Saturday, November 05, 2016

Update On Lee Ward's Letters To TfL And The Mayor.

Dear Lee Ward

Thank you for your recent correspondence, addressed to the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan. As a Correspondence and Investigations Officer for Service Operations, your correspondence has been forwarded to me for response on Mr Khan's behalf.

I can confirm that 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.

Similarly all taxi and private hire driver applicants must meet a range of strict criteria to ensure they are 'fit and proper' prior to becoming licensed in London. All applicants must undergo an enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) criminal records check both before they are granted a licence, and every three years after. The standards in this respect are the same for both taxi and private hire drivers.

Private hire drivers are not restricted from taking bookings anywhere in England and Wales, provided the vehicle, driver and operator are by the licensing authority where the booking is accepted. This is commonly referred to as "the triple licensing requirement".

A national change is required to address issues of cross border hiring and we are currently raising our concerns with Government to ensure that there are appropriate controls. However we do not currently have any legal jurisdiction to prevent private hire vehicles being licensed with more than one authority.

In respect of your comments relating to Uber and plying for hire; clearly, the introduction of smartphone technology has changed aspects of both the private hire and taxi industries. Private hire operators who offer their customers the option to book via app have significantly reduced the time it takes between booking a private hire vehicle and the journey starting. That being said, booking via an app is legal as long as a private hire journey is booked in advance through a licenced private hire operator, and the job is then despatched to a licensed driver and vehicle.

The time between a booking being made and a journey starting is not currently subject to any statutory control in primary legislation, or regulations. We support the concept of a statutory definition for plying for hire and pre-booked to enhance public safety and ensure the longevity of the two-tier system in London. We will continue to press government for a response to the Law Commission report on taxi and private hire services, in which this specific issue was considered.


Yours sincerely


Chelsee Mckinlay
Correspondence and Investigations Officer
Service Operations
Transport for London



Not what i was hoping for, so I sent this back...


Dear Chelsee

I thank you for your reply, and I am well aware of the rules and regulations including the app based booking systems that technology has brought to the trade, I agree that the technology has a huge role in the industry, provided of course that it meets all current laws and regulations.

However, can I bring to your attention an article that was published online which I wrote, it explains the issue in detail. The reference from the Canadian court is very much supportive of my case and although not British Law, Canada is a colonial country that has many similar laws to Britain.

http://taxileaks.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/uber-do-not-actually-accept-bookings.html?m=1

My example alone of how Uber accepts, or rather the driver accepts a booking is proof enough that every journey made by Uber is in fact illegal, something that your department does have the authority to deal with.

Perhaps TfL can take Uber to court and show their teeth instead of it being the other way round.

The evidence is there to show that the driver accepts the booking and not Uber.

Please respond as soon as possible, this is a matter of both urgency and due to insurance being invalid, public safety.

Let's hope no one has to prove this after a death occurs.

Yours

Lee Ward



And the reply was?.....


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


Thanks, and now you are up to speed...so, here follows two simple but accurate flow charts for how a standard computer booking and dispatch system works and how Uber's system works.

STANDARD SYSTEM...



UBERS SYSTEM...





Is it not obvious that with the Uber system, the driver accepts the booking?

That my fellow drivers and friends is and will be the downfall of this parasite to both our shores and this industry.

We just need someone at TfL or the Government to take a look and stop thinking that we dont know what the hell we are on about.






On 2 November 2016 at 22:51, lee ward wrote:
I have not finished with this line of inquiry, but I thought that it would be a good time to keep everyone updated.



I sent this email to Sadiq Khan on the 7th of September 2016...

Mayor Sadiq Khan

I write to plead for your help in what has become a nationwide issue which started almost 5 years ago in the Great City of London.

My reason for writing to you is twofold, one that you are in a position to act and two that as a qualified solicitor in law, you have the skills to see what this problem is without someone explaining it to you. There is also the added bonus that you are a Labour member and have previously held positions in the following departments with those departments responsibilities listed.

Department for Communities

Department for Transport

  • Sustain economic growth and improved productivity through reliable and efficient transport networks;

  • Improve the environmental performance of transport;

  • Strengthen the safety and security of transport; and

  • Enhance access to jobs, services, and social networks, including for the most disadvantaged people.

