Is it one of these, two of these or all three ? It must be at least one of them !
Quite frankly, the photograph of Boris Johnson sitting at the wheel of one of our work horses, made me feel sick !
Furthermore, the latest U turn on his personal views of what the Uber App represented, made me even more suspicious. As far as this politician and our London Cab Trade are concerned, this man is not to be trusted.Just as Livingstone did, Johnson will betray our trade and united trade support, and the quicker he has left City Hall the better it will be for us.
He is the Head of The Greater London Authority, and yet apparently doesn’t have either the powers or the spine, to control Peter Hendy or Leon Daniels, who answer to him. Or if the truth be known, doesn’t want to.
If he had, then maybe Johnson and Daniels would get their stories to collaborate correctly, and both agree on the same thing. The problem is of course, Johnson now states that the Uber App is a meter, and Daniels says that he thinks it isn’t, and that Uber are licensed are fit and proper to operate under their current operating style, which is of course by using a meter disguised as an app.
Now, to me, this stinks. In fact, the whole network of The London Mayor and his Transport For London system, stinks.
For instance, how is it, that the duty of the driver complaints system for Private Hire is not dealt with by TFL, as it is with us, and instead dealt with apparently by the Operators who they work for ? Could that situation not lead to corruption, or worse still, serious undeclared violations of licence?
Isn’t that like instead of having a referee on a football field, any decisions of whether a foul or penalty should take place, is dealt with by the player’s manager ?
Jim please let me get away with one swear word on this post mate, because this is Bollox !
If Johnson who is Mayor states that the App is a meter, then how can Daniels say “Uber remains a licensed PH operator in London, fulfilling the requirements as set out in private hire legislation.” …….Because they effing ain’t, are they ? They ain’t allowed a meter Daniels, and your governor said so !
It’s the same with the old bollox (last one, Jim !) about the DBS, old CRB check. I quote Daniels again ” To be licensed, and in the absence of a DBS check, a certificate of good conduct is required from the Embassy of the country of origin.”
Are you joking, Leon Daniels ? Are you serious ? You ever been to these countries ? I have ! I could get a driving licence, a marriage licence and a passport and still have enough left over out of a bullseye for a large chicken shawarma with chilli sauce and salad ! A certificate of good conduct from their Embassy ? Who writes these “certificates” out , Bin Hammam from Qatar ? Like many others I know, most of these officials and their Government officers, couldn’t lay in bed straight ! A certificate of good conduct ? Your’e honestly only joking, I know you are ! It’s Christmas after all. We all need pranksters for good cheer !
Try and get a job with MI5 with one of these “certificates” ! They’d laugh you out of Vauxhall !
And yet………..they’re good enough for TFL. As long as you adhere to the guidance, that’s as far as TFL are prepared to go. No pride, no standards, no loyalty to the forensically checked London Licensed Trade, just take all the rubbish from everywhere, as long as you stick to the guidance.
Which brings me back to these illusionists, Uber. Surely, any respectable, licensing authority anywhere, would naturally bodyswerve an outfit as controversial as Uber, until the legalities had been well and truly sorted out and etched in stone ? After all, any transparent and upfront licensing authority wouldn’t want to be associated with anything that may leave embarrassing or dubious history in their tracks. Would it ? Pardon the cliché, but isn’t it more than their job’s worth ?
Since Ubers appearance in London, TFL, Daniels in particular, appear to have welcomed them with open arms. Why is that ? There’s nothing in it personal for them, after all. They are just another mini cab outfit who pay TFL for licences aren’t they ?
It’s strange to see such underlying support from such a controversial mini cab firm, I think. If I were in charge of either surface transport or licensing, Uber’s reputation and previous form would frighten the life out of me. Allegations of world wide complaints regarding sexual assault, invasion of privacy, allegations of data protection abuse. etc etc……….I would run a mile, and I would only be prepared to deal with them when all the legalities of their operational intent had been clarified.
But that’s not the case with TFL, is it ? Why is that then ? After all, London isn’t short of mini cabs is it ? Strange turnout this.
