TfL: Blood On Their Hands, A Warning To Clubbers...by Thomas the Taxi

on 29 June 2007, two un-exploded car bombs were discovered in London. 


The first device was found in a 1989 light metallic green Mercedes 300E saloon car near the Tiger Tiger nightclub in the Haymarket. The device was removed and later disassembled by explosives officers. 


Several reports had been recieved by the police, including one from an ambulance crew (some time after 01:25) who reported seeing smoke inside the car. The ambulance had been called to the nightclub to attend a man who had fallen over and suffered a minor head injury. 

Around 04:00 there were reports that two large gas canisters and a large number of nails had been found inside the car. It had been illegally parked outside, in a TfL 24 hour bus lane for over four hours and never even got a ticket! 


A second device was left in a blue Mercedes-Benz saloon in nearby Cockspur Street. The fact that it was a car bomb, was not discovered until after it was towed away to the car-pound in Park Lane. The reason it had been towed away, it was causing congestion after being abandoned by a nervous terrorist.


London's Park Lane was later cordoned off while the suspicious vehicle was investigated. 


A controlled explosion was carried out on the car and it was found to be packed with 60 litres of petrol, gas cylinders and nails, the same as the car found in the Haymarket.


Scotland Yard, Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur urged people to be "alert and vigilant" and to report any suspicions to the police. 


We have been reporting cars and minicabs, left untouched, uninvestigated night after night outside Tiger Tiger and many other London clubs. 


At the time of the car bomb attack, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith chaired a meeting of the government's emergency response committee. In her first full day in the job, she urged the public to be vigilant. 
Perhaps she should have directed her comments at the Met police, Local councils and TfL. 


Four years on and its plain to see, that these agencies have failed in their duty of care to keep our streets safe. 


Why do the police and local wardens just turn a blind eye?
We have written many times to Local councils, LTPH and TFL. 
Very little action is taken by these agencies, WHY?


Will it take a catastrophic incident with great loss of life before they finally do something?


Well documented Islamic web sites said that these bombs were targeting hen nights as no one would miss these uncovered sluts and whores.


Its happened before and nothing is being done to stop it happening again...




 

The Cumberland Hotel capped fare scheme.. By Taxi Talk Reporter, Mike Hughes

The Cumberland Hotel capped fare scheme started this morning (Monday 29 Aug) - and it has already proved its worth.
Having been reminded about the scheme I turned up at around 6ish to find LeeW? and Johnathan (givati) already there ready to tell people about the scheme. There was a taxi on the rank, I made number 2 and a little while afterwards a Metro cab (I think his name is also Lee) joined us.

With three taxis on the rank we saw what appeared to be a hotel porter come along. He asked if anyone took credit cards. The first taxi said yes at which point the porter asked "How much for an airport". At first we thought he was asking how much it would be for a taxi to the airport but he was actually asking how much we would give him for an airport job! It beggars belief. When he realized he was not going to get anything he was off faster than a scalded cat.

It was then that Johnathan came into his own. When he calmed down (very slightly) he went to the Marriot at Park Lane and discovered that was where the porter had come from. I believe that he spoke (although that may be translated as 'had words') with the duty manager. I am told he also saw the porter slinking into the further recesses of the hotel. I shan't say any more now as there may well be follow up actions on this.

Being a Bank Holiday it was slow but at around 7.15 things started to move. The taxi in front got a 4 hand walk up to Kings X. I moved up and within minutes had three people walk out of the hotel and ask to be taken to Paddington. Before moving off I discovered that they were going to Heathrow. With the help and assistance of Lee, Johnathan and Dizzy who had also joined us the new Capped Fare was explained to them and off I went to Terminal 3 - a very happy bunny indeed!

On the way I further explained the system to my passengers, Robert Alexander and his wife Huang (both well into their 70's) of Orange County, California and their son Mark of Santa Cruz, California. They were absolutely thrilled with the service and the clear maximum pricing structure of the capped fare scheme. Robert said "We are here as tourists. Although we've been before this is the first time we've stayed at the Cumberland Hotel. Whilst it is very pleasant it was a little bit too business like and impersonal for me but this idea really adds that missing personal touch. Now I know about this service it may well persuade me to use the Cumberland again instead of looking elsewhere".

