SAFETY FIRST? The truth about assaults on drivers, lone working and whether current protections are enough

Safety for taxi and private hire vehicle (PHV) drivers remains one of the industry’s most pressing issues. Every shift brings risk. Drivers work alone, at night, and in unpredictable circumstances. The promise of CCTV, partitions and better technology offers reassurance on paper, but the reality on the road tells a different story.

Recent data reveals that the problem is far from under control. In London, the Metropolitan Police recorded 142 offences in which the victim was identified as a taxi or PHV driver during a six-month period between November 2023 to May 2024.

Even these figures may not tell the full story. Many drivers quietly admit that they rarely report incidents. Some fear losing work if a licence review follows. Others have simply lost confidence that reporting will lead to meaningful action. What cannot be ignored is the common thread: drivers are vulnerable, and the systems meant to protect them remain inconsistent.

Late nights and lone working

Few jobs demand the same level of isolation as driving a taxi through the small hours. The Government’s own guidance states that working alone at night “carries most risks of violence”. For many, it is unavoidable. Late-night work means greater demand, but it also means more intoxicated passengers, deserted pick-up points and limited police visibility.

Drivers in city centres often describe Friday and Saturday nights as the most unpredictable. Fare disputes, alcohol-fuelled aggression and robberies are sadly not rare. For rural or suburban drivers, the risk shifts towards isolation; long, dark roads with no witnesses and limited signal.

Cash adds to the risk. Despite the rise in contactless payments, some passengers still prefer to pay with notes, especially for short fares and in rural areas where signal for card payments is poor. Cash handling can make drivers a target. Official guidance now advises drivers to carry minimal cash and, where possible, bank it mid-shift. That advice is sound, but for many small operators, cash remains part of daily business.

Join us on WhatsApp here

Barriers and partitions

Physical protection inside vehicles has been discussed for years. Traditional London taxis benefit from fixed partitions that separate the driver from passengers. Many PHVs do not. The difference matters. A solid screen can block a sudden assault, stop a grab from behind, and deter violence before it begins. It makes everyone in the vehicle more at ease.

CCTV: A deterrent still not widely used

The case for CCTV is worth discussing too. Evidence shows in-car recording can cut threats and reduce assaults. Both passengers and drivers behave more cautiously when they know they are being recorded. Yet, according to the latest government figures, only 8% of licensing authorities in England require CCTV in all taxis, and just 7% do the same for PHVs.

That small proportion leaves thousands of drivers without what is arguably the most effective deterrent available, although many cabbies wanting the security that CCTV has to offer can receive it via a non-mandatory licensing avenue.

Join our YouTube channel here

Some councils have encouraged voluntary installation, others have hesitated due to privacy concerns and the cost of managing data storage. For drivers, this inconsistency means CCTV protection depends largely on whether the driver deems it necessary.

Technology and the human factor

Operators are increasingly adopting lone-worker technology. GPS tracking, silent alarms and in-app panic buttons now feature in many control systems. These tools can alert operators if a driver is in distress or has stopped unexpectedly. But they depend on real-time monitoring and quick response. For independent drivers, that layer of support may not exist.

Ultimately, technology can only do so much. Training in de-escalation, awareness and safer working practices remains a great skill to have in your armoury as a cabbie. Drivers need guidance on recognising risk, managing difficult passengers and knowing when to disengage. Yet access to consistent safety training across the trade is limited.

Are current protections enough?

The tools exist, but are they applied evenly? Some drivers enjoy the protection of full partitions, cameras and operator support, while others work with little more than instinct and experience. The issue is not lack of knowledge but lack of universal standards and funds.

If the trade is serious about protecting its workforce, certain measures should no longer be optional. Cashless payment options should be supported across all platforms. And licensing authorities should treat driver safety as part of their core duty, not a policy preference.

For now, too many drivers continue to work in isolation, hoping that common sense and good fortune will see them through each shift.