These attributes that you have gained among many in your career are the reason that I turn to you.

Uber came to these shores and set down in the Great City of London, where initially concerns were raised but fell on deaf ears, perhaps because of the Deregulation Bill that was going through Parliament at the time, perhaps for another reason, who really knows.

Several years down the line, scores of accidents, numerous charges of rape and sexual crimes, and various protests have all failed to bring this company to an end, and I cannot help but wonder why?

Any other group with this kind of record would have been dealt with, just cast your mind back to football hooligans, they were dealt with and to be honest, they were not in the same league as this corporation and its business ethics. A business that even states to its customers in the Terms and Conditions within its app that departs them from any lawsuit if the customer is injured in any way.

I am fully aware of the amount of correspondence that you and your department receive with regards to this matter, but this time it is not from a London Cabbie, but a Northern Private Hire driver, attempting in his lay mans terms to get across what Uber is doing to the industry nationwide.

It has no interest in the drivers, except for when it is promising to fill the tax mans coffers, but how can that happen if they flood the market with drivers at every opportunity that they get, these drivers will not be paying tax due to the lack of income that they will receive but will in fact claim any support benefit that they can to survive. While Uber takes 20-25% of every journey and pays what into the countries coffers exactly?

This company run the ‘Ignition Scheme’ where they pay the driver to become licensed in areas where the license authority are naive to the industry and what’s happening, fast tracking people to be licensed and then use the Deregulation Act 2015 to enable them to work in an area where they could not be bothered to obtain a license because of the requirements needed, this is also happening with licenses from TfL, easy to obtain and off you go to where you really want to work, borders are irrelevant now.

But that’s ok, because they have a smart phone with a sat nav on, of course they can be a taxi or Private Hire driver, safely transporting paying customers who are ignorant of the qualification that the driver has, or indeed the insurance also. Would this be suitable in other industries and more importantly, would it be accepted?

Explosion Scheme? Where a gas fitter gets to walk away with a smart phone and you tube.

Lightening Scheme?  Where an electrician gets to use the same smart phone with you tube.

I am guessing here, but I would say no. That’s the bits where your previous posts can be an asset to assist in the answers I am sure, but now for the legal bit that your lawyer hat can help to answer.

An operator of Private Hire Vehicles must accept the bookings on behalf of the Licensed Private Hire Drivers, and quite frankly, Uber do not do this because they are a P2P company as admitted under oath in Toronto 2015. I am pleased to read that the judge seated on that case was a little techno savvy and got the truth out of Uber and how it operates. But to be fair, he didn’t have to go that deep into it, he simply had to read the Terms and Conditions, and look at Ubers advertising where they never say that they accept a booking, they always say that they put the customer in touch with the third party provider (the taxi or PHV driver) they even state on one of the adverts that an Uber driver is a former Taxi Driver and now an Uber Partner;


https://help.uber.com/h/082ab6d7-fc81-41f5-a17a-49e5e82bbebd

7. Wait for a driver to accept your request.

8. When your request has been accepted, you'll see your driver’s location on your map, along with an ETA. Your app notifies you about one minute before your driver should arrive.

Or how about the advert mentioned previously where drivers are now Former Taxi Drivers?


          


You see, what we have is Uber paying for people to become drivers, usually of Private Hire Vehicles, and like all people who circumvent a process, these drivers do not care for the industry, the rules or the people that they are trusted to take from A to B. They are however like moths to a flame, flooding the area with unsustainable drivers where the people who use taxi services stay at the level as they have always been, you cannot make people catch taxis who do not usually catch taxis. This ‘pie’ of taxi users can only feed so many mouths.

Yes the English and Math test will slow down the influx of drivers for TfL, and the Insurance Policy that is in place for the term of the plate, as requested in the LGMPA 1976 Section 48 (1)(b) which is a year (as proven by Benson v Boyce) will of course make people think twice before they commit to what all others have committed to, or more importantly, all others up and down this land who did not circumvent the process.

