New taxi licences suspended by council amidst chaos at offices after knowledge requirement is scrapped.

The issuing of new Taxi licences has been suspended in Knowsley as the councilstruggles to cope with a deluge of applications.

The move follows changes to the licensing process which some critics say have made it too easy to for people to qualify to drive a Taxi - specifically removal of the ‘street knowledge’ section of the application.

Also it is no longer a requirement for a Hackney cab or private hire driver to live in the area where the licence is issued.

Taxi drivers in Merseyside have been speaking out over the issue claiming would-be drivers are ‘scamming’ Knowsley Council by going into the borough applying for a licence and then going to Manchester or Liverpool to ‘work for Uber’ because they don’t have to have ‘ street knowledge to get a licence in the borough.

Now Knowsley Council licensing bosses say they “intend to look into the reasons for the increased numbers, which may include a review of existing policies to ensure that they remain robust and fit for purpose”.

A statement on the authority’s website said: “The current rate of applications is not sustainable as the council’s licensing service simply has not currently got the resources to manage and regulate the increasing level of drivers, particularly if some of these drivers have no intention of operating within in the Knowsley area.”

For a taxi licence in Knowsley applicants must pay £49, show you ”are a fit a proper person’, pass a DBS and DVLA check, a medical and have been driving for 12 months.

Once you pass the checks applicants must complete the Level 2 Certificate in the ‘Introduction to the Role of the Professional Taxi and Private Hire Driver’ (QCF), which doesn’t include a ‘street knowledge’ test, before you are licensed to drive and take a driver skills assessment with council officers.

The temporary suspension is expected to last ‘no longer than 14 days’ and the council said “they would like to apologise for any inconvenience that this may cause but it is felt that this is a necessary measure at this time”.

A Knowsley Council spokesperson said: “The volume of taxi licensing applications received has significantly increased recently.

"In December 2016, we received twice as many applications as we would normally expect and we are not resourced to process and regulate this many applications.

"As a result, we are reviewing our processes and the reasons for the increase in applications. This is anticipated to take a few weeks and whilst this review is being undertaken, we have introduced a temporary suspension of any new licenses being processed.”

Source : Liverpool Echo 

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

TfL Reply Confirms Uber Are Operating Illegally....And Always a Have Been.

Lee Ward investigates :  How far would TfL go to licence an App that would illegally ply for hire ?

Dear TfL. 

I am considering investing in an app for Private Hire.

The App is basically when a member of the public requires a Private Hire to take them on a journey they ask the driver to take them.

The driver then asks for the customers name and inputs that into the App.

The App takes a GPS stamp of the drivers location and when he finishes the journey it takes another GPS to record the destination.

The App then sends this information to the base (licensed operator) and records the journey with the above information, which is;

Date and time
Customer name
Pick up location
Destination

Before I invest in this App, I wish to confirm that it would meet the criteria of TfL and if not, what part would require addressing.

Many thanks

Lee Ward

Their reply from the copy and paste specialist...

Dear Mr Ward

Thank you for your further email of 5 January 2016.

Booking via an app is legal as long as a private hire journey is booked in advance through a licenced private hire operator, and the job is then despatched to a licensed driver and vehicle.

The time between a booking being made and a journey starting is not currently subject to any statutory control in primary legislation, or regulations.

Yours sincerely

Chelsee Mckinlay
Correspondence and Investigations Officer
Service Operations
Transport for London

So on that bombshell, TfL have basically legalised Plying for Hire through the use of an App, any more proof that they are not fit for purpose?

This App would be illegal in many ways but TfL have not offered to explain that in their reply...

Editorial Comment : 

Let's just run with part of that reply again....surely TfL have just explained that Ubers modus operandi is totally illegal!

'Booking via an app is legal as long as a private hire journey is booked in advance through a licenced private hire operator, and the job is then despatched to a licensed driver and vehicle'.

Haven't we just seen Ube give evidence, to a court in Toronto, that they do not take bookings and that when a job comes into the system, it goes directly to the driver who accepts the booking in the vehicle. 

Uber stress, they are not a private hire company -even though TfL licence them as one- but a technology company. 

Using their evidence, given under oath in Toronto, Uber's operating system in London is 100% illegal and as such, their licence should be immediately revoked by Mayor Sadiq Khan. 

