Friday, April 21, 2017

We've Said It Before And We'll Say It Again, Follow The Money...Did You Really Think TfL Wouldn't Relicense Uber.

Uber could pay up to £2.1 million for a five-year licence under proposed changes to minicab fees announced by Transport for London today. 

The car hire app, which has around 30,000 drivers in the capital, faces higher fees to reflect the transport body’s increased licensing and enforcement costs. 

Up till now TfL enforcement has been woefully inadequate. 

A new five-tier structure, which will apply to all minicab firms, will help fund the 250 extra compliance officers being hired to check insurance and other paperwork in a bid to raise industry standards.

TfL, launched a consultation into the fees yesterday, said the charges would make sure operators paid according to the resources required to regulate their operations. 

It would mean that the smallest minicab firms, those with fewer than 10 vehicles, pay £2,500 for a five-year licence. Currently those with more than two cars pay £2,826 regardless of the size of their fleet.

Uber and Addison Lee (which has almost 5,000 drivers), would pay £166,000 for a five-year licence, plus £68 for every vehicle registered.

In both cases the number of vehicles is thought to be lower than the number of drivers in operation.

The capital’s minicab industry has grown dramatically from 65,000 licensed drivers in 2013/14 to more than 117,000 today. The number of vehicles has increased from 50,000 to 87,000 over the same period.

TfL estimates that its enforcement costs alone over the next five years will reach £30 million, up from a previous estimate of £4 million.

The total projected cost for licensing, enforcement and compliance — to crack down on illegal and dangerous activity — for taxis and minicabs over five years is £209 million.

Editorial Comment :

Up till now, TfL's enforcement has been no more than a joke. With COs spending most of their time harassing working Taxi drivers forced to over-rank because of the shortage of rank spaces to accomadate 21,000 Taxis.

TfL’s Helen Chapman said: “The operator fees system is no longer fit for purpose.”

That's funny Helen, we know something else that's not fit for purpose....

An Urgent Call For A Public Inquiry Into TfL :


On Friday 6th January 2017, a meeting took place with the Prime Minister Theresa May, asking for a public inquiry into Transport for London (TfL). With the help of the Taxi trade organisations, Mrs May was handed documents to back up the London Taxi drivers request.

As London Taxi drivers, we need to put pressure on the Prime Minister to grant a full public inquiry into TfL. You can help by completing a short form to send this pre-written and personalised email to your local MP. This has been written from your perspective as a London Taxi driver on how you have been affected by the governments and TfL's malfeasance.

In addition to this, we would highly recommend you request a visit to their constituents surgery to personally ask for assistance.

Please insert your Post Code below to help us find your local Constituency and MP.

Click on link below

We will never forget what this bunch have done to our trade.

You can leave to be a bailiff, you can leave to play with trains  

You can leave to be a cowboy, but we'll bring you back again 

The road we're on looks longer, the road we're on looks hard.

We'll take corruption head on, when you play in our back yard.

That ones for you Rett. 

Growing Uber Scandal Engulfs Another Government Minister, Sajid Javid.

The controversial, tax-dodging Silicon Valley company Uber — which runs a smartphone app that allows users to summon cheap minicabs — is a serious threat to the livelihoods of London's highly-trained and highly-regulated Taxi drivers.

Uber launched in the UK in 2012. Its enormous financial muscle (investors subsidise annual losses of around £2 billion), clever tax arrangements (it pays no VAT and most UK earnings are funnelled to Bermuda via Holland), and cavalier approach to regulation and employment law allow it to dramatically undercut its old-fashioned rivals.

Many black cabbies, whose income has declined by around 35-40per cent as a result, were — and still are — being forced off the road.

The fact is that tens of thousands of Uber cars now operate in London and about 30 other UK cities and towns. They add to pollution, and make traffic congestion worse.

There are also growing concerns about passenger safety. At one point, complaints of rape and sexual assault against Uber drivers were made in London at a rate of roughly one every 11 days.