Personally, I don’t think Uber are anywhere near as good as they reckon they are either. Their only asset is of huge financial backing which obviously is an advantageous one, but other than that, their expertise, people skills, driving skills and topography professionalism ain’t worth two bob !
But obviously, we have to challenge them on account of 400 years of principles and professional criteria at stake. Otherwise everybody would be inventing meter apps.
If we let money and financial backing override the laws of our land, we would be no better than the countries I refer to earlier, and the Lord knows how many envelopes stuffed with cash would be flying about.
From way back as far as 2008/2009, I have made posts on this site and others, to say that I think their is a deep hidden agenda in motion here. I thought it back then, and I think it even more today. The rate at which TFL welcome in mini cabs and dish out permits and roundels is breathtaking ! The old chant from LTPH about customers want choice, has been well and truly flooded. There are way more mini cabs in London now, than is required. Yet still the money making mini cab gravy train hurtles down the track.
Everyone is welcome ! Get a “certificate” from your Embassy, get a motor, pay TFL your dosh…….and fill your boots ! Like a nut and a bolt. What could be more simpler ?
And they come, and come, and come and come and come…………..Don’t worry about Enforcement & Compliance either. The two officers they used to have are in Madame Tussauds.
London and TFL are lucky to have at their disposal the very best knowledgable, licensed, medically fit, PROPERLY CHECKED, professional taxi drivers in the world. But they couldn’t give a monkeys about us, or our heritage or our platinum standard.
I agree, that sure, the public should be given a choice, and they do have. But to ignore mega rich offshore companies abusing and finding loop holes in our laws to peddle their inferior service, just because they have the dough to do it, is surely going in the same direction as countries such as Qatar and South Africa..
England used to be proud of it’s upright reputation of integrity, status and compliance. That sadly isn’t true anymore, is it ?
According to Apex, oil and Gas rich foreigners have crawled into our proud heritage and fabric, like maggots on the carcass of a bird. Look around our wonderful City and delve into the complicated and cleverly financed details to reveal the horror. All is not what it seems.
Rest assured that it is not our country anymore, financially anyway. The sway and the power of corrupt foreign investors has left a trail that the very best of forensic accountants would struggle with.
It seems that nothing is sacred anymore, even our country’s professional integrity.
I have personally operated in offshore foreign countries. I have witnessed first hand the power of the pound note and the law of the blade. Nobody is trusted, nobody is safe, and nobody expects to be either. What an awful way to live and work. I was glad to come home. Home to a safe, trusted, respected and decent country. Over the last ten years or so though, my opinion has changed.
It’s a dreadful case of every man for himself. That’s how we are all becoming, and as Jim said in a previous post, it is even rearing it’s ugly head in our trade now, as newer drivers join our ranks.
The answer ? I only wish I knew. I think the cancer has well and truly eaten it’s way into the heart of our old England now.
Even though I think that TFL are out to kill us off, I won’t give up my corner without a fight. It’s the least them betraying, short sighted treason mongers deserve.
And as the old saying goes ” The man with nothing to lose……….has everything to gain !”
Plans for US taxi giant Uber to open a Merseyside office is “another punch for Liverpool cabbies”.
Disquiet is brewing between Merseyside’s hackney taxis and private-hire vehicles. Photo: Matthew Fearn/PA Wire
Liverpool cabbies have vowed to fight moves by controversial ride-on-demand taxi app Uber to launch a new branch in Liverpool.
The US-based firm revolutionised the market in London since its launch in July 2012. Since then, it has expanded into Manchester and Leeds, making Liverpool the fourth city in the UK to be identified by the company as a suitable site for its operations. It already has a presence in 45 countries and more than 200 cities worldwide.
Uber is different from other black cab and private hire taxi services in that it works by customers downloading an app and entering their credit card information. It is now advertising for a general manager in Liverpool.
Uber taxi app
Liverpool Taxi Alliance have vowed to fight the move.
