Thursday, April 17, 2014

The Collateral Damage That Comes From TfL, Local Councils And The Met, Turning A Blind Eye....

Great Britain is in the throes of a rape and pedophilia epidemic unlike anything the country has experienced in living memory.

The number of so called unlicensed minicab related rapes is snowballing to such an extent that a British judge has issued a warning that no woman can expect to be safe while traveling in a minicab.

Reliable statistics on taxi and minicab rapes nationwide are difficult to obtain, and Freedom of Information requests seeking accurate data on minicab-related sexual assaults are routinely denied (here and here).

However, a much acclaimed report produced by the London Metropolitan Police Service estimates that on average there are a total of 1,125 sexual assaults, including rapes, each year involving minicab drivers in just London; this works out to approximately 22 sexual assaults against women by minicab drivers each week in England's capital city alone.

Moreover, according to a report entitled, "Ending Violence against Women and Girls in the UK," published by the Home Office in March 2013, only around one in ten women who experience serious sexual assault report it to the police. As a result, one can infer that the actual number of taxi rapes across Britain as a whole is far greater than many are willing to admit.

Apart from a few high-profile cases, these rapes are rarely reported by national newspapers in Britain, apparently because the politically incorrect crimes are not deemed to be newsworthy.

But a survey of stories buried deep inside local newspapers shows that (unlicensed and licensed) minicab related rapes are occurring in all parts of England, Wales and Scotland on an almost daily basis.

In a recent case in London that was reported by national newspapers, Mohamed Hacene-Chaouch, 46, was sentenced to seven years in prison for raping a 24-year-old female passenger in his minicab. Hacene-Chaouch -- an Algerian married father of five -- assaulted the woman after she got lost in Soho, central London.

The woman, who had been celebrating a friend's birthday and had become inebriated, told the jury that the last thing she remembered was being in the back of a car and being taken to an ATM machine. She said she drifted in and out of consciousness but woke up inside the car in front of her east London home to find Hacene-Chaouch raping her. Although Hacene-Chaouch denied the allegations, the crime was filmed by local CCTV cameras.

Judge Wendy Joseph at the Old Bailey accused Hacene-Chaouch of being a sexual predator and said: "It must have been clear to you that she was helplessly and hopelessly drunk. She trusted you to take her safely home. She was clearly vulnerable, she was obviously helpless and in your power, and I regard this as a significant feature." Joseph added: "I haven't heard a single word of remorse in any way, shape or form."

Hacene-Chaouch -- who was acquitted of an almost identical attack in London in 2004 -- showed no emotion and stared straight ahead as the judge read the sentence. But as he was told he would be banned from working or seeking work as a taxi or Private hire driver for 10 years, he gestured to his wife, who was watching the proceedings in the public gallery, and shouted: "Allah is great! I am innocent!"

In East London February 6, police said they were looking for an "Asian" man accused of sexually assaulting three women in his minicab, around the Canning Town district.

In Clapham, Salam Rahman, 27, and Mohammed Elahi, 26, were jailed for nine years for gang-raping two female passengers, one of whom was a 26-year-old newlywed. In Clapham, south London, Atiq Rehman, 20, tricked a 22-year-old woman into thinking he was a legitimate minicab driver. Rehman, an illegal immigrant from Pakistan who was twice refused asylum in Britain, raped the woman for 45 minutes while asking her how many children she wanted to have.

Assadullah Razaq, 31, was sentenced to eight years in jail for raping a 28-year-old female passenger. The defense attorney said that Razaq, an Afghan refugee and a married father of three, admitted to having sex with the woman, but maintained it was not rape. His attorney said Razaq came to Britain after being tortured by the Taliban, and that something had affected his mental state.

The Egg Club, King's Cross in central London, police said they were looking for a Turkish minicab driver who raped an 18-year-old passenger after driving her to a remote location. After the attack, he took her to Gloucester Place in Westminster where he pushed her from his car and left her lying in a gutter.

Non Enforcement of illegal plying for hire from TfL, is Totally Failing London.

Source: Gatestone Institute, International Policy Council


23 comments:

Anonymous said...

Is it just me or has anyone else noticed there's a theme running through this article?

Anonymous said...

Is this not an immigration problem and as for tfl should they not change the rules on licensing ie eu passport holders only so we have some sort of history on these people

Anonymous said...

Yes the theme is only highlight rapes etc occured in private cars and what about the taxi (black cab) drivers commiting same offences no mention, why

Anonymous said...

Put ranks outside all these clubs and bars and let yellow badges sevice them at the weekend. Place's like fabric and the egg could work well as well as all the other touting hotspots.If your all as genuine as you say you are you would all agree.

