Wednesday, October 31, 2018

Piracy By The Mayor Of London : ILLEGAL Eviction Of Gallions Point Marina Ltd

We've posted this story as Leigh Miller is a big supporter of the London Taxi Trade.
What if we told you that Sadiq Khan, the elected Mayor Of London, has been willfully abusing his power in public office by illegally evicting a legitimate company from its premises, illegally taking over its businesses, administration office, plant machinery and equipment, and hijacking a marina and boatyard, only to hand it all over to the Royal Docks Management Authority (RoDMA), one of his Mayoral/GLA-funded companies – stealing all the company’s contracted clients in the process?

You’d naturally assume that this is a made up story, right? As a matter of fact, this actually happened at 10.49am on 9 October 2018 to a family run business in East London: Gallions Point Marina Ltd, when the GLA, controlled by the Mayor Of London, ordered an eviction without giving any notice. Four High Court bailiffs, 20 private security guards and four security dog unit vans brutally and forcefully evicted two female members of staff from the marina’s administration office. 

Leigh Miller was assaulted by the GLA’s private security in the presence of the police (incidentally the staff called the Police to assist their help in stopping the illegal eviction!) as she went to access where she lives to retrieve a few essential personal possessions: handbag containing prescription medication, ID cash card and some clothes. It was clear GLA’s private security had been pre briefed to deny Leigh to access to her home to retrieve even a single item.  She was left standing with nothing but the clothes on her back.  Leigh went back to the Marina in the evening to try and retrieve her medication and a few personal items and was physically assaulted for a second time by GLA’s private security.  Who duly informed her that the GLA had instructed them under no circumstances were they to allow Leigh to access any of her personal possessions.  These events raise more worrying questions about the ex-human rights lawyer Sadiq Khan, now the Mayor Of London who completely ignored Leigh Millers basic human rights during this illegal eviction.  And more even questions by using the Met Police to enforce illegal evictions. Estimated cost of this outrageous exercise to the public purse: £30,000.

East Dock view, September 2018

Since 2016, Gallions Point Marina has been locked in an ongoing legal fight with the Mayor Of London, who is using the might and finance of three publicly funded authorities – GLA, TFL and RoDMA – to smother with litigation the Miller family who own the marina business. The plan is to terrify and crush Eric and Leigh Miller personally with eye-watering legal costs so the Mayor can get his hands on the marina and hand it over to London and Regional, a property company whose majority shareholders are billionaire developers the Livingstone brothers. The hyper-publicity-shy Livingstone brothers will then run and operate someone else’s marina under the questionable guise of “the Albert Island Vision”… with the new Mayor (no different from the old Mayor) of Newham Rokhsana Fiaz in cahoots, aiding these private profiteers who are land-grabbing publicly owned land from the people of Newham! A big media fanfare is being used to promote this “Albert Island Vision” by the Mayor Of London and the Mayor of Newham. It’s a carbon copy of the massive London Olympic scam (dig a bit and you’ll find it’s the same key public policy players behind it…Jules Pipe ex Mayor of Hackney, now Khan’s right hand land grab Regen man) with public land and public money going into private profiteers’ pockets with the flimsiest promises of jobs and homes. The reality is that these homes will be predominantly private, with a few paltry old chestnut crumbs of “affordable” homes – aka social housing for wealthy professionals earning upwards of £60,000 a year, and totally unaffordable to Newham residents and working-class Londoners.