Against this already troubling background, a series of extraordinary revelations in the Mail have in recent weeks thrown the firm to the centre of an extraordinary political scandal.

It dates back to late 2015, when senior figures in David Cameron’s government decided to secretly intervene to persuade the then Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, to abandon proposed new regulations that would curb Uber’s growth in the capital.

Cameron, Chancellor George Osborne and several other Cabinet ministers, along with their publicly funded staff, led by a Downing Street aide called Daniel Korski, launched a campaign to aggressively lobby fellow Tory Johnson on behalf of the tax-dodging firm.

During this period, between September 2015 and January 2016, the Mayor was considering measures to curtail Uber’s growing dominance of the London taxi market.

These included making cab drivers pass an English language test (many Uber drivers are foreign-born), capping the number of licences available, and requiring minicab firms to wait five minutes between accepting a booking and picking up a customer (Uber prides itself on fulfilling orders in an average of three).

But after intensive badgering by Cameron, Osborne and No 10 officials, plus several other loyal ministers, Johnson caved in, and dropped all significant new rules.

Uber’s revenues soared. Since at the time it employed Rachel Whetstone, one of PM’s and his Chancellor’s closest friends, as its most senior UK lobbyist, this affair seems to many in Whitehall to raise serious questions about cronyism and corruption.

Last week, as the scandal reached a rolling boil, Whetstone — who’d known Cameron for 25 years and was the godmother of his late son Ivan — announced she’d suddenly quit Uber.

Meanwhile, the Information Commissioner announced an investigation into suspicions that No 10 officials had breached the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, in an attempt to keep their lobbying of Johnson secret.

They are accused of deliberately hiding emails that showed how Korski had corresponded with the Mayor’s Transport for London quango about Uber. Deliberately destroying, hiding or altering requested information is a criminal offence under the FOI act.

A Taxi Driver Org has unearthed evidence that it claims shows a very similar sort of FOI cover-up involving staff working for Sajid Javid, who (unlike Osborne and Cameron) remains a Cabinet Minister.

This example stretches back to April 2016, when cabbies heard two intriguing rumours concerning the involvement of the then Business Secretary, now Communities Secretary, in this secret, and ethically dubious, lobbying campaign.

One suggested Javid had helped organise a meeting in Westminster just before Christmas 2015, at which senior Tories ordered Boris Johnson to lay off Uber. Several other Cabinet ministers, special advisers and Downing Street staff were said to be present.

The other rumour was that Javid’s staff at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills had, in October 2015, lobbied their opposite numbers at the Competition and Markets Authority — a regulator charged with protecting the public from unfair monopolies — to ask Johnson to drop several proposed Uber regulations.

Their entreaties, it was claimed, helped persuade the Authority, in December 2015, to publish a statement saying it was ‘concerned’ the Mayor would ‘excessively and unnecessarily weaken competition’ if he cracked down on Uber.

To establish whether either story might be true, the cabbies’ union decided to use the Freedom of Information Act to find out what the Department for Business — known as BIS — had been up to.

It wrote asking for ‘copies of email or written correspondence between ministers, special advisors and senior civil servants and other Government departments or public bodies’ relating to Transport for London’s regulations with regard minicabs for the period September to December 2015’.

On June 10, Javid’s department responded, in a letter on headed notepaper attributed to the Whitehall ‘regulatory delivery directorate’. 

Short and unequivocal, it declared that ‘following a search of our paper and electronic records, I have established that there are no records’ of the sort requested.

In other words, it appeared the department was claiming that neither Javid, nor any of his special advisers, nor any senior department civil servant had sent any email to any other ministry or public body concerning the proposed Uber regulations, during the period in question.

Remember: this reply was sent under the Freedom of Information Act, which requires Government officials to answer such questions truthfully. Breaking it can lead to criminal prosecution.

All of which now raises some troubling questions. For as a result of emails that were later disclosed by London’s City Hall after a separate FOI request, we now know that Javid was indeed present at a meeting held to discuss the proposed Uber regulations on December 16, 2015.

