Headlines
Aldermen: Uber Drivers Not Complying with City Codes to be Arrested
In a turn of events, Oxford board of aldermen have decided to change how they deal with unauthorized drivers and vehicles for hire.
Uber connects drivers hired by the company with people around Oxford who need rides.
Since Uber, a transportation smartphone app, began operating in Oxford, city officials have struggled to figure out how to deal with the drivers that were hired by the company but have not been permitted by the city.
Oxford police officers have been issuing citations up to $1,000 per offense to the drivers, but the conversation changed last night to arresting the drivers and towing the vehicles after more than two months of citations. Uber official Austin Barbour discussed the problems with aldermen at the Oct. 7 board meeting, but promises made at that meeting have not been fulfilled.
“I cannot stress enough how much Oxford welcomes and embraces the application technology — but that does not mean that using it is a free pass to avoid complying with any laws for safety any more than anyone else,” Ward 1 alderman Jay Hughes said. “That being said, and despite repeated assurances from Uber representatives at the last board meeting, the city clerk confirmed on the record that not a single driver using an Uber app has applied for a license, background check, or provided any proof of insurance, as required by local and state law.”
Hughes also said Uber’s “bold advertising” around Oxford in The Citizen and The Oxford Eagle is encouraging drivers to operate without proper permits and licenses. When asked about the citations officers had been giving drivers in August, Uber representative Kaitlin Durkosh told HottyToddy.com that the company would continue to pay the fines on behalf of their drivers.
“Uber drivers who were stopped over the weekend advised officers that the Uber management instructed them to continue disregarding local and state laws and that Uber would pay all of the fines,” Hughes said. “Thus, the fines are no longer a deterrent, and an arrest will stay with the driver and his/her record.”
Due to repeated and flagrant violations by unauthorized drivers for hire in unauthorized vehicles, notice is hereby given that beginning immediately, all unauthorized drivers of vehicles for hire in Oxford will be arrested on site and the vehicle will be towed from that location.
UPDATE
Hughes sent this message to the media today in response to the comments regarding Uber in Oxford:
Oxford is not trying to do what has been characterized as “running off Uber.” In fact, that is far from the case. We just want drivers to comply with very simple regulations – and they can still drive for Uber, Lyft, alone, or any taxi company they want. Our ordinance is not simply a “taxi” ordinance – it is an ordinance regulating safety and passengers in “Vehicles for Hire.” Vehicle for Hire is pretty simple – you pay someone to take you somewhere in a vehicle. These ordinances were designed while taking into consideration Uber, rickshaws and other emerging options in mind, not just taxis.
My reasons for objection and vote last night are not based upon competition or anything remotely close to it. There is no limit to who can drive here. It is really pretty simple: Apply, have a clean background, car and insurance, and you can drive. No one has ever been turned down.
When I reported in my summary that it is based upon safety, that is the case — clear and simple. As a board in executive session, we have dealt with significant late night issues of assault of drivers, sexual assault of passengers, wrecks, fare-jumpers, and a host of other issues that would have been beyond my imagination a year ago. As a result of these problems, we spent seven months diligently researching and analyzing different ordinances measured to attempt to devise the safest manner to get citizens, students and 1.4 million annual visitors from one place to another in Oxford.
The result was a very simple and easy process:
1. Fill out an application to operate on city streets and pay an application fee.
2. Have a background check performed by our police department.
3. Have your vehicle inspected by a city representative.
4. Get a decal to put on your vehicle to show you are a licensed operator.
5. Provide proof of insurance (even Uber’s policy could work if they would simply provide it) and have a security camera to protect the driver and passenger.
Once this is done, you can drive people for free or hire in Oxford and drive for Uber or Lyft, or any other taxi company.
Uber representatives came to town, presented our board with its request to exempt their drivers from all of our laws, and when denied, went full-steam ahead, flagrantly violating these very simple requirements. It has refused to provide the insurance policy to Oxford, or any other city we are aware of.
