Monday, April 09, 2018

To Represent Or Not To Represent That Is The Question. Or, Why Are Our Leaders Not Shaking Spears At Mike Brown's TfL?


TFL licensing stats from last week

TfLTPH issued 275 PHVs (455 previous week, staff are on holiday) while the Licensed Taxi trade lost 12 drivers, with only one new licence being issue. 


And now conformation (as if were needed) that there's a definite cull of Taxi drivers and TfLs promise to promote the Taxi trade through the knowledge was just another lie. 


Another week where TfL have allowed an unlicensed company (UberBV) to illegally dispatch journeys direct to the driver for acceptance, before any details are taken (also illegal under current regulations), while the leader of our largest representative group is off swanning about, promoting a vehicle that allegedly the trade can't afford with current work levels. 

So we asked the LTDA:
In light of Tim Fenton’s evidence posted on Zelo Street Blog, when are Steve Mc and the other leaders in the UTG, going to demand Uber’s illegal operation be shut down ?"

The LTDA disregarded the issue in question (Tim Fenton's evidence) and answered with their letter to TfL concerning Uber LL's relicensing....not quite what was asked.
This is their answer: Click link below !
Notice that page two is blurred out!!!

We then asked the LTDA:
Why no mention of UberBV and the TfL cover up since 2013?
They came back with:

"Uber BV was in our objection to licence letter"...???

They went on to say, "only two trade orgs actually objected!!!"
Yes we know that!

Carrying on they said : "Until Uber are proven not fit and proper in court, there is no case against TfL- just because some idiot on twitter says it’s easy, it ain’t!"

Nothing however about TFL's cover up alleged by Mr Fenton and backed up by FOI recovered emails!
This has obviously gone unnoticed by the LTDA legal team

God forbid we might expect the LTDA to do anything other than easy!!!
So we thought we'd offer some advice:

"As you're finding this too difficult... let me spell it out for you 
• All jobs are being dispatched illegally by Uber BV and not Uber LL.
• UberBV are operating without a licence
• TfL closed down Taxify for operating through a third party! 
• If they can close done Taxify, they can close down Uber BV"

Easy enough?

But apparently the LTDA are not finding it easy enough and replied:
"No! Tfl say they “are minded to believe” this is the case! 
Very different from a statement of fact!!
Get yr own lawyers if it’s so easy."

Carrying on the conversation, the LTDA were asked this question by another driver:
"If it’s the driver that’s accepting the booking then surely it must void their insurance, why haven’t TFL revoked the license, also what’s happening with them committing perjury in court ?"

To which they replied:
"Yes, if, as we say, the driver accepts the booking. That’s what will be determined in the court! 
As for allegations re evidence given in meter case, we have written to LCJ, DPP and Police, replied from all, police investigating our allegations."

Hold on a second "Yes, if, as we say, the driver accepts the booking"
It's actually not 'as you say', Uber have already admitted on oath in two court cases that it is the driver who accepts the booking..... But also you have the fact that Uber London Ltd (whom TfL licence as operator) do not dispatch the jobs ..... It's unlicensed Uber BV a company based in the Netherlands.

This being the case, you can now understand why the LTDA's reply below to another driver, has again left us puzzled at the attitude (or lack of it) towards this issue with TfL!

Question left unanswered !

Over half the trade are members of this, the largest trade representative org, or an associated representative group or union under their wing..... will this conversation make you feel relaxed that everything possible is being done to save and protect your livelihood?

Or are you now of the opinion that in the background....actually not much is happening?

TAXI LEAKS EXTRA BIT: from John Reid 
Surely when Mr. Brown is on such friendly terms with the management of the trade organisations, it cannot be a good thing for the trade. 

We, after all, are trying to stop UBER illegal plying for hire and TfL are trying to keep there trading partners in work illegally. 

Yes I too have heard the saying well if it is that easy get your own legal team and you do it, but why should I when I have already paid handsomely to be represented. It would seem to me that we have all been waiting far too long for something to happen, dont these organisations relise if the real trade go so do they! 

The situation we seem to find ourself in is the work seems to gets less and less and the cost of a new taxicab is twice what the last one was and just ask yourself what will happen if TfL manage to get UBER relicensed.... there is a good chance that the trade could be threatened.


5 comments:

Anonymous said...

In this glorious country that feed drugs to drug addicts and gives an alcohol allowance to alcoholics don't be to surprised 2 or 3 hundred rapes and jacked up fares don't raise an eye after all if and when needed do they care what side of the border our front line get blown up not a jot as long as they are alright greed and corruption is here to stay

Dads Defending Daughters said...

Our problem isn't only Steve Mc, the reincarnation of Philippe P├ętain, but those other Org and Union leaders who suck up to McNamara.

For too long our reps have treated meetings with TfL as a place for gathering first hand information (being told what changes TfL will be making or stance TfL will be taking), instead of negotiating.
We don't need cosy - we need leverage.

No one trusts TfL. Very few trust our Orgs and Unions.
We have been let down.

Anonymous said...

Its in the name, con-servative party, any taxi driver foolish enough to vote for them ever again cant moan about earning peanuts!

Anonymous said...

"if the trade go,es so will they" where too?with the sale of taxi house,they,ll be able to live quite well i,d imagine on the proceeds,aren,t the members of the ltda share holders? is there a ltda rulebook? perhaps members should have a look at the activeitys of the ltda,makes you wonder if they,ve got a vested interest in watching the london cab trade go down the gurgler,when was the last time any of the hierarchy of the ltda got their arse in the seat of a cab?why should they,they,ve all got "company cars"

Anonymous said...

makes you wonder why drivers are still paying the monthly direct debit, you can get the legal cover cheaper and the old some is tax deductable chestnut would also apply to the new legal cover you take out, maybe its the cxhance to win the monthly diary draw that keeps them paying !