Uber has attracted controversy and been the subject of protests by established taxi firms, who accuse Uber of unfair business practices and compromising passenger safety.
Only last weekend, authorities in the Indian capital, Delhi, banned Uber after a driver allegedly raped a female passenger.
Jimmy Bradley, spokesman for the Liverpool Taxi Alliance – which supports the city’s black cab and private hire drivers, told the ECHO: “If Uber think they’re going to come here like they came into London, they’ve got another thing coming.
Mr Bradley added: “These drivers could be anyone. And this is an international company based in California taking money from loyal, local people.
“It’s just one punch after another, and we’re absolutely sick of it.
“I’ve spoken to private firms, and they’re suffering too. There’s a complete saturation of taxis in the city, and this is people who have been loyal to Liverpool and built up their companies over 25, 30 years.
“Joe Anderson has executive powers to deal with stuff like this, and they’re not being loyal to us.”
Just yesterday, the Spanish government also banned the controversial cab company, with a Madrid court ruling that fares charged by Uber drivers “constitutes unfair competition”.
As Uber began to advertise for a general manager for Liverpool yesterday, the Liverpool Taxi Alliance tweeted a link to the Uber job advertisement, saying: “Be worried! be very worried guys!”
The announcement comes as a further blow to Liverpool’s black cab drivers, after it was announced that Sefton-based taxi giant Delta is to take advantage of a relaxation in regulations and open up an office in the city centre.
Controversial Uber are synonymous with cheap fares, which passengers can order on a mobile phone app.
In India, a 26-year-old woman used the Uber smartphone app to book a taxi home on Friday night but said she was taken to a secluded area and raped.
The Home Ministry wrote to state governments around the country saying: “Following the incident of a heinous crime, the government of Delhi has banned Uber to provide any transport related service in Delhi.”
An illustration picture shows the logo of car-sharing service app Uber on a smartphone next to the picture of an official German taxi sign in Frankfurt, September 15, 2014.KAI PFAFFENBACH/REUTERS
Uber offered a woman £20 ($31) credit after she reported being sexually harassed during a journey in London, it’s been revealed.
In an email exchange seen by Newsweek, the female passenger first notified the company of the driver’s misconduct saying: “Driver was very forward and quite creepy. Asked me if I wanted him to go down on me. Not cool.”
She received a reply from a marketing manager who apologized for the “intrusive experience” and said that their driver operations manager was “already investigating this with [the driver] and I can assure you that the necessary actions will be taken to avoid a similar incident in future”.
The email concluded by thanking the women “for raising this with us – while painful to hear, it’s the best way for us to address any incidents like this”.
However, the female passenger, dissatisfied with this response, then wrote back with a longer explanation of the incident, which took place in March this year. She described how, having initially got in the back of the cab the driver invited her to sit in the front, which she agreed to do, feeling car sick. He then started asking about her relationship status before using increasingly inappropriate language:
“Towards the end of the journey he was asking if I liked blow jobs, saying that he was very good at going down on girls or giving “sucky sucky” to girls and did I want him to do it to me. He even suggested that he could pull over into a side street and do it now if I wanted, which was I think the scariest part of the drive.”
She detailed how, as a woman alone in the car, she felt very uncomfortable and if she hadn’t trusted the Uber name she would have got out the car. She concluded the email:
“I am aware that this kind of thing becomes very much a he-said, she-said kind of deal, but I did want to make you aware of it as I feel that people really trust the Uber name (as I do) and my trust was completely violated. I am pretty relaxed and outgoing and I feel that I can take care of myself, and if I felt so uncomfortable I dread to think how a more timid girl would have felt. I won’t be taking this any further but I do implore you to take this quite seriously as I worry for other women who could find themselves in a similar situation.”
A different Uber marketing manager responded by apologising again, saying that they were “shocked” to hear of her experience. The email then tried to assure the woman that “while things like this should definitely not happen in the first place, in the unlikely event that they do occur we have the full details of the driver, trip and rider on our systems so that we can immediately investigate any concerns raised.”
