Blast From The Past.... With TfL Run By Cowboys, The Nightmare Continues

   After six demos and two all party engagements, the signs still went up!

I remember, many years ago, the Metirpolitan Public Carriage Office, writing to every licensed Taxi driver saying "their must be no, 'no go areas' in London for Taxis". 

"You will be expected to go to any destination anywhere within a six mile radius (now extended to twelve) or within one hour in duration and their must be no exceptions". 

Now we have a Mayor, in charge of a Transport body (TfL), bent on the destruction of our 360 year old trade by creating 'no go areas' for London Taxis.

We've had 8 years of protest, demonstration, consultation after consultation, engagement and negotiation. Apart from the killer on the knowledge protests, which saw top TfL directors moved sideways, we've had little or no success. 

Last year, after six demonstrations and two bouts of negotiations, we lost access through the Bank Junction, financed by TfL just to speed up bus times. Once through the junction the busses hit chaos which negates any advantage made by the ban!!!

This is about to be followed by a complete ban from Tottenham Court Road, plus Oxford Street and Baker Street are still being negotiated.

Caught up in the middle of this attack on our trade, are the unfortunates, and they are the disabled and less mobile members of the public. Mayor Khan is trying to steal the freedom of the disabled, to shop wherever they like, in order to give way and make more room for the able bodied shoppers who he hopes will travel forwards and backwards on the Tubes new Elizabeth line. 

The most scandalous aspect of these plans being....there are two wheelchair users on the board of TfL who have said nothing in defence of the disabled's right of access and to shop on Oxford Street.

There is as always a hidden agenda and Khan obviously feels he can supply many extra passengers to the new line by making it as difficult as possible for taxis to get to popular destinations around central London. 

PROJECT HORIZON:

Taxi Leaks spoke of Project Horizon several years ago and TfL flatly denied it ever existed.

We predicted back then, that under this agenda, there would be Taxi no go areas, followed by Private Hire rest ranks where drivers could wait to be hired and PH WAVs rank spaces at mainline stations. 

Remember the Gold, Silver and Bronze PH ranking system? It's still there in the background as TfL never fully scrap an idea, they just shelve it till the time is right. 

WE ALWAYS SAID TFL WERE A BUNCH OF COWBOYS

With Country Boy Rett Russell in charge of London's Ambulance service, it's only a matter of time before we see NHS Uber ranks at hospitals around Greater London...an going on TfL's present form, outside Greater London too. 

As Harry Wall said, "History is there to learn from".

Seems our trade has learned nothing

After years of negativity and deterioration, fighting the unfair and elitist United Trade Group, did we not all cheer when Val Shawcross announced the UTG would be scrapped and the gagging order known as the engagement policy would be assigned to the shredder. 

So what is plan B.

It seems the old United Trade Group is to be replaced by the new United Trade group, and the old gagging order known as the engagement policy, is to be replaced by a new gagging order called the new engagement policy. Again the right to exclude any group they see fit to exclude.

And the price for signing away the right to criticise TfL in print or on social media, is a seat at the old fold up table.

Towards the end of this year, the Taxi trade will be expected to purchase the new electric TX5, even though neither TfL, the GLA, the Mayor or our trade Orgs, have bothered to explore the health risks associated with the radiation given off from the bank of batteries inside the vehicle. 

Not only has TfL put us in the predicament of not being able to afford this vehicle by selling our work to a NonDomicile company that pays little to no tax, we now learn this week that the government is likely to scrap the subsidy they were going to give Taxis and private hire to go electric.

But tell me this Sadiq, will the new electric Taxis be allowed to use all these no go areas and eventually replace the dirty buses that are running round, 100% on diesel, as replacement batteries proved to be too expensive ?  

A blast from Taxi Leaks past December 2013

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2J4cwtF
via IFTTT

And So It Begins....Visa Doubles Transaction Charges to 8%

£1bn assault on the High Street: Shopkeepers suffer as Visa hikes fees on card payments. Unfortunately, this will give the green light to increase transaction charges for Taxi drivers taking Card payments. 

It's estimated that shopkeepers will pay £1billion extra a year to payments giant Visa after it hiked fees.

The increase comes as the Taxi trade faced a boom in customers who want to pay by card.

