“Discrimination of any kind has no place in ground transportation industry”

“Being an Authority Figure Doesn’t Make You a Legal Risk!”—GetTransfer.com CEO Alexander Sapov Disqualifies Driver’s Claims in Lammy Incident

“Ground-transportation fares should be calculated per kilometer travelled, not by the passenger’s political weight.”, Alexander Sapov 

I refute the justification used by a driver Mr. Mimun who attempted to retroactively charge an extra €700 fee after discovering his passenger was David Lammy. I call this  move “an unlawful breach of contract, in a logic that echoes discrimination.”
In response to recent allegations regarding an incident involving a transfer arranged through our platform, I wish to address the situation directly. During this transfer, the driver, Mr. Nasim Mimun, reportedly attempted to increase the fare mid-journey upon discovering the identity of his passenger the David Lammy. Mr. Mimun later explained his actions in a statement to prosecutors, asserting:

“When I received the transport request, the names of the passengers were not disclosed, nor was their status as authority figures mentioned. Such circumstances represent a transport risk, which justifies a different fare.“, Mr. Mimun

I find it essential to publicly respond to Mr. Mimun, not only to correct legal inaccuracies but also because this issue affects fundamental principles—the integrity of professional service, the right to privacy, and fairness within a society still grappling with inequalities.

I’d also like to clarify that:

“The Sun misrepresented my communication. I respect Mr Lammy’s modesty in selecting the most economical vehicle available, though I believe his team should have chosen a more suitable option.”, Alexander Sapov

Nor Authority figure nor VIPs Are Not a “Transport Risk” category to be evaluated in the car by driver — That “Transport Risk” Category Simply Doesn’t Exist

Mr. Mimun’s central claim is that he was exposed to an increased “transport risk” by transporting a high-profile public figure, and therefore was entitled to renegotiate the fare — demanding an additional €700 after the service had begun.

Let me be absolutely clear—I personally find this legally and ethically absurd. Under French transport law, there is no such category as “VIP transport” risk. The term “transport risk” appears in insurance law to describe risks related to road safety, accidents, or damage to cargo. It does not, in any context, relate to a passenger’s professional or political status.

All French drivers – whether taxi operators or VTC chauffeurs – carry professional liability insurance that applies equally to every passenger. The law draws no distinction between conveying a government minister and transporting a schoolteacher. The duty to provide the agreed-upon service safely is identical in every case, and so is the fare.

The manner in which this incident occurred and has subsequently been portrayed increasingly suggests to me that it is more a personal vendetta rather than common sense.

The Legal Right to Privacy Applies Equally

Mr. Mimun said the problem was that the platform hid Mr. Lammy’s name when the ride was booked, so he didn’t know who his passengers were.

In fact, the opposite is true. Under French and European law, passengers — including public officials — are under no obligation to disclose their name or status when booking private transport. There is no “VIP declaration” clause. Consumers book as private individuals, and that privacy is not a technicality — it’s a right.

This protection exists for good reason. In a world where high-profile individuals face targeted attacks and media harassment, anonymity isn’t only legal it is a must have. It is necessary for safety and dignity. Suggesting that David Lammy should pre-declare his presence as a “special risk” verges on profiling.

To read more about French Law

Contract Law Leaves No Room for Retroactive Surcharges

Here are the facts:  the fare was agreed in advance between the passenger and the driver. The driver accepted the booking under the conditions stated. French law — particularly the Code des transports and the civil code — treats such contracts as binding. To increase the fare afterward is a breach of contract.

GetTransfer.com operates within EU consumer protection standards, which require that all pricing be disclosed and agreed before a ride. This ensures transparency for the passenger, and fairness for the driver. It protects both parties — and it cannot be undone mid-journey because of a sudden change in perception.

No platform in France, nor I believe anywhere recognizes a retroactive “VIP surcharge”. The €700 fee demanded by Mr. Mimun was nonsensically arbitrary, even how he calculated it is questionable. Worse, when this unlawful charge was refused, which I repeat that Lammy did the right thing to do,  he (driver) drove away with the passenger’s luggage — behavior that has since led to criminal charges for theft. I make my position clear: It was not just a breach of policy, our guidelines and local law. It was a violation of the public trust and law. An attempt to discriminate.