She went on to say that the trip had been refunded and £20 had been credited to her account “in hope that you will give us a second chance”. The email was signed off: “Sorry again for such an un-Uber experience.”
The woman heard nothing more of the case from Uber.
Newsweek contacted Uber to ask if offering credit to passengers in these circumstances was a company policy. “We take all allegations incredibly seriously,” a spokesman replied.
“Any driver who is accused of acting inappropriately is suspended from the platform while an investigation is undertaken. We would of course refund a trip if an incident had occurred or the rider was not happy.”
The company could not confirm that the driver had been fired, only commenting that the “driver in question is no longer on the Uber platform”. Due to the company’s privacy policy they “don’t divulge the measures taken in relation to either driver partners or riders on the Uber system”, so it remains unclear if the driver lost his contract as a direct result of the stated case.
When asked how many investigations and cases like this Uber London deals with every year and month the spokesperson declined to disclose the figures. When asked if it was an official policy to give credit if the driver has been sexually explicit to a passenger, he replied:
“Fortunately incidences of this nature are so rare that an official policy is not needed. Any incident is handled on a case-by-case basis and taken very seriously. We do of course often refund a trip after a negative experience of any sort, as our customers expect only the highest standard of service from Uber.”
Several other women told Newsweek that they had experienced unwanted advances in Uber cabs in London, including a woman who was offered a massage by her driver four times in the course of a journey late at night, despite giving a firm ‘no’ on each occasion. Despite feeling “very uncomfortable and unsafe”, she didn’t file a complaint with the company.
This is not the first case of a passenger being given credit when they’ve complained over the conduct of an Uber driver. In November Alexandra Craigle, a woman from New York suffering from cancer, reportedly received abusive texts and voicemails from her Uber driver after cancelling the taxi ride home from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center where she was receiving radiation treatment.
Having explained she had the disease and that she’d cancelled the trip in order to go collect her scarf, the driver replied: “Yeah right I think you deserve what happened to you with such a character.” She also says he left her a voicemail calling her an “animal”. Uber reportedly contacted her and offered her $30 credit in compensation.
Valued at $40 billion in its last round of funding, the taxi app has grown exponentially since its launch in 2009 – it operates in 250 cities across 50 countries. But the Uber has come under fire recently following the alleged rape of a passenger in Delhi by a driver, leading to it being banned in the city. Spain, Thailand and the Netherlands have also prohibited the app in the last few weeks.
Boris Johnson appears to be backing London’s cabbies in a row with his transport chiefs over controversial ‘taxi apps’.
Credit: PA
The mayor believes the smartphones used minicab firm Uber are ‘effectively a meter’. If the mayor is right, Uber drivers could be breaking the law.
But Johnson’s verdict contradicts the view held by bosses at Transport for London who granted Uber a Private Hire licence.
Credit: PA
The decision infuriated the black cab trade and led to a series of protests where cabbies blockaded parts of central London
TfL wants the High Court to give a ruling but the case has been delayed by a decision by the cabbies’ union, the LTDA, to launch a private prosecution against four Uber drivers.
Credit: PA
We’ve got to sort this out because what you’ve got is the Uber people using what I think is effectively a meter because you’re reading from it the fare and distance.If it’s a meter then that company is in breach of the act.
But the trouble is the initial advice that TfL got was that it wasn’t a meter. and so we had to.
It doesn’t matter if the calculation is done in outer space as far as I’m concerned, if it’s there in the dial, if the actual meter is there in the cab, then that’s a meter.
Anything that a human being reads is a matter. But this is for the courts determine.
– BORIS JOHNSON, THE MAYOR OF LONDON
Since launching in London over two years ago, hundreds of thousands of Londoners have already embraced Uber connecting them to the safest, most reliable private hire and taxi drivers in this great city.
TfL has already looked at the Uber app and found it to be compliant with regulation, and we welcome its decision to confirm their interpretation – that Uber’s app, installed on a driver’s smartphone, is not a taximeter – in the High Court.
Recent Comments