Also there, according to a civil servant’s note of the proceedings, were ‘various Government officials and special advisers’ including Daniel Korski, the Downing Street fixer.

The official purpose of the meeting, the civil servant’s email explained, was to discuss what it called the ‘consultation on the Private Hire Regulations Review’ — the exact topic the FOI request asked for correspondence about. Given this fact, Javid’s department’s response that there were ‘no records’ seems — shall we say? — odd.

In theory, such a denial could only be supported if that key December 2015 meeting (involving several ministers, advisers and other officials, from across Whitehall and Downing Street) had been scheduled without any correspondence being sent to or by Javid, or any of his senior members of staff or civil servants.

Is it reasonable to believe, in an ever-more-connected world where even minor meetings are routinely arranged via email, that this was the case?

Is it also plausible that after this important meeting, no record, minutes of proceedings, or other note of its existence, or even any related correspondence can have been conveyed to or from anyone senior in Javid’s department?

‘There are clear procedures in place when it comes to answering Freedom of Information requests and all of those were followed,’ they say. ‘Searches were undertaken to identify any correspondence within the scope of the request — these were carried out within Freedom of Information rules and no relevant information was identified.’

However, not everyone is convinced.

The taxi group has written to the Information Commissioner, which regulates FOI disclosures, asking for a formal investigation into whether the department’s claims were accurate. It’s also filed a complaint to the Parliamentary Standards Committee and the head of the Civil Service.

The Information Commissioner has already begun at least one inquiry into a parallel incident involving Cameron’s No 10 team.

It centres on a response to another Freedom of Information request sent in March last year in which No 10 denied there were records of any exchanges about Uber with Boris Johnson’s City Hall officials.

In fact, No 10’s claim was later shown to be highly dubious.

Such correspondence, was subsequently found and released by Transport for London. 
This showed that Daniel Korski sent the organisation at least three emails and received four about Uber.

There are widespread calls for a full Parliamentary inquiry into this issue. 

Not surprisingly, there is a growing furore about this suspected culture of cover-up — fuelled by the fact that Osborne, who was one of those lobbying for Uber to be spared stringent new rules in London, is now being paid £600,000 a year to work one day per week for BlackRock, a U.S. investment firm with a £500 million stake in Uber.

Indeed, there are widespread calls across Westminster for a full Parliamentary inquiry into the relationship between Uber and Cameron’s inner circle.

Lib Dem leader Tim Farron says: ‘There is a gathering amount of evidence that No 10 and ministers attempted to cover their tracks over how they have lobbied for Uber. It’s time a full investigation was undertaken into this cover-up at the heart of Government.’

Meanwhile, there is the second, parallel issue that the taxi union had heard whispers of: the question of whether Javid’s staff secretly urged the Competition and Markets Authority to criticise Boris Johnson’s proposed crackdown on Uber.

For while his ‘BIS’ department has formally insisted neither Javid, nor his advisers, nor any ‘senior civil servants’ contacted any other public body about Uber during the period in question, a separate FOI request — to the Competition and Markets Authority — appears to tell a different story. It reveals Authority staff discussed Uber with ‘BIS colleagues’ via email on multiple occasions. On October 5, 2015, for example, staff at the regulator were told that Javid’s department ‘wanted to know if we’re planning to respond to the Transport for London [TfL] consultation on Uber’.

Emails were then exchanged between officials at Javid’s department and the Competition and Markets Authority on October 12, 13 and 14, with the subject line ‘Tfl/Uber’. They mentioned that staff at the two organisations were scheduling phone conversations to discuss details of their respective positions on Uber.

On October 19, a member of the Authority’s staff even contacted one of his peers at the Department for Transport, apparently on the instructions of a BIS civil servant, saying: ‘I had a useful conversation with [name redacted] about BIS’s thinking on this matter and I thought it would be useful to speak to you as well.’

Finally, on October 27, an official at Javid’s BIS department exchanged emails with a colleague at the Authority saying his office would find it ‘very useful to know where CMA’s thinking is’ on Uber regulations and proposing a ‘quick call’ on the phone to discuss it.

