After Just Three Days, Taxify Call Halt To Operations Following TfL Investigation

When you're a ride-hailing company, a lot can happen in a week. Just three days after it brought its private hire app to London, Taxify has suspended all rides as it seeks to clarify its standing with the capital's transport authority. Transport for London confirmed yesterday that it was "urgently investigating" the Uber rival because it isn't a "licensed private hire operator" and was performing its services without the necessary clearance.

While Taxify doesn't hold a licence itself, CEO Markus Villig told media that the company operates as a "technology platform," which sources rides for an existing ride-hailing operator called City Drive Services. Taxify purchased City Drive Services, allowing it to piggyback on the London-based firm's licence (which expires in 2019).

In a statement, Taxify said it had accumulated over 30,000 customers and added 3,000 drivers since it launched, adding: "Taxify is a technological platform for customers to hail rides from City Drive Services, a licensed London based private hire company. This has been raised as a concern by TfL and in full cooperation, Taxify have temporarily stopped operations to clarify its legal position with the regulator and reach a resolution so that services can return to normal."

"TfL have a responsibility to Londoners to make sure there is a competitive ride-hailing market in the capital that strengthens incentives for operators to improve quality and safety while also bringing the overall cost down for customers. Taxify's model does just this having achieved significant breakthroughs in over 19 markets around the world, and we look forward to an open and transparent dialogue with TfL in the coming days to resolve this."

In a letter to Transport for London and London's deputy mayor for transport, GMB union secretary Steve Garelick called Taxify's acquisition tactics into question, noting that the company's decision not to advise TfL of a change to licencing conditions appeared "incompatible with the law."

It's now Transport for London's job to identify whether Taxify's decision to trade under a subsidiary's licence is against the rules, which could see the company keep its drivers off the road indefinitely.

Source : Engadget

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2j9RotB
via IFTTT

And Finally...Word From The Trade's Meeting With TfL and Mike Brown .

This from Grant Davis, Chair of the London Taxi Drivers Club:

Yesterday's meeting with Mike Brown started with the 13k PH drivers who have been asked to re take their DBS - I asked Helen Chapman & Mike Brown to suspend them until retested, this fell on deaf ears.

I stated I had members who had suffered and if anything the PH drivers should face the same.

This was refuted.

Today on LBC the Mayor stated they had not supplied an "enhanced CRB" not good. 

Ms Chapman told us she would guarantee that every PH driver retested would pass.

Which I found extraordinary.

(Can you see something wrong with this picture???)

We complained about Compliance and the heavy handed approach.

We told them we were being unfairly treated and they needed to come back under TPH.

We spoke about the promised bus lane access... Shorter St, Byward St, Euston underpass and were told we faced opposition within Tfl from the buses.

(Can you see something wrong with this picture???)

Steve Mc spoke of Bank Junction traffic and that figures used by CoL were flawed - we also put forward a case for us to us Tottenham Court Road due to flawed figures. 

We also showed we had support from the public, retailers and that the only opposition was Camden.

We spoke about charge points ( or lack of them ) there is only 1 at present and that don't work.

(Can you see something wrong with this picture???)

Tfl are promising 75 before Xmas, but I will be very surprised if they achieve half that . 

I brought up that TfL wanted us to have a 10 yr age limit due to the electric cabs and how plentiful the infrastructure world be, total codswallop.

Thank God we got 15 from Boris.

Again, we told Tfl "you cannot make policy on promises".

Not much was mentioned about Uber relicense, or not , but that was expected.

We also debated the lack of "e- hailing" policy by Tfl and I spoke of our efforts in Brighton.

If Tfl had a policy in place and they stated all apps were ASAP bookings, we would have no problems

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

TfL...Nothing To See Here....Can You See Something Wrong With This Picture. By Jim Thomas

Do you remember in magazines such as Take a Break, there used to be a section that showed a photo or illustration with the by-line "can you see something wrong in this picture......

At the Trade Meeting with Mike Brown on Wednesday, TfL Said that drivers who hold DBS certificates supplied by Onfido do in fact hold a fully "bona fide" enhanced DBS and in their (TfL's) eyes, they are OK to carry on as Licensed Private a Hire Drivers.

This was refuted yesterday by Mayor Khan who said "the 13,000 disputed DBS certificates, provided by Onfido  were indeed NOT enhanced". 

Seems someone is lying again!!!