I can see why you are struggling to deal with what you have inherited from the previous Mayor of London, shutting down Uber and having people shout that you have put out of work 35,000 people, but you will not be doing that, you will push these people to regular operators who work within the law and employ people to answer telephone requests to make bookings, perhaps you would even make 10,000 new jobs. But nothing should prevent you from ensuring that a company who transports tens of thousands of people daily in this country to be legal, nothing.

Unfortunately, you chose to put yourself forward for this position and it is now your duty to close this illegal company down, for the benefit of the people who trust in the Transport Sector of this country, be them living and working here or simply visiting, either way they trust this industry, because this industry is one of the most regulated in the world and ask any real driver, they will tell you how proud they are to be a representative of this industry, we are fit and proper people, it’s time for you to be the same.

I trust you as a person, and know that deep down, you know what you have to do. Be the man that you promised to be, sort this sorry situation out, don’t compromise, steralise.

Yours

Lee Ward

ALPHA Chairman

Sheffield




Friday, November 04, 2016

TfL COs Coming a down Hard On Taxis. But Are They Exceeding Their Authority.... By Paul Sweeney.


Word coming back to us from the front line that these COs have been instructed by TFL to really get in our faces.

Considering its alleged lots of these COs were/are ticket inspectors or PHV drivers, then you can see we are going to face a few issues. 

We've heard reports COs getting heavy at Kings Cross and Waterloo. 

One driver a old boy, was totally confused with this new mandate and did not have the required TFL stickers. The COs started to get heavy and when other drivers became involved, the driver was told to leave the rank. 

These COs do not have the authority to ask you to leave the rank. TfLTPH have said openly stops are not being dished out, just warning letters sent through the post.


This is what Taxi Leaks have been told, so we must take them at their word.

Drivers then pointed out to the COs the Ubers parked and openly touting at the St Pancras drop off. 
A CO replied "we have been instructed to focus on Taxi Trade". 
This is going to continue and whilst we are receiving the heavy treatment, the untouchable PHV trade continues to bring London towards Anarchy.  


Editorial Comment : 
Where are the Orgs on this matter?
The LTDA have posted many times about being in attendance at St Pancras and yet when the COs turned up, not one LTDA marshal insight.  


The Orgs need to wake up and do something united. Any Org who does not want to unite on the discrimination being inflicted on our trade by TFL, should be removed from your patronage. 

   

TfLTPH, Oh What A Tangled Web You Weave...by Jim Thomas.

Just when you thought scandals at TfLTPH couldn't get any more convoluted, another little gem drops into our lap. 


In an email reply to a Taxi driver, TfLTPH's head of policy Tom Moody, makes the statement that a minicab operator/driver who accepts a booking and takes payment, there is in our (TfLTPH) view, what amounts to a contractual arrangement between the operator and the driver. 
He goes on to say, "I don't think that it is for us to comment on any specific contractual arrangements between the various parties". 


INTERESTING COMMENT FROM THE HEAD OF POLICY AT TFL, WHICH SURELY INDICATES UBER ARE A TRANSPORT PROVIDER AND NOT A TECH COMPANY

Let's not forget that this is also the same licensing regulator that is currently insisting that our trade give free credit to all in sundry, using both chip and pin or Contactless transactions....

One rule for PH....and a stiffer one for us. 

Many drivers believe that this is just the tip of the iceberg as one major CC company has warned (as predicted) it's transaction costs could soon rise.

TfL's tenuous links with third parties stakeholders are beginning to leaked out.

TfLTPH have been unwavering about the rear siting of the CC reader, even in light of safety concerns of drivers. 

LTPH have reluctantly allowed independent companies to supply machines attacked to a bluetooth printer, knowing full well that when (not if) TfL bring in the requirement for the CC reader to be attached to the meter (rumoured to be coming into affect summer 2017), the smaller machines i.e. CabApp, PayPal, iZettle and the like, will become obsolete. 

This would mean an approximate loss of investment by the driver to the tune of £400. 

Although Helen Chapman recently stated that "at present" they had no plans to do this.... The LCDC have alleged in the last issue of the badge, that TfL have employed an independent consultant to contact major CC companies, with a view of doing just this!


Just as you were thinking, this couldn't get anymore damming, the Twitter account @TfLTPH put out this tweet, showing a bias towards to a certain third party stakeholder. 