The Broader Context Matters

What makes this incident particularly disturbing is who the target was: David Lammy. A man whose entire political career has been dedicated to confronting structural inequality and discrimination — from the Windrush scandal, to systemic racism in the justice system, to socioeconomic gatekeeping at elite universities. A man who has consistently stood up for those who are treated differently, priced differently, judged differently.

The notion that he should be hit with a fabricated “transportation risk fee” simply because of who he is places this case squarely in the realm of the social-justice issues he has championed.

Time and again, Lammy has asked why discrimination still lurks in the everyday details—pricing, gatekeeping, access. This incident is a textbook example.

Our Standards, and the Standards of the Law

GetTransfer.com is guided by clear corporate values and principles:

• We do not support — nor will we ever defend — attempts to exploit passengers based on their status, identity, or perceived profile.
• We uphold the right of all passengers to privacy and equal treatment.
• We condemn practices that distort contractual obligations and harm consumer trust.

We are equally committed to the rights of professional drivers. The overwhelming majority of our partners-drivers abide by the rules, honor their commitments, and treat passengers with the dignity they deserve. The conduct attributed to Mr Mimun is neither typical of this industry nor compatible with the standards of ground transportation.

Final Words: The Price You See Is the Price You Pay

GetTransfer.com was created to make travel simpler, safer, and fairer. You submit a ride request, review quotes from drivers or carriers— completed with prices, vehicle photos, and ratings—pick the option you prefer, and that’s it. There are no backroom calculations, no hidden surcharges, no sliding scales based on who you are.

It’s more than just a business model – it’s a guiding principle.

To Mr. Lammy, we extend our respect and regret that this incident occurred. To all our clients — known or unknown — we commit to continue defending your rights. Not just because the law says so, but because righteousness demands it.

P.S.

An interesting fact that caught my sight was a quote by Mr. Mimun – “We were followed from Italy by two vehicles because of her husband.” The statement was given to vice-prosecutor Aude Menaige in the south-east city of Bonneville on May 6, three weeks after the trip. If cameras were in place on these roads, tracing the cars would be straightforward—so I’m unsure what point he’s trying to make. Drivers, I invite you to share your thoughts and suggestions in the comments section below regarding this incident overall and how these vehicles fit into the narrative, and what exactly Mr. Mimun might be implying.

GetTransfer legal provisions to prevent discrimination 

I am glad to recall that we have a special section in the GetTransfer Service agreement in order to prevent any discrimination in the relations of the service’ users. We are basing this on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000, establishing the inadmissibility of discrimination as follows: “Any discrimination, in particular on grounds of sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic traits, language, religion or belief, political or any other views, membership of a national minority, property status, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation. 

We expect all users of GetTransfer service, both passengers and drivers, to be tolerant and not specify any requirements of a discriminatory nature, either on certain sex, race, nationality, sexual orientation or social status basis. All the users of the service shall enjoy the equal treatment, in online or offline communication. If a user breaches this requirement, we reserve the right to stop cooperation with him.

GetTransfer user agreement contains a separate section that prohibits discrimination:

11. PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION

11.1. Discrimination refers to any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference in the rights and freedoms of an individual or a group of individuals, as well as support for discriminatory behaviour.

11.2. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000 establishes the Inadmissibility of Discrimination, in particular article 21, paragraph 1, contains the following: “Any discrimination, in particular on grounds of sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic traits , Language, religion or belief, political or any other views, membership of a national minority, property status, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation.” Paragraph 2 once again emphasizes that “any discrimination based on nationality is prohibited”. Racial Equality Directive 2000/43/EC establishes a ban on all forms of racial discrimination; Gender Equality Directive 2006/54/EC (in relation to employment) establishes the equality of men and women, prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. The prohibition of discrimination is the basic principle of international law, recognized and actively supported by the entire world community.

11.3. When using the Service, the User shall be tolerant and not specify any requirements of a discriminatory nature, in particular the requirement that the transportation Service be provided by a Carrier of a certain sex, race, nationality, sexual orientation. If the User indicates discriminatory requirements, the Company reserves the right to reject the request and terminate the Agreement with the User (block the access to the Personal Account).