Plaza Executive Cars..."Taxi Service"...In Liquidation....Still Operating From Royal National Hotel?

Letter from Greenbadgejohn: 

As the race to the bottom continues to endorse illegality within the private hire systems (licensed or otherwise) 

In the case of the unlicensed car service at the Royal National Hotel, it only goes to show how low corrupted hotel concierge's will stoop to place their own well paid guests into unsafe vehicles for the devils shilling.

As hard as TFL tries to distance its self from illegal activities in reality TFL lost its moral compass the day it originally licensed Uber in London and now the fly by nights circle London with impunity licensed or not as anybody with half a brain knows that a yellow private hire disk holds not one iota of credibility as disclosed in a recent Freedom of Information Request. 

(FOI 0845-1718) 9th July 2017 Disclosed:

Legislation in London Allows licensed PHV's to be used for private purposes; They can therefore also be driven by unlicensed drivers.
It is not a regulatory requirement for vehicle owners, whether individuals or companies,to inform us when a PHV is used by a non licensed driver for private use nor do they need to request special permission to do so.

Melissa Nichols (FOI case officer)
General Council, Transport for London.

So there you have it, An extract from a recent FOI request clearly showing how unimportant a Private hire Yellow disk actually is on a private hire vehicle.

Anyone can use, borrow, or hire a private hire vehicle irrespective of their previous criminal past (as long as they hold a driving license) and TFL do not involve themselves one bit, so a central London hotel ducking and diving with illegal private hire services (unlicensed by TFL) is only apparently breaking one law..... not paying TFL a licence fee to do so!

The TFL crap continues to rise to the surface like an undigested curry... disgraceful.

Be Lucky, & keep up the good fight against this most corrupted regime.

greenbadgejohn (on twitter)

Comment From Len Martin ex chair of the UCG:

So, if the Hotel isn't a satellite office, it is offering a car service for which it can expect no compensation for providing such a service. 

So if it is offering to be an "arranger" of such a service wouldn't we expect it to offer a range of services from a selection of suppliers?

But it  seems to be an exclusive offering. 

So would it be unreasonable to anticipate some formal of reciprocation? 

Maybe not even cash, but something. This maybe direct or "in kind" it can't legally be a formal activity because we know they are not licensed. 

So is there any form of compensation taking place? 

How does this sit with the bribery act 2010? http://ift.tt/14JqMeM

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

UCG Say COs Have No Power To Confiscate Personal Property : Met Say COs Could Be Libel To Theft From Vehicle Charge

After yesterday's major bus crash, questions were asked about the driver. 

We wanted to know if the bus driver was also working as a PHV driver.

Not hard to check you would think. 

But again this is TfL after all.

As John McEnroe said " You cannot be serious.

It's now become crystal clear, that TfL are positively getting involved to cover up UberRape and also protect the name of this company from any bad publicity.

If this wasn't serious, it would be comical.

So TFL believe this headline is misleading and want it removed from Taxis. Surely they should be over the moon that a frequent predator has been taken out of circulation !

To Comply....Or Not ToComply....That Is The Question:

 

      

Compliance officers are still insisting Taxi drivers remove the Taxi news paper from view and in certain cases have entered Taxis (without invitation) and (in our opinion) illegally removed the drivers property from the vehicle.

The officers are told by their managers to say that this headline is misleading and must be removed....when in fact this story shown on the cover of a Taxi paper, is true and factual. 

This is no more than TFL protecting the name of its stakeholder partner. 

Why have our largest Taxi representative orgs not challenged the actions of compliance officers ???

It's there publication after all. Have they just supplied the bullets for someone else  to fire the gun!

At least the United Cabbies Group are up to date....

Taxi Leaks have asked TfLTPH Twitter account 65 times to be shown the legislated regulation, which gives a CO power to physically remove property (a news paper) from my Taxi ?

So far, TfL TPH have ignored every tweet. 

We would take it then that no such legislation or regulation is in place and that the COs are acting outside their authority. 

We have been informed by Metropolitan police that COs who confiscate these papers are guilty of theft from a motor vehicle. 