Gerald Coba said...

Anon 11:44

What you want to compare the 22weekly minicab serious sexusl assaults, including rapes, with the 2 cases of black cab drivers recorded over the past 40 years.

Ok then. In the interest of a more balanced article.

Let's look at thestatistics.

The Black Cab (Taxi) industry has the lowest recorded incidents of sexual attackers, predators and child molesters, than any other industry in London. This includes police officers, teachers, clergy men, doctors, etc.
The PH (minicab) industry has the higest recorded incident of predatoral sexual assaults including rapes and child sex attacks. Much more so, than any other industry in London.

Anonymous said...

Nice one G.C.

Anonymous said...

This is precisely why the laws on yellow badges. accepting prebooked work out of sector must be changed.

I know the knee jerk reaction from rhe All London community is to immediately imagine every yellow badge converging on the west end at rhe drop of a hat, but it just wouldnt happen.

Any driver who uses radio or app technology knows that there is only ever enough work around at one time to top up your street work, and it would be imposible for ANY driver to make a living soley on this work.

This combined wirh the high vigilence of drivers checking every Id that passes them (and you do!!! whether you give a sideways glance or just aggressively stare and gesture at the condemned) would ensure that ir was not worth suburban drivers remaining out of sector in rhe hope of earning enough money.

However, if just one vunerable passenger is saved the life changing experience rhat these PH drivers inflict on rhem and their families, then I fail to see how allowing Licenced and.vetted Suburban Taxi drivers to accept a prebooked app or radio job whilst returning to sector can be a bad thing.

If you doubt my word because you havent got a radio or dont use apps, ask a driver who does if they could survive on radio or/and app work alone.

The truth is that although its hard enough for anyone of us to scratch a living at the moment green or yellow, every time Private Hire are exposed to criminal activity by their drivers the passengers are not the only victims of the crime because all to often the words Cab and Taxi are wrongly used, damaging our already sinking trade further.

What is so wrong with granting passing Taxi drivers the same legal right as a PHV.

If the saftey of these passengers really is paramount, it really should be a no brainer!!

If the reputation of our trade is to be defended then allowing a private hire driver priority over a Licenced Taxi Driver should be quashed, and by saying that a PH driver can accept pre booked work anywhere in London via a licenced operator, but a Licenxed Taxi Driver must be within their Licenced area to accept EXACTLY the same work, this priority is being exerted.

Any normal thinking person must see that passenger safety Must come first, but then again, normal thinking doesnt sit too well with the authorities we have to endure.

Anonymous said...

Please could you site the exact laws that states London suburban (yellow badge) drivers can’t accept pre-booked work out of sector and therefore where it must be changed?

Anonymous said...

The laws limiting a taxi licence apply at all times the taxi is working.
The law states that a taxi undertaking Private hire work is still a taxi and not a private hire vehicle,

Simon Buggy from Tfl provided this explaination to a similar question.

Thank you for your comment. I read it with interest as your understanding of the law that governs London taxis is not the same as ours and I hope that I can now clarify the position as we see it. Please be aware that I can only comment on licensing in London and I am not able to comment on the situation elsewhere in England and Wales where different legislation apples.



A London taxi driver is issued with a licence that allows him or her to ply for hire in a defined area of London. The licence does not allow for any other activity and there is no provision in the legislation governing taxi and private hire services in London that allows a taxi to be used as a private hire vehicle. Whenever a driver accepts a fare, whether from a street hail, through a radio circuit or via a smartphone app, he or she is deemed to be plying for hire at that point hence the need to be in his or her licence area. Furthermore, although licensed private hire operators can discharge bookings using a London taxi driven by a London taxi driver, the driver remains bound by taxi legislation and is plying for hire when accepting the booking.

These are the laws that bind us, but of you want the specifics look them up yourself!!

Anonymous said...

You still haven’t given me the Act of Parliament and neither has Simon Buggy or anyone else at TfL.

Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998
4 Obligations of London operators.
(1) The holder of a London PHV operator’s licence (in this Act referred to as a “London PHV operator”) shall not in London accept a private hire booking other than at an operating centre specified in his licence.
(2) A London PHV operator shall secure that any vehicle which is provided by him for carrying out a private hire booking accepted by him in London is—
(a) a vehicle for which a London PHV licence is in force driven by a person holding a London PHV driver’s licence; or
(b) a London cab driven by a person holding a London cab driver’s licence.
Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976

46 Vehicle, drivers' and operators' licences (1) Except as authorised by this Part of this Act—
(a) no person being the proprietor of any vehicle, not being a hackney carriage [or London Cab] in respect of which a vehicle licence is in force, shall use or permit the same to be used in a controlled district as a private hire vehicle without having for such a vehicle a current licence under section 48 of this Act;

Government had no reason to legislate further restrictions on taxi drivers as they were already licensed and previously been found to be ‘fit and proper’ to carry out this form of work without the need of an additional licence.

