Taxi Driver Online :: View topic - Watford station (again!)

A good fact based article, see you dont need shoddy opinion based rubbish.

Anonymous wrote:

A good fact based article, see you dont need shoddy opinion based rubbish.

Getting off the point again, but when you say you, what you really mean is you.

I'm quite sure the many thousands of people who visit TDO, wouldn't if they didn't like it.

If you want bland boring taxi stories, there are plenty of publications out there, that easily fit that particular bill. :wink:

Strange comment there. :shock:

The story is fact based, by someone who has taken the trouble to get to those facts.

Your starting to sound like the editor of Cab Trade News, and he is anon as well. :wink:

I wouldnt know I have never read cab trade news, is that the one written by John from Manchester?

What you solicitor Friend Mr Davis forgot to point out was the fact the HC drivers were paying £300 per year, Silverlink were giving the docket work to the PH, the PH were paying nothing to Silverlink, answer me this one then? How come AA United are charging 25% more than the HC were, popped into Watford this morning on my way back from London and AA United are charging £15 for a £9 fare, seems like they want their cake and eat it to me.

So ripping the customer off is ok then, phone him tonight and ask him about the trouble there last night when two bouncers employed by AA United tried to stop a woman getting into a HC that she flagged down, the other day she was charged £15 by AA United where as the HC only charge £9, the woman ended up hitting one of the bouncers and telling him to F**K off she'll use who she wants, oh and by the way while we are on the subject ask him about Watford Council next week. See Mr Davis you ought to get out more sitting in your office all day makes you a sad man.

Nidge wrote:

If you wish to report the ongoing situation then by all means do so. As long it is factual you will be free of criticsm.

Best wishes

John Davies

No doubt you and your solicitor Friend Mr Suspect will pick the bones out of it.

Author:	Taxi Driver Online [ Thu Mar 04, 2004 3:10 am ]
Post subject:	Watford station (again!)
Read the article here: http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/watford.htm Note - previously posted on forum. Discuss the issues below!

Author:	Guest [ Thu Mar 04, 2004 3:53 am ]
Post subject:
A good fact based article, see you dont need shoddy opinion based rubbish.

Author:	Sussex [ Thu Mar 04, 2004 12:38 pm ]
Post subject:
I think it all boils down to the fact, that if you shout and scream at those holding all the cards. In this case the lease-holder. Then you, more times than not, will end up with nothing.

Author:	Guest [ Thu Mar 04, 2004 12:42 pm ]
Post subject:
Anonymous wrote: A good fact based article, see you dont need shoddy opinion based rubbish. Getting off the point again, but when you say you, what you really mean is you. I'm quite sure the many thousands of people who visit TDO, wouldn't if they didn't like it. If you want bland boring taxi stories, there are plenty of publications out there, that easily fit that particular bill.

Author:	Guest [ Thu Mar 04, 2004 1:19 pm ]
Post subject:
Anonymous wrote: Anonymous wrote: A good fact based article, see you dont need shoddy opinion based rubbish. Getting off the point again, but when you say you, what you really mean is you. I'm quite sure the many thousands of people who visit TDO, wouldn't if they didn't like it. If you want bland boring taxi stories, there are plenty of publications out there, that easily fit that particular bill. oh I see we have a sun reader here you mean a story has to be twisted and contain blatant lies to hold interest? Bollox

Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

Watford station (again!) http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=424	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Sussex [ Thu Mar 04, 2004 2:34 pm ]
Post subject:
Strange comment there. The story is fact based, by someone who has taken the trouble to get to those facts. Your starting to sound like the editor of Cab Trade News, and he is anon as well.

Author:	Guest [ Thu Mar 04, 2004 4:08 pm ]
Post subject:
Sussex Man wrote: Strange comment there. The story is fact based, by someone who has taken the trouble to get to those facts. Your starting to sound like the editor of Cab Trade News, and he is anon as well. I wouldnt know I have never read cab trade news, is that the one written by John from Manchester?

Author:	Sussex [ Thu Mar 04, 2004 5:47 pm ]
Post subject:
Anonymous wrote: I wouldnt know I have never read cab trade news, is that the one written by John from Manchester? No, Peter the bus-driver.

Author:	Nidge2 [ Fri Mar 05, 2004 2:45 pm ]
Post subject:
What you solicitor Friend Mr Davis forgot to point out was the fact the HC drivers were paying £300 per year, Silverlink were giving the docket work to the PH, the PH were paying nothing to Silverlink, answer me this one then? How come AA United are charging 25% more than the HC were, popped into Watford this morning on my way back from London and AA United are charging £15 for a £9 fare, seems like they want their cake and eat it to me.

