TfL CAUGHT LYING AGAIN, IN COVER UP OVER THE TRUE SEXUAL ASSAULT STATISTICS... By Jim Thomas.

True to his word, TfL commissioner Mike Brown (who speaking to Grant Davis said he wanted to go on record as not being party to the corrupt licensing of Uber, at Palestra 21/11/16) has released a set of the statistics for serious sexual assaults, including rapes broken down over the past 14 years.

https://t.co/dB0vvfz0It

On close inspection, it's plain to see that the figures have been spun, manipulated and massaged. 

How do we know this?....simple. 

We're already in possession of statistics obtained by freedom of information request from the Metropolitan Police. 

https://t.co/6JfAvJa8E4

The figures given to us earlier this year by the Metropolitan Police, were for reported minicab related sexual assaults, including rapes, from just 6 London boroughs, not including the City of London police. 

Mayor Sadiq Khan read out the result of this FOI (no 2016020000642) to at Mayors question time when asked for the latest statistics by GLA member David Kurten, UKIP. (see video below)

So it should be safe to assume that TfLs figures which they say they have acquired from the Met and cover the whole of London's 32 boroughs (including the City Of London), would be of a greater amount.

Wrong....TfL have spun these statistics so much they've actually come up short with a total showing less attacks than in the original FOI request read out by Khan at City Hall, an impossibility.

This being the case, we can dismiss these results. 

We strongly believe this action confirms that TfL's directors and top managers are again complicit in fabricating the truth.

Why would a government body, who has a duty of care towards informing and keeping the public safe, lie about the amount of rapes occurring in private hire vehicles?

In our opinion, there can only be one answer, they are part of the overwhelming corruption embedded in our licensing authority. 

It is our opinion these stats have been manipulated so as not to cause alarm to the public and to grease the passage of a certain minicab app's relicensing early next year.

But with all TfL's spin, there are certain patterns that TfL have failed to hide!

Going by the figures published on the TfL website, in 2012 (the year Uber were first licensed) there was a massive rise in the amount of reported sexual attacks, at least 20% more than in the previous year. Moving on, the figures agains show an unprecedented rise between 2013-2014, a 35% increase which correlates to the escalation of drivers working on the Uber platform. 

Amazingly, TfL have given exactly the same figures for 2015 as 2014. We've ask them to confirm this and have been assured the figures are correct...So, what a coincidence !

Could it be that TfL's propaganda machine wants to go into overdrive ...telling the media last year saw a zero percentage increase in attacks, from the previous year?

The reason why we don't believe for one moment TfL's stats, is that when he left the Cabbies Cabinet meeting with Mike Brown, Chairman of the LCDC Grant Davis, informed drivers protesting outside, the figure we had received from the met of 154, were from just 6 London boroughs. Now we have TfL saying their figure of 136 attacks, includes all 32 London boroughs, including the City of London Police. 

Why did Mayor Khan present the exact same figures we had received, on request to David Kurten  at City Hall and not the ones shown on TfL's website....?

Click here for Khan addressing the GLA https://t.co/fLFgNOZQHw

Perhaps now would be a good time for TfL to explain why their statistics were inexplicably less, than the figures we obtained by FOI request. 

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2fXUwqg
via IFTTT

COUNTING SHEEP : DO YOU TAKE CASH? Dads Defending Daughters

Minibus licence loophole puts people at risk

A legal loophole that allows minibus drivers to operate without undergoing a criminal record check is putting passengers in danger, councils say.

Drivers of "public carriage vehicles", which seat 9-16 people, are not subject to a criminal check - unlike hackney carriage and private taxi drivers.

This allowed "unscrupulous drivers" to work even if councils have banned them, the Local Government Association said.

A Department for Transport spokesman said it was planning immediate action.

Under the current rules, drivers of public carriage vehicles are licensed by the DVLA, whereas councils license taxi drivers.

Taxi drivers require an up-to-date enhanced criminal record check to be issued with a licence.

The LGA said a loophole meant drivers who have been refused a taxi or minicab licence - or whose licence has been revoked by councils - could instead obtain a minibus licence and continue to operate in the same area.

Some had continued working with the same company, the LGA added.

'Extremely worrying'

It urged the government to change the law to ensure vehicles seating nine to 16 people were instead licensed by councils.

Simon Blackburn, from the LGA, said the majority of minibus drivers were "people who the public can trust".