As most of the Taxi top digital advertising screens in London belong to Verifone, we ask this question:
Why are TfL paying a company to advertise its own credit card service ?


Uber Faces $5 Million Suit From San Francisco's Oldest Cab Company


Another party is suing Uber over the ride-hailing service's business practices. This time it's San Francisco's Flywheel, the taxi company formerly known as DeSoto Cab, also known as SF's oldest taxi company. To the tune of a $5 million-plus federal suit, Flywheel alleges that since UberX came to be in 2012, the city's taxi industry has lost 65 percent of its riders and 30 percent of its drivers, according to SF Gate.

Flywheel claims that's the result of Uber setting prices between 10-and-45 percent lower than that of taxi services, and that Uber can cover this cost thanks to investments from deep-pocketed venture capitalists. There are a few bits about Uber misrepresenting its safety, pricing and potential earnings for drivers as well.

"This lawsuit is about holding Uber responsible for their unlawful practices," Flywheel CEO Hansu Kim told the publication. "It is not about stifling competition or technological innovations. We want all on-demand taxi services to be treated fairly under the law, and competing on an even playing field."

Flywheel also thinks that Uber will drive out all of its competitors, create a monopoly and then jack prices up because it'll be the only option available.

A Stanford professor doesn't think the suit will go anywhere though because courts have made it "extremely hard" to prove predatory pricing. "The complaint that a competitor charges too little money is usually not evidence of a secret conspiracy to drive everyone out of the market and then raise prices," Stanford Law's director Mark Lemley said. "It's usually (made by) someone who is failing to compete in the market and is upset about it."

NBC Bay Area reports that Flywheel's lawyers predict the case could take over a year to be resolved.

Uber's response? "We compete with lots of ways to get around, especially car ownership," according to a statement given to TechCrunch. "Our goal is to provide a credible alternative to the private car. Our technology lets us make our network more efficient over time, and innovations like UberPool are further lowering prices, making ridesharing available to more people."

Amid all the other litigation Uber currently faces, this once again proves that you can indeed sue for anything -- winning is another matter entirely.

Source : Engadget 

Thursday, November 03, 2016

TfL : Woefully Inadequate, Incompetent And Biased. Remember Remember The 8th Of November.... By GreenbadgeJohn.

Lets be honest, ...The actions of TFL are actually completely predictable, as they are under immense pressure from us in the taxi industry, they are naturally going to respond against us in kind and try to intimidate us into giving them justifiable and defensible reasons to bring the public into the domain, supporting their actions...and by the same defensive strategy try to alienate us as Luddite's and uncooperative objectors.

The whole ploy of publicly endorsing (and advertising the 'TFL' card payment message) is a strategy of elevating TFL's public status whilst placing us as second class subservient followers of the tfl doctrine of "do as we say or else" mantra. 
As the 8th November demo approaches we will all have our say in the media arena and try to remember that.


So keep calm and carry on, and remember... 'card payments are not a statutory payment recognised in UK law neither are they compulsory legal tender'.

Ironically, TFL allows re application of fraudulently acquired minicab drivers medicals...provided they have another cloak and dagger tfl arranged test (forgetting they all attempted to defraud the current system tfl and attempted to deceive) also allowing NSL testing centre's to license private hire vehicles who's drivers presented the cheapest third party non fare paying passengers insurance cover notes ...not 12 month policies or documents of hire and reward insurance they were meant to have.

Now as a consequence, private hires vehicles flood the London streets, whilst at the same time tfl are attempting to put stops on Taxis, to prevent them working for the unobtrusive or minor credit card notice failings and other related acceptance discrepancies....none of which are safety or life threatening. 


Dont put up with this nonsense.. this is a corruptly derived plan... demonstrate our complete disgust... 

8th November ... be there in the square... we have more questions for TFL than they have or can possibly answer...only public attention and media exposure will draw the corrupt poison from TFL which is killing our business whilst they get rich.

Be Lucky

greenbadgejohn

Editorial Comment : 

The Licensed Taxi trade has drawn a line in the sand....and asked all orgs, rank and file drivers to cross over the line in a show of United Trade support.

Even though they haven't balloted their members, the LTDA have decided not to cross the line with the rest of the trade, after taking advice from their political advisors......there's a surprise.





