Are these people really worth this amount of money? ... Letter To Taxi Leaks

Have a quick perusal of the' tfl organisational chart 2014 /15 'on google and see what these 'executives' earn, it will make your hair stand on end and raise your blood pressure, they are phenomenal figures. 

            >To Download Chart, Click Here<

These people are simply not worth the vast sums of money they are being paid. It's heart breaking to see the depths this city has fallen to when you attempt a journey by road. 

In 29 years I have never experienced such interminable road congestion as now. So many roads have been closed from the city westwards to soho, Mayfair and beyond. 

The job of cab driving has been thoroughly deskilled. Traffic is being funnelled down main routes, those little streets to the side, a form of pressure relief valve are closed. As difficult as the App companies make life for the established business that we try and run, the real latent threat is the tfl policy of shutting down roads/routes. 

They are like veins that carry blood. 

They are either being removed from usage or narrowed, ie parliament sq, Farringdon road Victoria embankment and so on. 

Truthfully,knowing what you do regarding the geography of London, a cab wouldn't be your instinctive choice as a means of transport if you had to get somewhere. 

Why couldn't the LTDA, LCDC, RMT and god knows how many other trade reps have argued for us to be given access from Oxford st into soho st, a small but significant measure. 

Open up Rupert St from Brewer St into Winnett St into Wardour st, for 'Cabs Only'.

A job from Great Marlborough street to Covent Garden can literally cost someone an arm and a leg, it's embarrassing! 

This Brown character has a shinny cv and yet what concrete proposals for improvement has he got. This dystopian existence we all now suffer has occurred on his watch, the mans a clown. 

A well remunerated clown at that. 

Regards Rob.

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/1U3LW13
via IFTTT

United Trade Group Snubs Meeting With TfL Over Daniels Attendance.

It's been alleged that yesterday, the LCDC along with other invited trade organisations who make out the exclusive united trade group (UCG), snubbed the the proposed meeting with TfL and the new Mayor. Reason being, Mike Brown was allegedly insisting that Leon Daniels be present.

Below is the response from TfL's Mike Brown, in regards to the trade's snub.

Sadiq Khan who has been heavily lobbied by most of the taxi organisations, and other close and trusted trade supporters, is well versed of the problems within London's taxi industry. It is believed that once he has his feet under the table and fairly reviewed the structure and processes of the trade that changes will be introduced.

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/1XCcSLg
via IFTTT

Action For Cabbies Update :

Action for Cabbies wholly supports and agrees that all taxis should accept credit cards and that passengers are able to pay fares by cards as well as cash; what we do not support is the ban on transaction surcharges and the surcharges being levied against drivers. 

If card payments become as popular as TfL suggest they will be, TfL’s ban is likely to cause annual losses to the taxi industry of over £9m a year, losses the industry can ill afford when it is under unprecedented competition from  minicabs. 

Therefore, Action for Cabbies has funded a claim brought by driver, Mr James Thomas, for a judicial review of TfL’s decision to ban drivers from passing on transaction fees to passengers where they are paying by card. 

The claim was formally served on TfL yesterday, 17 May 2016. 

It is our view – and the view of Rosenblatt (Jim’s lawyers)  - that TfL’s ban is both unfair and irrational. 

A much fairer solution, and one supported by the majority of all respondents during TfL’s 2015 consultation, would have been for TfL to have allowed drivers to charge a surcharge which reflects their transaction fees, but no more than these fees incurred by the driver.  

We very much hope that Jim’s claim will encourage TfL to review its decision and adopt this fairer solution.

Thank you for your continued support, stronger together.

Action for Cabbies.

Editorial Comment:

Of course the CC mandate is a great idea, it brings us inline with most of our competitors. But at the same time, we can't have an open ended agreement where equipment suppliers can raise the odds ever time the opportunity presents itself. 

If the percentage of card users rises in line with TfL's expectations, at present rates, the trade will lose over £9m a year. If the surcharge should rise as contracts come up for renewals, the trade could be losing £18-20m every year.

It should be left to individual drivers, to decide whether they charge the passenger or not. If using more economical equipment from companies such as iZettle, PayPal or CabApp, all set at around 2.75%, some drivers will feel they can absorb the charge.