There you have it, the capped fare scheme can also help the hotel's image in the eyes of their clients - a true win, win situation.

I am reliably informed that shortly after that Dizzy got a capped fare which came out of the hotel. There may be a small degree of argument as to who got the first Cumberland Capped Fare but for the moment I am claiming that title.

Keep up the good word chaps. It's small beginnings but you've planted the acorn firmly in the ground. It's up to the rest of us to see that it grows into a full oak tree laden with goodness for all of the London taxi trade.

Original Video - More videos at TinyPic


Editorial Comment:
Lets not forget that this was the system which was put to Mr Oddy, General Secretary of the LTDA by Johnathan. Oddy argued it wouldn't work/couldn't be  done and eventually told Johnathan to "F-Off". (Full meeting can be heard on the Bob Oddy exposed Tapes: Listen here.

Reply To Our Article From TfL

I believe this issue has been discussed on your forum (http://theandersonshelter.blogspot.com/search?q=broad+street) and thought the following might be of interest.

Kind regards

Dan

Liverpool Street Crossrail works – clarification on traffic restrictions

John Mason, Director of London Taxi and Private Hire, said

“There has been quite a bit of speculation and misinformation about the restrictions that are in place around Liverpool Street station – as a result of long-term Crossrail works.

“I thought it would be useful to set the record straight and state clearly and categorically where taxis and private hire vehicles can and can’t go.

“The traffic restrictions do not apply to the whole of Old Broad Street.  Taxis and private hire vehicles can in fact enter Old Broad Street up to Broad Street Avenue.

“These restrictions are likely to be in place for a significant length of time.  We are working closely with colleagues from Crossrail and the City of London to ensure that the disruption is kept to a minimum.  Further changes or removal of restrictions will be communicated to you in due course.”     

Dan Maskell
Transport for London | TfL Press Office, 11th Floor, Windsor House, 42-50 Victoria Street, London, SW1H 0TL.

Editorial Comment:

Dear Dan

Thank you for taking the trouble to contact the Anderson Shelter and for the advice to drivers.

However we have been given similar advice on other occasions and going from past experience drivers are very suspicious of the consequence of setting down past the parking restriction poles.

I myself had a battle with Westminster Council after being issued a ticket on the licensed Taxi rank outside Tiger Tiger after being told by PCO/TfL that I could legally rank outside the venue. 

My appeal was turned down by the council and an appointment was made with the adjudicator. I was offered no help from the then PCO or TfL. The matter was only resolved after the intervention of Council leader Collin Barrow.

Our suggestion is that the poles need to be moved to the junction of Broad Street Avenue, that way there can be no issue with CoL parking Wardens.

James Thomas 

Editor The Anderson Shelter Taxi Blog.

From TfL's Ministry of Mis-information.

John Mason

John Mason, Director of London Taxi and Private Hire, said

“There has been quite a bit of speculation and misinformation about the restrictions that are in place around Liverpool Street station – as a result of long-term Crossrail works.

“I thought it would be useful to set the record straight and state clearly and categorically where taxis and private hire vehicles can and can’t go.

“The traffic restrictions do not apply to the whole of Old Broad Street. Taxis and private hire vehicles can in fact enter Old Broad Street up to Broad Street Avenue.

“These restrictions are likely to be in place for a significant length of time. We are working closely with colleagues from Crossrail and the City of London to ensure that the disruption is kept to a minimum. Further changes or removal of restrictions will be communicated to you in due course.” 

Editorial Comment:
Perhaps Mason should have made a field trip instead of relying on his fish-shop chums at the LCDC. The signs are in fact at the junction of Old Broad Street and London Wall with just a 10 foot clearance. A second Taxi would be stopped within the crossing markings. 

Any Taxi Dropping passenger past the poles is at the mercy of the Traffic Wardens. You will then have to apply to see the Traffic Management Oder and make an appeal. As most Taxi drivers cant be bothered and just pay up, that would be that.


The City of London and many other local councils have made a fortune from the Taxi trade, knowing full well that drivers rarely challenge a ticket. Truth is 43% of all appeals are successful and in Hackney, for some reason (could it be their wardens are encouraged to give out illegal tickets?) the success rate is 75%.