During the eviction of the marina, the bailiffs, who were assisted by the Met Police (also controlled by the Mayor of London), were immediately informed that their High Court writ paperwork was incorrect. Staff presented them with the Gallions Point Marina Limited company incorporation documents and court-stamped Judicial Review application documents (dated 4 October 2018) to prove that the legal case is still active within the court system. Dated 2 October 2018, the High Court eviction writ from RoDMA (funded and controlled by the Mayor Of London, and who incidentally are only supposed to control the water and not the land) was incorrectly addressed to private individuals, Eric Miller and Leigh Miller, and not to the company that is both the legal occupier and also the legal sitting tenant of the marina. Eric and Leigh do not pay the rent and their clients do not pay the Miller family. Gallions Point Marina Limited makes all rent payments, and all client payments are made to Gallions Point Marina Limited. So the High Court eviction writ should have been addressed to Gallions Point Marina Ltd and not to Eric Miller and Leigh Miller. The bailiffs also refused point-blank to hand over a second writ dated 2 October 2018 from GLA Land & Property Limited (again controlled by The Mayor Of London) and an attached map. They refused to provide copies of these documents and to allow any copies of these documents to be made.

Gallions Point used for sales & marketing

The legal action has been directed at Eric and Leigh personally. It is clearly a tactical shock-and-awe attack by three publicly funded entities, GLA, TFL and RoDMA, all controlled by Sadiq Khan, the Mayor Of London. The Mayor’s modus operandi in this aggressive pre-planned attack and blatant piracy of the Millers’ business stinks of institutional joint enterprise and abuse within public office. Ironically the GLA took rent from Gallions Point Marina Ltd’s business account on 5 October 2018. And RoDMA took rent from the Marina’s business account on 15 October 2018, six days after it forcibly and illegally evicted Gallions Point Marina Ltd.

There is no court order in existence for possession or eviction against Gallions Point Marina Ltd. The High Court writ was addressed to Eric Miller & Leigh Miller. Gallions Point Marina is a separate entity that has been totally excluded from the legal case, despite legally occupying the land and paying the rent since 1999. The company is also a legal sitting tenant. The 2010 lease was never signed and there is hard evidence to confirm that The GLA are aware of this fact 

Eric Miller founded the marina in 1992 on derelict, contaminated wasteland in the Albert Docks. At the time people laughed at Eric...

They told him he was mad to set up a boat yard there. But Eric and his daughter Leigh prevailed and pumped blood, sweat, tears, and every penny they earned for 27 years into creating Gallions Point Marina and its infrastructure

Source :

Tuesday, October 30, 2018

Taxi Licence Renewals ... TfL Liable For Loss Of Earnings After Drivers Lied To? by Jim Thomas

In some cities it takes just 4 minutes to become an Uber driver. In London, you can be up and running as an Uber driver in as little as four weeks. 

Yet Taxi drivers who have been working as licensed Hackney carriage drivers, many for over twenty/thirty years are waiting 4-6 months, just to get their licenses renewed. 

Many drivers have lost work, some up to 2-3 months after being told by TfLTPH that they can’t work until they are in possession of their new licence!

This is (of course) not true!
The fact is that under the Transport Act 1985 section 17 subsection 7, your current licence continues to be valid until you receive your new licence.

Back in May 2014, I sent this email to Sir Peter Hendy who was then commissioner of TfL, the position of held by Mike Brown. 

Licence Renewals:
Under current legislation, a Taxi or private hire driver has the right to carry on working while waiting for a renewal for as long as it takes, unless he is informed that his licence application has been unsuccessful. 

I would like to bring your attention to the transport act 1985 section 17 subsection 7 which clearly states:

(7) Where a person holds a licence which is in force when he applies for a new licence in substitution for it, the existing licence shall continue in force until the application for the new licence, or any appeal under this section in relation to that application, is disposed of, but without prejudice to the exercise in the meantime of any power of the licensing authority to revoke the existing licence.


Therefore, in our legal teams opinion there is no need for TfL to issue temporary licences and the driver should carry on working as his old licence will remain in force until he either receives a newly issued licence or receives word his application is turned down.

As hundreds of drivers have lost many days-weeks-months income, after being of the opinion they can't work, could you please make an immediate statement informing these drivers that under the act of 1985, they can in fact carry on regardless.  

One word from you Sir Peter would mean they could carry on earning a living and would put an end to the massive amount of stress TfL have inflicted on these drivers and their families.

