Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Fri May 08, 2026 1:07 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 61 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
toots wrote:
Quote:
“The only details they provided were about insurance costs – and fuel prices are falling.


That's as maybe, but, how much have they risen since the last fare increase?

Quote:
We aren’t aware of any drivers leaving the trade


Leave and go to work where?

Quote:
The majority of people have had to cope with a wage freeze for the last three years


Does that mean less people are getting taxis to help meet the financial burden for the drivers?

Quote:
there is a danger of taxi drivers pricing themselves out of the market


Ahh I see now, they're refusing the fare rise for the good of the taxi driver, silly me :roll:

Quote:
We recognise and have a degree of sympathy that costs have increased, but there’s a feeling among members that the trade needs to absorb cost increases as best they can


Of course they do because they haven't got to maintain and run a taxi ffs

Quote:
“While committee members had every sympathy with taxi drivers, who like most members of the public are hard-working and doing their best to earn a living in the current climate, everyone is suffering and there cannot be exceptions.”


Perhaps somebody should tell our politicians that, we could save a fortune in expenses for them.

Quote:
Hafeas Rehman, association chairman, said: “The drivers will be very, very disappointed and some will be very angry.


So I wonder what they will do about it?


fuel prices aren't falling ffs................they've gone up 3p per litre this week

toots is right, insane but right, people are so much sh*tting themselves about their jobs the " The majority of people have had to cope with a wage freeze" argument has as much relevance as the GMB union.........costs are increasing so prices have to increase.....unless Sheffield council want their taxi fleet to become the stalwarts of the fight against inflation ffs

Again the council mention the wage freeze......okay cards on the table.....its actually their wage freeze.......they freezed the wages of their staff and because they did that.....and the unions representing their workers had no b*llocks.............. everyone else has to suffer.

We've made cuts.....so you have to eat horsemeat.

In any reality these people are basically c*nts.

Best Wishes

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:22 pm
Posts: 14152
Location: Wirral
CC wrote:
fuel prices aren't falling ffs................they've gone up 3p per litre this week


You're being robbed :lol:

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 7:33 pm
Posts: 1117
Location: City of dreaming spires
£1.49 is the highest I've seen for a litre of diesel:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
187ums wrote:
£1.49 is the highest I've seen for a litre of diesel:



same around here but ive seen £142.9 across in Newcastle

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—for ever.”
George Orwell, 1984

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Britons Weary of Surveillance in Minor Cases


Published: October 24, 2009


POOLE, England — It has become commonplace to call Britain a “surveillance society,” a place where security cameras lurk at every corner, giant databases keep track of intimate personal details and the government has extraordinary powers to intrude into citizens’ lives.

Jenny Paton with her daughters Thea, left, and Esme last month at their home in Poole. A school application by a third and youngest daughter set off a local council's surveillance of the family.

A report in 2007 by the lobbying group Privacy International placed Britain in the bottom five countries for its record on privacy and surveillance, on a par with Singapore.

But the intrusions visited on Jenny Paton, a 40-year-old mother of three, were startling just the same. Suspecting Ms. Paton of falsifying her address to get her daughter into the neighborhood school, local officials here began a covert surveillance operation. They obtained her telephone billing records. And for more than three weeks in 2008, an officer from the Poole education department secretly followed her, noting on a log the movements of the “female and three children” and the “target vehicle” (that would be Ms. Paton, her daughters and their car).

It turned out that Ms. Paton had broken no rules. Her daughter was admitted to the school. But she has not let the matter rest. Her case, now scheduled to be heard by a regulatory tribunal, has become emblematic of the struggle between personal privacy and the ever more powerful state here.

The Poole Borough Council, which governs the area of Dorset where Ms. Paton lives with her partner and their children, says it has done nothing wrong.

In a way, that is true: under a law enacted in 2000 to regulate surveillance powers, it is legal for localities to follow residents secretly. Local governments regularly use these surveillance powers — which they “self-authorize,” without oversight from judges or law enforcement officers — to investigate malfeasance like illegally dumping industrial waste, loan-sharking and falsely claiming welfare benefits.

But they also use them to investigate reports of noise pollution and people who do not clean up their dogs’ waste. Local governments use them to catch people who fail to recycle, people who put their trash out too early, people who sell fireworks without licenses, people whose dogs bark too loudly and people who illegally operate taxicabs.

“Does our privacy mean anything?” Ms. Paton said in an interview. “I haven’t had a drink for 20 years, but there is nothing that has brought me closer to drinking than this case.”

The law in question is known as the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, or RIPA, and it also gives 474 local governments and 318 agencies — including the Ambulance Service and the Charity Commission — powers once held by only a handful of law enforcement and security service organizations.