But many drivers feel 4-5% plus a 20p transaction charge is an unwelcome expense, which they should be able to claim back from passengers, using their facility. 

The trade has to protect itself and should never agree to any arrangements which may put its future in a precarious position.

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/1Va32PV
via IFTTT

Time For Transparency

We all know how much Leon Daniels earns, what his benefits are and hopefully a full record of his dinners and lunches provided by those who he meets with.

Is it now time for our trade leaders to follow suit? After  all they should have nothing to hide from their memberships nor should they want to.

We know how much Mick Cash (RMT) is paid and what his benefits are, the same applies to  Len McCluskey of UNITE.

So in the words of Delia Smith 'let's be 'avin you' Steve, Grant, Len & co.

1. How much are you paid by your organisation as a salary or stand down pay?

2. Declare any other benefits such as cars, health schemes, low or zero rental cabs, garage servicing etc?

3. Do you receive any other income from cab related activities such as marshalling, TfL boards and committees, radio circuits etc?

Let's be clear no one is accusing or inferring anything but in these difficult times we need to be sure those who speak for many of us are really doing just that rather than ensuring some kind of 'status quo' is maintained.

So nothing to lose and a lot in reputation to enhance, I am sure the editor of this blog and others, the trade press or LTR will,be happy to broadcast anything you release.

We all know how much to the meter a cab driver takes, it laid down in law.

All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

I'm Spartacus



from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/1rUrwBm
via IFTTT

LTDA Taxi House 18th May 2016 : Drivers Turn Out To Support Sean Day.

Taxi House Woodfield road. Drivers support Sean Paul Day at complaint hearing.

This afternoon, Sean Paul Day appeared before a complaints committee at Taxi house, accused of lying about the LTDA's JR bid, they claim was running in parallel with the Action For Cabbies Fundraising campaign.

Drivers turned out to support Sean and the forecourt of Taxi house soon filled to over capacity, with approximately another 50-60 Taxis queuing in Woodfield Road. 

Sean faced the committee accompanied by Marc Turner who was not allowed to speak. But Marc was allowed to read a prepared statement in support of Sean, at the end of the meeting. 

The hearing lasted just over an hour. 

Sean was seen leaving the building with supporters, shown to the door by Bob Oddy. 

We asked Sean of the outcome and it appears no division on his future as a member was made today. He has been told he will be contacted by mail and informed of the committee's decision in due course ( much in the same way they expelled Mike Calvey). 

Below, Oddy is quizzed,  'where has the money gone Bob?'

...

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/206osgg
via IFTTT

London Taxi Drivers Fund For Underprivileged Children : London's Finest, Take 200 Kids To Woburn Safari Park

Another story you won't see in the press today....or on any of the mainstream TV news broadcasts

Words cannot express the the pride I feel in my fellow cabbies and the members of the LTDFUC, who again this morning, gave up their days work to take 200 kids for a fun packed trip to Woburn Safari Park

Just one of the reasons our taxi trade in London, is the envy of the World. 

Perhaps somebody should tell Dave, George, TFL and the media!!!!!!

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/1TG91Hd
via IFTTT

Letter To Baroness Kramer, From Chair Of ALPHA : Re The Taxi Deregulation Act 2015

For those unaware, a quick reminder of who Baroness Kramer is. 

Susan Veronica Kramer, Baroness Kramer, (née Richards; born Holdorn London, 21 July 1950) is a Liberal Democrat politician. 

Member of Parliament, Richmond Park, from 2005 to 2010.

Prior to that having a career in infrastructure finance and in 2000 having been a candidate in the London Mayoral Ellection.

Lady Kramer began her career in finance. She rose to become a Vice-President of Citibank in Chicago. She and her late husband then set up Infrastructure Capital Partners, a firm which advises on infrastructure projects, primarily in Central and Eastern Europe. Its alleged she still remains a director of the firm.

As patron of the Suzy Lamplugh Trust Lady Kramer should be well aware of the recent record high number of sexual assaults recorded in London minicabs made public recently by Freedom of Information Request to the Met Police.

See previous Taxi Leaks article about Baroness Kramer and Taxi and Private Hire deregulation 2014.  >CLICK HERE<.