It follows that multiple emails about the Uber affair were being sent from Javid’s department to the Competition and Markets Authority, a ‘public body’, during the period in question.

A stench now hangs over not only Cameron’s No 10 team, but a growing swathe of Whitehall. And, of course, a serving Cabinet Minister, Sajid Javid
So, why did Javid’s ministry suspect no such email existed?

Asked about this matter, a spokesman for Javid’s ministry claimed that those emails were not disclosed in the BIS department’s original FOI response because they failed to fall ‘in the scope’ of the request.

The spokesman argued that the FOI request that was refused had merely asked for correspondence about Uber from ‘senior civil servants’, and said that the civil servant who sent the emails from BIS to the CMA was not sufficiently important to be officially regarded as ‘senior’.

Is that a fair point, or weasel words? Sadly, we cannot be sure: the individual’s name has been redacted from the correspondence released under FOI.

However, what we do know is that after these emails were exchanged, the CMA took the unusual step of deciding to speak out forcefully against regulation of Uber.

Its eight-page statement opposing nine of Boris Johnson’s 25 proposals, published in December 2015, stunned many observers, who did not regard the issue of cab regulation in London as being something the Competition and Markets Authority ought to take an interest in.

After all, the public organisation, which is charged with protect consumers from the unfair power monopolies, had only days earlier been formally asked — again by the black cab lobby — to investigate whether loss-making Uber was using a predatory pricing structure.

A written complaint to the Competition and Markets Authority by taxi-drivers (seen by the Mail) claimed that tax-dodging Uber was charging artificially low fares in order to try to drive competitors out of existence and establish a monopoly which could be exploited in future.

In response to that complaint, the Authority said it would not investigate the matter because it was ‘unlikely to fit with the CMA’s current strategic priorities’.

So at one moment, the Competition and Markets Authority was claiming it wasn’t interested in an Uber issue.

The next moment, just days later, it was deciding to publish a lengthy document telling Boris Johnson in great detail why he ought to leave Uber alone. It gives the impression of being a strange, and sudden, volte face.

And there’s another intriguing piece of this complicated jig-saw. Alex Chisholm, a career civil servant who was the CMA’s chief executive at the time of this controversy, has since become permanent secretary in Sajid Javid’s BIS department.

And for its part, the Competition and Markets Authority vigorously denies that either Javid or anyone from the BIS department had any influence on its decision to oppose regulation of Uber, saying: ‘We did not respond to the consultation because of an “instruction” by Government.

‘We chose to respond as we believed it could reduce competition.’

Yet many MPs are increasingly concerned about this affair. Among them is Labour’s Wes Streeting, chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Taxis, who has seen copies of emails between Javid’s department and the Competition and Markets Authority.

He says: ‘The Competition and Markets Authority is supposed to be independent of government and acting in the interests of customers. If, as it appears, senior figures in government have leant on the CMA in Uber’s favour, this is incredibly serious and demands an independent investigation.

‘Given that the Competition and Markets Authority told the taxi industry that an inquiry into Uber was “out of scope”, and then subsequently lobbied the Mayor of London in Uber’s favour, there is a foul stench of hypocrisy hanging over the whole affair.’

He’s right, of course. For that stench now hangs over not only Cameron’s No 10 team, but a growing swathe of Whitehall. And, of course, a serving Cabinet Minister, Sajid Javid.

So a full Parliamentary inquiry, into this ever smellier scandal, is surely the only way to clear the air.

Source : MailOnline 

Grant Davis, taken from FaceBook :

After Sajid Javid wrote in the Telegraph that he was going to " face down London cabbies" over UBER , I wrote to him requesting a meeting:

I was somewhat surprised to get a response and a meeting date. I duly contacted Hailo & GETT Taxi along with LTC to form a group that would showcase our "Tech" and prove we were not luddites.

The meeting lasted around 45 mins and he did not seemed interested one jot.
We told him Hailo had been in London for 2 years, the greenest cab in the World was coming, but he wasn't interested.