Another Prius Fire : How Long Before Someone Is Burned To Death?


Another Uber Prius has burst into flames, this time in Bruton Street in the a heart of Mayfair. 

This is becoming an all too familiar sight on London streets as more and more of the 600 newly licensed private hire drivers per week, realise these not enough work to go round and they can't make enough to rent/lease these vehicles on their own. So they take to sharing, in some cases with two other drivers. 

This vehicle is not suitable to be used constantly, over a 24 hour period, constantly on charge, which is causing the batteries to overheat and spontaneously combust. 

Will TfL take the same line they did when new TX4s were bursting into flames ?   

How long before someone is seriously burned or even killed?


It's obvious these cars have a serious problem, but will TfL force a recall and take these dangerous vehicles off the road until they can be modified, so as not to put the public at risk of burning to death.

Going by the way TfL have shown bias towards this company I wouldn't hold your breath waiting.

   

Wednesday, November 02, 2016

TfL COs Out In Force To Put Stops On Taxis Without (Or The Wrong) Credit Card Stickers.


Level playing field my arse ...

TfL's COs were out in force toda putting stops on Taxis for having none or the wrong type of Credit Card stickers.

Shame that the army of TfL COs developed blind eye and blinkered syndrome and just ignored the scab fest on the opposite side of the road. 

Would it not have been a show of goodwill towards the trade to have turned up with boxes of stickers, giving them out to drivers who didn't have them on.


Why are they treating this as such a heinous crime. 

This is just typical of the bias and woeful incompudance shown towards our trade by managers at TfLTPH.

When asked by a driver why they were being so forceful, a CO said: 
"we are only acting under orders"

Whilst private hire  murders and rapists are allowed to keep their TfL licenses, COs are under orders to take Taxis off the road for not having or displaying the wrong type of Credit Card stickers. 

Uber, Not Only Homophobic, Discriminates Against Guide Dogs... Now Study Shows They're Racist.


Ride-hailing service Uber, appears to be racially profiling passengers, a new study suggests.

According to the study by researchers at Stanford, MIT and the University of Washington, which was presented to the National Bureau of Economic Research -African-Americans are more likely to face cancellations and extended wait times when using Uber.

“Frankly, that discrimination exists was not surprising after all the evidence of discrimination elsewhere,” said Stephen Zoepf, Executive Director of the Center for Automotive Research at Stanford and one of the authors on the paper. “It essentially confirmed our suspicions more than anything else. 

I think that the magnitude of the discrimination and the cancellation rates was surprising to me.”

Researchers came to their conclusions after conducting more than 1,400 case studies.

Riders with African-American sounding names experienced wait times up to 28 percent higher, African-American riders were up to two times more likely to have a ride cancelled when choosing UberX, a lower cost service from the ride sharing giant.

They also found that cancellations from an Uber driver were three times more likely to happen with black men.

Uber defended their business, citing a study saying the ride hailing services are more likely to operate in lower income communities than standard taxis.

Uber says its app is designed specifically to prevent discrimination.

Its not just race that uber discriminate against... they have form for discriminating against gets couples and guild dogs 


http://www.advocate.com/world/2015/01/06/no-fare-london-uber-driver-kicks-out-gay-couple-kissing

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uber-driver-throws-out-gay-couple-kissing-taxi-lgbt-homophobia-a7120886.html%3Famp?client=safari

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3556274/Uber-driver-fined-1550-refusing-accept-blind-woman-guide-dog.html

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.standard.co.uk/news/london/uber-driver-refused-to-carry-blind-woman-because-she-had-a-guide-dog-a3274516.html%3Famp?client=safari


Tuesday, November 01, 2016

Uber Driver Murdered Wife After Googling Most Painful Place To Stab Someone


An Uber minicab driver murdered his wife after searching on Google for ‘the most painful place to stab someone’, a court heard today (tues). 

Jose Leonardo, 56, repeatedly knifed 52 year-old Maria Mbombo in the body and arms and left her to bleed to death at their family home in north London, jurors heard.

He then went to buy beer from a local shop while his two sons discovered their mother's body lying lifeless on the floor of the bedroom. 

