Canning Town minicab driver thought cyclist he crushed while distracted by his mobile phone was a speed bump

Canning Town minicab driver thought cyclist he crushed while distracted by his mobile phone was a speed bump

A MINICAB DRIVER CRUSHED A CYCLIST BECAUSE HE WAS DISTRACTED BY HIS MOBILE PHONE HAS BEEN BANNED FOR DRIVING.

Abdelyekini Olafusi of Hoskins Close, Canning Town, hit the 41-year-old woman at the junction of Theobalds Road and Clerkenwell Road in Islington in May last year.

When the 57-year-old appeared at Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court, the court heard that he was waiting at traffic lights when the lights turned green, he moved off and went to make a right turn.

He clipped the cyclist’s back wheel, and she fell to the ground – but Olafusi kept driving and went over her.

The court heard that he initially thought he had gone over a speed-bump, and that she was lucky she didn’t die.

The victim suffered a broken leg, a fractured pelvis and a wounded chest.

A year later, she is still recovering from her injuries.

Olafusi received a 15 month driving ban and was ordered to pay costs totalling £1260

Detective Sergeant Cheryl Frost said his reckless driving is “a stark reminder of the dangers and consequences of using a mobile phone whilst behind the wheel.

“The victim suffered horrific injuries, and was incredibly lucky not to have been killed.

“Stiffer penalties were recently introduced for drivers who use mobile phones whilst on the road, and we are committed to enforcing these new laws to make London’s roads safer.”

With Time Running Out, Chris Johnson Asks For Your Support To Hold TaxiApps To Account.

With Time Running Out, Chris Johnson Asks For Your Support To Hold TaxiApps To Account.

Dear All,
I am asking for your support to help fund an employment tribunal case against MyTaxi – I have raised just over £11,500 to pay for the legal support that’s needed in bringing this case, however, I need to raise a further £6,500 in total to fully fund this case, therefore, I am respectfully asking for your help in raising this money….here is why I believe this is such an important case for the taxi trade….
Please support here:
What I think an Employment Tribunal against MyTaxi will achieve……
Not every business can get seo backlinks from Freshlinks to market themselves. An Employment Tribunal will define if we are “marketing ourselves to the world” or not in an independent capacity. And for more info read this article given below.
If I lose the case – we can transfer the argument across to the reasonable understanding that if taxi drivers are “marketing ourselves to the world” independently on the App then there is a strong argument that we must be “plying for hire” independently on the app – is this logical?
Plying for hire is all about availability and exhibition and probably not very different to marketing oneself as available for hire, we have our taxi light on when we are available for hire and marketing ourselves “for hire” and off when we’re not marketing ourselves “for hire”.
(**I’ll come back to this point).
I am is bringing an “employment case” against MyTaxi subject to raising £18,000 – it’s not a regulatory case – therefore, we must not confuse the two.
Should I lose the case it’ll be because MyTaxi has successfully argued that I am “marketing myself to the world” via the App as an independent taxi business and not integrated into MyTaxis’ business.
The Taxi trade should then be able to take the arguments from the employment tribunal case and argue that the judgment potentially tells us that we are operating independently on the app and “marketing ourselves to the world” independently via app, then, in my opinion, we would have a strong argument in asking how is this different to plying for hire?
THIS IS ALL OF COURSE IF I LOSE AN EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL.
My opinion is;
The level of control MyTaxi exert over the driver i.e. terminating or suspending drivers without reason, fixed airport fares and other obligations they place on the driver reflects that of a “controlled worker”, therefore, I don’t see how MyTaxi can argue that we are operating independently and on our own, there is simply too much “control” applied by MyTaxi for this to be the case – so, I believe that we are a limb-b workers (a limb-b worker is a category of self-employed and someone with some worker rights).
It’s important to note that we will not lose our self-employed status if I win this worker rights claim. 
**Coming back to plying for hire. 
To obtain a statutory declaration of plying for hire, especially on Apps would be a good thing and I would support anyone for trying, but the problem in doing so, in my opinion, is a judge would have to look at all aspects of existing case law and would potentially take the Uber employment tribunal case into consideration as well, where it was decided that the driver WAS NOT “marketing themselves to the world” independently – the question for me therefore, is “plying for hire” and “marketing yourself to the world” independently one of the same thing?
The Uber employment tribunal found that Uber is in control. i.e. It’s Uber who deactivate/suspend the drivers, control the fare price (same as MyTaxi fixed airport fares) etc.
This fits with the argument that if Uber as an operator is in control and accepting the booking then the booking must be a pre-booking to fit with private hire legislation, in this case, how could the Judge in the Uber Employment Tribunal find that an Uber driver was “marketing themselves to the world” independently as they cannot “ply for hire” independently, the question equally arises, how can a taxi driver be “marketing themselves to the world” when operating outside of their licensed area, given the fact taxi drivers cannot “ply for hire” outside of their licensed area?
So we have in the Uber situation;
• Uber in control of the driver.
• The app job is a pre-booking.
• Result = Driver is a worker for Uber and has limb-b worker rights.
MyTaxi situation;
• Is MyTaxi in control of the driver?
• How can MyTaxi offer jobs to drivers outside of their licensed area unless it’s a pre-booking?
• Result = Is the taxi driver a worker for MyTaxi, and would I win a claim for worker rights?
Maybe it’s wise to suggest, we should first understand if we are “marketing ourselves to the world independently” or not on the app before we ask if we are “plying for hire” on the app – to do this I would need support in this employment tribunal case against MyTaxi.
Outcome.
If I win, drivers using the app will be entitled to basic protections such as the National Minimum Wage, paid annual leave and protection under anti-discrimination legislation. Given the increasing market dominance of these apps these are important rights and winning may well stop apps like MyTaxi illegitimately undercutting individuals who are genuinely operating on their own account.
If I lose, we are potentially “plying for hire” on the app, and therefore, MyTaxi cannot put Private Hire onto the app as it’s illegal for Private Hire drivers to “ply for hire”. I strongly believe that the employment argument also supports anyone trying to obtain a declaration of plying for hire via the courts and any outcome here would be beneficial and supportive to the action of the United Trade Group (UTAG).
If we fail to support an employment tribunal case against MyTaxi then the corporate apps will eat us alive, especially when the taxi fleet is reducing because more diesel cabs are coming off than electric cabs coming online, coupled with very few knowledge students. What happens when MyTaxi have more demand than supply? Would they put minicabs on the app to meet that demand?
Please don’t let us walk blindly into oblivion.
Best Wishes
Chris Johnson.
@InThePinkTaxi
You can now contribute towards the UTAG challenge