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2iYhQo6
via IFTTT

Uber Passengers Get Insight To Life Without The London Taxi Trade

Furious Uber customers slam cab firm for TRIPLING its rates during London Underground strikes

UBER has been accused of “greed” after the company tripled its prices to cash in as the London Underground grounds to a halt.

The minicab app imposed “surge pricing” as tube lines shut down causing the cost of typical journeys to soar.

It comes as thousands of commuters face a morning of misery caused by tube strikes.

Talks to avoid the strike action failed in the last hours, meaning the 24-hour strike is now in full swing as commuters try to get to work this morning.

Uber users tweeted their anger at the online taxi company, expressing outrage as taxi fares rose by up to three times when thousands were struggling to get to work.

One traveller wrote:”Only people happy about the tube strike are Uber drivers.£50 for a journey that normally costs a tenner.”

Another commented: “Uber drivers just making bank today, god bless capitalism #TubeStrike”

“Uber trying to charge £50 to get to work on tube strike day?? A disgrace,” one user added.

An Uber spokesperson said “the company’s pricing is to ensure that you can get a car no matter what” and insist that this is “not a surcharge that are adding on for the tube strikes”.

The spokesperson added: “The fare increases automatically, and only in response to real-time demand when there are not enough available cars.

“As all of the licensed driver who use the Uber app work independently, higher fares incentive more drivers to go online so we can help more people get where they need to go.

“Without this pricing model there would simply be no cars available.”

Up to 4,000 station and ticket staff will walk out from 6pm on Sunday as part of the ongoing dispute over staffing numbers.

The walkout and impending threat of more industrial action is in protest at 800 jobs cuts and ticket office closures under former mayor Boris Johnson’s regime.

Source : Sun Online 

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

Moroccan taxi drivers check the Uber app as they wait for customers in Casablanca

Casablanca (Morocco) (AFP) - As their smartphone screens lit up with ride requests last month, Uber drivers in the Moroccan city of Casablanca must have thought that business was booming.

Instead, they found themselves surrounded by irate local taxi drivers, who forced them from their vehicles and handed them over to the police, the latest in a string of protests in the kingdom against the controversial travel app.

"After the tramway, illegal drivers and now Uber, they are trying to kill us off," said Abdelouahed, who works for a small local taxi firm.

Uber launched in Morocco's economic hub in 2015 but was banned by local authorities after just one month.

It has recently found itself the target of increasingly brash protests organised by owners of Casablanca's famous tomato red cabs.

"When you open Uber on your phone, you see drivers swarming around you like a virus," said Nordine, a fifty-something driver sat on the hood of his taxi.

"And like a virus, you need radical solutions. Trap them."

In one protest last month, dozens of taxi drivers posed as would-be passengers, flooding the app with requests before forcing the Uber drivers from their vehicles, much to the bemusement of onlookers.

The management of taxis in Morocco normally falls to local government. The transport ministry has so far kept quiet as to why Uber continues to operate in the streets of Casablanca.

             - 'Illegal and unauthorised' -

"Our position hasn't changed," a senior official from Casablanca's local administration told AFP. "We see (Uber) as an unauthorised and illegal company."

Local media said recently that as many as 30 separate protests against app drivers had been held, ranging from threats, car chases and even ambushes such as the one in December

Uber Morocco director general Meryem Belqziz insisted these were "isolated" incidents.

"There were no injuries. It was more harassment," she told AFP, admitting however that Uber drivers had been "shaken" by some protests.

There are now more than 250 taxis working for Uber in Casablanca, Belqziz said, and the app has enjoyed 15,000 unique users in the last three months.

Business has boomed for Uber since it launched in San Francisco in 2011.

But the smartphone app has faced stiff resistance from traditional taxi drivers the world over, as well as bans in some places over safety concerns and questions over legal issues, including taxes.

Uber says it is not a transport company like taxi firms, and that it simply connects drivers with passengers.

While many drivers have been tempted by Uber's model, many more operators of Casablanca's estimated 18,000 taxis continue to denounce the app's "unfair competition", while passengers still heavily rely instead on local ride startups such as Careem and chauffeur.ma.