Transport for London Taxi & Private Hire Abstract of Laws

4. Requirement for a PHV operator’s licence (s1, 2 and 29 1998 Act)
Only a person who holds a PHV operator’s licence for London may accept bookings for private hire vehicles in London.

An operator is the person who is permitted to make provision for the invitation or acceptance of private hire bookings.

Any person who accepts private hire bookings without a valid PHV operator’s licence is guilty of an offence punishable by a fine of up to £2500.

The only exemptions from licensing are those operating licensed London Hackney Carriages and individuals who supply vehicles solely for weddings and funerals.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Anon, why are you quoting the Private hire Act?
You are a licensed Taxi driver, with a licence to ply for hire in a suburban sector.

You are not a minicab and the Private hire act of 1998 doesn't apply to you..

Outside of London, drivers can be duel licensed, this however is not he case in London.

If you want the act that covers all this search for the London cab act 1938 plus amendments.

There is nothing stopping a yellow badge driving along with his light on, he only begins plying for hire when found standing. Taxis making there way to the Putney island rank with their light on are not breaking the law, that only happens if they stop for a hail. Whereas the Taxis over ranking on Putney high street are found standing and therefore plying for hire, whether they have their light on or off.

If a taxi is found standing, light on or off, and he is not already hired, under hackney carriage rules he is obliged to take a job up to 12 miles as he was been found plying for hire.

This does not apply to moving vehicles

I don't expect for one moment hat you will already know this, but given a bit of research it's not that hard to find.


But if you want to pick up a job out of sector, just carry on doing it...till you get caught and have your licence revoked. But don't say you wasn't warned or try to claim ignorance of the law.

Anonymous said...

Okay, with respect please try to read this carefully as all you need to know has been explained several times but you seem to be having trouble absorbing it.

A taxi is a taxi bound by taxi law

A private hire vehicle is a private hire vehicle bound by private hire law.

Neither can ever be the other under any circumstances.

As the law you have quoted states, a private hire operator may dispatch work to a private hire vehicle driven by a private hire driver, (This job must be dispatched and completed in compliance with the laws that govern private hire vehicles) or a London Taxi driven by a London taxi driver, (this job must be des patched and completed in compliance with Taxi law.

The dispatch method does not affect the legal status of the vehicle or driver, As a London Taxi all acceptance of all jobs is regarded as plying for hire and therefore a driver must accept work in compliance with his or her licence conditions.

It's not so difficult to understand if you read it without trying to find a way of twisting the words to fit your agenda, but if you carefully read your abstract laws you will see that a taxi is always a taxi in law. This has been challenged several times through legal battles but this has always been the outcome in these cases.

Try spending 10 minutes googling cab laws and you can find this all out for yourself along with the exact laws each part of my answer are covered in.

Hope this helps some more!!

Anonymous said...

How about this one, since the legislation you quoted stated that the operator would be dispatching the job to a london taxi and london taxi driver,,,,

31 Breach of Terms or Conditions of Cab-driver's Licence
(1) If the holder of a cab-driver's licence
(i) drives a cab of any type which by the terms of his licence he is not permitted to drive (not being a cab which is withdrawn from hire), or
(ii) plies for hire with a cab or permits the cab to be hired in any part of the metropolitan area in which by a condition attached to his licence he is prohibited from plying for hire with a cab,
he shall be guilty of a breach of this Order.
(2) Section 35 of the London Hackney Carriage Act 1831 and paragraph (2) of Section 17 of the London Hackney Carriage Act 1853 shall not apply in the case of a cab-driver who is in any part of the metropolitan area in which by a condition attached to his licence he is prohibited from plying for hire with a cab.

Note the part that says ' or permits the cab to be hired' which is the crux of the private hire operators dispatch being accepted.

Is that enough law for you, or should I spend five more minutes to find another piece?

When your dealing with a trade that goes back 350 years everything you can think of has been tried and tested before....hence these laws being passed over half a century ago ( some of which based on laws passed in the 1850's) as chancres like yourself tried their luck in any way they could,

Anonymous said...

I have quoted the Acts of Parliament that allows Hackney carriage to be used for pre-booked work as described to me at a meeting with the Law Commission last year held at Steel House 11 Tothill Street
London SW1H 9LJ.