Letter below is from Lee Ward Chair of ALPHA.

Dear Lady Kramer

After reading the arguments for and against the deregulation of the taxi industry and more importantly the cross border hiring or sub contracting, I wish to ask you what the intention of this amendment was.

i have read the notes from both the House of Commons and the House of Lords on this matter and I have taken note of the examples that you gave during this debate. My question is this;

Did the change in law take into account that a company such as Uber (but other companies now do the same) take a booking in, for example my home town of Sheffield, and give it to the nearest Uber driver that is vacant and waiting for a job regardless of the authority that this said driver is licensed by, or was it so that a company could take a booking because the person booking trusted that company and was happy for that company to deal with such booking when the person was in an area that the trusted company did not have any vehicles or actually covered work wise?

You see the problem is, that we as a trade see a massive loophole within the industry, one that puts serious issues on public safety. As I have referred to just now, Uber take a booking and pass it to the nearest driver regardless of how many drivers are sat waiting to take work that are licensed in the area. These vehicles can not be stopped and checked or even questioned by the local authority in the area that they are working in, how can we ensure that the person driving is the person licensed and insured? we can not.

I now make reference to your speech within the House with regards to this issue as follows;

"I was in Gloucestershire and going to visit an elderly friend in a nursing home. I got to the station and there was no one around. I looked at the board and started calling taxi firms and car hire firms and not one could supply a car."

As the then Minister for Transport, I can not understand why you did not look at the place that this train station was and not pre empt any transport issues that you may encounter.

"We are often concerned about young people out late at night who try to find a taxi to take them home safely. In that situation, we do not want them having to track down one company after another. They should be able to call an operator who they have confidence in who can find them a taxi, even if it is subcontracted from out of area."

Does this really happen now, where the company that they book with sends a vehicle licensed sometimes up to 200 mile away to collect them and take them to their destination (who can not be spot checked by the local licensing officers), while locally licensed drivers are sat about waiting for a job?

 

"Most car hire companies have a limited number of wheelchair-accessible vehicles and there may be circumstances where a disabled person needs to travel in a particular kind of vehicle. It is all very well to say that disabled people need to make advance bookings, but I want people with disabilities to be able to live their lives as freely as the rest of us can and not always have to think about things in advance—or, frankly, have to do without. We have a mechanism here which gives an operator the scope to reach out of area and subcontract to someone else who has a wheelchair-accessible vehicle to meet a need. That is exceedingly beneficial."

Does Uber even have wheelchair access vehicles, let alone take advance bookings for these people?

"I want to make it clear that the initial operator who takes a call and makes a booking remains liable to the passenger who made the booking. He is the person with whom the contract has been established. If someone chooses to call a particular operator, that operator retains the liability for the subcontractor, so the terms and conditions, the recording of the booking and the fare, if it has been agreed, all remain with the operator who the customer has contacted."

I will now show you what Uber's Terms and Conditions are with regards to their acceptance of liability for sub contracting bookings (even if they do sub contract to themselves)

UBER MAKES NO REPRESENTATION, WARRANTY, OR GUARANTEE REGARDING THE RELIABILITY, TIMELINESS, QUALITY, SUITABILITY OR AVAILABILITY OF THE SERVICES OR ANY SERVICES OR GOODS REQUESTED THROUGH THE USE OF THE SERVICES, OR THAT THE SERVICES WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR-FREE. UBER DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE QUALITY, SUITABILITY, SAFETY OR ABILITY OF THIRD PARTY PROVIDERS.

I guess they think otherwise, dont you?

This email could go on for much longer, but I think I will leave you with this summery to ponder before you reply.

The Deregulation Act of 2015 has done nothing for the Private Hire industry across the UK, if anywhere. The reasons and arguments from both the House of Commons and the House of Lords are so flawed that it is quite apparent that no imput from the industry was taken into account, or even requested.

My final request from your self is that you reply to this email with good faith so that I can post your reply to the drivers (as I will post this email awaiting your reply) who work long and hard to make a living across this country at hours that people seldom relate to, ensuring that the public of this great country get home safe and soundly.

Yours sincerely

Lee Ward

ALPHA Chairman

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/1Oz382a
via IFTTT