The recent opening of a new tram line in the city has also siphoned off some of the local drivers' traditional clientele.

"The tram has already eaten up an important part of our market, and things are getting worse with Uber, which operates without constraint," said Abdelouahed.

Belqziz insists that Uber and local taxis can operate side-by-side, but admits her firm's legal status "needs clarifying".

"With every important change you meet resistance, but with time people get used to new modes of consumption," she said.

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2iRcye9
via IFTTT

Pie And Mash Restauranteurs Drop UberEats Out Of Respect For Their Customers ... By Jim Thomas

Out of respect for the decision made by the management of Manzes, the oldest original Pie And Mash shop, Taxi Leaks has decided to pull the article published last night. 

We would like to congratulate the management for arriving at a more sensible decision to drop UberEats in respect for their regular customers. 

As they say "All's well, that ends well". 

Below is the statement released earlier this morning :

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2j5Bc8F
via IFTTT

Manze Turns To The Dark Side And Sparks Social Media Rebellion.

One of the most staple delights of the London Taxi driver has been a taste for the traditional dish of Pie and Mash. 

The first time I sat down to eat with a group of Taxi drivers who were on lunch break, was in the late 1950's, Manze's restaurant 147 Canterbury Road Market, West Kilburn. 

For many years I followed my Grandfather, uncles and cousins desire for steak pies and lumpy mash drenched in licker, served on a marble table.

Unfortunately it now appears that Manze have forgotten what loyalty to you customers means. 

After having the support of out trade en masse since 1892,  they have turned to the dark side. 

Manze put out a tweet saying they were signing up for Uber eats, this imediatly sparked a torrent of social media postings from angry Cabby customers.

News is now spreading like wildfire amongst the trade who are lining up to pledge never to darken Manze's door step again. 

A question to the CEO of Manze, how many London Cabbies do you think eat in your establishments ?

And how many Uber drivers do you think will replaced them ?

Here are just a few of the tweets from yesterday.

And just a few of th comments from Face Book :

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2i1WFSP
via IFTTT

Criminals Are Dodging Council Ban And Driving For Uber In South End

A seaside town has complained that Uber, the app-driven taxi service, is using convicted criminals to tout for business even though the council has banned them from working as cabbies.

Taxi firms in Southend, Essex, have been dismayed by the arrival of up to 50 Uber drivers operating in the resort.

Among the new drivers are two familiar faces — Nasser Hussain, 60, and Nisar Abbas, 37, who were stripped of their private hire licences by the council for operating a ring in which they and other drivers shared each other’s penalty points for speeding, running red lights and other offences to avoid being banned.

Uber drivers are required to hold private hire vehicle (PHV) licences issued by the local authorities, but the two men sidestepped their bans by applying through Transport for London (TfL) instead of Southend council.

Such “cross-border” drivers are exploiting a legal grey area, which has worked to Uber’s advantage as the company seeks to expand into new areas across the UK.

Other places affected by the tactic include Bristol, where dozens of Uber drivers are using London PHV licences to avoid the local council’s requirement that taxi drivers must take a special driving and city geography test.

At Southend Crown Court in 2010, Hussain and Abbas were each jailed for 12 months after pleading guilty to 10 counts of perverting the course of justice.

The judge, Ian Graham, told Hussain, who lives in Southend: “You continued to carry the public when you should have been off the road altogether.”

Tony Cox, Southend council’s cabinet member for transport, said: “What I find astounding is that we did our part and removed these people from the road, but we now find we are impotent to protect the public.

“Uber are sticking two fingers up at licensing authorities like ours, and TfL is complicit in it.”

Despite complaints from the council, both Hussain and Abbas were still shown on TfL’s register of licensed drivers last week.

Steve Garelick, of the GMB union’s professional drivers’ section, said: “It is tantamount to an invasion and it is a much wider problem than Southend. Across the country, Uber are twisting the regulations to suit their ends. Local licensing systems are being sidestepped in the most cynical way.”

Uber now asks prospective drivers if they have had a PVH licence rejected or revoked.

An Uber spokesman said Hussain and Abbas still drove for the company but that their vetting was a matter for TfL.

A TfL spokesman said: “These are very serious issues, which have been raised with us and are under investigation

Source : Sunday Times 

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