Finance Team • April 18, 2024

Uber's recent announcement to integrate Black Cabs into its ride-hailing app has caused quite a stir within the London taxi and private hire vehicle (PHV) industry, sparking a mix of skepticism, indifference, and curiosity among industry insiders and customers alike.

The move has raised questions about the implications for traditional taxi services, the impact on existing drivers, and the overall future landscape of transportation in the city. The decision marks a significant shift in the competitive dynamics of the industry and has left many wondering how this new partnership will shape the way people get around in London moving forward.

grey saloon car parked

During a recent meeting held by the London Assembly Transport Committee, the focus was set on addressing the ongoing challenges encountered by black taxis and PHVs. Uber's strategies came under close scrutiny during the session.


Steve Wright MBE, Chair of the Licensed Private Hire Car Association, shed light on a prevailing apprehension within the industry regarding Uber's expansion into the Black Cab sector. Pointing to Uber's turbulent history with the taxi industry, Wright stressed the prevailing doubt among numerous self-employed drivers in both sectors.


Wright MBE commented, “Uber, as a PHV service, has long expressed intentions to introduce driverless cars and potentially replace traditional taxis, a move that has not sat well with many. This initial skepticism poses a hurdle for self-employed drivers. Nonetheless, Uber's business model is distinct, and they are looking to tap into the black cab market following the example of other ride-hailing apps.”


In alignment with this view, Steve McNamara, General Secretary of the Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association (LTDA), cast doubt on Uber's ability to draw in a substantial number of Black Cab drivers. McNamara drew a comparison between Uber's approach and that of other app-based platforms like Gett, which have cultivated more collaborative partnerships with the taxi industry.


McNamara stated, “To launch an app in London, you need a base of 3,000 drivers as a minimum. I'll be surprised if Uber manages to recruit even 30 drivers, let alone 3,000. Our relationship with the private hire industry has evolved significantly over the years, with drivers working happily with other platforms. Uber, however, has a long history of unilateral actions and lacks transparency in its market entry.”


Helen Chapman, Director of Licensing, Regulation, and Charging at Transport for London (TfL), emphasized that the decision to join Uber's platform rests with individual taxi drivers, indicating that TfL views this as a matter between Uber and the drivers.

Chapman stated, “This is a matter for Uber and individual taxi drivers to decide, and it's not within TfL's jurisdiction as the regulator.”


Mariusz Zabrocki, General Manager at FREENOW, dismissed Uber's announcement as a mere PR campaign, questioning its potential impact on the Black Cab market. Zabrocki's remarks echoed a broader industry sentiment skeptical of Uber's entry into this space.


Zabrocki commented, “This seems like another PR campaign from Uber. We've seen other companies attempt to enter the Black Cab market without any significant impact. Drivers have expressed negative feedback about Uber, and I doubt they'll choose to work with them.”


Since the London Assembly meeting, Uber has reported progress in recruiting London taxi drivers and preparing for its planned Black Cab launch this year.


An Uber spokesperson stated, “Our recruitment and preparations for launch are on track. We have received positive feedback from drivers during roundtable discussions and in-person events.”


  1. What are the specific concerns raised by industry figures regarding Uber's inclusion of Black Cabs in its app?
  2. How does Uber's history with the taxi trade influence the skepticism expressed by drivers toward its expansion into the Black Cab sector?
  3. What contrasting approaches have other app-based platforms taken compared to Uber when entering the taxi market, and how does this impact driver perceptions?
  4. Why do some industry representatives doubt Uber's ability to attract a substantial number of Black Cab drivers to its platform?
  5. How does the regulatory body, Transport for London (TfL), view the decision for individual taxi drivers to join Uber's platform?
  6. What role does transparency play in the industry's perception of Uber's market entry strategy compared to other app-based platforms?
  7. How do drivers' past experiences with Uber influence their willingness to work with the company in the Black Cab sector?
  8. What specific concerns do drivers express regarding Uber's potential impact on the Black Cab market and their livelihoods?
  9. What steps has Uber taken to address driver concerns and recruit London taxi drivers for its Black Cab launch?
  10. What are the potential implications for the Black Cab industry if Uber successfully integrates Black Cabs into its ride-hailing app, and how are drivers preparing for this possibility?


As the discussion continues, the industry awaits to see whether Uber's expansion into the Black Cab market will gain traction or face ongoing resistance from a wary industry.


You might also like

VAT changes and Uber’s contract rewrite — what drivers, operators and lenders must model now

By taxi finance direct team • January 27, 2026
In January 2026 new VAT rules changed how the private hire sector is treated for VAT in the UK. The detail matters: who is the supplier of transport determines who must charge VAT. Platforms, drivers and brokers are now dealing with new tax and contract arrangements that affect fares, margins and forecasting. What happened and why it matters The government updated the VAT approach so fares could become subject to 20% VAT when the platform is the transport supplier. In response, outside London Uber rewrote contracts to emphasise an agency relationship: Uber acts as an agent and the driver is the supplier. That shift moves responsibility for VAT and related reporting to drivers — though many drivers fall below the VAT registration threshold and so fares stay VAT‑free in practice. London remains different because TfL requires a different model. Immediate practical impacts for drivers and operators Drivers must check whether they need to register for VAT, and how that affects take‑home pay and pricing. Operators and fleet owners should review their invoicing and accounting; if platforms change who invoices customers, revenue timing and reclaim rules change too. Brokers and lenders should stress‑test models for different VAT outcomes — what if key routes become taxable? How does that affect margins, residual values and lease payments? How to model the risk (practical steps) Re-run cashflow forecasts with both VAT and non‑VAT scenarios. Identify trigger points where VAT registration would be required (driver turnover thresholds, company turnover). Build contingency for price sensitivity — if fares rise, demand may fall on marginal routes. Review contract terms with platforms and operators to clarify who issues invoices and when payments occur. Longer‑term picture This change reveals how tax and contract design can rapidly reshape market economics. Expect platforms, operators and regulators to keep testing arrangements regionally. For lenders and brokers, the right response is simple: stress‑test, document assumptions, and build buffer into finance structures where VAT or contract role might shift overnight. Bottom line  VAT changes are not just a tax issue — they change who carries cashflow risk. Model both sides, be conservative on revenue assumptions, and make sure documentation captures who is contractually responsible for supply and VAT. That clarity protects drivers, operators and anyone financing vehicles.