However, he added: "This loophole provides an opportunity for unscrupulous drivers to continue to work in close proximity to passengers, even when a council has determined that they are not safe to do so.

"Larger minibuses are often sent in place of a regular taxi to pick up individuals or small parties, purely because they are nearest to the pick-up point rather than because there is a requirement for such a large vehicle. 

"They are used to take groups of children to school, or to drive groups home after nights out.

"It is therefore extremely worrying that councils' proactive work to protect taxi passengers from harm - and particularly those who may be most vulnerable - is being undermined by this loophole."

A Department for Transport spokesman said public safety remained "our first priority".

It said: "It is the responsibility of councils to meet their legal requirements to ensure all drivers are 'fit and proper' persons before issuing a taxi or private hire driver's licence.

"We are taking immediate action to provide the same level of protection for passengers in minibuses as they receive in taxis."

Editorial Comment:

Unbelievably this loophole has existed for years yet only now do they promise 'action'. It's not prevalent in London but it is elsewhere and you can bet an infamous operator is watching closely if it's another money maker.

No date set but it does show that if the authorities WANT to do something they can (usually after negative PR) but with our travails they find all sorts of now patently bogus reasons why it can't be done.

Perhaps the same LGA should look at illegal PFH and cross border hiring and ask the same Dept of Transport to act or will the lobbyist get in first?

No wonder ordinary people have little faith in politicians or the authorities to act in their interest as opposed to that of lobbyists of the tax avoiding exploiters propped up by the tax and housing benefits system.

Time for change!

I'm Spartacus

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2gOajoo
via IFTTT

Motorcyclist, 24, killed in Maida Vale crash. Minicab driver arrested at scene.

A 24-year-old man has been killed and another man arrested in a smash between a minicab and motorbike in west London.

The young motorcyclist died at the scene of the crash, which happened on Sutherland Avenue in Maida Vale at around 11.20pm on Thursday night.

Police raced to the road, at the junction with Shirland Road, and found the man seriously injured.

Paramedics fought to save his life but he died around half an hour later.

The driver of the car, a 22-year-old man, has been arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving.

He is currently in custody at a central London police station, a Met spokeswoman said.

The motorcyclist’s next of kin have been informed.

His body will be formally identified and a post-mortem examination carried out.

Police closed the road and enquiries continue.

The Met are asking anyone with information or who witnessed the collision to contact police on 101 or call Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111. 

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2fNG58f
via IFTTT

Ex-Rugby Star Used Uber Driver To Run 'Breaking Bad' Crystal Meth Factory In Bayswater.

A former rugby star was convicted after copying the hit TV show Breaking Bad to rake in hundreds of thousands of pounds by cooking crystal meth.

Lorenzo Bocchini, 36, set up a hi-tech drugs laboratory in his luxurious Little Venice home, where police recovered £300,000 of drugs, £33,000 cash and a stun gun.

Crystal meth at the flat was found to have been dyed blue — the colour of a narcotic created by fictional drug baron Walter White in Breaking Bad.

Bocchini’s brother Alessandro, 43, was arrested along with his wife Justine, 36, in the same police operation eight months earlier at their Bayswater home.

Officers recovered crystal meth, MDMA and £12,210 in cash. The couple pleaded guilty to a string of drugs offences, including possession with intent to supply crystal meth, the designer drug mephedrone, ecstasy and cocaine. They were jailed earlier for six and four years respectively.

Footage seized from CCTV inside their home showed the pair counting thousands of pounds worth of cash just hours before they were raided.

Police say the family members ran a wholesale drugs distribution network using an Uber driver as a courier to transport packages to users around London, referring to the deliveries as “T-bags”.

A financial investigation identified £100,000 of drugs money went via the couple’s bank accounts in the six months before their arrest.

In total, detectives believe they have identified millions of pounds of assets, including a flat in Dubai.

The family were targeted by detectives from Lambeth police’s Omega drugs and firearms team in a long-running surveillance and intelligence operation. Detectives had been investigating a spate of deaths from chemsex drugs such as GHB, including fatalities at a gay sauna in Vauxhall.

Today Det Con Matt Clark, who led the investigation, said: “The Bocchini family were making significant profits selling highly dangerous and addictive class A drugs. What we uncovered was the wholesale supply of crystal methlyamphetamine and other drugs, focusing on the ‘chemsex’ scene in south London.

“The use of crystal meth within this scene is hugely damaging and we believe there are strong connections to drug deaths, rape and child sexual exploitation, links which we continue to investigate.”