But what many passengers don’t realise is that every transaction costs the driver, and Visa has been accused of cashing in, by hiking its fees.

Card sharks: Taxi have seen a massive increase in customers who pay by card for even the cheapest journeys meaning that drivers with company's that charge the extra 20p on top of the transaction percentage, pay even more in fees

Experts warned that some will see their bills more than double. 

Obviously it's not just Taxis who will be affected, payments consultant CMSPI said that increased card costs will hit Europe’s shops for £2billion.

In the UK alone, which has embraced contactless cards and chip and pin, the bill will be £1billion.

Visa Europe has doubled charges since 2015 from an average 4p per transaction to 8p, says CMSPI. 

Firm’s crippling £26,750 card bill 

Hardware store owner Vin Vara says his firm is struggling because of huge bills from credit card companies.

Vara, 58, employs 38 people at 11 Tool Shop stores in London and lost £20,400 in fees last year as shoppers paid by credit card. 

Some 60 per cent of customers pay by card and he expects the bill to rise to £26,750 this year.

He said: ‘People don’t understand the damage this can do. I’m scared for others on the High St about what’s going to happen to them.’

It used to keep just 1.5p of this as profit but now takes 5p after cutting costs, the consultant said.

CMSPI chief executive Brendan Doyle said: ‘This is incredibly disappointing. Visa, a multinational that consistently reports profit margins in excess of 50 per cent on multi-billion-dollar revenues, is piling cost after cost onto retailers and the latest change will be particularly hard on struggling small businesses.’ 

He added that CMSPI will complain to the European Commission about the hike.

Visa has become more aggressive since it was bought by its US sister firm for £15billion in 2016.

Until then, Visa Europe had been owned by banks, including Lloyds and Royal Bank of Scotland, and they made billions from its sale to namesake Visa Inc. 

The American company’s chief executive Charles Scharf plotted to hugely increase fees – in 2015, he said he hoped to ‘expand yields in Europe’.

MPs and business groups called for regulators to step in.

SNP MP Stewart Hosie, of the Treasury Select Committee, said: ‘It’s a scandal card issuers’ fees have increased massively. I would hope and expect card issuers would think again before they impose these costs.’

Meanwhile, High Street retailers face average hikes for UK card fees of 75 per cent, and other European card costs will come close to trebling with an increase of 189 per cent.

James Lowman of the Association of Convenience Stores said: ‘We encourage the Payment Systems Regulator to look closely at these fees to ensure fairness.’

Andrew Cregan, at the British Retail Consortium, also backed intervention by the regulator.

Visa said: ‘The figures quoted are misleading and over-inflated. Our pricing means we can invest in world-leading cybersecurity and consumer protection, in innovation such as contactless and mobile payments, and in providing a global network which enables billions to make purchases safely, securely and reliably.’

TAXI LEAKS EXTRA BIT :

In the past, we've seen many retailers refuse to take Amex because of the time it takes them to pay up. 

We could now see the same exclusion notices regarding payment with Visa cards.

The London Taxi trade haven't been granted the right to choose how they are paid as our largest org says "it was a done deal'....and it was the drivers who were done!

The trade were promised a increase in bums on seats and a massive publicity campaign from TfL.....it just never happen. 

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2srGgJL
via IFTTT

Breaking News : LPHCA Has Lost Its Challenge To TFL's New Operators Licence Fees.

The Licensed Private Hire Car Association (LPHCA) has lost its case against TFL's proposals to increased fees for operators with over 11 vehicles to over £3,000, when they were previously under £3,000. It said the measures could "wipe out" operators, "leaving the futures of many drivers, industry suppliers and others connected to the industry in jeopardy".

The UK's largest private hire trade body, United Private Hire Drivers (UPHD) applied to intervene in the case, which was heard in the High Court, but its application was rejected.

It has argued that the change in fees breaches the Equality Act of 2010 by forcing drivers to shoulder "unfair costs and regulatory burdens" while denying them representation in the stakeholder process.

TfL announced last year that it was increasing charges for private hire operators for the costs of licensing, compliance and enforcement to reflect the growth of the private hire industry and the costs required to regulate it.

The number of privately licensed drivers soared by 78 per cent from 65,000 to 160,000 last year, while the number of vehicles increased from 50,000 to 112,000 over the same period.

