More Congestion, More Pollution, More Cycle Lanes

Legal Trouble On The Horizon For The Toxicity Charge

To try to reduce air pollution in London, the toxicity charge, or T-charge, will come into effect on the 23 October 2017. It aims to discourage the use of older cars on the road, as these produce the most dangerous fumes.

Now, however, FairFuelUK is seeking to raise a legal challenge against the T-charge, arguing that a full public enquiry should have preceded the decision to implement it. The challenge could have implications for every major UK town and city.

What is the T-charge?

The T-charge is expected to affect up to 10,000 vehicles every weekday, so plenty of people will find themselves needing to pay it. It targets nitrogen oxide and particulate matter, as these have a negative effect on human health. This is becoming more worrying as the population of London continues to grow.

Anyone driving through London in a car, van, minibus, bus, coach or heavy goods vehicle that does not meet the Euro emissions standards will be required to pay the T-charge. This is in addition to the congestion charge that is already in place.

What will you be paying?

The minimum emission standards are Euro 4 for petrol and diesel vehicles, and Euro 3 for motorised tricycles and quadricycles. Any vehicle that does not meet these standards will be subject to the T-charge.

The charge will apply to drivers using the capital’s roads between 7 am and 6 pm Monday to Friday. The cost to those drivers will be £10 per day. The T-charge does not apply on bank holidays, or from Christmas Day to New Year’s Day.

If you are unsure of whether you’ll need to pay the T-charge for your vehicle, you can check your vehicle registration certificate (V5C), which displays the emissions standard that the vehicle is classed as.

If your vehicle doesn’t meet the Euro emissions standards, and you fail to pay the T-charge, you will be sent a penalty charge notice for £130. This will be reduced to £65 if it is paid within 14 days.

Legal issues with the T-charge

The T-charge has recently come under fire from FairFuelUK. The organisation has described the Mayor of London’s decision to implement this charge as unlawful and unfair. This is because FairFuelUK doesn’t believe that drivers should be penalised for driving older petrol and diesel cars. The campaigning organisation feels that a full public enquiry should have been carried out before the decision to roll out the T-charge was made.

FairFuelUK has now launched a crowd funding campaign to raise money for a two-part legal challenge against the T-charge. This would firstly see it ask the Mayor of London to change his mind about introducing the T-charge. Secondly, it would ask the Prime Minister and the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra) to investigate how else London could reduce pollution.

Learning from other countries

The T-charge may seem like a harsh idea. However, examples from around the world show that Londoners could actually have it worse. Paris, for example, has banned all cars registered before 1997 from using city centre roads between 8 am and 8 pm on weekdays in a bid to reduce pollution.

Similarly, the Mayors of Mexico City, Madrid and Athens are currently looking at banning all diesel cars from their city centres by 2025.

If the T-charge is a success in London, it is thought that it will be rolled out to 25 other UK towns and cities. These include Birmingham, Nottingham, Southampton and Derby, which will start by charging older lorries, taxis and coaches by 2019.

With legal issues against the T-charge being raised before it has even been implemented, the future of the charge is far from certain. However, one thing is for sure – urgent thought needs to be put into how else pollution can be lowered in the UK’s major towns and cities, whether this has to do with penalising certain motorists or not.

What can we do to reduce pollution in our city centres without penalising motorists? Or is charging drivers based on their vehicle type the only viable solution? Leave a comment below. 

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

I'm Spartacus asks the question : "So when is a handgun not a handgun?"

Following on from yesterday's FOI request on Neil Billany's Emails, I'm Spartacus asks the question :

"So when is a handgun not a handgun?"

It seems when Uber ascertains it isn’t, not the police!

That astounding & disturbing fact from the diligent & professional Inspector Billany alone warrants a revocation today let alone consideration of renewal.

Let’s put it another way:

I as a proprietor, investigates me as a driver, for ‘pulling a blade’ on a passenger... no question of a revocation as I (as a proprietor) had ascertained it was a cosh. Yeah right!

There’s a duty under the common law to assist in the apprehension of a felon.

All the rest to me just shows TfL’s obsession on how things appear... rather than doing anything about serious threats to public safety.

Any right minded citizen must be outraged.

I'm Spartacus. 

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2wAYiy4
via IFTTT

More FOI Results : Emails between Peter Blake, Helen Chapman And Neil Billany.