The situation is not helped by the LTDA who's policy is to tell drivers they will deal with ticket, then secretly pay at a discounted rate using subscribers money. 


The most sensible thing to have done would be to remove the thick red line in Bishopsgate until we get back to normal. But no its actually been re-painted!!!
Why make the traveling public drag their luggage hundreds of yards to reach this mail terminal.


Its called common sense John, something we don't see very often coming from LTPH.


Or is that what this is really about, to alienate the public against the Best Taxi Service In the World.
TtT.

..........................................................

Unite on stage Paul Walsh, Grant Davis and Peter Rose

Try Cab Enforcement's New On-Line Complaint form...its simple. TtT

Reporting touting and illegal cab activity

Licensed and law abiding taxi and private hire drivers and other members of the public often have valuable information on touting and other cab-related offences across London.

If you have information then please let us know. Such information is valuable in helping our Safer Transport Command tackle the problem.

What is touting?

• Any private hire vehicle that isn't booked, isn't legal and isn't safe
• Only taxis (black cabs) can be hailed and can pick up customers on the street without a booking
• If a private hire or minicab driver approaches you on the street or accepts your journey without a booking it is illegal, even if the driver is licensed by TfL

Drivers that tout are committing a criminal offence under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. Drivers arrested and charged with touting are also charged with having no valid insurance (for carrying passengers).

Drivers that tout for business are commonly referred to as touts, illegal cabs or unbooked minicabs.

Reporting

If you have information about touting or other illegal cab activity, please use this form. Alternatively, you can call 0845 300 7000 or email ltph.enforcement@tfl.gov.uk. When submitting a report, please provide as much detail as possible about the incident or issue. 

Please note you should not use this form if you are reporting a specific crime or require a real time response. If you are reporting a crime or require a response then you should report the incident directly to the Metropolitan Police Service on 0300 123 1212 (24 hour). In an emergency call 999.

Why Not give it a go

Just Click Here

Motorists could get CCTV fines refunded

As many as 24 local authorities face potential claims from motorists after a successful challenge to a ticket by a driver in Richmond-upon-Thames, west London.

Nigel Wise contested a ticket issued by a mobile unit claiming that the device had not been formally approved by the Department for Transport.

His appeal was upheld by the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service and the council also agreed to pay Mr Wise £50 costs.

Richmond Council alone estimates that its liability could be as high as £1.05 million if it refunds an estimated 20,000 parking tickets issued between 2009 and 2011.

Proposals to refund the money, drawn up by Lord True, Richmond’s leader, will be considered by the council next month.

But in its own trade journal, Parking News, the industry estimates that as many as 24 councils could find themselves in the same position as Richmond.

The mobile CCTV units which use cameras fitted to a periscope are normally found on Smart cars.

They have been commonplace in London for several years and their use has spread to the provinces following a change in the law in 2008.

Councils using the units, whose fine have been subject to appeal, include Medway, Wirral, Bournemouth, Basildon, Plymouth, and Bolton.

Other authorities could find their parking fines challenged unless they can show that the complied with the small print of the Traffic Management Act 2008, which requires formal approval before the mobile cameras are allowed on the streets.

In particular they should check the paperwork sent by the Government’s Vehicle Certification Agency, which was found to be defective in the Richmond case.

Many motorists have been incensed by the cameras especially when they see the units brazenly parked on double yellow lines.

In her latest report, published earlier in the summer, Caroline Sheppard, the chief traffic adjudicator outside London, said councils should make sure the mobile units complied with the law.

This followed complaints about the quality of evidence provided by the mobile units which was often found to be unclear.

There had also been allegations by motoring groups that the mobile units were being used for “fine harvesting.”

In her report Mrs Sheppard said that the mobile cameras should only be used with “fairness and integrity.”

“The dash for cash through the sheer number of PCN’s which CCTV can dish out has clearly caught out some local authorities and deservedly so,” said Paul Watters of the AA.

They are quick enough to chastise drivers for minor parking bloomers yet think they can get away with wholesale rule breaking.