Space will be mad available for your answer on the Taxi Leaks blog.


Jim Thomas 

This is the reply we received from Leon Daniels, on behalf of Sir Peter Hendy:

 Dear Mr Thomas,
I refer to your email to Sir Peter Hendy regarding the provisions of section 17(7) of the Transport Act 1985 in relation to taxi drivers renewing their licences. Please accept my apologies for the delay in providing a reply.

As far as is possible we will issue a driver his or her new licence in advance of their old licence expiring.

However, this is dependent on the driver submitting a complete and timely application, which includes the result of the DBS check and any other information that is required, as we cannot make a licensing decision until this information is received. 

It is therefore imperative that drivers start the application process in good time to allow for all necessary checks to be completed before their licence expires.

Where we are provided with a complete application, including the results of the DBS check and any other necessary information, but have not yet made a licensing decision before the old one expires, the existing licence will remain in force until a decision is made in accordance with section 17(7). 

In these circumstances, a driver will not be issued with, nor require, a temporary licence pending a decision being made on their application.

Please note that contrary to the comment in your email, section 17 of the Transport Act 1985 only applies to London taxi driver and vehicle licences, not London private hire vehicle driver licences. (Well, we can live with this bit)

Kind regards

Leon Daniels | Managing Director  
Transport for London | Surface Transport | Palestra |
11th Floor - Zone R4| 197 Blackfriars Road|Southwark|SE1 8NJ


TFL's woefully inadequacy gets worse. 
From Thursday 1 November, there will be a temporary night time taxi rank between 00:00 and 04:00 on the east side of Wilton Road, outside the Apollo Theatre. 

The rank at Terminus Place will not be available. At all other times, the rank in Hudson Place serves Victoria Station.

More scandal swept under TFL's massive carpet: 

Mohiussunnath Chowdhury attacked three police officers with a samurai sword while shouting 'Allahu akbar'.

And in December 2015 a Uber driver, Muhiddin Mire, tried to behead a stranger in a London Tube station, yelling: 'This is for my Syrian brother.

Last Week Uber Were Going To Buy All It’s Drivers Electric Cars...This Week, They Are Just 3rd Parties.

A long-running case over the status of Uber drivers will be heard in the Court of Appeal on Tuesday and Wednesday.

The taxi-hailing app is contesting an employment tribunal finding that drivers should be treated as workers rather than self-employed.

If classified as workers, Uber drivers are entitled to paid holiday and the minimum wage. Unions calculate this could be worth £18,000 per driver. (70,000 drivers nationwide)

Uber said the tribunal "fundamentally misunderstood" how it operated. This is also what they told judge Emma Arbuthnot! 

It is the latest stage in a legal battle led by two Uber drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam, who won an employment tribunal in October 2016.

After the tribunal ruling in October 2016, Uber appealed to the employment tribunal, but lost in November 2017. The tribunal upheld its original decision that any Uber driver who had the Uber app switched on was working for the company under a "worker" contract.

Uber is now taking the case to the Court of Appeal, the next stage of the appeal process before the Supreme Court.

James Farrar is one of the two drivers at the centre of the case

Uber said that 60,000 licensed private hire drivers now use its app across UK. 

But the case could have implications beyond Uber, according to law firm Leigh Day.

"This appeal is of great significance not only to Uber drivers but also to millions of other workers in the gig economy and we hope that this can now bring this matter to a conclusion for the benefit of all workers," said Nigel Mackay, partner at Leigh Day. 

Law firm Leigh Day started the legal action against Uber on behalf of 25 members of the GMB union, which initially included Mr Farrar and Mr Aslam but they pursed their case with a different union, the IWGB, 

What is the 'gig' economy?

Uber drivers win key employment case

Mr Farrar, who is branch chair of the IWGB United Private Hire Drivers branch, said mini-cab drivers were still waiting for justice, two years after the tribunal ruling.