The clear reason is that the only policy we can find it is not an automobile insurance policy — it is a liability policy if someone actually sues and pierces the corporate veil of Uber. Uber particularly denied insurance coverage earlier this year when a six-year-old girl was killed in an Uber car accident in San Francisco. Uber denied liability because it claimed the driver to be an “Independent Contractor.” Virtually all private driver’s personal insurance policies exclude coverage when carrying passengers for a fee. But, Uber and the drivers lead people to believe they are covered in these personal autos when it simply is not the case.
Uber claims it conducts its own background checks, so it should not be subject to our police checks. This same background check system has permitted three drivers’ in the past month to cause a ball-peen hammer attack, sexual assault, and drug bust while impaired in Tuscaloosa. The “vehicle inspection” is disingenuous when many drivers rent cars or use other people’s vehicles (as the one I rode in last weekend).
The drivers have readily told me how easy it is to get around the background check with Uber. Some websites even give easy steps on how to beat the Uber background check if you are concerned. Personally, while riding in Austin two weeks ago, I learned of an Uber driver who started driving for Uber after his city taxi license was revoked for raping a co-ed. In each of these instances, a security camera would have prevented the problem — a $200 security camera — or changed the outcome. A background check by police instead of the company with a vested interest would have revealed very real criminal history.
So, the ultimate goal here is truly to ensure safety and compliance. These same drivers are being paid handsome sums by Uber to come in from Memphis and operate illegally in Oxford on game weekends. I again share that I am completely in favor of Uber, as a new and exciting technology.
However, it does not mean the drivers get to skip the narrowly tailored laws. There is no reason these drivers can’t pay the nominal fee and go through the proper process — and then use Uber, particularly when they have personally reported to me making as much as $2,500 on game day alone in Oxford. Some of our city taxi drivers are also Uber drivers in their own cabs, yet they comply. Other cab companies here and in every major city use the “Hail My Cab” app to connect them directly with passengers, but they still have to comply with the laws. Having a different name for the app simply does not get a hall pass on compliance.
The bottom line is that there may be many valid points and opinions on each side of the debate about Uber. However, as an alderman, I have to do what I think is best for Oxford, not Uber, and not drivers from Memphis. Let there be no doubt that I have taken all points into consideration and find that there is no legitimate reason for anyone to be able to escape the narrowly tailored regulations we have in place to enhance safety and security. Please do not think for a minute that Uber is about benefiting young, poor, Oxford drivers. It sends drivers here for game weekends when it is easy pickings. There is not one Uber car available in Oxford as I type this, nor was there last Wednesday night when I left dinner on the Square.
However, there were multiple available on game day, many at prices much higher than our local taxies. It is easy to be competitive when all you do is come in for the volume times, while our local drivers have to work their tails off and starve in the slow times. Uber claims it does nothing wrong but connect an unauthorized driver with someone who wants to pay for a ride. There are similar apps that connect passengers or goods directly with drivers of tractor-trailers or pilots of private airplanes. However, don’t think for a minute that the driver or pilot gets to operate without the proper license, insurance, and DOT/FAA requirements.
I genuinely do regret some perceptions that we are trying to run off Uber. However, perfection is difficult when 150,000 people come to a town on a day that designed for 10,000. In the end, my duty is to evaluate all information and scenarios and do what I think is best for Oxford. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes it is hard, and sometimes I just piss off people. In the end, I want to sleep well and believe I did what was best. That is true with this Uber decision as well.
Amelia Camurati is managing editor of HottyToddy.com and can be reached at amelia.camurati@hottytoddy.com.