               Caught on Camera

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

Breaking News : Benchmark Capital To Sue Travis Kalanick For Fraud

The battle between Benchmark Capital and Travis Kalanick just went nuclear, with the venture capital firm suing the former Uber CEO for fraud, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty. The complaint was filed earlier today in Delaware Chancery Court.

Key graph, per the suit: "Kalanick, the former CEO of Uber, to entrench himself on Uber's Board of Directors and increase his power over Uber for his own selfish ends. Kalanick's overarching objective is to pack Uber's Board with loyal allies in an effort to insulate his prior conduct from scrutiny and clear the path for his eventual return as CEO—all to the detriment of Uber's stockholders, employees, driver-partners, and customers."

Why it matters: If Benchmark's suit is successful, Kalanick would be kicked off Uber's board of directors -- thus eliminating any faint hopes of him returning to the company in a substantial role.

What to know: Benchmark was an early investor in Uber, and has a seat on its board of directors. It also helped spearhead the move to have Kalanick resign in June, and tensions between the two have contributed, in part, to the slow pace of finding a replacement. Oh, and venture capital firms don't usually sue fellow board members of their single most valuable investment.

Complaint: The suit revolves around the June 2016 decision to expand the size of Uber's board of voting directors from eight to 11, with Kalanick having the sole right to designate those seats. Kalanick would later name himself to one of those seats following his resignation, since his prior board seat was reserved for the company's CEO. 

The other two seats remain unfilled. Benchmark argues that it never would have granted Kalanick those three extra seats had it known about his "gross mismanagement and other misconduct at Uber" — which Benchmark claims included "pervasive gender discrimination and sexual harassment," and the existence of confidential findings (a.k.a. The Stroz Report) that recently-acquired self-driving startup Otto had "allegedly harbored trade secrets stolen from a competitor." Benchmark argues that this alleged nondisclosure of material information invalidates Benchmark's vote to enlarge the board.

Moreover, Benchmark alleges that Kalanick pledged in writing -- as part of his resignation agreement -- that the two empty board seats would be independent and subject to approval by the entire board (something Benchmark says was the reason it didn't sue for fraud at the time). But, according to the complaint, Kalanick has not been willing to codify those changes via an amended voting agreement. 

What Benchmark wants: An invalidation of the June 2016 stockholder vote and related actions, which would effectively eliminate the three board seats. And, in so doing, remove Kalanick from Uber's board of directors. It also is asking the court for a preliminary injunction against Kalanick's ongoing involvement in Uber board matters which, if granted, would remove him from the CEO search process.

Stakes: Per the complaint, Kalanick currently holds around a 10% equity stake in Uber, which most recently was valued at around $70 billion. Benchmark holds approximately 13 percent.

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2wym1vo
via IFTTT

Royal National Hotel Alleged To Be Offering Guests An Illegal, Unlicensed Car Service.

A London Taxi Driver picking up a Passenger at the Royal National Hotel, over heard the concierge taking a booking for their car service.

The driver spotted this list on the counter of the reception desk, giving prices from the hotel, to destinations around London. 

The price list also states it's car service is licensed by TfL and gives a licence number. We checked the number with the TfL website licence checker and found no such licence exists. 

TfL TPH Twitter account was asked to confirm if this was a legal car service and was the Hotel in possession of a PHV operators licence or licence variation for a third party operator. 

The TfL TPH Twitter account then came back with this reply. 

We also checked out Plaza Executive Cars Ltd and found that if this company exists, it's not licence by TfL 

So there you have it.

The Hotel has no such licence which makes this car service illegal. As all journeys are taken illegally, the passengers will be in the same position as if they had been touted in the street. 

We will be expecting TfL to visit the Royal National Hotel and take action to get them to stop illegally touting customers. We would also expect a prosecution in this case where the Hotel is allowing the public to be put in danger by their concierge use of an unlicensed service .... We expect this but, but going on TfL's poor performance in the area,we won't be holding our breath. 