He then went to buy beer from a local shop while his two sons discovered their mother lying lifeless on the floor of the bedroom, it is claimed.

Leonardo, 56, admits killing his wife but claims he should be cleared of murder because he suffered from a ‘loss of control’, jurors were told.

But prosecutor John Price QC revealed Leonardo’s phone had been used to search Google a few hours before the murder.

One read ‘can I survive stab in the eye’ and the other was ‘most painful place to stab someone’, the Old Bailey heard.

Websites related to these search terms were accessed between 2.41pm and 2.46pm.

Half an hour later Leonardo accessed a Camden Council parking permit website.

Mrs Mbombo, who worked as a cleaner, is last known to have used her phone to speak to a friend at 3.52pm.

Both her and Leonardo’s phones stopped being active from around 5pm.

Mr Price said: “Maria Mbombo died in her home at her husband’s hand.

“He attacked her and stabbed her many times with a knife.

“Because of the wounds he inflicted upon her, she bled to death. He was alone with her in their home while that happened.

“The prosecution allege that this is a clear case of murder.”

The couple met in 1988 and move to the UK from the Netherlands in 1990 with their two sons Carl, now 23, and Jacque, 27.

On 18 May this year Jacque returned to the family flat at Chestnut House, Maitland Park Villas, Belsize Park, to find the lights out and the door locked from the inside.

He got no answer despite buzzing and kicking the door and shouting ‘Open the Door’.

Mr Price said Leonardo must have been inside with his dead or dying wife at the time.

Leonardo left the flat an hour later without speaking to his sons and both Jacque and Carl ran inside to find their mother lying on her back on the bedroom floor.

She was wearing a white top and black knickers, her face was purple and she was not breathing.

Paramedics were called at 11.55pm and arrived to find her cold to the touch with rigor mortis in the jaw.

“It was confirmed she was dead and indeed must have been dead for some time,” said Mr Price.

Leonardo, who had cuts to his wrist, was arrested near the Super Choice Convenience Store in Queens Crescent after midnight.

He told officers: “My wife is killed.”

Leonardo, of Maitland Park Villas, Belsize Park, denies murder and perverting the course of justice


Amazingly, TfL haven't revoke this mans licence.


And yet a licensed London Taxi driver who was involved in quite a bad accident in Westminster due to his condition as a diabetic, received a demand from TfL to return his badge, bill and identifiers immediately.....
WHILST IN HOSPITAL IN AN INDUCED COMA. 

Spartacus, Joins Up The Dots ... And A Plea From UCG Chairman Trevor Merralls To LTDA's Steve McNamara.


So today we have people waiting in agony on trolleys in A and E whilst the underfunded NHS struggles to cope. 
We are one of the lowest funders of health care in the developed world by percentage of GDP.

Why is that?

Here's one reason: TfL, whose senior offices (who as employees of a public authority are effectively officers of the Crown) licensing Uber who pays zero vat in the Netherlands yet HMRC guidance is clear that VAT should be paid in the country where the booking is undertaken, (If that ain't here then they can't have a licence).

TfL of course know all this and should never have licensed Uber until HMRC had given clearance and the tax due paid here at 20%.

We also had Leon Daniels coaching Uber in the notorious 'Dear Jo' emails about the clearly fictitious difference between short and long term pre booking and to introduce Uber to 'players' in the transport sector.

How many phone calls or emails have you ever had from Leon?

You own more licensed vehicles than Uber, is it perhaps you don't have powerful advocates like Daniel Korski or David Cameron?
It certainly isn't because of the 'tax take' from Uber funding public services.

We now have the employment tribunal's devastating verdict on their practices again mostly designed to avoid paying the dues that we all do to support essential services.

So we have joined the dots, those poor souls without any dignity lying on trolleys are there due to lack of resources.

The very resources that TfL have been instrumental in denying the other lawful authorities of the Crown that fund the NHS.

We all hope of course that no relative or friend of Leon Daniels and others responsible etc are ever in the unfortunate position of many in A&E today, but if they are, those people need to reflect on their actions and inactions.

The same need to reflect applies when we remember all those devastated by sexual assault as TFL licence individuals with no checkable past, ignore bogus medicals etc etc. 