“In 2008 we were promised a fairer enforcement system for all but despite efforts to bring this about even that new guidance was not adhered to – its is tough for local authorities to repay large sums when budgets are being cut but it is a lesson that should be learned given the fact something like 10m penalty charge notices are issued every year”. 

One Law for us and another law for them?

Bus Driver In Court Charged With Causing Death by Careless Driving...By Jason Byrne.

Ming Wei Tan, 20.

A bus driver has today appeared in court charged with causing the death of a Cambridge University Medical student.
Ming Wei Tan a 20year old from Singapore, was hit by the bus outside Belsize Park Underground Station on Haverstock Hill  and then dragged more than half a mile under the wheels of the double decker.

Today Shahriar Firouzian, 51, appeared at Highbury Corner magistrates' court, charged with causing her death by careless driving.


He spoke only to confirm his name, address and date of birth during today's brief hearing, where a not guilty plea was entered on his behalf.


Four days after the death of Ms Tan, her boyfiend George Starling, 19, committed suicide. The young mans father, Lieutenant Colonel John Starling said his son had been "tipped over the edge" by the death of Ms Tan, only five months after the death of his mother Deborah.


Martha Godwin, prosecuting, told the court today: "The defendant was driving a bus. The victim collided with the bus and was dragged for a distance of approximately 825 metres."
Granting him unconditional bail, District Judge James Henderson said: "The allegation is too serious for this court to deal with. It needs to be dealt with at the crown court."  
The case will be submitted again at the same court for a committal hearing on October 6.


Editorial Comment:

It hasn't gone unnoticed, that the driving standard of London's buses has dropped to an unacceptable level, Just a five minute drive along Oxford Street would show this. Cut backs in staff training have led to applicants driving buses on the street of the capital in just a few weeks. 

Many accidents are occurring and members of the public are dying. 

Is it time to re-train these drivers to a higher standard?

.............................................

Message from our Scrap the Satellite Office Campaign!

Another Rickshaw Rape in Central London... by Thomas the Taxi

A doctor was raped by a rickshaw driver after a night out in London during the early hours on February 5., a court has heard.

The woman, in her 20s, was attacked after her friend departed and she was left alone with Turkish-born Murat Durmus, 23. 

The Doctor who had kept her sexuality a secret, was forced to come out to her family because of her ordeal, the Old Bailey was told.

The woman and her girlfriend had walked around the road closures near Tottenham Court Road and decided to catch a rickshaw, which ply for trade all over the West End, to their homes near Tower Bridge.

Her friend was first to get out and the doctor was left alone to continue her journey in the rickshaw with Durmus.

A passer-by noticed Durmus arguing with the doctor, telling her to get back inside the rickshaw. When the passer-by intervened, the doctor grabbed his arm and said she wanted to go with him. But Durmus insisted he was owed money by the doctor.

The Good Samaritan accompanied the pair to a cash-point but left when the woman walked away and Durmus rode off.

The woman said: "Things got a bit hazy then, I honestly don't remember how it all started, but I remember telling him to leave me alone".

Lisa Matthews, prosecuting, said: "The CCTV shows the defendant picking her up and putting her into the rickshaw and then driving around".

The jury were shown CCTV footage of Durmus as he cycled through the deserted streets sometimes doubling back on himself.

Ms Matthews added: 'Her next memory was being raped by him. That happened she thought, in the rickshaw".

Because she had been drinking heavily, she remembered something of standing up and then lying down.

She said she was crying and saying 'no', but he put his hand over her mouth to stop her screaming.

After raping her, Durmus cycled off leaving the woman to make her own way home, the court was told.

Ms Matthews said: "She was very distressed by what had happened and told her flatmate that she had been raped. She also told her brother who was staying with her".

Her family at that stage did not know she was in fact Gay and she found it very difficult to tell them what had happened.

The doctor was able to give police a description of her alleged attacker and his rickshaw and 13 days later he was tracked down and arrested.

The court heard DNA from Durmus was found inside his alleged victim.

Durmus of Walthamstow, denies two counts of rape and claimed the sex was consensual.

He Said "She had approached me, took my hand and went into a corner and kissed me. We returned to my rickshaw and went to a garage area". 

He said she initiated the approach.'

The trial is expected to last two weeks.