TfL expects the cost of enforcement alone to reach £30m - up from a previous estimate of £4m - over the next five years. With the costs of licensing and compliance taken into account, the total reaches £209m over the same period.

​A TfL spokesperson said: “The licence fee changes reflect the increased cost of regulation and associated enforcement activity that has been driven by the huge growth in the private hire industry.

“The changes will fund the additional 250 compliance officers who do a crucial job in driving up standards and ensuring Londoners remain safe. After listening to the views of stakeholders during consultation we amended the fees structure to take into account the potential impact on small and medium-sized operators.

“We consider the changes to fees to be proportionate and will be defending our position.”

James Farrar, chair of the UPHD branch of the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain, said: "It's not surprising that gig economy bosses represented by the LPHCA are fighting tooth and nail to pass their cost and regulatory burden on to drivers. But it's dismaying to see TfL work so hard to avoid answering some troubling questions about how it discriminates against 117,000 mostly minority minicab drivers. We will be watching this case very carefully and we'll continue to pursue other avenues to challenge institutional racism at Transport for London."

An Addison Lee spokesman said: “We fully support TfL’s efforts to improve safety in the private hire sector through better regulation and more enforcement officers. Addison Lee recognises that these measures need to be paid for and we are happy to play our part through the increase to our licence fee.”

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2sjskCB
via IFTTT

Think Your Online Account Details Are Safe ??? Well, Think Again!!!

A hacker who carried out attacks on a string of companies before selling customers’ data on the dark web has been jailed for more than 10 years.

Grant West, 26, carried out cyber-attacks on high street brands including Sainsbury’s, Asda, Uber, Argos and bookmakers Ladbrokes and Coral.

He obtained the email addresses of more than 160,000 people and sent them phishing scams masquerading as Just Eat to get their personal data.

West, who used the online identity “Courvoisier”, sold the information on the dark web, stashing his ill-gotten bitcoin profits in online caches.

He was sentenced to 10 years and eight months at Southwark crown court on Friday. The judge, Michael Gledhill, described West as “a one-man cybercrime wave” and said he had “secreted away” some of the £1.6m worth of cryptocurrency that is unaccounted for.

He said: “Regrettably, as this case has demonstrated, security of information held electronically is at best poor. When such inadequate security is confronted with a criminal of your skills and ambition it is totally unfit for purpose and worthless.

“This case should be a wake-up call to customers, companies and the computer industry to the very real threat of cybercrime.”

He added: “You have a deep and impressive knowledge of computers and if you had decided to use your abilities lawfully I have no doubt at all that you would have had a very successful career.

“Unfortunately you saw the potential of using your skills to make a great deal of money not lawfully but by crime, blatant crime and your crimes were highly sophisticated.”

West’s two-and-a-half-year scam came to an end in September last year when he was arrested in a first-class train carriage in the act of accessing the dark web. He had been returning from a trip to visit his girlfriend and co-defendant, Rachael Brooks, in north Wales.

West, who was living in a caravan park in Sheerness in Kent, used the stolen email addresses to send out messages posing as Just Eat with offers of cash rewards in exchange for customers filling out a survey.

Respondents were asked to confirm personal emails and supply extra details in order to obtain the reward, which were then harvested by West. The information, which included everything needed to make purchases online, was then advertised and sold to customers from his dark-web shop.

He built up huge caches of bitcoin and other cryptocurrency in online “wallets”. Police also found £25,000 in cash and a stash of cannabis when they raided his home last year.

The prosecution estimated that the total loss to customers and businesses was more than £1m.

A total of £84,000 was fraudulently taken from compromised accounts held at Barclays, costing the bank more than £300,000 to remedy. British Airways also suffered a £400,000 loss after Avios accounts were targeted.

Just Eat said no financial information was obtained in West’s fraud, but estimated the cost of combating the scam at more than £200,000.

Brooks, of Denbigh, north Wales, was previously given a community order after she admitted using the details of two of West’s victims to buy herself a bikini online.

West previously admitted a string of charges including conspiracy to defraud, unauthorised modification of computer material, possession and supply of cannabis, possessing criminal property and money laundering.

He has a number of previous convictions, including drug offences and other frauds.