TfL are terrified to even publish the numbers, how immoral is that from a body charged with protecting the public?

We won't rest until there's a parliamentary enquiry and those culpable held to account.

As we say just like the Tribunal , IDS, James O'Brien, Iain Dale and the now many returning cab customers have joined the dots and the picture we all see is very disturbing.

The forces of justice, morality, national duty and the public good are with us and we are on the march!

I'm Spartacus.

TREVOR MERRALLS' PLEA TO LTDA'S GENERAL SECRETARY STEVE McNAMARA FOR TRADE UNITY.

    

#STRONGERTOGETHER.

Monday, October 31, 2016

TfL Withholding Sexual Assault Stats : If They Won't Inform The Public..... THEN WE WILL - By Jim Thomas


Seeing as how TfL are dragging their feet with the sexual assault figures, let's look at what we've already been given and know to be factual !

Freedom of information request 2016020000642 
made to the Met:

Feb 15 to Feb 16 there were 154 reported sexual assaults including rapes.

We were also informed, this included 32 attacks carried out by Uber drivers*.

*We've seen in the media that some attacks carried out by Uber drivers, who were not actually doing an Uber job offer, or were not signed on to the Uber platform, are placed outside the Uber drivers category !

We've also seen in the media that a licensed Private Hire driver convicted of rape, but because he was driving an unlicensed vehicle at the time of the attack, was classified as a fake taxi rather than a minicab related driver.


It makes you wonder, just how far these people at TfL will go to disguise the fact that rapes and sexual assaults by minicab drivers are "off the scale" and out of control. 

Later in the year, we found that the stats given in the FOI request, came from just 6 of the 32 London Boroughs. 

So, let's do the maths:
For the benefit of the doubters... let's level out and do the maths. (154 divided by 6 multiplied by 32... this should give us an approximation for the whole of GMPD) 

So now we come to the realisation, there could be as many as 821 'reported' sexual assaults including rapes for the whole 32 London boroughs, Feb 15 to Feb 16. 
Remember, these are just victims who have reported their attack to police.

Rape Crisis org and the Suzy Lamplugh Trust, have previously told us, only 1 in 10 sexual assaults and rapes are actually reported.
(this has also been confirmed by the Met Police)

So now we could be looking at a figure closer to 8,210

8,210 sexual assaults including rapes, of passengers who thought they are being taken home safe, because the car was licensed by TfL and had TfL roundels showing. 
No wonder TfL don't want this information to get out!

That's an average of 158 attacks a week 
An average of 22 attacks every day. 


How come TfL and the Met are keeping these shocking statistics from the public ?

Surely the Mayor has a duty of care to keep the public better informed about the dangers of getting in an unbooked Minicab ?
Public safety should be paramount.

This is what we already know.
The stats used were from the FOI request 2016020000642 given out by the Metropolitan Police covering the period from February  15 to February 16.

Moving on: 
We've now been told that new stats available to TfL could show almost double the amount of attacks in just the first 6 months February 2016  to August 2016. 
It's no wonder TfL don't want this information to get out. 


Where is the media on this ?
These statistics should be all over the press. 
Why are TfL keeping these statistics from the public ?

By not publicising these facts, are TfL libel... should a victim who's life has been shattered, wish to sue ?

Many in the Taxi trade believe that TfL are withholding these figures so they can manipulate the true total. 
Many believe TfL will be holding back these stats until after Uber are relicensed next Spring.

If TfL and the Mayors office won't inform the public,
THEN WE WILL.

    

Taxi Leaks Extra Comment :
We are fighting evil in it's crudest form. 
These alleged corrupt people within TFL are the worst type of people in society - If just one life is ruined because of their dedication to being sociopaths, it's one victim too many.

I personally couldn't live with myself if I thought I had contributed to an innocent person being put in harms way in the most vile way possible...

But then it's not me that has to wake up everyday, look in the mirror and ask myself what kind of person I am. 

Mayor Khan is allowing  TfL to destroy lives of Londoner's and worst of all... visitors to London, who he has a duty of care to protect.

On the World stage Khan is destined to be exposed and despised - He will never be able to blame anyone for his fate, as he is a self made man of conviction.

L.Green. October 2016
#strongertogether