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Mar 05, 2004 2:57 pm ]
Post subject:
It's called the free market Nigel. If customers don't want to pay it, then they wont. But I think you have missed the point, it seems that the council and the train operator almost begged the HC lads to put in a tender. They didn't, they followed crap advice, and have lost out. A lesson to us all.

Author:	John Davies [ Fri Mar 05, 2004 3:17 pm ]
Post subject:
Nidge wrote: What you solicitor Friend Mr Davis forgot to point out was the fact the HC drivers were paying £300 per year, Silverlink were giving the docket work to the PH, the PH were paying nothing to Silverlink, answer me this one then? How come AA United are charging 25% more than the HC were, popped into Watford this morning on my way back from London and AA United are charging £15 for a £9 fare, seems like they want their cake and eat it to me. You have selective reading atrributes Nigel. The second paragragh of that article states, "The Taxi drivers withheld payment because they were disputing the rights of Silverlink to install a private hire freephone, increase the annual permit payment and the use of private hire firms for their lucrative account work" Is that clearer now? The permit fee of 355.00 is the figure given by Silverlink and confirmed by Mr Sarwar and another Taxi driver who worked at the Station. If you have a problem with the figure of 355.00? then just for you I'll amend it to read approx 355.00 lol The article was about Watford Station not what AA united may or may not be charging the punters they transport from A to B. You are quite at liberty to write your own article on that score. Best wishes John Davies.

Author:	Nidge2 [ Fri Mar 05, 2004 3:35 pm ]
Post subject:
So ripping the customer off is ok then, phone him tonight and ask him about the trouble there last night when two bouncers employed by AA United tried to stop a woman getting into a HC that she flagged down, the other day she was charged £15 by AA United where as the HC only charge £9, the woman ended up hitting one of the bouncers and telling him to F**K off she'll use who she wants, oh and by the way while we are on the subject ask him about Watford Council next week. See Mr Davis you ought to get out more sitting in your office all day makes you a sad man.

Author:	John Davies [ Fri Mar 05, 2004 4:12 pm ]
Post subject:
Nidge wrote: So ripping the customer off is ok then, phone him tonight and ask him about the trouble there last night when two bouncers employed by AA United tried to stop a woman getting into a HC that she flagged down, the other day she was charged £15 by AA United where as the HC only charge £9, the woman ended up hitting one of the bouncers and telling him to F**K off she'll use who she wants, oh and by the way while we are on the subject ask him about Watford Council next week. See Mr Davis you ought to get out more sitting in your office all day makes you a sad man. Nigel, That report of mine was done several weeks ago. It represented the facts at the time. What transpires from that date on is a completely different issue. What Watford Council may or may not do is irrelevant until they do it. Once they have done it, you can report on it. If you have the ear of Watford council and you know of some news that may be of interest, then I'm sure there are several people who subscribe to this forum who would be interested in seeing it. The conflict at Watford Station was pointed out quite clearly in the report. Ongoing situations are not in my portfolio of events. I have laid the foundation of the facts, the ongoing situation has to be resolved by the parties concerned. If you wish to report the ongoing situation then by all means do so. As long it is factual you will be free of criticsm. Best wishes John Davies

Author:	Nidge2 [ Fri Mar 05, 2004 5:01 pm ]
Post subject:
John Davies wrote: Nidge wrote: So ripping the customer off is ok then, phone him tonight and ask him about the trouble there last night when two bouncers employed by AA United tried to stop a woman getting into a HC that she flagged down, the other day she was charged £15 by AA United where as the HC only charge £9, the woman ended up hitting one of the bouncers and telling him to F**K off she'll use who she wants, oh and by the way while we are on the subject ask him about Watford Council next week. See Mr Davis you ought to get out more sitting in your office all day makes you a sad man. If you wish to report the ongoing situation then by all means do so. As long it is factual you will be free of criticsm. Best wishes John Davies No doubt you and your solicitor Friend Mr Suspect will pick the bones out of it.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Mar 05, 2004 8:51 pm ]
Post subject:
Nidge wrote: No doubt you and your solicitor Friend Mr Suspect will pick the bones out of it. I always find it amusing Nigel, that you think anyone who isn't as thick as you, is a solicitor.