Under the law, the localities and agencies can film people with hidden cameras, trawl through communication traffic data like phone calls and Web site visits and enlist undercover “agents” to pose, for example, as teenagers who want to buy alcohol.

In a report this summer, Sir Christopher Rose, the chief surveillance commissioner, said that local governments conducted nearly 5,000 “directed surveillance missions” in the year ending in March and that other public authorities carried out roughly the same amount.

Local officials say that using covert surveillance is justified. The Poole Borough Council, for example, used it to detect and prosecute illegal fishing in Poole Harbor.

“RIPA is an essential tool for local authority enforcement which we make limited use of in cases where it is proportionate and there are no other means of gathering evidence,” Tim Martin, who is in charge of legal and democratic services for Poole, which is southwest of London, said in a statement.

The fuss over the law comes against a backdrop of widespread public worry about an increasingly intrusive state and the growing circulation of personal details in vast databases compiled by the government and private companies.

“Successive U.K. governments have gradually constructed one of the most extensive and technologically advanced surveillance systems in the world,” the House of Lords Constitution Committee said in a recent report. It continued: “The development of electronic surveillance and the collection and processing of personal information have become pervasive, routine and almost taken for granted.”

The Lords report pointed out that the government enacted the law in the first place to provide a framework for a series of scattershot rules on surveillance. The goal was also to make such regulations compatible with privacy rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights.

RIPA is a complicated law that also regulates wiretapping and intrusive surveillance carried out by the security services. But faced with rumbles of public discontent about local governments’ behavior, the Home Office announced in the spring that it would review the legislation to make it clearer what localities should be allowed to do.

“The government has absolutely no interest in spying on law-abiding people going about their everyday lives,” Jacqui Smith, then home secretary, said.

One of the biggest criticisms of the law is that the targets of surveillance are usually unaware that they have been spied on.

Indeed, Ms. Paton learned what had happened only later, when officials summoned her to discuss her daughter’s school application. To her shock, they produced the covert surveillance report and the family’s telephone billing records.

“As far as I’m concerned, they’re within their rights to scrutinize all applications, but the way they went about it was totally unwarranted,” Ms. Paton said. “If they’d wanted any information, they could have come and asked.”

She would have explained that her case was complicated. The family was moving from their old house within the school district to a new one just outside it. But they met the residency requirements because they were still living at the old address when school applications closed.

At the meeting, Ms. Paton and her partner, Tim Joyce, pointed out that the surveillance evidence was irrelevant because the surveillance had been carried out after the deadline had passed.

“They promptly ushered us out of the room,” she said. “As I stood outside the door, they said, ‘You go and tell your friends that these are the powers we have.’ ”

Soon afterward, their daughter was admitted to the school. Ms. Paton began pressing local officials on their surveillance tactics.

“I said, ‘I want to come in and talk to you,’ ” she said. “ ‘How many people were in the car? Were they men or women? Did they take any photos? Does this mean I have a criminal record?’ ”

No one would answer her questions, Ms. Paton said.

Mr. Martin said he could not comment on her case because it was under review. But Ms. Paton said the Office of the Surveillance Commissioners, which monitors use of the law, found that the Poole council had acted properly. “They said my privacy wasn’t intruded on because the surveillance was covert,” she said.

The case is now before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, which looks into complaints about RIPA. It usually meets in secret but has agreed, Ms. Paton said, to have an open hearing at the beginning of November.

The whole process is so shrouded in mystery that few people ever take it this far. “Because no one knows you have a right to know you’re under surveillance,” Ms. Paton said, “nobody ever makes a complaint.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/world ... d=all&_r=0

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news ... ull/129510

TT's press release made the Morning Star :lol:

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Sheffield taxi drivers plan street protest over CCTV cameras



TAXI and minicab drivers are set to bring a Yorkshire city centre to a standstill as part of a continuing protest at a council ruling which forces them to install CCTV in their vehicles.

Sheffield Council has also been threatened with legal action over the new policy, announced on February 5, which licensing bosses claim will improve both driver and passenger safety.

The Yorkshire Post reported last month that drivers would be angry if the scheme was imposed, and yesterday the chairman of the city’s taxi trade federation branded the idea “madness”.

Hafeas Rehman, who represents Sheffield’s hackney carriage drivers, has already threatened the council with judicial review proceedings, a move which is now backed by the GMB union.

Plans for compulsory CCTV cameras in other cities have caused controversy, with Oxford Council withdrawing a similar ruling and Southampton Council being forced to revise its policy.

Mr Rehman said installing CCTV in Sheffield’s 2,000 taxis and private hire vehicles would cost individual drivers £500 each, a cost which was not sustainable in the current financial climate.