' 

 REMEMBER 2005...
'£1' rickshaw driver jailed for rape
23 March 2005
A RICKSHAW driver has been jailed for eight years for raping a drunk passenger he promised to take home for just £1.

Colombian Luis Rozo, 29, was found guilty of attacking the 21-year-old girl in a dark alley off Herbrand Street, St Pancras.

Rozo picked up his victim after a night out in the West End and agreed to take her back to her parents' house in Camden Town for a bargain price.

But instead he pulled up in a dead end and attacked the girl, who had been drinking heavily. But Rozo was unaware that he was being watched by a resident, Snaresbrook Crown Court heard.

Andrew Halsey, 47, saw the rickshaw from his flat and dialled 999.

London taxis voted best in world

World travellers have voted London's taxis the best but also the most expensive.

The traditional London black cab was streets ahead of its nearest rival - the New York yellow taxi - in a survey of nearly 5,000 travellers from 23 countries by Hotels.com.

London was placed top in five of the seven categories voted on, being first in its class for safety, friendliness, cleanliness, quality of driving, and knowledge of the area.

Hong Kong cabs were in third place overall, with Tokyo fourth and Singapore fifth. Dublin cabs were ninth.

Those polled considered New York taxis to be the most available but also reckoned the Big Apple cabbies had the worst knowledge of their area.

Bangkok's taxis offered the best value for money but their drivers were voted the worst in the world.

The poll also found:

:: Britons reported losing a number of items in cabs, ranging from a hamster to a flute, while one Korean traveller lost a dried cuttlefish;

:: Argentinians were the worst tippers, with Hong Kong residents the most generous;

:: Italians were the only nationals who put cleanliness ahead of safety in choice of cabs;

:: Koreans were the least appreciative of the famous London cabbie, with 37% admitting to hating "chatty drivers".

Hotels.com communications director Alison Couper said: "It's great to hear that London has won the best taxi accolade for the fourth year running."

Editorial Comment:
Again, for the fourth year running, we have been voted the Best Taxi Service In the World.
Its such a shame that our own licensing authority (TfL) is not of the same opinion and doesn't show any appreciation of the standard of service provided by London's 24,000 Licensed Taxi Drivers.

It would also be very interesting to see a list of the worlds worst private hire service. Bet we would rank pretty high on that list as well!.
TtT. 

Minicab driver Masood Ahmed guilty of 'sickening' rape

A minicab driver has been jailed for 11 years for raping and threatening to kill an 18-year-old woman in Surrey.

Masood Ahmed, 26, of Seaforth Avenue, New Malden, south-west London, was sentenced at Guildford Crown Court.

The woman was attacked by Ahmed in Parvis Road in West Byfleet in the early hours of 13 August 2010.

Det Ch Insp Steve Hayes said: "This was a sickening assault by Ahmed who saw an opportunity to attack a lone woman in the quiet early hours and took it."

Ahmed was sentenced to nine years in prison for each of the two counts of rape he was convicted of, and five years for a charge of assault, to run concurrently.

He also received two years for one count of making threats to kill, to run consecutively.

Mr Hayes added: "I am extremely pleased with the sentences handed down today.

"Stranger attacks of this nature are treated very seriously.

"Surrey Police put every available resource into this inquiry and our work paid off with Ahmed identified and arrested within 24 hours.

"I am very proud of the efforts made by the whole investigation team."

Surrey Police said Ahmed, who worked for a firm in London, had forced the woman into woodland, put his hands around her throat and threatened to kill her before he assaulted and raped her.

Officers recovered a number of items from the scene including a petrol receipt which allowed detectives to trace Ahmed from CCTV at a filling station.


Editorial Comment:
Its seems the BBC News website has finally started to research these cases properly. This is the first time in years that a predatory minicab sex fiend has not been referred to as a Taxi driver. Well done Beeb, keep it up. 

Minicab Wannabes Told By Court to Stay Out Of Bus Lanes...By Thomas the Taxi.

Again the good name of our trade has come under attack from lazy journalism. This time from an online magazine aimed at the City of London called "City AM". Read Here
In her article in the daily capitalist column about the reintroduction of foot messengers to the square mile, HARRIET DENNYS refers to John Griffin as  Britain’s best-known Taxi driver. Surely an insult to every licensed Taxi driver who has completed the knowledge. 