| Sat, Aug 31 |  | vs Furman | W, 76-0 |
| Sat, Sep 7 |  | vs Middle Tennessee | W, 52-3 |
| Sat, Sep 14 |  | @ Wake Forest | W, 40-6 |
| Sat, Sep 21 |  | vs Georgia Southern | W, 52-13 |
| Sat, Sep 28 |  | vs Kentucky | L, 20-17 |
| Sat, Oct 5 |  | @ South Carolina | W, 27-3 |
| Sat, Oct 12 |  | vs LSU | L, 29-26 (2 OT) |
| Sat, Oct 26 |  | vs Oklahoma | W, 26-14 |
| Sat, Nov 2 |  | @ Arkansas | W, 63-35 |
| Sat, Nov 16 |  | vs Georgia | W, 28-10 |
| Sat, Nov 23 |  | @ Florida | L, 24-17 |
| Sat, Nov 30 |  | vs Mississippi State | 2:30 PM ABC |
JD Turner
October 22, 2014 at 10:33 am
this is such a load of bs. I’ve used uber many times in 2 different cities and i’ve never had a problem. PLUS it’s so much cheaper than the price gouging that goes on here in Oxford. It is ridiculous. This city needs a clean sweep of it’s officials as well as this state. We need to get people in here with common sense instead of big purse strings…..
USG
October 22, 2014 at 12:37 pm
Well, you never had a problem in the other two cities because the drivers received licenses, got a background check, and supplied proof of insurance. Here, Uber is flat out telling drivers to forget about the laws because Uber will just pay the fine. You failed to see the whole issue with the way Uber is handling things here.
A clean sweep of all local and state officials? You’re clearly the one lacking common sense.
Chip
October 22, 2014 at 12:38 pm
The city is afraid they will lose there DUI income plain and simple. Ruining peoples lives is what keeps the city of Oxford in business.
C. Lake
October 22, 2014 at 1:39 pm
Make Mr. Barbour and co. liable as well.How about a $5 million bond as collateral, put up by those that are telling the drivers to ignore the rules.
Last, but NOT least: their is possessive, there is a direction!
pilot mkn
October 22, 2014 at 1:48 pm
Someone needs to buy Mr. Hughes a bottle of “No More Tears” baby shampoo.
LK
October 22, 2014 at 2:06 pm
I don’t think the issue is about whether it’s easier for the passengers. It’s about protecting the people of Oxford. Do a little research and you’ll see that Uber is a shady company.
It may be EASIER for you to get a ride, but it won’t be easier for you to get money out of them if they wreck and you end up in the hospital. You’ll be out of luck then.
And I don’t buy the losing the DUI income one bit. Unfortunately, that income stream will always continue to flow, because people are just stupid.
crony capitalism
October 22, 2014 at 2:31 pm
First, all uber drivers are required to pass a background check and supply proof of insurance. It’s truly amazing the idiots that post before they do their research. Second, this is the kind of crony capitalism that you would expect out of the windy city, not out of a small town in MS. I’ve had to deal with these thugs (alderman) of Oxford on more than one occasion and they will do everything (including breaking the law) to get their way.
LK, uber is one of the fastest growing companies in the WORLD at the moment. They will soon make a mult-billion dollar IPO. Please don’t put unsubstantiated claims on this post… share your links.
I use this company any time I travel. They are usually 30-40% cheaper than cab companies. Let capitalism work
Anonymous
October 22, 2014 at 2:50 pm
All bout money
Anonymous
October 22, 2014 at 3:48 pm
Oxford is just pissed they miss out on the revenue cut from the taxi company. The law they cited about ” for hire vehicles” was implemented a few months ago when the cabs started to complain about uber. The whole “I am just following the rules” (that he made up a little while ago) act is a bit ridiculous.
Cal Wells
October 22, 2014 at 4:46 pm
The entire response can be summarized by this quote:
It is easy to be competitive when all you do is come in for the volume times, while our local drivers have to work their tails off and starve in the slow times.
I don’t want a camera recording me while I’m sitting in a car…who owns that footage?
Thom
October 22, 2014 at 6:05 pm
Regardless of whether I or you agree with the law, it IS the law and should be obeyed. One of the main reasons why our country is so messed up today is that too many Americans, from the President on down to the man on the street, do not respect the rule of law.
Not Thom
October 22, 2014 at 10:26 pm
Thom,
Your “the law is the law” argument is just plain stupid. Why have you turned off your brain and let others think for you?