Anna Mackenzie, defending, said West has been a cannabis user since the age of 14 and suffered from low self-esteem, lack of confidence, anxiety and depression.

“He has expressed remorse and shame and acknowledges his irresponsibility, selfishness, greed and hunger to succeed,” she said. “He wishes to offer apologies to the victims and businesses affected by his actions.”

Source : The Guardian.

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2LGjMhe
via IFTTT

Sean Paul Day and Mirna Borne In London Taxi Radio : Subject, The Apps.

SPD ON LTR

By Mirna Borne / May 29, 2018/ Podcast, SPD at LTR/

Host this week @seanpaulday, Presenters, @mirnaborne

SPD discusses App regulation and criticises the taxi hailing apps for not applying conditions to prevent unsavories  from accessing the platform.

A call for Apps to declare their hand and commit to being ‘plying’ Apps.

Does this put Plying 4 Hire back on the map ? In our opinion it should never have gone away.

SPD asks, what movie and what track would you take with you to a deserted island ?

Also, TAXIAPP, Taxileaks News-Desk and much more ….

A

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | RSS | More

SHARE THIS:

• Facebook14
• Twitter
• Google
• Email
• Tumblr
• LinkedIn
• Pinterest

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2kvdPae
via IFTTT

The Hostility Explained : Hundreds Of Met Police Officers Moonlighting As Minicab Drivers

Almost one in five Met Police officers have secondary business interests, figures obtained by the Evening Standard show

Hundreds of London police officers are moonlighting as minicab and private-hire drivers, the Evening Standard can reveal.

More than 300 Metropolitan police officers have declared business  interests as drivers or chauffeurs, figures obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show.

In total, 5,395 serving Met police officers — almost one in five — declared business interests with the force.

Metropolitan Police Federation chairman Ken Marsh said many of the business interests were likely to relate to consultancy work or property. But he added: “Our job is a professional job and it clearly shows you we aren’t paid a professional salary. You have to ask the question, why does someone need a second job when they’re a police officer? It’s not right at all.”

Police officers declaring business interests included chief superintendents — one of the highest ranks.

But more than 70 per cent of officers with declared business interests were police constables, the lowest rank. A Police Federation spokeswoman added: “The sad reality is that some police officers are having to find additional means to make ends meet. Given the choice, officers would rather not take on a second job, but some unfortunately have no alternative.”

Scotland Yard allows officers to hold second jobs down 

The Met police said in a statement that secondary employment or business interests are permitted “providing it is compatible with being a member of the police service”.

It added: “An officer/staff’s role in the Met will always be considered as a priority over any business interest. 

“The police service, the regulations and procedures that govern external business interests recognise that there is a need to ensure that where officers/staff have secondary employment or business interests that these are compatible with their role and do not create any conflict of interest.” 

The figures come after a warning that key workers including police officers were being priced out of London. Only eight per cent of homes in the capital can be afforded by an officer on an average salary of £44,824, according to research by website reallymoving.com. 

One former Met officer, Claire Hearn, said she left the force after previously juggling her duties with a tea party business.

“It was never a problem,” she said. “But it’s not the sort of job you can do without giving 100 per cent. As the business grew, I realised the passion was with that really. 

“It’s not something that the Met stop you doing — they decide whether it’s something suitable you can do alongside the police.”

Source: Standard

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2L3PAv6
via IFTTT

The LCDC Question, Submitted By David Kurten Of UKIP ...And The Mayor's Answer. Part 2.

WTF is Khan talking about when he answered David Kurtan at Mayors Question Time "designed to ensure London remains the world leader in regulating taxi and private hire service"

Why has no one challenging Khans statement?

Who told him the regulators were the best in the world?

London's Private Hire Trade (since the implementation of a Uber) has seen the statistics on PH driver rape and sexual assault go through the roof!

TfL have allowed an illegal operation to carry on in London for the last 6 years, while consciously discriminating against Licensed Taxi Drivers struggling to earn a living.

TfL have allowed an operation to continue knowing drivers had fake medicals, plus an alarming 13,000 drivers with fake criminal record DBS certificates.....how can Khan make his statement when he knows TfL have allowed this???

Hotels.com held a survey of the public around the world and it was the London Taxi trade voted the best in the world for eight years straight.....not the regulators who would feature somewhere close to the bottom.  