Can you see something wrong with this picture???

Now, even though, in their (TfL's) eyes, nothing was wrong with the faked enhanced certificates, they have asked (nicely) that the drivers with the face DBS certificates resubmit new non-fake ones and they have given these Minicab drivers, 28 days grace to do so. 

Can you see something wrong with this picture???

Let's just remind our selves of another little scandal that was swept under the carpet at Palestra 

This is the headline from the Sun newspaper 2nd October 2016.

ROGUE GPs are coining it from minicab and Uber drivers by lying on vital forms about their fitness to carry passengers.

Three doctors caught by The Sun were happy to sell a faked medical all-clear — required to get an official cab licence.

This ran parallel with the fake topographical tests organised to grease the way of applicants to fill the ranks of Uber Prius', was preceded by the on/off HR insurance lie from Leon Daniels and proceeded by the Sexual assaults and a Rapes escalation of Uber drivers, which reveal an incident rate of one sexual attack by an uber driver on a passenger, every 11 days. 

Can you see something wrong with this picture ??? 

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2vR5nKE
via IFTTT

Is The Taxi Trade On The Verge Of Extinction ......Again ?

The London Taxi Trade on the very verge of extinction....shock horror....from the advance of technology and the onslaught of electric, driverless cars....

Now where have we heard all this before? 

The story below was sent to my by Stanley Roth, published in the Taxi Trade newspaper "The Steering Wheel" 49 years ago, predicting a so called new concept of a driverless Taxi, routed by computer....yes this really was 49 years ago. 

At that time, Dr L R Blake, director of Bush Electrical Engineering said the driverless Taxi would be on the road within 4 years....well as Stan says, we are still waiting. 

He also raises a very interesting question? 

Article from the Steering Wheel :

     

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

Sadiq Khan Linked To Uber ? : Mayor's Night Time Commissioner "Has Conflict Of Interest" Over Uber Case

LBC has discovered that Sadiq Khan's Night Time Commissioner is representing three Uber drivers in a court case.

Pre-eminent barrister Philip Kolvin QC was appointed by the Mayor of London last December and advises on the project to make London a 24-hour city, bringing together pubs, nightclubs, the police and transport - including Uber.

But it now appears there could be a conflict of interest in Mr Kolvin’s role as Night Time Commissioner because he is representing Uber drivers in court, with those drivers are having their legal costs met by Uber.

Conservative MP and former Transport Minister Theresa Villiers says the London Mayor now needs to review the appointment. She told LBC: "I have concerns about what I've heard bout Philip Kolvin's involvement in defending Uber drivers in court.

"He's got a perfect right to do that, but I do worry that this gives him a conflict of interest regarding his role on the Mayor's Night Time Commission.

"I think the Mayor needs to look at the situation. I'm not sure it's really credible for Mr Kolvin to continue with these cases if he's going to continue with his role as Commissioner."

LBC's Political Editor Theo Usherwood explains: "My initial focus was on the Berkshire town of Reading. That's because in March last year, its council refused to grant Uber an operator's licence on the grounds it wouldn't guarantee having an office in the town staffed on a daily basis.

"As a result, Uber launched the Reading Reward Zone - promising the first 150 drivers to cover the town between £15 and £25 per hour. That led in June to council officers catching two men, who pleaded guilty and were fined £500.

"But now another two Uber drivers are being prosecuted by the council. One of the men is due to go to trial in November. Both are represented by Mr Kolvin QC.

"He is described by the Legal 500 as the “standard-bearer” when it comes to licensing, and I’ve been told by other barristers his fees will run into the thousands of pounds for a day’s work. My source at Uber has told me that they’re paying their drivers’ legal fees in this case.

"To be clear - Nobody is calling into question Mr Kolvin’s professionalism as a barrister.

"But the appearance of a conflict of interest centres on his role as chairman of the Night Time Commission."

Keith Prince, the Conservative chairman of the Greater London Authority’s Transport Committee told me that because Uber has more cars on the road than any other minicab company, it would inevitably have an interest in the Night Time Commission’s work.

He said: "Is this the right position to have where you have someone who will, in his role as Night Time Commissioner, be looking at contracts across London and looking at how the night-time economy works.

"No one can deny that Uber has an interest in how the night-time economy work."

Mayor's office insists there is no conflict.