Harriet Dennys

Harriet obviously hasn't done her research. Griffin has never been a Taxi driver, he never had the strength of character to make the grade. He is in fact no more than a back street minicab driver who found a way of amassing a fortune on the backs of extremely low paid foreign workers desperate for a job. Apart from the fact he tells his drivers to park on licensed Taxi ranks, there the similarity ends.


You would think that writing for an online City magazine, Harriet would at least take the time to do some basic research into articles she posts but no, sadly not. She goes on and actually calls him a Taxi Tycoon later in her article. 


In her interview Griffin takes a pop at the trade he aspired to emulate and now despises, saying;
Addison Lee is on an “upwards spiral”, with revenue up 22 per cent for the year to date, lifted by the new iPhone app for mobile bookings – “the single biggest contributor to revenue upturn in the company’s history”. “The days of standing in the street waving your hand to get a cab are over.”

MEANWHILE, Addison’s Lee’s legal battle to win the right to use bus lanes has come to a disappointing (for him) conclusion. The court has refused the minicab firm’s appeal, in a judgment that has left him fuming.

Griffin has been on tenterhooks for weeks to hear whether he would secure the ruling to allow his vans in Bus Lanes.

“We are only seeking fairness,” said Griffin, who plans to seek a judicial review.

“We demand the right to trade on a level playing field with our competitors.”

That's easy done Johnny, just get your minicab drivers to do the knowledge and buy a fleet of proper Taxis. That way they can legally drive in most bus lanes and use licensed Taxi ranks, instead of flouting the law.

Mind you Johnny, you wont get away with paying them the minimum wage, so you probably wont be doing that!

Harriet, next time you get in one of Griffins vans, ask the driver how much he earns an hour, I promise you, you will be shocked!

If you feel like complaining to her Editor, He is Allister Heath, his email address is 
allister.heath@cityam.com


Also on twitter
@AllisterHeath 

TFL and Taxi Idling... by David Davis.

It seems that the latest ridiculous emissions strategy by TFL to reduce emissions by imposing a regulation to stop taxis idling is just another ploy to hide the facts; they have no proper knowledge of understanding as to how to implement an effective emissions reduction strategy so they have decided to do something which sounds good for political reasons.

The concept of reducing emissions by stopping vehicles idling is a valid one. However most of the research for this has been conducted in the US where they have tested light duty gasoline (petrol) engines and heavy duty diesel engines. They do not  have an abundance of Light Duty Diesel Vehicles in the US and therefore there does not seem to be any test evidence for these vehicles.

As a Public Body TFL have legal requirements with regards to their decisions and practices.

It is a pre-requisite of a fair and lawful process that it should be known in advance to those who must comply with it: see R (Walmsley) v Lane [2005] EWCA Civ 1540, in particular Sedley L.J.‟s observation at [57] that “it is inimical to good public administration for a public authority to have and operate such a policy without making it public” and that failure to do so “exposes such an authority to the risk of lawsuits based on ignorance of how it has gone about taking the material decision”.

In order for TFL to have complied with this legal requirement they should have conducted proper testing at a Vehicle Certification Agency Lab, which would mean testing the actual vehicle  that they are imposing this restriction to ie a London Taxi and use  the exact drive cycle of a London Taxi ie not the Euro 3 drive cycle in which a taxi reaches speeds of 70 mph but a drive cycle in which the taxi drives at the speeds that it would in London (an average of 8 mph).

The reason that they need to test an actual London Taxi is because the engine design of most London Taxis is very basic. The Fairway, TX1 and TX2 do not have a complicated electronic management system and therefore the test results of other vehicles that do and show benefits of idling are not applicable. The requirement for a proper drive cycle is because the main pollution problems in London relate to Particulate Matter and Nox. A Diesel Particulate filter operates effectively when it is at its ‘light up temperature’. This is obviously more easily achieved when the engine is warmed up. It is also the case that an older basic engine creates pollution when it is cold; its easy to see smoke from the tailpipe when you start the engine from cold and not when the engine is idling.