What Khan should have said:

London has the best and most stringently regulated taxi service in the world, but with a virtually unregulated and unsafe private hire trade allowed by TfL who obviously don't care about public safety.

TfL have purposely blurred the lines between Taxis and Private hire to dilute the complaints about rape, serious sexual assault, fraud, hacking and poor standard of driving. 

It is TfLs intention of dragging down the best Taxi service in the world and introduce a one tier system that they can milk the life out of to fill the void in their £1bn budget deficit. 

 

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2L19GpN
via IFTTT

The LCDC Question, Submitted To David Kurten Of UKIP At The GLA ...And The Mayor's Answer.

Meeting: Mayor's Question Time

Date: Thursday, 17 May 2018

Reference: Question 2018/1265 

Main question.......David Kurten

TfL allowed Uber to operate in the on-demand market without changing the legislation, holding a consultation or informing the Taxi Industry. Taxis and Private Hire (PH Vehicles) now operate in the same market. Taxis (stringently regulated) have to compete with PH who benefit from light touch regulation. TfL decide what vehicle Taxis drivers drive and set their fares, leaving drivers with no control or choice with regards to costs. PH Operators on the other hand have the flexibility to bring down fares and PH drivers have multiple choices of vehicles to keep their outgoings to a minimum. How do you expect the taxi trade to survive in London with such disparity created by TfL?

Answer..........The Mayor

Transport for London (TfL) regulates according to standards that are provided for in primary legislation and regulations designed to ensure public safety.  It also regularly consults on changes to taxi fares and tariffs.

As you will be aware my Taxi and Private Hire Action Plan contains a number of measures to maintain a vibrant two tier market in London that gives space for all service providers to flourish. This includes measures designed to improve safety in the private hire industry and to support our world renowned taxis.

TfL recently published a new policy statement setting out how private hire and ride-sharing services will operate in London in the future. The policy has been written in response to changes in the private hire industry and the many new services being offered. It has been designed to ensure London remains the world leader in regulating taxi and private hire services while maintaining public safety.

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2J949jY
via IFTTT

Uber Still Wants Rider Rape Case Decided Privately

Uber Technologies Inc, recently said it wouldn’t force riders who allege sexual assault by drivers to take their cases to arbitration. Later the same day, the company asked a judge to make a group of women do just that with some of their claims.

Uber is no longer fighting to keep a federal judge from hearing assault and battery claims by nine unidentified women who said they were raped or otherwise assaulted by drivers. But the company still wants the women to pursue separate, individual cases before private arbitrators on allegations that Uber falsely marketed safe rides to users despite refusing to adequately screen drivers.

“They did this purely as a publicity play, knowing full well it didn’t mean anything,” Jeanne Christensen, the women’s attorney, said of Uber’s May 15 announcement that it wouldn’t try to force them to arbitrate the assault and battery claims. “They’re trying to gut the lawsuit by saying instead of one suit we’re going to have nine.”

Tony West, Uber’s chief legal officer, announced in a blog post the company’s decision to soften its stance on arbitration for civil sexual assault claims. He also said the company won’t try to convince women alleging assault to keep their claims confidential.

West told Bloomberg Law in a statement that the move doesn’t apply to class actions but “impacts the near entirety of assault claims we see on our platform.”

“We’ve heard over and over from the dozens of advocacy groups we’ve spoken with that few experiences deprive an individual of control more than sexual assault or sexual harassment,” West said. “And we’ve heard what’s most important is for us to restore some sense of control to survivors—whether that’s by giving them a choice of venue in which to pursue their individual claims, or to free them from confidentiality provisions that prevent them from telling their stories if they choose. So while these changes may not please everybody, we believe they represent important steps forward that will ultimately help us all prevent sexual assault more effectively.”

“So moving forward, survivors will be free to choose to resolve their individual claims in the venue they prefer: in a mediation where they can choose confidentiality; in arbitration, where they can choose to maintain their privacy while pursuing their case; or in open court,” West said. “Whatever they decide, they will be free to tell their story wherever and however they see fit.”

The group of Uber riders sued the company in November, alleging that each of the nine women were assaulted or raped by Uber drivers. Some of those women were intoxicated at the time of the incidents. One woman said the driver carried her from the car into her home where he proceeded to rape her.