"As the government ignores this mounting crisis, it's been left to workers to fix this broken system and bring rogue bosses to account. If anything gives me hope, it is the rising tide of precarious workers that are organising and demanding a fair deal," he said.

'Significant' financial implications

Uber said it had made changes to give drivers more control over how they use its app. It also cited a study by Oxford University that found drivers make more than the London Living Wage and want to keep the freedom to choose if, when and where they drive.

"Almost all taxi and private hire drivers have been self-employed for decades, long before our app existed. We believe the Employment Appeal Tribunal last year fundamentally misunderstood how we operate," an Uber spokesperson said

"For example, they relied on the assertion that drivers are required to take 80% of trips sent to them when logged into the app, which has never been the case in the UK."

The GMB said Uber should admit defeat.

Sue Harris, legal director at GMB, said: "While the company are wasting money losing appeal after appeal, their drivers are up to £18,000 out of pocket for the last two years alone.

"That's thousands of drivers struggling to pay their rent, or feed their families."

The £18,000 figure is based on an Uber driver in London working a 40-hour week.

Paul Jennings, partner at Bates Wells, the law firm representing Mr Farrer and Mr Aslam, said a key issue in this case was whether Uber had mischaracterised the employment status of its fleet and in so doing failed to observe fundamental employment rights. 

"The financial implications of this judgment could be very significant," Mr Jennings said. 

The IWGB said Deliveroo riders, outsourced cleaners, restaurant workers and others in the gig economy would take place in a march on Tuesday to raise the issues facing "precarious workers"

Source : BBC


TAXI LEAKS has been informed that tomorrow morning, the Trade Associations & Unions will be meeting with both Mytaxi & GETT.... to discuss trade concerns and questions

Monday, October 29, 2018

Exclusive : The FIX 2, The LTDA AGM, You Decide ? ..... by LondonTaxiRadio.

The LTDA’s 2018 AGM. 


Forget what you’ve been told, here is The LTDA’s AGM (before, during and after) detailing the scandalous lengths the COM will go to prevent drivers asking pertinent questions that desperately need answering.

See video below 👀

After suffering a landslide defeat at the 2017 branch elections, what could the association do to ensure another 2 outsiders don’t become eligible for elections to the COM in 2020? 

Surely they wouldn’t be reduced to staging another debacle like the one at Harlesden? 

Or perhaps something worse, like an engineered series of events that’d lead to the branches - and subsequent election- being cancelled? 

You decide


Private Hire Licenses Are Being Issued To Convicted Criminals In Secret Council Meetings

Private Hire licences, are being issued behind closed doors to drivers convicted of offences including child sex crimes and reckless driving, the Local Democracy Reporting Service has revealed.

The findings follow a government report that claims current taxi and private hire laws are "not fit for the modern world".

According to the report, rules need tightening on everything from CCTV use in taxis to criminal record checks.

In London last year, it was revealed that private hire drivers had submitted 13,000 fake DBS criminal record check certificates. 

Some existing laws date back to 1847.

In most areas licences for taxis and private hire vehicles - or minicabs - are issued by unitary, borough or district councils. In London the system is managed by Transport for London.

In recent weeks, Local Democracy Reporters have reported that: 

  • A Private Hire driver in Sandwell was allowed to keep working, despite a criminal conviction for sexually assaulting a child. The case was heard in private
  • A Cornwall private hire driver was granted a licence behind closed doors, even though he had been convicted of causing death by reckless driving in 1986 and common assault in 2011
  • Birmingham City Council revoked a private hire licence in February, more than two years after the unnamed driver had been convicted of human trafficking offences in Belgium. Licensing staff found out through a criminal records check when his licence was up for renewal - but it had gone unnoticed when the licence was renewed in 2016
  • In Scotland, burglars, arsonists, domestic abusers, thieves and reckless drivers were all successful in acquiring private hire licences from Borders Council

The Bolton News also reported that licensing chiefs let a private hire driver off with a warning - also in private - after he was convicted of driving without due care and attention and failing to stop after an accident.