Regardless of whether or not the idling restrictions are effective, the bottom line is that TFL have again acted improperly and targeted London Taxis with another ineffective strategy. The age limit for taxis that is due to be implemented in January is also improper and does not comply with the legal requirement cited above;

1/ In 2006 and again in March 2010 the Department of Transport issued a Best Practice Guide to give Local Authorities and Taxi Licensing bodies guidance as to the regulations that they should operate by.

In this guidance they said with regards to Age Limits

‘‘It is perfectly possible for an older vehicle to be in good condition. So the setting of an age limit beyond which an authority will not license vehicles may be arbitrary and inappropriate’’

They are saying that it is not good practice and not appropriate to impose age limits and yet TFL have completely ignored this.

The full report can be seen here http://www2.dft.gov.uk/pgr/regional/taxis/bestpractice/pdf/guide.pdf

2/ TFL have conducted absolutely no emissions conformity testing to show that older taxis are creating more pollution than newer taxis. As a Public Body they are required by law to make reasonable and rational decisions. It is not reasonable or rational to just guess that older taxis are creating more pollution; TFL should have conducted proper tests on all ages of taxis to prove that this is the case.

There has actually been independent testing carried out which shows that the opposite is actually true; older taxis do not necessarily create more pollution that newer taxis.

3/In 2007/2008 TFL implemented an Emissions Reduction Project, which made it compulsory for Taxis of a certain age to be fitted with an emissions reduction system that had been approved by TFL. These systems were fitted at great expense (more than £2000 per system) and this was done so on the expectation that these taxis could continue to be used as they now achieved a Euro 3 Emissions Standard. It is not therefore reasonable and rational to now say that these vehicles must now be scrapped having forced taxi owners to spend money on having an emissions system fitted.

It is also not reasonable or rational to say that these older vehicles, (which by TFLs own definition are now Euro 3 compliant ) must be scrapped and at the same time allow other Euro 3 vehicles i.e. TX2s to remain on the road.

TFL have stated that the age limit will be introduced to reduce emissions. If they are to comply with their legal requirements for fair and consistent decisions then they would have to say that ALL Euro 3 Taxis must be taken off the road, not just taxis of a certain age because by their own definition they are doing this to reduce emissions and not to persecute owners of older taxis.

4/ In a recent High Court Judicial Review taken by Taxi Drivers in Newport in Wales against the licensing Authority who were trying to impose an age limit, the age limit on Taxis was ruled to be unlawful by the Judge.

One of the reasons given in the ruling which deemed the imposition of an Age Limit unlawful, was the fact that the Licensing Authority had failed to conduct proper consultation (which is again part of its legal requirement as a Public Body)

In London TFL has conducted token consultation with some Taxi trade representatives. However this consultation has not been conducted fairly or properly.

5/ The taxi trade representatives may have conceded to a15 year age limit because TFL was trying to impose a 10 year age limit. This means that they have effectively been coerced into accepting an age limit by thinking that it was the best option available. The fact is that they should not have been forced into accepting an age limit at all. This does not constitute proper consolation.

In addition the taxi trade representatives did not consult with their members at all. In order for this to have been a proper consultation the trade representatives should have conducted proper and fair consultation with their members before accepting any decisions. This was not done.’’

6/ TFL have not taken into consideration the age of the engine. Many of the older taxis have had there engine replaced with a newer engine and therefore their levels of pollution are no greater than that of a taxi which is 5 years old.

I personally believe that TFL as an entity does not operate in a proper and lawful way. However the taxi trade has themselves to blame for allowing this to happen.

I am an outsider looking in  and it is plain to see that the reason that TFL has the ability to continue to act improperly is because the London Taxi trade has no unified representation. The organisations which are supposed to represent you seem to be run by people who have their own personal agendas in mind ie they run a taxi business and are looking for the best solution for themselves. The majority of London Taxi drivers seem to be apathetic; they have the ‘Im all right Jack’ mentality and dont care about the principles of what is taking place.

At the end of the day the London Taxi trade has to make a choice; either put aside your political and personal differences and take proper united action, or as someone else has said ‘assume the position’ and let TFL do whatever they want (whether its proper and lawful of not).

Dave Davies, Eco-Power