Another Open Letter From Taxi Leaks...Asking More Important Questions.

Let's get one thing straight from the start, Taxi Leaks is an impartial Taxi news website. We carry no paid adverts and do not carry advertorials for any Org, Union or company for monetary gain. The links we do have are there strictly through merit. 

Most of all, we are not an org, we do not represent the trade....all we do, is inform the trade. 

Having said that, we have found ourselves having to ask TFL's commissioner and directors questions because will feel these important questions are not being asked by our trade representative bodies. 

So today, we put these questions to TfLTPH:

1. After last weeks case, can London's Taxi drivers have an apology from TfL who’s COs we’re removing copies of Taxi paper from Taxis, saying the “headline was wrong”? We have video of drivers being harassed.

   

TfL COs Protecting Uber From Rape Headlines In The Press!

Will TfL now issue an apology to Taxi drivers who were harassed by COs?

2. Could you please tell my under what circumstances, Grayhound Cars have been given an exemption to allow them to display their name on liveried front doors ? Also, I'm told Otto cars is being allowed to advertise on its cars rear body work. Please explain why?

WHAT MAKES GREYHOUND CARS DIFFERENT TO ANY OTHER PH PRIUS???

3. In the Reading verdict yesterday judge Emma Arbuthnot on Page 4, section 14 (how the app works)...said it was the driver who accepts the job and only then Uber makes the booking. This is illegal under current legislation laid down by Parliament....Will you therefore revoke Uber’s licence ASAP ???

Judge Emma Arbuthnot, in summing up :

IF THE DRIVER ACCEPTS...THEN UBER COMFIRMS THE BOOKING!!!

We also asked the LTDA the third question adding the caveat 'will you be at Palestra today demanding Uber's immediate revocation?'

As of yet, we've received no answer from any one!

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2Jg5WzJ
via IFTTT https://ift.tt/2mbpMmz https://ift.tt/12cqxIH

Breaking News : LPHCA Has Lost Its Challenge To TFL's New Operators Licence Fees.

The Licensed Private Hire Car Association (LPHCA) has lost its case against TFL's proposals to increased fees for operators with over 11 vehicles to over £3,000, when they were previously under £3,000. It said the measures could "wipe out" operators, "leaving the futures of many drivers, industry suppliers and others connected to the industry in jeopardy".

The UK's largest private hire trade body, United Private Hire Drivers (UPHD) applied to intervene in the case, which was heard in the High Court, but its application was rejected.

It has argued that the change in fees breaches the Equality Act of 2010 by forcing drivers to shoulder "unfair costs and regulatory burdens" while denying them representation in the stakeholder process.

TfL announced last year that it was increasing charges for private hire operators for the costs of licensing, compliance and enforcement to reflect the growth of the private hire industry and the costs required to regulate it.

The number of privately licensed drivers soared by 78 per cent from 65,000 to 160,000 last year, while the number of vehicles increased from 50,000 to 112,000 over the same period.

TfL expects the cost of enforcement alone to reach £30m - up from a previous estimate of £4m - over the next five years. With the costs of licensing and compliance taken into account, the total reaches £209m over the same period.

​A TfL spokesperson said: “The licence fee changes reflect the increased cost of regulation and associated enforcement activity that has been driven by the huge growth in the private hire industry.

“The changes will fund the additional 250 compliance officers who do a crucial job in driving up standards and ensuring Londoners remain safe. After listening to the views of stakeholders during consultation we amended the fees structure to take into account the potential impact on small and medium-sized operators.

“We consider the changes to fees to be proportionate and will be defending our position.”

James Farrar, chair of the UPHD branch of the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain, said: "It's not surprising that gig economy bosses represented by the LPHCA are fighting tooth and nail to pass their cost and regulatory burden on to drivers. But it's dismaying to see TfL work so hard to avoid answering some troubling questions about how it discriminates against 117,000 mostly minority minicab drivers. We will be watching this case very carefully and we'll continue to pursue other avenues to challenge institutional racism at Transport for London."

An Addison Lee spokesman said: “We fully support TfL’s efforts to improve safety in the private hire sector through better regulation and more enforcement officers. Addison Lee recognises that these measures need to be paid for and we are happy to play our part through the increase to our licence fee.”

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2sjskCB
via IFTTT https://ift.tt/2xnRlkZ https://ift.tt/12cqxIH

Black Taxi Ban Leaves TP Icap Staff Fuming

Expenses crackdown at interdealer broker TP Icap: 

This time it’s black cabs in the sights of the beancounters.

Because of the Bank Junction Taxi ban, resulting in higher fares as drivers take Junction avoidance routs, the edict has gone out across the whole company that staff aren’t allowed to take traditional London taxis any more — despite the firm occasionally slapping its livery on them — and they’ll have to rely on Uber to get around town instead.

The TP Icap is happy to advertise on London cabs, but staff may not enter them. Expenses department will also be bouncing back any claims for client entertaining including wine costing more than £80 a bottle: cue much chuntering at boss John Phizackerley, who’s apparently known on the trading floor as Ronnie Barker because of his resemblance to the departed comedy genius.

There’s not much laughing among the rank and file, however.

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2J36xZi
via IFTTT https://ift.tt/2s4g4ou https://ift.tt/12cqxIH