David
October 22, 2014 at 11:35 pm
Amelia, this is a joke. Why is it that you think you are so much smarter than the leadership of the dozens of large cities around the country that allow Uber? If you were serious about keeping Oxford safe you’d be getting creative to come up with ways to get folks home safely rather than just shooting down options.
Alan
October 23, 2014 at 7:40 am
The problem with Oxford’s current taxi policy, a $10 charge per rider, is that a single person trying to get home on a busy night will never get a licensed taxi to stop for them. Why take 1 guy home for $10 and a $2 tip when you can take 5 people for $50 and a $10 tip? I’ve been stranded every single time I’ve tried to get a taxi home on a football weekend. With Uber this year, I’ve had no problems. Oxford really needs to rethink its laws and make first-call first-serve requirements for taxis. No telling how many times I’ve sat on the square after everyone else has left and heard Angel Taxi say “The driver will call when he is on his way” and 4 hours later its 5am and no taxi ever came or called.
Anonymous
October 23, 2014 at 11:05 am
For the record. Uber conducts its own background checks via a third party vendor. Its based on name/DOB/SSN, which are often times stolen due to ID theft. These types of BG checks are riddles with flaws. Uber WILL NOT sublit their drivers to a Level 2 BG check, which includes fingerprints. A sensible person would ask “Why Not?”. Additionally, Uber does require drivers to show proof of insurance. However, that insurance is useless when you use your personal vehicle for-hire, just ask your agent/Ins. Company. Uber’s Insurance is provided as a surplus/excess policy, which is generally not permitted to be a primary provider in most states. Therefore, the driver will be responsible. And if that doesnt worry you, perhaps one should review the waiver signed by all Uber drivers. The waiver releases Uber from all responsibilty or Liability assocaited with the driver’s actions. All of this is easily checked on line.Take a couple of minutes and watch this on YouTube:
https://youtu.be/XT8Kv7Et0OI
Anonymous
October 24, 2014 at 11:12 am
If it’s all about safety…why are they allowing cabs to transport passengers without seatbelts? I personally know of one that imitates the Scooby Doo van that has bean bags thrown on the floor for passengers to sit on. Not to mention the cabs drive like a bat out of hell and get away with it! Don’t seem safe to me!
Anonymous
October 24, 2014 at 2:51 pm
I know beyond the shadow of a doubt that there are people trying to apply and being told they are not qualified. Then upon returning to request a permit for independent contract work, they are told that they must apply for a business license which is $550 along with other assorted fees.
My personal friend has been trying for 3 days to go though the taxi channels the government put in place and was literally laughed at when he said “UBER” as his answer for what company he wanted to drive with. The clerk then responded with “that’s not a real company.”
Oxford Government is playing a strange game. They keep talking about how easy it is to apply and then will not allow the drivers any kind of ease and stop them at square one. This is an outrage.
Vote these people out and take this issue to someone at the state level to see if we can get some progress.
russell
November 7, 2014 at 11:04 am
Uber is NOT above the law
SIMPLE
NOTE # they pay or offer incentives for people to post positive comments – shameful – dig deeper and see how unconscionable this Uber is!
follow @arrestinguber to see the fight against Uber unfold…
Gary
September 10, 2017 at 3:50 am
So, I am shady because Uber is shady. There are weeks I make only $30/day, I have a clean, safe care and I keep commercial insurance. I am more then willing to do a full back ground check and I would like to be able to pay a fee to get a city sticker so I can park on the square. But Oxford said, ‘no’ to my request to pay the $500 fee for parking privileges.
As for driving in Oxford, I go to Memphis these days…in Oxford, I feel lucky to get $3/hr where I can my $25/hour in Memphis. As for $2500/week, someone was trying to recruit you to drive…in bigger cities, Uber will pay you to recruit people. Oh, Oxford is about 5 miles from city limits to city limits, most rides you give is under the minimum. Which is $3.
Oh, and where can I find the ordinance that cover Uber…I would like to read them. There is no need to hide them. I have read been reading the city ordinance and I can find nothing about taxi’s and Uber/Lyft and car top signs.