As a Business Secretary, the man was / and is a disgrace.

Thursday, April 20, 2017

Speeding Fines Set To Rocket From Next Week

From 24th April, the rules are changing in relation to the way drivers will be fined for speeding offences in the UK.  As of next week, the maximum fine will increase by 150% from £1000 to £2500.

The new rules mean that from 24th April, driver’s can be fined up to 175% of their weekly income.  They can also be disqualified from driving for up to 56 days for ‘driving grossly in excess of the speed limit’ according to the Sentencing Council.

A new three-band system will be in place, which will determine a driver’s fine and number of penalty points.  We have outlined below the three bands and the new rules that will apply to each band.

Band A – Driver’s will receive 3 penalty points and a fine, which starts at 50%, but can range from 25% to 75% of their weekly income.

Band B – Driver’s will receive 4-6 penalty points OR disqualification from driving for 7-28 days and a fine which starts at 100%, but can range from 75% to 125% of their weekly income.

Band C – Driver’s will receive 6 penalty points OR disqualification from driving for 7-56 days and a fine, which starts at 150%, but can range from 125% to 175% of their weekly income.

These bands are based on a driver’s speed in mph.  The speed limits, recorded speeds and relevant bands are shown 

Speed limit : Recorded speed (mph)
   20    Speed 21-30 (Band A)   Speed 31-40 (Band B)  Speed 41+ (Band C)

   30    Speed 31-40 (Band A)   Speed 41-50 (Band B)   Speed 51+ (Band C)

   40    Speed 41-55 (Band A)   Speed 56-65 (Band B)   Speed 66+ (Band C)

   50    Speed 51-65 (Band A)   Speed 66-76 (Band B)   Speed 76+ (Band C)

   60    Speed 61-80 (Band A)   Speed 81-90 (Band B)   Speed 91+ (Band C)

   70     Speed 71-90 (Band A)   Speed 91-100 (Band B)    Speed 101+ (Band C)

For a first time offender, the chance to take a speed awareness course may be offered, which would mean avoiding the penalty points, but not the fine.  This however, won’t be offered to repeat offenders.

New research by Green Flag suggests that speeding offences in the UK have increased by 44% in the last 5 years.  The Sentencing Council has said that the move to raise penalties aims to ensure there is a “clear increase in penalty as the seriousness of offending increases”.

Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Can We Do It, Yes We Can.... We're Still Here And We're Fighting Back

I couldn't believe my eyes, coming back home from a shopping trip. When I went out, the fund was still three grand short with just a few hours left to go.

But when I got home, with a couple of hour still to go, we had passed the target and money was still coming in.

The total finished up:

Proceedings have started against Uber, and they will be served court papers by the end of this month. 

A very big thank you to all those who pledge, some pledging multiple times. There were some massive pledges, but every pledge mattered.

To those who never pledged, it's not over yet, you will have another chance to help soon.

 This is the email, sent out today 20th April, to all who pledged


Your donation to Uber must pay all of its taxes helped raise a total of £107,650. The crowdfunding campaign has now closed.

On behalf of the Case Owner, thank you for your generosity.

Keep an eye out for updates from the Case Owner in your inbox and on the case page!


The CrowdJustice Team

Good Riddance To Old Rubbish. Osborne to stand down as MP

What they think of the SubStandard at London Taxi Shelters

George Osbourne, the former chancellor, has said he is stepping down as an MP “for now” following his decision to take a job as editor of the Evening Standard and other lucrative roles outside the House of Commons.

Following 24 hours of speculation about his future, he told the Evening Standard he was quitting but hinted he may want to return to frontline politics in future. Fat chance there Georgie boy...

His decision to quit will be a relief for Theresa May, who sacked him as chancellor when she took over last July. Osborne had indicated he was prepared to fight against a hard Brexit taking the UK out of the single market from the backbenches.