What the DfT’s plan to cut taxi licensing bodies means for drivers and operators in England

By Taxi finance direct team • January 27, 2026
The Department for Transport’s consultation to reduce the number of taxi and private hire licensing bodies in England will change how the sector is overseen. Right now 263 different councils and authorities issue licences. The proposal replaces them with roughly 70 local transport authorities. That’s meant to align licensing with transport planning and close gaps where drivers work across borders. What’s changing, in plain terms Fewer licensing bodies should mean more consistent rules across regions. If you’re a driver who regularly crosses council borders, the aim is to reduce the “out‑of‑area” work that makes enforcement and background checks harder. For operators, it could simplify compliance: one set of expectations across a wider area, rather than dozens of different standards. Safety and standards The DfT explicitly links the change to passenger safety. Under a smaller set of licensing authorities, standards for safeguarding, vehicle checks, and driver vetting could be applied more evenly. That should make it easier to trace complaints and to carry out coordinated enforcement where a driver operates across several towns. Business impacts for operators and brokers Operators may face transitional costs: changing administrative processes, revalidating licences, or adapting to new local fees. Brokers and finance partners should model the short term: expect some paperwork and timing risks. In the medium term, though, more consistent rules reduce regulatory uncertainty — which lenders prefer when underwriting vehicle purchases or lease agreements. What drivers need to know  Drivers should watch the consultation closely for changes to licence conditions, medical checks, and fee structures. If you work across borders, a consolidated licensing area could cut duplicate checks and make it easier to work outside your home town. Next steps and timing The consultation closes and the DfT will assess responses before proposing next steps. Any actual change will take time; councils and trade bodies will be consulted on detailed arrangements. For businesses, now is the time to map dependencies — licence renewals, fee cycles and compliance systems — to avoid surprises. Bottom line This is a structural change intended to make licensing fairer and safer. There will be short‑term friction, but for operators, drivers and funders the prize is a clearer, more consistent regulatory framework across larger transport regions. Watch for the DfT’s next announcements and plan transitional cashflow around licence timing.

latest taxi industry updates and insights - recent VAT changes

By taxi finance team • January 20, 2026
The UK’s recent VAT change for taxi and private hire journeys has pushed platforms, drivers and local authorities into rapid adjustment. Intended to make taxation fairer, the rule’s knock‑on effects are already changing industry contracts and everyday economics. What changed From early January 2026 the government clarified VAT treatment for journeys sold via platforms. Where a platform buys and resells travel as a principal, VAT applies. To limit the extra VAT bill, some platforms outside London have changed driver contracts so the platform is an agent and drivers are the supplier. That shifts VAT responsibility onto drivers rather than the app. London’s rules differ because Transport for London does not permit the agency model. Immediate effects on drivers and fares Drivers work on tight margins. For many, handling VAT means more paperwork and the need to understand registration thresholds and invoicing. Some drivers worry they will collect VAT but not hit the turnover needed to reclaim input VAT — a cash‑flow and admin headache. Platforms argue the change keeps headline fares lower for riders, but drivers report uncertainty and frustration. Early signs show drivers considering switching apps or reducing hours — which could affect availability in some areas. Supply‑side and local effects The UK market already varies by city. London’s distinct licensing and rules mean drivers there face a different VAT picture than drivers elsewhere. That inconsistency complicates multi‑area fleets and drivers who work across boundaries. Operators and fleet managers must now plan for a mixed regulatory landscape where pricing, compliance and reporting differ by licensing area. Local licensing reforms under DfT consultation could change this picture again, so operators are juggling two moving parts: tax rules and licensing reform. How platforms might respond practically To reduce the burden on drivers, platforms could offer simplified VAT reporting tools, payroll‑like reporting that automates remittance, or transitional support such as guidance sessions and clearer invoicing. Some operators might internalise VAT at platform level in parts of the business where they act as principal, to keep drivers focused on driving rather than tax admin. However, any shift back to platform VAT responsibility is constrained by local rules such as TfL’s stance. Policy trade‑offs and suggested fixes The goal of closing VAT gaps is sensible — it restores revenue and aims at fairness. But policy must avoid offloading complexity onto those least able to bear it. Short‑term fixes: publish clear HMRC guidance tailored to PHV drivers, encourage platforms to provide automated VAT receipts, and offer a transitional window with simplified registration routes. Medium term: align national tax rules with the DfT licensing reforms so drivers working across areas face fewer surprises. Bottom line VAT reform is necessary but fragile in execution. If platforms, regulators and driver bodies work together, the change can land as intended — fairer tax treatment without collapsing driver incomes. If not, the market risks fragmentation, higher costs for some passengers, and real income pressure on drivers. Practical support and clear, consistent rules will determine the outcome.