Bury Council, however, refused to give a private hire licence to a driver accused of sexual assault, even though he was later found not guilty of the allegations. 

As the licensing authority, many councils hold the hearings in private under local government rules about protecting personal information.

They have to decide if someone is "fit and proper" before granting a taxi or private hire licence. Although guidance has been published by the government and Local Government Association there are no legal rules on how to determine a "fit and proper person".

Donna Short, director of the National Private Hire and Taxi Association, said there was "nothing sinister" about the private meetings. 

She said they simply showed councils following their data protection protocols, but added a national driver database would help reduce the number of licences being given to convicted criminals.

A voluntary scheme run by the Local Government Association lets licensing departments check for drivers who have had licences revoked elsewhere, Mrs Short said, and was a good interim measure.

The government report was completed by the Task and Finish Group on Taxi and Private Hire Vehicle Licensing in September. It was set up by the Department for Transport to look at a "safer and more robust system".

The group's chairman, Prof Mohammed Abdel-Haq, called the current situation "inconsistent, ineffective and incompatible with the protection of vulnerable people" and said the government needed to act quickly to avoid putting public safety at risk.

Following abuse scandals in RochdaleRotherham and Oxford, it has called for CCTV to be installed in all taxis and minicabs, criminal records checks for drivers every six months and the ability to check if a licence application has previously been refused elsewhere.

The report's 34 recommendations also included:

  • The ability to take action against "out-of-area" drivers - those licensed by another council
  • New guidance on which convictions should be seen as grounds for refusing or revoking a licence
  • A major rule change to make sure drivers either start or finish each journey in the area that licenses them
  • A national database so councils can check if drivers have had licenses refused or revoked elsewhere
  • English language checks for drivers
  • A "cap" on the number of taxi and private hire licences in each council area

Personal safety charity the Suzy Lamplugh Trust has done its own research into the taxi and private hire trade. 

The charity's Saskia Garner, who was part of the task group, said it found inconsistencies in how councils dealt with convictions and "worrying patterns of behaviour" by drivers.

"Although taxi and private hire drivers hold a position of trust, transporting passengers who are often alone and in a locked vehicle, the highest level of criminal checks is not required in law - only recommended in guidelines," she said. 

"Passengers are therefore being left at risk." 

Most drivers did not pose a personal safety risk to passengers, she added, but they were being let down by a minority slipping through the net. 

The Department for Transport said it was considering the report and would be responding "in due course".

It added: "Taxis and private hire vehicles provide a vital community service helping people get to the shops, see their friends or go to work and school.

"But they need to ensure the safety of their passengers is paramount, especially when transporting the most vulnerable in society."

A Private Member's Bill that would have brought in some of those changes was "talked out" of the Commons earlier this year, but could be discussed again this week.

Daniel Zeichner, the MP behind that bill, backed the new report and said he hoped it was a "catalyst for action that is so badly needed".

Source : BBC


Another U-know who driver managed to turn his private hire car upside down on the Aldwych his morning. This is becoming a far to frequent sight on the streets of the capital. 

Well done TfL.

Stratford this afternoon.....this driver didn't quite manage to roll completely over, but well done TfL for scrapping the advanced driver tests!

Statement from London Assembly on TfL’s finances, "Woefully Inadequate"....Again.

In response to the Secretary of State for Transport, Chris Grayling MP’s comments that Transport for London (TfL) is suffering “deep financial difficulties”, Gareth Bacon AM, Chairman of the London Assembly Budget and Performance Committee said:

“The London Assembly holds the Mayor and the organisations he runs to account. The biggest of those organisation is TfL and we take our role very seriously.

“The comments from the Transport Secretary are not dissimilar to what we have been saying for the past year.

“TFL is certainly in some severe financial trouble. A number of factors have contributed to this situation and we continue to investigate those factors and the implications for Londoners.