He has been under pressure from some Conservative colleagues and the opposition to go since he was revealed as the surprise choice to edit the London newspaper. Labour raised concerns about the potential conflict of interest between his job as a Tory MP and publishing objective news coverage for readers.

Some of his constituents also opposed the idea of having a part-time MP who was editing a London newspaper and four other roles, which collectively made him the highest-earning member of the Commons. 

Since becoming a backbencher, Osborne declared new employment paying £650,000 a year for one day’s work a week for fund manager BlackRock. He has earned £800,000 for 15 speaking engagements in the last year, collects a £120,000 a year stipend from a US thinktank and has a book deal on top of the £75,000 MP’s salary. He will take up his editorship in mid-May.

Almost 200,000 people had signed a petition started by one of his constituents urging him to “pick a job”.

Osbourne can expect to be welcomed on his first day as editor of the Standard by a mass reception of London's Taxi drivers, called by the Independent Taxi Alliance.  

The ex-chancellor sold the London Taxi and Private hire industries down the river in favour of a NonDomicile company that pays no Tax or VAT and treats its workers like slaves. 

Osbourne and former Prime Minister Cameron put pressure on former Mayor Boris Johnson, which saw TfL change statutory legislation to allow licensing of this toxic company by TfL.

Tuesday, April 18, 2017

Breaking News ... Another Rat Jumps From The Sinking Ship.

Uber's vice president of global vehicle programs leaves company

Uber Technologies said on Monday that its vice president of global vehicle programs, who played a role in the company's self-driving car program, has left the company.

Neither Uber nor the executive, Sherif Marakby, said why he was leaving. The former Ford Motor executive joined Uber just last April to help with its autonomous vehicle project in Pittsburgh.

"Self-driving is one of the most interesting challenges I've worked on in my career, and I'm grateful to have contributed to what will soon be a safer future for everyone," Marakby said in an emailed statement.

The departure is the latest of several high-profile exits from the ride-hailing company.

Uber has been rocked by a number of setbacks lately, including accusations of sexual harassment from a former female employee and a video showing Chief Executive Travis Kalanick harshly berating an Uber driver.

It has also been sued by Alphabet's Waymo unit for stealing some of its self-driving technology, an accusation Uber denies.

The company is seeking a chief operating officer to help Kalanick manage it, repair its tarnished image and improve its culture.

Separately, the privately held company made public some of its financials on Friday, revealing that it was generating more revenue but still making large losses.

---1851, The Great Exhibition ---- 2017, The World Turned Upside Down? By I'm Spartacus

So let's cast our minds back to the Great Exhibition in Hyde Park in 1851, imagine the millennium dome (but successful) times ten with millions and millions of visitors, anyhow some (they are always with us!) unscrupulous operators took advantage of passengers and charged double or treble the usual fares.

Nowadays that chicanery is all done electronically by others!

Anyhow the authorities decided to introduce a fare chart which became the meter to mandate the fare based on the running costs and a fair return for the driver and the horse of course.


Now as fools join the race to the bottom against others who subsidise fares as the rider only pays 41% of the true cost, why is this done, they're not a charity?

It is of course to exterminate the competition aided and abetted by morally (but not financially) bankrupt politicIans who favour offshore predators against the interests of their own citizens!

This is a scandal that should make any right thinking person sick to the pit of their stomach, let's hope those involved are shown for what they are, it's not about 'technology' it's about greed, tax avoidance and immorality, nothing new under the sun there!

Anyhow, now we have so called supporters of the cab trade offering fixed fares below any kind of economic return, it can only end one way as we engage in a Dutch Auction, you can bet these 'supporters' won't have their income cut.

One Taxi Trade union has taken a stand and its members voted unanimously to boycott these fares, I urge you to do the same.

Ask your org to set aside any shilling your organisation takes in advertising, it ain't worth it. Don't act like the politicians we condemn please?



Last week's C4 inspirational documentary of The Knowledge should remind us of what we have and what we have to defend.


I'm Spartacus

          Statement from the RMT.

                GETT POLICY

RMT London Taxi Branch fully rejects the pernicious predatory pricing model launched by Gett.