Alessandro was identified as a supplier of wholesale amounts of crystal meth and police raided his Bayswater house last November.

His wife Justine, the mother of two young children, told officers as the pair were held: “It was a good life.” During interviews, both denied possessing or dealing drugs and Justine claimed she just “baked cup cakes”.

However, photographic evidence from Alessandro’s phone showed a kitchen table laden with crystal meth in a preparation phase prior to sale, with a text message from him that read: “Well cooked my little chef.”

His brother Lorenzo was due to be sentenced at Southwark crown court on December 1 for drugs supply offences. He pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing.

When officers raided his rented flat in July, as well as drugs and cash they found sachets of dye used to colour the crystal meth blue in an apparent copy of the Breaking Bad series.

Police say all three offenders grew hooked on the drugs they supplied.

Det Insp Stephen Payne, of Omega squad, said the case was unusual because none of the main offenders were previously known to police.

He added: “In that sense it was like the Breaking Bad scenario. These were professional people who made a choice to go into this venture. They were not career criminals but were looking for an opportunity to make money out of nothing.

“They lived a high-roller, Breaking Bad lifestyle, not really knowing what to do with the cash. They even seemed to adopt the Breaking Bad signature of dying their crystal meth blue.”

Lorenzo Bocchini played as a prop for two Italian club sides in his career between 2000 and 2010, including for Viadana in the Heineken Cup.
In 2010 he was named by the British press as one of the players from the L’Aquila club who helped survivors when an earthquake hit the town.

source: http://ift.tt/UeNgQp

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2fZz9mP
via IFTTT

Driver Makes Stand Against TfL...And Wins.

One late evening on my way back to Heathrow I stopped at the BP garage on the A4 and set on the forecourt to eat my sandwich. I looked up and saw a sign that read by parking here more than 30 minutes you agreed to pay a £100 fine or words to that effect. This gave me an idea, the rest is history...

On the morning of 1 November 2016 two things happened, the first being this, upon entering the north feeder park I was confronted by compliance officers and a police officer who I noticed was handing out TfL envelopes containing CC stickers.

I asked the officer what he thought he was doing as I believe that what was going on was a civil matter.

He responded by saying he was assisting.

Upon further questioning he told me he was there to prevent a breach of the peace.

I've been Austin had a breach of the peace been reported!

He said no.

The second thing to happen was this, I arrived at terminal five buffer lane in mid afternoon to be confronted by two compliance officers, One of which approach me and asked me why the taxi wasn't displaying TFL stickers, to which I replied no where in the Metropolitan carriage at 1869 all the London carriage and stage act 1907 or any TfL literature does it state that I am physically obliged to play stickers in my vehicle. I told this TfL employee if you would like to place them with him self after reading my terms and conditions it was more than welcome to do so. 

My terms and conditions are as follows:

Before affixing any notice sticker or effort Tyson to the vehicle please read the following.

By affixing a noticed sticker or advertisement to this vehicle, you will have agreed to contract and you will become liable for the following fee schedule.

NOTICE...................£5,000 

STICKER..................£5,000

ADVERTISEMENT.. £5,000

I asked the compliance officer if he had read and understood this, he replied that he didn't.

He then told me "you must stick them on" to which I replied "there was no legal and lawful requirement for me to do it but if you wanted me to do it, I would write you an invoice for the work". Which he declined.

I have then made the video below which categorically stated to him that I was not refusing to play stickers et cetera and she was more than welcome to do it.

Two days later I received the stop note for 

"non-compliance, external signage does not comply with guidelines 6,2,1.", with additional notes being "refusal to display stickers or credit card payment device in the taxi".

I immediately phoned TfL enforcement and told them I wanted to make a formal complaint against their compliance officer for lying, stating that I had irrefutable video evidence that I have not refused.

After telling Sonia Allman (enforcement manager) to remove the illegal stop no on my vehicle I was told, "there may have been a mistake".

She then requested me to email her with the details of what had occurred which I did. A short time later I received a response stating that she was sorry and that my vehicle should not have been declared unfit, and I was free to continue working. 

Since TfL have stated that my vehicle is not on fit, one can reasonably assume the opposite to be true that it is fit.

I believe my stand against TfL has done two things, firstly it is shone a spotlight on the unions who claim to represent us. Why haven't they come up with anything to halt the onslaught from TfL?

Why has it been left to the drivers themselves?