You can now contribute towards the UTAG challenge

UTAG have done their bit, delivering a JR which another org alleged could never happen.

Now it’s your turn

Support the team who are supporting the trade.

This is what drivers have been crying out for, no-one is going to do this for us, we need to fund this challenge from within our trade.

There will be those drivers who say they cannot afford to contribute to this, but can any driver afford not to contribute?

There are various different options for contributing over 25 weeks, 50 weeks etc.

Please click on the link below to register and donate.

https://www.unitedtradeactiongroup.com/contact

Police to launch new crackdown on Lisson Grove gang causing misery for taxi drivers

Police to launch new crackdown on Lisson Grove gang causing misery for taxi drivers

The Met has sought to reassure cabbies in St John’s Wood and Lisson Grove by saying it is taking “covert and non-covert” action against a gang in Lisson Grove targeting taxi drivers.

Images have circulated on social media in the last few weeks of young men allegedly part of the gangs that target drivers,

Transport for London has also reminded drivers that they can turn down fares if they feel unsafe.

There’s fewer police officers, and after closures to police stations, there’s only one police station open in each borough overnight. That’s if when you get there you can convince officers to be interested in what’s going on.

You shouldn’t take social media as gospel, but there’s a lot of drivers talking about it on there and it keeps coming up again and again. They need to report it so police can take action,” he said.

A Met Police spokesperson said: “We are currently unable to comment on any ongoing operational activity but officers who regularly patrol this area are aware of a number of offences of theft from cab drivers over the last few months.

When such crimes are reported they will be investigated appropriately to secure evidence to support a prosecution.”

 

Source:

Ham & High

Taxi! Metrocab prototype number one up for grabs

Taxi! Metrocab prototype number one up for grabs

Offered on behalf of its late owner, this unique survivor is no ordinary taxi. Built in 1969 to showcase a new direction of generational cab design, powered by a 1760cc S4 diesel engine churning out 52bhp and mated to a four speed all-syncromesh gearbox; this is Metrocab prototype number one.

Or, as some view it, a forerunner to the Range Rover P38.

First registered for road use in 1970 before undergoing tough and steadfast road trials across Britain for the best part of three years, this prototype then went on display in the London Cab Company museum in South London. After the museum closed, the Metrocab fell into the custody of a former chairman of the London Vintage Taxi Association, here you can book taxi without any problems, this company has the best personal, latest vehicles at a great affordable price and it is so easy and fast to use.

Only two prototypes were crafted sporting such a design, first spotted by the press undergoing traffic flow analysis outside Westminster in 1970. Designed by Metro-Cammel-Weymann as a rival to the Beardmore MK VII, it took some 17 years before manufacture of a production model began – albeit with updated aesthetics.

First hitting Britain’s cities in 1987, and remaining in production until late 2006, the final design utilised the headlamps and grille of the Ford Granada Mk II, with taillights from the Escort Cabriolet. The dashboard originated from the Austin Montego, with switchgear borrowed from the much-lampooned Maestro hatchback.

The original prototype, for sale here, employed the grille and headlamps off Ford’s Cortina Mk II with a bespoke interior and profile not dissimilar to British Leyland’s first stab at creating a pre-production Range Rover design.

The body comprises of a four door frame consisting of six light fibreglass panels with a separate chassis frame, and was originally designed to be lifted off the chassis as a single unit. Unused for the last three years, this Metrocab will most likely require some recommissioning before being capable of long-distance travel.

It’s an incredibly rare opportunity to acquire such a vehicle, and we can bet that such a culturally significant prototype that eventually defined a generation of Londoners, 17 years later than it expected to, won’t hang around for long.