RMT interpret fixed prices such as £40.00 from Kensington to Terminal 5 and £8.00 from Fulham to Hyde Park as nothing more than a cynical structure that serves to accelerate a race to the bottom!

RMT were instrumental in rejecting the Systra proposals that would have seen a marked reduction on the Tariff. As a result the union therefore rejects an attempt by Gett to offer work that is markedly below the Metered Rate, which will only have the effect of pushing prices down on other available Apps in order to compete.

Further, RMT believe that private companies have no place in future Tariff negotiations.

Open Letter Calling For The Resignation Of TfL's Leon Daniels ... from Sean Paul Day.

Please treat this correspondence as a statement calling on the resignation of Mr. Leon Alistair Daniels (Managing Director, Surface Transport)

Mr. Daniels  wilfully facilitates a covert political agenda against the licensed taxi trade & Private Hire industry,  inflicting immeasurable harm. 

The policy, which has left the taxi trade in a place of excruciating incertitude for over four yeas has caused chronic economic and emotional damage- to many.  TfL has never collated data on the detrimental effects sustained  by tens of thousands of individuals as a result of policy direction

The  interminable haemorrhaging of PH licenses has decimated environmental and economic sustainability and embedded great uncertainty into a comparatively harmonious market. 

TfL is a weird and grotesquely unaccountable arrangement that has never questioned  investment (from institutes with gross human atrocity records) to fund an aggressive predatory pricing policy. 

A corporation only fixes prices artificially low to annihilate the opposition and with that I conclude, TfL cultured an environment for the taxi trade to become unviable. 

I am aggrieved that Mr. Leon Daniels is still in public office and/or sharing a Directors position on London Buses LTD. By remaining, Mr. Daniels ridged adherence to policy constitutes a dereliction of care to ensure public safety. TfL has never afforded due diligence on safety. 

To  disambiguate, I meet all statutory licensing regulations to work as a taxi driver and fulfil the criteria of a ‘fit and proper’ person. 

With this, I question the ability and efficacy of senior management at TPH to regulate with discernment  after inflicting on it such irreparable damage. 

If senior management at Transport for London believe this comment to be unjust or injurious to an employee or brand, then I invite Mr Mike Brown (Commissioner) or Peter Blake (Director Of Service Operations) to file a lawsuit against me. 

I conclude, the only solution to the dire situation (experienced across the whole of surface transport) to to fully dismantle TfL. Nothing has convinced me that TfL can take an objective stance and make decisions in the interest of the trade. 

TfL needs to disband at the earliest possible moment. But Mr. Daniels needs to go now. Malfeasance in public office is being committed. 

Sean Paul Day

Editorial Extra :

       Statement From The ITA : 

Want to know who's side Mayor Khan is on, why not come along with the ITA and ask him.
May 18 at 10pm.


Monday, April 17, 2017


Our 363 year old trade is at the most crucial juncture in its entire history.  Our mantra may well be 'BE LUCKY' but there are going to be choices on individual, as well as collective levels that cannot be left to luck or chance.


TAXIAPP was formed a year ago by working Taxi drivers who couldn't stand by and witness the trade’s struggles any longer.  'The Knowledge' and 'Meter', bedrocks of our industry have become endangered.


Every licensed Taxi driver embarked on the Knowledge and sacrificed plenty of years to attain self-employment and independence.  Only then were we able to ply for hire and work a meter.  A privilege accorded exclusively to proud recipients of Green and Yellow badges.


TAXIAPP have come to the opinion that it's time this trade, CIRCLED ITS WAGONS and started to fight back.  


At TAXIAPP we are opposing the competition, whether it is from within or out of the trade.  We don't do "If you can't beat them, join them" defeatism.




TAXIAPP believes the meter is a great equaliser affording drivers and customers protection and transparency.  We also believe in not devaluing the professional World class service that we offer.  Only individual drivers at their discretion should consider 'fixed prices'.