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2vlX3AK
via IFTTT

Taxi Drivers Get TfL To Admit Uber Are Acting Illegally. Blue Touch Paper Lit, Next Comes The Fireworks.

On Monday, a mixed group of Taxi drivers from Dads Defending Daughters and also trade reps from the LCDC, met at a prearranged location just off the M25. Their mission was to drive into Brighton and make themselves available for job offers from online Taxi apps. 

The main Brighton Taxi association had been informed and agreed to join with the action. This wasn't to be a predatory take on regular Brighton licensed Taxi work, the aim was to show Uber -who have been using London licensed vehicles and London licensed drivers- are working illegally in disregard of the Hackney Carriage acts and the Private Hire act of 1998.

   

The procession of Taxis, paraded outside Brighton and Hove's Town Hall were drivers on London Taxi apps, switched on and made themselves available for hire.

To most drivers amazement, job offers came through... and some were accepted. 

Screen shots were then sent to TfL to seek conformation on whether any laws/regulations was being contravened. 

Then TfL TPH dropped his little bomb shell

Now perhaps TfL TPH could explain why TfL registered Ubers are allowed to wait for App work, in a high street car park in Reigate and Banstead.

 

Extra Comment from Dads Defending Daughters' Lenny Etheridge: 

I believe the UCG's proposed demo is a direct response to Brighton.

All this Human Rights tosh about magazines on show, is deflecting from the most significant move against TfL (and Uber) in five years!

I am of the opinion, most drivers don't understand the significance of Monday's action.

On Monday, the Dads Defending Daughters along with the LCDC, lit the blue touch paper... but the fireworks are only just about to start. 

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2uI9W4J
via IFTTT

U.S. card firm Vantiv clinches $10 billion deal to buy Worldpay

Stop the fake taxis: warning as hundreds sign-up to illegal cab services on Facebook

YOUNGSTERS have been warned not to accept lifts from strangers after it emerged that hundreds of people had signed up an illegal taxi service on a social networking website.

The Daily Echo has been made aware of two Facebook groups offering lifts around Bournemouth and Poole.

The groups, one of which has more than 2,000 members, encourage people to offer lifts and helps those looking for transport get in touch with drivers.

Members are able to post in the group either offering or asking for a lift at certain times. All the details are then finalised through private messages.

Messages insinuate a fee would need to be paid, although there is no mention of money changing hands in either of the groups' descriptions.

Some of the messages include, "doing lifts for £3 to most areas", "anyone needing lifts cheap?!££", "doing lifts all night ££", "lift in 20 minutes from Cameo?" and "bored so doing lifts".

Offering lifts is not a crime in itself, but becomes so when the driver asks for a fee above petrol costs.

Dorset Police and both Bournemouth and Poole councils have been made aware of the groups - but it is up to the local authorities to prosecute should any of the users be found to be operating illegally.

Peter Haikin, head of regulatory services for Bournemouth and Poole councils, said: "Anyone acting as a taxi operator or driving a taxi without a licence is in breach of the law and could face prosecution, with fines of up to £2,500.

"We are aware of both Facebook groups and are investigating to ascertain whether any users are operating illegally.

"If they are, we will take action to prevent further operations, which would include requesting Facebook to have the groups closed down.

"In the interests of safety and security, we would advise people not to use unlicensed taxis.”

Former Borough of Poole licensing committee chair Cllr Judy Butt has expressed her concerns about the groups and has warned that it is not just illegal but that people could be compromising their safety.

Cllr Butt added: "Unlike taxis these drivers are not regulated, not insured and have not been through the strict checks that those who have taxi licences have to go through.

"It remains to be seen what the intention is but there are definitely some concerns.

"I wouldn't want my children getting into a car with strangers that was unlicensed."

A Dorset Police spokesman added: "Our advice would be get a bus or licensed taxi and you’ll get home safely. Trust in what you know, not who you don’t."

Concerns about 'fake taxis' have been highlighted recently since a woman was allegedly sexually assaulted in Southampton after she got into a car believing it was a taxi

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2fs259f
via IFTTT