TfL says the person in the driver's seat is responsible at all times. Uber and Otto Car still have not said who employs them

On 17 September this paper ran a piece headlined "Three companies stand behind the driver's seat in the Uber and Wayve cars. None has yet said who employs the person in it". That is still true. What has changed is that the regulator has now told us, in writing, what that person carries.

Transport for London's answer to our request, on 1 October, put it in one line. These cars are licensed as private hire vehicles, so a licensed driver "must be in the vehicle and is responsible for the vehicle at all times". To run the cars without one, a company would have to go through the government's separate process for automated passenger services.

Responsible at all times, in a car that is driving itself most of the time.

Here is who we asked about that person, and what came back.

On 7 September we asked Uber whether the person aboard is employed or contracted, by whom, and what the role pays. We gave Uber until 14 September. Nothing has come back.

On 9 September Wayve told us, on the record, that Otto Car oversees the trained private hire drivers in the London service, not Wayve. It said it does not publicise salary information.

On 17 September we asked Otto Car whether the drivers are its employees, self-employed, or renting a car from it, and what they are paid. We asked for a reply by 24 September. We received an automated acknowledgement and nothing since.

Now set that beside the rules TfL released to us. When something goes wrong, the report records whether the car was in manual mode or Wayve's system was in charge. That one field decides whether the moment belonged to the driver or the machine. The scale deciding how serious the moment was comes from Wayve's internal definitions, and TfL has blacked it out. The reports go from Wayve to TfL. TfL will not say whether any exist.

So the person in the seat holds the legal responsibility. The record of what they did, and how it was graded, sits with the company whose software they supervise and the regulator that licensed it. And the firms that engage them have not said on what terms: Uber after more than three weeks, Otto Car after two.

I think this is what work changing looks like close up. The driver used to do the job. Now the driver answers for a job a machine is doing, and the account of each shift is written by somebody else. If the trial does what it is for, the seat empties. The least we should know before it does is who the person in it works for.

I am not suggesting these drivers are badly paid or badly treated. I don't know, and that is the point. We will print whatever Uber and Otto Car send, in full, whenever it arrives.