Uber classifies drivers as independent contractors, rather than employees, but the lawsuit alleges that the drivers act as agents for the company.

Uber users are required to check a box signaling that they agree to certain terms and conditions before they can download the smartphone application that connects them to drivers. The terms include an agreement to take any disputes to arbitration, instead of a federal or state court. After Uber announced it would waive that requirement for riders accusing drivers of sexual assault, the company said it won’t enforce similar restrictions on drivers and Uber employees alleging sexual harassment on the job.

Proving a ‘Pattern’

Christensen thinks the company is pushing arbitration of the unfair competition and consumer fraud claims to avoid litigating publicly the question of whether the company knew or should have known about driver assault risks and took adequate steps to address it.

“They don’t want the discovery to come in about all of the other incidents,” Christensen told Bloomberg Law. “We’re trying to show there is a pattern, that they’ve known all along how often this is happening and that they didn’t even do anything about drivers that had multiple complaints against them.”

West said in the blog post that the company “struggled” with the decision to partially waive arbitration for a number of reasons, including what he said is a lack of reliable data on sexual assault and harassment.

“There is no data to reliably or accurately compare reports against Uber drivers versus taxi drivers or limo drivers, or Uber versus buses, subways, airplanes or trains,” West said.

Uber announced in April that it would beef up rider safety protections, including by more frequently running driver background checks. The company has resisted calls to fingerprint drivers, saying those fingerprint checks could perpetuate discrimination because they are based on arrests rather than convictions. Uber checks criminal records using driver’s names, Social Security numbers, and drivers license information.

Christensen said Uber is also trying to avoid a class action by limiting the federal court case to the individual assault and battery claims, which the judge may decide to separate. She said she raised the unfair competition and consumer fraud claims in part to support bringing the lawsuit as a class action.

“Negligence for individual assaults doesn’t lend itself to a class action in the way that a consumer fraud law does,” Christensen said. “I’d be pleading different causes of action if they said you have to litigate those individually.”

Source : 

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2INdH4R
via IFTTT

Black Taxi Ban Leaves TP Icap Staff Fuming

Expenses crackdown at interdealer broker TP Icap: 

This time it’s black cabs in the sights of the beancounters.

Because of the Bank Junction Taxi ban, resulting in higher fares as drivers take Junction avoidance routs, the edict has gone out across the whole company that staff aren’t allowed to take traditional London taxis any more — despite the firm occasionally slapping its livery on them — and they’ll have to rely on Uber to get around town instead.

The TP Icap is happy to advertise on London cabs, but staff may not enter them. Expenses department will also be bouncing back any claims for client entertaining including wine costing more than £80 a bottle: cue much chuntering at boss John Phizackerley, who’s apparently known on the trading floor as Ronnie Barker because of his resemblance to the departed comedy genius.

There’s not much laughing among the rank and file, however.

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2J36xZi
via IFTTT

TfL Bottle It And Rethink On Basic English Language Tests For Minicab Drivers.

New rules forcing private-hire drivers in London to prove their English language skills are set for a rethink.

The rules would have forced them to pay £180 for a written essay and speaking test by July 16 this year, unless they could produce GCSE certificates proving their command of English.

Scroll to continue with content

Private-hire drivers unable to pass the test or produce certificates would have been banned from working as minicab drivers in the capital.

Today Transport for London said the deadline for drivers to prove their grasp of English had been extended until April 30 next year.

TfL said it would also now review the regulations, to “make satisfying the requirement as simple as possible”.

The announcement came after a crunch meeting between the Licensed Private Hire Car Association and Mayor Sadiq Khan yesterday.  

TfL officials also met representatives of the British Dyslexia Association, which had warned that some private-hire drivers would find it “impossible” to pass the new test.

Steve Wright, the hire car association’s  chairman, said that “tens of thousands” of drivers, including those with reading and writing difficulties and from ethnic backgrounds, had feared they would lose their jobs.

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2s4q161
via IFTTT

Public At Risk Part 2 : Taxi Scandal, Riddle Of Firms All Based In Single Office

Above a diner and accessible only via a back door off a dingy alley stands a small and unremarkable office.