Can you please provide me with all email correspondence under an FOIA between the following dates and involving the following TfL staff: 1st January 2017 - 11th July 2017 (a) Peter Blake and Neil Billany (b) Helen Chapman and Neil Billany

We answered

TfL Ref: FOI-0866-1718

Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 11 July 2017 asking for information about correspondence.

Your request has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and our information access policy. I can confirm we hold some of the information you require. 

Please see the information you have requested attached in relation to emails exchanged between Neil Billany and Helen Chapman. Please note that we do not hold any emails exchanged between Neil Billany and Peter Blake within the time period you have specified.

For clarify, the letter in the first pdf is an attachment to an email provided on page 10 of the second pdf.

Please note that in accordance with TfL’s obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) some personal data has been removed, as required by section 40(2) of the FOI Act. This is because disclosure of this personal data would be a breach of the DPA, specifically the first principle of the DPA which requires all processing of personal data to be fair and lawful. It would not be fair to disclose this personal information when the individuals have no expectation it would be disclosed and TfL has not satisfied one of the conditions of Schedule 2 of the Data Protection Act which would make the processing ‘fair’. 

If this is not the information you are looking for, or if you are unable to access it for some reason, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal as well as information on copyright and what to do if you would like to re-use any of the information we have disclosed. 

Yours sincerely 

Lee Hill

Senior FOI Case Officer

FOI Case Management Team

General Counsel

Transport for London

SEE RETURNED FOI RESQUEST RESULTS, CLICK LINKS BELOW:

Document no1 Redacted.pdf

Document no2_Redacted.pdf

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

Letter From Harry Wall : The Blind Leading The Blind ?

You may be aware by now that Monday's Make a Stand demo has been cancelled. I can't tell you all how choked I am but unfortunately not enough support was forthcoming.

Initially, the feeling was good but as the days went on it became apparent that feeling wasn't lasting. 

Add to that the dreadful members of our trade, only too pleased to scupper any chance of unity that might bring some semblance of hope, who played their part brilliantly and I have to congratulate them on a job well done. 

They should all be very proud of themselves.

This past 3 weeks has been an education in many ways but the main lesson I learned was that this animal is too sick to help. 

The negativity on social media has played a huge part in its failure and has been watched from around the country by those who were at first raring to stand with us regardless if they were Taxi or PH because they saw the bigger picture.

Now, 3 weeks on and after reading the comments from leading trade figures within the orgs they want nothing to do with us, can you blame them?

I can't.

We had 8 cities at one point, 8 CITIES!!

Almost over night, they all cried off.

All because of org mentality, caveman mentality and sheer ignorance.

I've learned many in this trade, including activists from all orgs and unions are riddled with insincerity and deceit and I no longer want any part of it, it shames me.

Next week TFL officially announce if Uber are licensed. If they are, the orgs will go into overdrive and scream from the rafters, "JR,JR,JR!!"

Whist watching Taxify come back on line.

If they don't get licensed the orgs will go into overdrive screaming "Look what we did! Look what we did!"

"Ain't we clever"

Then Uber will appeal and keep functioning for the duration of the appeal. During which time Taxify will come back on line, along with Via and no doubt closely followed by Lyft.

Back to square one.

"Big news Monday!"

It's the business model that's the problem, not the company.

We had our chance, we blew it thanks to us.

I tried, I failed and I'm truly sorry.

I now wash my hands of it.

Be lucky

Harry.

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

Estonian ride-hailing startup Taxify hopes to have issues with local regulator Transport for London (TfL) resolved and restore service in the British capital by the beginning of next week at the latest.

On Sept. 8, just three days after launching its service in London, Taxify had to halt its operations there after TfL launched an investigation into the company.

It was determined that Taxify was not registered in London as a private hire vehicle operator, due to which it did not have the right to accept ride bookings.

Taxify CEO Markus Villig told ERR that preparations are underway for continuing operations in the British capital — TfL demanded additional security requirement compliance from the company, and Taxify hopes to have everything in order by the end of the week.

"Our plan is to launch sometime this or next week," he added.

The Estonian ride-hailing service has previously cited TfL's lack of interest in dialogue or offering tips to ensure their application is approved. According to Villig, the authority's attitude has not improved, but the company has reached an alternative legal solution.