TfL is facing a £700 million annual cut in Government funding

The Mayor’s fares freeze will cost TfL £640 million over four years [1]

Crossrail has been delayed and a later opening date is expected to cost TfL hundreds of millions in lost revenue.

“It’s clear that the primary cause of TfL's woes is the removal of the government grant. But the Mayor knew this was the situation before he took office and still imposed a fares freeze.

“We are one of the world’s greatest cities. It is absolutely essential that we have a world class public transport system. However, TfL is currently experiencing a perfect storm of fiscal uncertainty. We need to find a way through these issues and ensure TFL gets back into the black as soon as possible

London Assembly statement in response to secret TfL Crossrail meeting

In response to TFL's board meeting held in secret where Crossrail was the only item on the agenda... Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM, Chair of the London Assembly Transport Committee, said:

“Yet again TfL is not providing Londoners with the transparency they expect and deserve.

“Time and again, the Transport Committee, has criticised the Mayor, TfL and Crossrail for a lack of transparency and clarity. 

“The Mayor and TfL are either wilfully ignoring our suggestions or are simply not learning lessons.

“There has to be transparency – especially when it comes to matters pertaining to Crossrail – for the sake of Londoners and to build trust.

“This meeting should be held in public and only when a sensitive issue is raised and discussed should the meeting go into private session.

“It is important for Londoners to know what is going on behind closed doors and feel respected enough to be told about something that ultimately they are paying for”.

Sunday, October 28, 2018

Uber drivers ‘£18,000 poorer’ as firm appeals two-year-old tribunal order

GMB union says 40,000 drivers are worse off through missing holiday and sick pay, despite a court ruling in 2016

Uber drivers are estimated to be more than £18,000 out of pocket because the ride hailing company refuses to recognise a two-year-old ruling entitling them to holiday pay, a minimum wage and rest breaks.

The law firm Leigh Day – acting for the GMB union, which brought the action against the tech giant – calculates that its 40,000 drivers are all owed almost £11,000 in wages and more than £8,000 in holiday pay. But Uber is continuing to appeal the ruling, made two years ago at the central London employment tribunal.

“These figures lay bare the human cost of Uber continuing to refuse to accept the ruling,” said GMB legal director Sue Harris. “While the company is wasting money losing appeal after appeal, drivers are up to £18,000 out of pocket. That’s thousands of drivers struggling to pay their rent, or feed their families. It’s time Uber admits defeat and pays up. The company needs to stop wasting money dragging its lost cause through the courts. Instead, Uber should do the decent thing and give drivers the rights to which those courts have said they are legally entitled.”

However, a spokeswoman for Uber said “almost all” taxi and private hire drivers had “been self-employed for decades”, long before Uber existed. She quoted an Oxford University study based on a poll commissioned by Uber, which found that its drivers make more than the London Living Wage. She added: “If drivers were classed as workers, they would inevitably lose some of the freedom and flexibility that come with being their own boss.” 

Since the ruling, Uber says it has given drivers more control over how they use its app, plus sickness, maternity and paternity protection.

“We think the Employment Appeal Tribunal fundamentally misunderstood how we operate,” the spokeswoman said. “For example, they relied on the assertion that drivers are required to take 80% of trips sent to them when logged into the app, which has never been the case here.”

In its recent accounts, Uber London acknowledges that the self-employed status of its drivers is disputed. It says: “The Uber Group [is exposed] to numerous legal and regulatory risks, including the application, interpretation and enforcement of existing regulations … as well as risks related to … the company’s classification of drivers as independent contractors.”

Since you’re here…

… we have a small favour to ask. More people are reading The Guardian’s independent, investigative journalism than ever but advertising revenues across the media are falling fast. And unlike many news organisations, we haven’t put up a paywall – we want to keep our reporting as open as we can. So you can see why we need to ask for your help.