WE have faith in our own technological structure and altruistic business model that can collectively insulate ourselves from the corporate inspired takeover of our industry.  Far off mercenary money men 'wrongly' think our trades’ future belongs to them.


Now, more than ever, we need to work cohesively together to ward off their aggressive drive to control 'OUR' work, and force us down to a one tier system. 


The corporates lobbyists, with government collusion and facilitation, have been pushing the American tech firm hard.  Even so, their mega budgets have been unable to polish that turd!


TAXIAPP represents the best our proud trade offers.  Safety, instantly recognisable, knowledgeable drivers.


Only by banding together can we protect ourselves from whatever the gig economy may throw at us.






Oh What A Tangled Web They've Woven, some are gone but not forgotten ..By Jim Thomas


In criminal law, a 'conspiracy' is an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime at some time in the future. Criminal law in some countries or for some conspiracies may require that at least one over act must also have been undertaken in furtherance of that agreement, to constitute an offense. 

There is no limit on the number participating in the conspiracy and, in most countries, no requirement that any steps have been taken to put the plan into effect (compare attempts which require proximity to the full offence). 

For the purposes of concurrence, the actus reus is a continuing one and parties may join the plot later and incur joint liability and conspiracy can be charged where the co-conspirators have been acquitted or cannot be traced

Rules have been bent, relaxed and changed by our licensing authority, to smooth the way for Uber to be licensed. 
Lies were told by TfL directors, at transport committee investigations conducted by members of the Greater London Authority.
• Yes they have a landline for bookings (lie).
• On off insurance (lie).
• It's a meter, it's not a's definitely a meter.

Uber were allowed to operate without a licence variation from premises in N1 with the full knowledge of TfL compliance. Instead of revoking their licence for operating from unlicensed premises -as per manual- Uber were given 6 weeks grace by compliance to "sort the matter out" and get a licensed.

We've recently been informed by a nation newspaper that certain government members including a former Prime Minister and Chancellor leaned on former Mayor Boris Johnson, to "go easy on Uber".

We are now informed by the GBM on Twitter that in June 2015, Transport for London move their £3.8bn pension fund in to the hands of Uber's biggest investor. 
Conflict of interests? 

Below is an article posted on Black Rocks website

Transport for London ("TfL") Pension Fund selects BlackRock for £3.8bn investment mandate

London – June 11, 2015 – TfL Pension Fund ('The Fund') has appointed BlackRock to manage liability-driven investing (LDI) and passive equity portfolios totaling £3.8bn assets.

The £1.6bn LDI mandate will include measures to protect the Fund from market uncertainties, including inflation as well as interest rate and equity volatility, whist having measured exposure to risk to achieve excess positive returns. The Fund's £2.2bn passive equity exposure will include investments across a range of index funds. The primary objective is for the Fund to hold sufficient assets to meet its member liabilities.

This new mandate follows an initial £100m commitment made by the Fund into the BlackRock Renewable Income in March 2014 - a UK-focused fund that invests in onshore wind, offshore wind and solar projects - which is part of a strategy to introduce new asset classes into the Fund's alternatives portfolio.

The Fund has over 82,000 members with assets of £7.3bn as at March 31 2014, across multi-asset index strategies, enhanced index funds, bonds, global equities and alternatives.

Editorial Extra: 
With all this evidence on the table, our trade should be on the cusp of a major victory, and yet forces are at work to deflect efforts away from total victory, simply because of egos and ulterior agendas.

Instead of every org and union, fully uniting as a force complete, against the very people who would seek our destruction...yet again, we see exclusions and secret deals with the chosen ones around the folding table. 

Instead of drawing a line and leaving past histories behind, certain people have had a line drawn around them, akin to a forcefield and are being targeted in revenge for scores that have been festering over many years.

Fake Twitter and FaceBook accounts abound, commissioned to spread malicious gossip on social media, in attempts to blacken names and reputations of targeted trade figures. 

The reasoning behind the fake rumours and PR spin is simply greed, the massaging of egos and the pursuit of glory.