I much prefer their interpretation of the law.

So far you have not been able to quote the acts you are referring to.

So let’s just wait for now until the Law Commissions report and draft Bill is published on the 23rd May 2014.

Editorial said...

Sorry but any points being made or countered have been lost by the insistence of posting using anonymous.
All the posts just blend in and no one can track who's making a point.

But then this was not the place for this debate and should have been carried out on the forum where identity is clearer.

Anonymous said...

Well, you clearly are incapable of understanding the simplest of facts. It baffles me how you could possibly be so obtuse.

No one has argued at any time that hackney carriages can accept prebooked jobs that are dispatched by private hire operators. They can. Your absolutely right!!!

But a hackney carriage is only a hackney carriage if it complies to hackney carriage law and is driven by a hackney carriage driver who is complying with the conditions of his Hackney carriage licence.

If he is not complying with the conditions of his hackney carriage licence then he is not legally considered to be a hackney carriage driver in a hackney carriage: he is an unlicensed driver in a hackney carriage.

All your clever words and interpretations will never find a provision for such a driver being allowed to accept any work in this scenario in any of the laws relating to private hire or taxis, past present and I dare say future; so short of the law commission removing the concept of sectors within a licensing authority, and thus changing the dynamics of your argument by making current yellow badges licensed for the whole of London, then everything will remain the same and you will be entirely disappointed.

The whole concept and definition of hackney carriage drivers and private hire drivers are specified by the type of licence they hold, not the vehicle they drive.
But in order legally undertake any work they are licensed for they must be driving a licensed for purpose vehicle.

.....I don't know why I'm wasting my breath

'Be Lucky' though I suspect that you won't feel it soon.

Anonymous said...

I’ve been on Google as you suggested and found this.

The Institute of Licensing.
As well as plying or standing for hire and responding to hailings, a hackney carriage can be used for pre-booked journeys. Such a booking can be made directly with the driver, or alternatively via a booking agent. Pre-booked hackney carriages can accept bookings for journeys which start outside the district in which the vehicle is licensed, and such journeys do not have to pass through or end in the district in which the vehicle is licensed.

Oh, and by the way, it is the Hackney Carriage vehicle that is licensed to ply for hire, not the driver.

Read what is printed on your licence ‘Bill’. Licensed to drive a motor cab (taxi). You the driver have never been licensed to ply for hire.

Stephen Mulligan said...

.....read my previous post ( anon 10:59 ) again, slowly and carefully, and then please clarify which part of your new post is actually relevant to making a new point or contradicting what I have said!!!

I don't follow what you're trying to say or the point you're trying to make with this last post!!

Anonymous said...

Anon, instead of wasting time looking up legislation on the internet. Stop moaning, try the harder route and do the green badge. That way you can pick up fares where you like, instead if sitting on an dead rank playing with your phone. People like you give yellow badges a bad name. Whinge whinge whinge.

marshmellow said...

maybe the L.C review will allow y.b to have a ph licence and your current hackney one as well and you can put a roundall in your rear window just to prove the you have the 2 licences this would not apply to g.b as they wont need one and this law would have to be clear ..if you want to work the burbs ony just get the hackney ..if you want the burbs and be entitled for radio work anywhere get your hackney and your p.h..simple..

Anonymous said...

Doing the green badge knowledge to enable you to pick up punters in central London is a thing of the past as proven by 70,000 PH drivers and their less expensive vehicles. They can/do pick up and form ranks without the need of an overpriced purpose built vehicle or any form of lengthy knowledge test.

Licensing private hire has made the knowledge examination and the London taxi industry as we know/knew it is becoming more redundant by the day.

The Mayor his Assembly Members and TfL favour London private hire over London hackney carriage as shown by the way they deal with compliance and enforcement.

Welcome to the real world.

Toxic Sock Fluff said...

Well, the sarcasm isnt lost on me Marshmellow, but if that is what is takes to get vunerable passengers into a Licenced Taxi Drivers vehicle and not an unchecked criminal from far flung regions, then i for one would be prepared to swallow it!!

And Im not talking about central London, if they put a restriction to the borders. i am constantly called to Fez, The Grand, Infernos, Mosquito, Plan B (to name a few) having rejected the job several times before hitting the boundary of my sector before I can hit Accept and U turn to get it.

How many of these jobs give up on the second or third attempt and get in an available unlicenced (due to touting) PH vehicle?

If drivers could accept these jobs whilst returning to sector it could make a real difference to these statistics.

I know its a far from ideal solution, but Ive not heard anyone come up with a better one