The Guardian is editorially independent, meaning we set our own agenda. Our journalism is free from commercial bias and not influenced by billionaire owners, politicians or shareholders. No one edits our editor. No one steers our opinion. This is important because it enables us to give a voice to the voiceless, challenge the powerful and hold them to account. It’s what makes us different to so many others in the media, at a time when factual, honest reporting is critical.

Our journalism is increasingly funded by our readers – thank you for your support. Less than three years ago we had 200,000 supporters; today we have been supported by over 900,000 individuals from around the world. Hundreds of millions read The Guardian’s independent journalism every year but less than 1% of them help fund it. Our long term future will only be secure if we’re able to keep growing this relationship.

Saturday, October 27, 2018

Exclusive : TfLTPH COs Overstepping Their Authority Again. Demanding Passengers Only Use Rear CC Machines

It’s been bought to our attention that TfLTPH COs are overstepping their authority again this morning. 

The TfLTPH staff are loitering at the drop off point at Kings Cross Station. 

They approach drivers seen making credit card transactions using a hand held unit. The COs then inform the driver that they can’t use the hand held unit (a false statement) and must use the one fitted in the rear (again false). 

They then expand on this by telling the driver if they continue with the transaction, they will be reported. 

This is in fact not true. 

There are no regulations or laws saying you can’t offer the passenger a choice of payment options. 

Conflict of financial interest?

It appears as if the COs are acting as agents on behalf of certain Transport for London board member who has a financial interest in certain Credit Card facilities and transaction companies, such as WorldPay. Surely not !!!

     Screen shot from TfL website 

If a customer wants to pay by Green Shield stamps, or with a live chicken and 10 pound of potatoes, as long as the driver agrees, it’s no one’s business but the driver and passenger. 

We comply with the mandate laid down that we must take credit or debit cards in payment for Taxi fares, and we all comply under the conditions of fitness of the vehicle with working machines in the rear.

But that’s as far as our responsibility goes. 

Arrangements can be made to take payment by whatever means are agreeable between the driver and customer, it has nothing to do with TfLTPH. 


We've seen PCOs overstepping their authority before, with their attitude and the way they speak to drivers. They have in the past given instructions they have no authority to give, they've taken property from Taxis they have no right to take. 

It's now been bought to our attention that Mr Nandha's PCOs appear again to be acting beyond their authority

We expect an apology from Anand Nandha head of compliance at TfLTPH as soon as possible.

      Image from on route magazine 

This search of Taxi Leaks archives makes very interesting reading:

Friday, October 26, 2018

Look What Else Is In Store For Us.... Roll Over, Roll Over...

If you walk through the City of London at 08:30 in the morning, you can't fail to notice just how packed the pavements are.

Going against the tide of people is extremely difficult in an environment that is just not designed for walking.

That could be about to change.

Next week, the local authority will take another step towards a bold, radical plan to change the streets in the Square Mile over the next 25 years.

Some streets could be closed to motor vehicles during rush hour and there could be zero emission zones.

There will also be a 15mph speed limit across the district.

The local authority wants to cut the number of vehicles by a quarter by 2025.

The issue of pedestrianisation raises the question again of who cities are for and who should benefit from them.

And any change in road space is contentious and highly charged.

The City's local authority carried out a public consultation and discovered some stark facts.

Cycling CEOs drive out chauffeurs

It found 98% of people travel to the area by walking, cycling or public transport, while 84% think pavements are too crowded.

Four in five people think traffic levels in the City are too high, with 67% saying it contributes to poor air quality, while 59% said it creates an unpleasant street environment.

The authority said it listened to workers and businesses and has to deliver what they want to remain competitive - especially in a post-Brexit world.

It also said it must improve the area to appeal to business and wants to change the priority completely, giving more space to pedestrians and cyclists.

One of the City's councillors, Chris Hayward, told me the age of chauffeur-driven cars is coming to an end.

"We have found that more and more cars don't work," he said.

He said CEOs are often seen now on bikes or walking, but as more offices will be opening, the City must reduce and divert traffic.