I have seen the minutes of the tear film board meeting where it was decided that all London taxis must take credit cards and pay for the privilege and it stated that Bob Oddy declared an interest and didn't speak!

So much for representation!

I was also told by Unite after telling them of my interaction with the police at Heathrow, to "put my "f***ing" stickers in like everyone else" so not much out there either.

The second thing my action has highlighted is this, TfL have no authority,  let me say that again "TfL  have no authority", the reason I say this is as follows, on TfLs own website it states:

"TfL is a statutory body created by the Greater London Authority (GLA) Act 1999. 

This act gives the Mayors of London a general duty to develop and apply policies to promote and encourage safe integrated efficient and economic transport facilities and services to, from and within London.

When carrying out his duties the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan must abide by the law like everyone else.

He must cause no harm loss or injury to a third party. Remember the 3.9% being siphoned out of your wages and being paid to a private company.

Not only does the mayor have no authority, he has actually committed a criminal offence of misconduct in a public office (malfeasance).

The current conditions of fitness state "no advertisements to be allowed on glazed areas, except to rear wit no advertise months to be allowed in glazed areas except to react windscreen. When the consultation took place, was it explained to the 536 drivers who replied that mandatory acceptance came with a 3.95% +20p pay cut ?

It will take on average two weeks work for year to pay WorldPay/VeriFone 3.95% surcharge....hold on a minute, WorldPay......? 

TfL board member Mr Ron Kalifa, is Deputy Chairman of credit card system provider WorldPay and is also a non executive director of Visa Europe, so no conflict of interest there then.

See video below :

    

Editorial Comment :

Hang on a minute....is that TfL board member Mr Ron Kalifa, giving out stop notes for not displaying his stickers?

 

We understand that Jamie has made contacted with TfLTPH to ask why a compliance officer lied, why his stop note was rescinded, plus he's asked them to supply him a billing address. 

As yet, TfL haven't replied.

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2fRnWkY
via IFTTT

Letter To Taxi Leaks : Uber Has Become A Global Haemorrhoid For The Legitimate Car-Hire Business.

We certainly share a view of Uber, et al.  It has become a global haemorrhoid for the legitimate car-hire business.

One of the biggest problems has been the patently rotten job that has been done in terms of defining the issues for the public and as those issues have been presented to various courts in a number of places.  Please indulge me the opportunity to help everybody see the forest for the freakin' trees.

(Yes, I believe I do indeed have the definitive analysis--read on and tell me how I could possibly be wrong.)

Everybody is focused on the hype and crap, and nobody is digging in and looking at what's really happening.  Uber's "app" is nothing more than a gimmick if you don't pair it up with a large number of cars to "network."  Yes, people like being able to hail a ride without talking to anybody, and there would undoubtedly be a contingency that would swim upstream and keep using Uber, even if the company weren't providing superior service (as in faster response time to service requests).  But, in the long run, people will choose the service provider who gives them the quickest response--that's been central to the car-hire industry since jump.

The point is, if you look at those places where Uber has grabbed a major share of the local car-hire market, you'll see that they are invariably running many more cars at any given time than any of the "competing" traditional taxis.  That is the key to their success, not the app or their future vision, ad nauseum.

All Uber is really doing is enabling customers to place orders and have them transmitted to drivers via a cellphone.  (That's new?)

Here in the U. S., we have a divergence of legal decisions on whether or not taxis and TNCs are in reality doing the same thing. In local legal jargon, it's whether or not they are "similarly situated parties."  A judge in Boston said they clearly are, another judge in Chicago has decided that the way Uber dispatches ride requests makes them "different" from traditional taxis.  The matter may eventually land with the Supreme Court, although the issue to most sensible people is much simpler and more clear-cut than to justify the highest court in the land needing to make the final call.

Look at the number of vehicles and the cost per vehicle if you want to illuminate the real source of Uber's advantage over traditional taxis.  It's about economics and physical logistics, not technology.

As far as Uber being a "technology company" rather than a car-hire operator, that might play fine if it weren't necessary for drivers to establish their status through Uber--i.e., if all the drivers were in fact completely independent and autonomous, Uber could possibly claim all they do is offer dispatching service.  But, even if they don't own the cars, they pretty much own the drivers, and that to most logical people should make it clear that Uber is indeed in the transportation business.  In the same vein, if taxis start using all the same methods as Uber, can they then claim to be "technology companies," too?

Tom Edwards
Owner/Manager
Uptown Taxi
Chico, California

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2gp7uwn
via IFTTT