"The first time they were not satisfied with the licensed business we have, but this time we found a different kind of legal solution with which we believe they will be more satisfied," Villig explained. "We're currently waiting for final approval from them so we can relaunch."

While the delay has meant additional expenses for the expansion to London, according to the CEO, the increase has been marginal in the context of the company's launch budget.

"Ultimately, what is most important for us is that [London] was our most successful launch ever for drivers and clients alike, so if we incur some additional legal fees, that isn't the main concern," said Villig. "Businesses are generally more concerned about where to find clients and drivers. In our case, thankfully, these problems have already been solved."

Expansion to Paris not to be affected

According to Villig, Taxify's planned expansion to Paris will not be affected the obstacles the company has encountered in London, as transport regulations in Paris are significantly simpler and the launch of new platforms more competition-friendly.

"Everything is going smoothly in Paris," the CEO confirmed. "Rather, we hope to receive final confirmation from London this week — then everything will be shipshape in both cities."

He noted that preparations are underway in Paris, and that there are teams on location in both cities who are working on training drivers.

When exactly Taxify can be expected to launch in Paris, however, Villig was unable to say, noting that the goal was to line up hundreds of drivers first, as Paris is such a large city to cover.

During its first three days of operation earlier this month, 3,000 drivers joined and 30,000 clients downloaded the Taxify app before the company halted operations after local regulator Transport for London had claimed that the new market entrant had failed to obtain a proper operating license.

Taxify operates in 19 countries around the world. In early August, the company announced that Chinese ride-hailing app Didi Chuxing had purchased a 13-percent holding in Taxify and would support the growth of the Estonian-developed platform in Africa and Europe.

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

Transport For London Have Quietly Increased The Cost Of Uber's Licence To Operate In London....Follow The Money... By Gerald Coba

A major set back for those who thought Uber would not be relicensed at the end of this month

London's Licensing authority (TfL) have pushed forward with new plans that are set to add nearly £1m to its bill.

They now plan to charge a maximum fee of £2.9m for the largest mincab firms to operate in the capital, it can be revealed, amending its original plans to increase it to £166,000.

To those who said there is no way TfL could relicense a company with so much controversy and complaint against it (sexual assaults including rapes of passengers by drivers, theft, customer account hacking, overcharging, spying on officials) we would answer, this has never been about regulation, legislation or public safety, it's always been about money.

Follow The Money!

TfL have also quietly backed down on their proposal to charge a £68 fee per Minicab, for any firm with more than 1,000 vehicles, after a backlash from the operators.

The changes were made after the industry warned that the extra costs would put small and medium sized firms out of business. This means the larger operators such as Uber and Addison Lee will now pay more and just a few of the smallest will pay less.

The troubled startup would have been charged just over the £2m mark, based on the number of cars it has, but will now have to pay the maximum £2.9m fee for operators with more than 10,000 vehicles.

And Addison Lee is now expected to foot a bill more than twice as much as under the original "per car" plans, as operators running between 1,001 and 10,000 cars will be charged £700,000. A further 10 operators with between 500 and 1,000 cars will have to pay £350,000.

The current fee is just £2,800 for any operator with more than 1,000 cars, but TfL has said it must change in order to cover the costs of a huge rise in the number of minicabs on the road. So much for congestion and pollution,as long as you got the money.

Follow The Money!

The changes are expected to bring in millions more as it becomes self sufficient after losing government subsidies, but it has warned that it still faces a shortfall.

It estimates more than 1,500 operators in total with fewer than 500 cars will be negatively impacted, paying between £3,174 and £157,000 in additional costs over five years. 400 with less than 10 cars will pay £826 less.

The details of the changes were quietly revealed among documents published with TfL's latest finance committee meeting last week and also include the date they are likely to be implemented - 1 April 2018.

Uber and Addison Lee have had their operating licences renewed in the short-term while TfL makes the changes, for four and six months respectively. But both will face a second temporary renewal before the changes comes into force.

Uber's is due to be renewed at the end of September and Transport for London faces mounting pressure over the matter. But where money is concerned, pressure calling for public safety is like water off a ducks back to TfL. Its alleged they will be looking to give Uber an 8 month extension, by then the new charges will be firmly in place.

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2w2VMMR
via IFTTT