Black cab drivers have their concerns.

Steve McNamara of the Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association (LTDA) says pedestrianisation is being dreamt up by middle-class blokes who don't realise how the milk for their caramel lattes is delivered.

"They are strangling the best city in the planet and they don't realise people need to have goods and services delivered," he said.

He thinks the march to pedestrianisation will kill The City.

* Oxford Street 'traffic-free' plans ditched

Living Streets, a charity, disagrees. It said what this shows is how transport has changed and how The City is now listening.

The charity argues a reallocation of road space is long overdue.

An interesting comparison to the City is in Westminster, where the mayor's flagship policy was to pedestrianise a large part of Oxford Street.

Oxford Street has terrible air quality and extremely high collision rates.

Pedestrianisation was due to be London Mayor Sadiq Khan's transport legacy of the first term - £8m was spent by TfL drawing up the plans.

There the original plan has died as the road is owned by Westminster Council.

The council reversed its support of the scheme after opposition from residents who feared traffic displacement. They had threatened to stand as independents in the local elections.

There will now be two pedestrian piazzas although traffic will still run along Oxford Street. <click link

Full pedestrianisation has gone.

Richard Beddoe from Westminster Council said it had to listen to the reaction in the consultation. He believes the council had to ditch the mayor's plan as it only focused on one street and not the wider area.

Privately, City Hall was fuming at that decision.

Whatever route authorities take, they can't please everyone.

The question is, who do they listen to? Residents, workers or drivers? Or is it really about compromise?

Where the balance lies often comes down to political interpretation.

Source : BBC 


Comfirmed, Taxi age limit back on the agenda as TfL determined to hold trade to a certain org leader's alleged promise of 9000 ZEC vehicles by 2020 

Still No Apology From Woodfield Road For The Fake News They Published In Taxi

ReTaxi only bus lanes, eTaxi only ranks, eTaxi only streets and areas are coming to London....and they are coming sooner than later. 

So, what do our orgs intend to do about this obvious attempt to divide the the trade....again.

Another question that hasn't been answered, is why the LTDA tried to lie in their inhouse publication (Taxi) not only to the trade but also their own 10,000 members about TFL's intention to introduce these new measures, which will dramatically effect drivers working conditions in the capital. 

There is also another major question that needs an immediate answer...
What else does the LTDA know, that they are not telling their members, or the trade in general???

With the alleged words "Fake News" being banded about, the London Cab Drivers Club, (for the sake of clarity), asked TfL compliance if the signage featured in a post on Taxi Leaks (which was referred to as Fake news in the LTDA Taxi paper) was actually proposed to the DfT by TfL. 

At the recent TOPS meeting, TfL confirmed they submitted the e-Taxi bus lane templates to the DfT for approval. 

They added that although the signage had been approved, there are no plans (as yet) to introduce the signage on current bus lanes Londonwide. 

But the question now begs to be the LTDA’s Chairman Richard Massett had access to the original templates:-

Why did they crop the TfL logo and address out of the images shown in Taxi? 

Why did they infer that the signage being at the bequest of TfL was rumour and "Fake News"?

Why were they trying to cover up the fact that TfL had submitted the signage and why did they say the e-Taxi bus lane signage was intended for Manchester. A statement that has now been shown to be "FAKE NEWS".  

But it’s all cleared up now, the Fake News was not the post on Taxi Leaks, it was in fact the article that appeared in Taxi Paper. This has been confirmed by TfL. 

Perhaps Chairman Richard Massett would like to publish an apology in the next issue of the LTDA's in house publication, Taxi paper.

Perhaps The LTDA could explain why they tried to cover up TfLTPH E-Taxi Signage  
In Taxi 

As Chairman, is Massett responsible for this Fake News, if so, should he resign ?


Imagine how much work we are going to lose if we can't use bus lanes at peak hours???

It seems the secrecy is to continue with TfL and trade meetings, care of ..... 
You guessed it The LTDA and Unite.