A spokesman for Mr Khan told LBC that Mr Kolvin has declared all of his interests with the GLA and provided advance notice about the impending case between the Uber driver and the LTDA. As a result the GLA's monitoring office has also reviewed the issue and concluded there is no conflict.

The spokesman also said the Commission had no decision making powers. In reference to the Bexleyheath hearing, the spokesman added: "Philip stands by his undertaking not to carry out any work for Uber in the capital and that is not breached by acting for this individual.

"There is no conflict of interest in acting for a London citizen in a taxi licensing prosecution and chairing a Commission advising on the future of the night time economy in London." 

Uber's licence to operate in London is up for renewal at the end of this month. Transport for London will make the decision on allowing them to continue. If it doesn't, Uber faces a lengthy legal battle to stay in business in the capital.

Source LBC. 

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

Start-up raises £14m to trial driverless taxis on London's streets

A technology company that hopes to put driverless taxis on the roads of London by 2019 has raised £14m, the biggest investment in an autonomous car start-up in Europe.

FiveAI, a Cambridge-based company founded last year, has secured the funds months after winning millions of pounds in government support to fund trials of a driverless taxi service in the capital.

Despite being a minnow compared to the likes of Google and Uber, which are investing billions in their own driverless car programmes, it hopes to gain a foothold in the UK by teaching its cars to navigate the peculiarities of British roads.

“It’s a medieval city, the topography, objects and the behaviour of people in London are different to those of Phoenix, Arizona,” said Stan Boland, FiveAI’s chief executive.

The company is raising the funds from the European venture capital firm Lakestar Capital, as well as Amadeus Capital Partners, run by Acorn Computers founder Hermann Hauser.

It is gradually developing its driverless car technology and plans to run a trial of 10 cars in an outer borough of London in 2019, allowing passengers to order rides in the same way they use Uber and other taxi-hailing apps.

A consortium led by the company that also includes Direct Line, the University of Oxford and Transport for London won £12.8m from the departments for business and transport in April as part of a government push to support driverless cars.

Mr Boland, a serial entrepreneur who founded the tech companies Element14 and Icera before selling them to chip firms Broadcom and Nvidia for $640m (£491m) and $367m respectively, said he hoped to expand across Europe while Silicon Valley companies were focusing on American cities.

On Tuesday, a separate driverless car group led by software group Oxbotica said it planned to test driverless vehicles between London and Oxford in 2019.

It’s the year 2025. Your driverless car has just crashed into a tree at 55mph because its built-in computer valued a pedestrian’s life above your own. Your injuries are the result of a few lines of code that were hacked out by a 26-year-old software programmer in the San Francisco Bay Area back in the heady days of 2019. As you wait for a paramedic drone, bleeding out by the roadside, you ask yourself – where did it all go wrong?

The above scenario might sound fanciful, but death by driverless car seems inevitable. In May this year, semi-autonomous software failed in the most tragic way: Joshua Brown’s Tesla Model S drove under the trailer of an 18-wheel truck on a highway while in Autopilot mode.

Read more at http://ift.tt/2eMnbPJ

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2xQpTZ4
via IFTTT

TfL Have Lost Control... Should They Be Replace As Regulatory Body? : Part 2....by Lee Ward

Remember this reply from Chelsee at TfL?

Dear Mr Ward

Thank you for your email response of 17 October 2016.

When booking a private hire vehicle, the passenger is deemed to be entering into a contact with the licensed operator who is inviting the booking and then fulfilling it with a licensed driver and vehicle. When accepting a booking, by whatever means, the operator is obliged to make a record of it at their licensed operating centre. The details of contracts between passengers and specific licensed operators are a matter for those two parties.

In accepting the booking and taking the payment, there is, in our view, what amounts to a contractual arrangement between the operator and the passenger. We will not comment on any specific contractual arrangements between the various parties.

As previously advised, Uber London Limited is registered as a private hire operator in London, having met the same pre-licensing requirements as any other applicant for an operator's licence and is subject to all legislation which applies to private hire operators in the Capital.

Yours sincerely


Chelsee Mckinlay
Ends.

As they agree and admit, the contract is between the customer and the person/company that invited the booking....INVITED the booking....

So, if Uber California or Taxify are the people that own the App which INVITES the booking to be made and then passed on, then THOSE companies require and Operators license as explained above.

The total disregard to this by TfL and any other authority is beyond any comprehension of the trade and requires immediate action. 

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