To the untrained eye, it is the home of a local minicab firm, Wednesfield Cars, whose manager is adamant that his is the only business operating there.

Wolverhampton council knows better. It has licensed 13 competing Minicab companies to run their operations from the very same office.

In the past three years, Wolverhampton has become the go-to local authority for thousands of drivers from all corners of England in search of a minicab licence. In 2015, it issued 852; this year, 9,388. The same period saw the number of minicab companies licensed to operate in the city climb from 12 to 100.

In total, 58 of those companies are listed as operating from one of four Wolverhampton addresses. When The Times visited, there was no trace of 52 of them.

The council has not merely licensed dozens of hard-to-spot firms at those locations. It has also issued licences to thousands of drivers who work in other English towns for companies with exactly the same business names as the Wolverhampton operators. 

Those firms run visible minicab operations in places including Birmingham, Manchester, Stockport, Stoke-on-Trent, Derby, Mansfield, Nottingham, Cambridge, Windsor & Maidenhead and Swale, in Kent.

One of the four addresses has for the past few years been the operations hub for a genuine local company called ABC Cars and its sister ABC Countdown Cars. According to the council, an additional 17 minicab firms operate at the same place. Not so, says Richard Halsall, ABC’s manager, who said he had never heard of any of them.

Licensing experts have suggested an explanation. Under the Deregulation Act 2015, minicab companies operating anywhere are entitled to subcontract work to other firms, with one proviso.

If a minicab firm in Manchester wants to use drivers and vehicles licensed by Wolverhampton, the pre-booked work they are given must be sub-contracted to the firm by a Wolverhampton minicab operator. So it would be convenient for the Manchester firm to be able to show that all the jobs it gives its Wolverhampton drivers were sub-contracted by its sister firm, of the same name, in the West Midlands city.

If that sister operator has no employees and runs no vehicles, the law does not seem to care. This loophole has been embraced by Wolverhampton council, whose “efficient” approach to licensing has proved highly lucrative. Its income from taxi and minicab licences rose from £263,000 in 2014-15 to £2.2 million in 2017-18.

Last night the council defended its conduct, insisting that it applied stringent standards to drivers it licenses and claiming that its popularity was due to swift and efficient online applications.

The authority’s licensing committee chairman, Alan Bolshaw, said its approach complied with relevant legislation and, by embracing digitalisation, was far more advanced that the “very traditional and rigid licensing practices” used by other local authorities.

To suggest that a minicab operator needed to have employees, drivers and vehicles in the area where it was based was a concept that belonged, he said, to the days of “long-winded and outdated processes”.

The 52 minicab operators that did not appear to exist at the four addresses were entirely legitimate. Each was, he said, represented at its registered operating base by a digital recording system, in the form of a box. “Why are there so many vehicles and drivers on the roads licensed by Wolverhampton council? Because we have the best licensing system in the UK,” he boasted.

Other councils would beg to disagree, particularly those hit by a recent influx of Wolverhampton-licensed minicab drivers and cars. Many, as was the case with the earlier surge in Rossendale-plated vehicles, have voiced safeguarding concerns.

Licensing officers in Southampton were contacted by Hampshire police investigating the alleged rape of a female passenger by a local driver. The council did not have him on its books and it turned out that he had been licensed by Wolverhampton.

In Rotherham, the town hit by a mass sex-grooming scandal in which minicab drivers were implicated, more than a dozen men, including five refused licences by the council for reasons including safeguarding concerns, have applied for Wolverhampton licences.

Birmingham councillors claim that Wolverhampton is “more lenient” than its neighbours. A Coventry licensing committee member complained that “treating taxi licensing as a cash cow undermines public safety”. The West Midlands authority was handing out minicab licences “like sweeties”.

Nottingham’s chief licensing officer, Richard Antcliff, accused Wolverhampton of exploiting a “farcical loophole” in the regulations. “Somewhere along the line, Wolverhampton has lost its moral compass,” he said.

The driver arrested in Southampton had no convictions and lost his licence immediately, Mr Bolshaw said. Wolverhampton had “worked extensively” with Rotherham council and the National Crime Agency “to ensure any drivers implicated in child exploitation do not gain Wolverhampton licences”.

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2IKiKyN
via IFTTT