He added: “Just a week before making this announcement, the council’s licensing committee refused drivers permission to increase the fares we charge by a few pence.

“As a group, taxi drivers in Sheffield have worked hard with the council and police on crime prevention and safeguarding children issues and then we get this kind of slap in the face.”

In a report recommending the move, Sheffield Council’s head of licensing, Steve Lonnia, referred back to a case in which a taxi driver lost an eye when he was attacked by a passenger last summer.

CCTV has also been justified by some supporters who cite the case of Sheffield driver Zahoor Mahmood who was jailed last August after being convicted of sexually assaulting two female passengers.

But Mr Rehman claimed these were isolated cases. He said forcing drivers to use CCTV “sent out the wrong message” and added: “It is ridiculous. Are they trying to suggest that all drivers are potential sex offenders?

“In the case of the driver who lost an eye, the attack happened outside the car, so CCTV inside the taxi would not have helped.”

Peter Davies, the regional officer for the GMB said he had written to Mr Lonnia requesting an “urgent meeting” to discuss the plan and said advice was being sought from lawyers on a legal challenge.

He added: ““We cannot accept that anyone will benefit from a policy that forces drivers to comply. The likelihood is that we’ll end up with a minimum set of standards at a maximum cost to drivers.

“GMB encourages the use of CCTV but the council are forcing a policy through that will result in a £500 system without any consultation with the drivers.

“This council seems to be approaching this with a ‘we know best and you’ll do as you are told’ attitude. Well maybe they don’t and maybe we won’t.”

Coun John Robson, chairman of the city’s licensing committee, said: “In 2007 there was a trial run of CCTV in taxis. Before the trial one in seven fares resulted in incidents such as verbal abuse, threats of violence, non-payment, taxi damage and more.

“During the trial that reduced to less than one in 100. Last year we had the most appalling incident of a driver who was attacked by a fare and unfortunately he lost the sight in one eye, losing his job and his income.

“He has spoken out and said that CCTV should be mandatory. A licensed driver has also been sent to prison for eight years for the false imprisonment and sexual assault of two women passengers.

“The policy allowing CCTV has been discretionary for a few years but, in the light of these particular incidents, we have decided in principle that this should now be mandatory.

“The safety of both drivers and passengers is our main concern.”

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/aro ... -1-5422205

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:22 pm
Posts: 14152
Location: Wirral
Whilst I agree that CCTV is a good option I feel that nobody is listening to or considering the taxi drivers when they voice concerns over the costs and how they are to pay for this.

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:44 pm
Posts: 10591
Location: Scotland
Just to throw the cat amongst the pigeons so to speak, I wonder how many drivers of the asian community are worried that they will be found out if they let the cousin twice removed drive for them, as it will be on camera


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
"One in seven fares prior to the trial resulted in an incident - whether that was verbal abuse, threats of violence, physical assault, a dispute over the fare, people running off without paying or damage to the taxi.”

These figures, if correct, represent a total indictment upon the taxi users of Sheffield – the 1 in 7 fares ratio is illuminating because that roughly translates to 3 incidents during an average shift – and 7 incidents on a busy Saturday night – per taxi. If we are to believe the 1 in 7 figures ratio (and bearing in mind there’s 850 odd taxis in Sheffield) – a Saturday night will see South Yorkshire police expect to deal with almost 6000 taxi related complaints.

By any reckoning those figures make Sheffield the worst place in the UK to drive a cab – indeed – I strongly suspect there’s cab drivers in hell thinking, “This jobs crap, what with the abuse from Satans acolytes and the torture but it could be worse, I could be driving cab in Sheffield”.

If there are nearly 6000 incidents in Sheffield on a Saturday night – perhaps the council need to think of something a little more radical than CCTV – I would suggest stocks in there City centre – and facing facts – they’ll need a few of them.

More seriously, the 1 in 7 figure does sound like something that only a cab driver would come up with – a cab driver who perhaps wanted CCTV funding. This aside – I wonder why the police don’t appear to have been contacted regarding crime incidents involving taxis – if there are 6000 incidents every Saturday night – then I’m sure they’d want input.

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57377
Location: 1066 Country
A Judicial Review will only look into the process, not the end product. So you could spend 1000s and 1000s, win, and then the council do it properly.

In other words a delay is all you win.

The trade need to think more than twice about going down this route.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Sussex wrote:
A Judicial Review will only look into the process, not the end product. So you could spend 1000s and 1000s, win, and then the council do it properly.

In other words a delay is all you win.

The trade need to think more than twice about going down this route.


So a council appearing to make the facts up to suit them as they go along shouldn't be challenged?

"One in seven fares prior to the trial resulted in an incident - whether that was verbal abuse, threats of violence, physical assault, a dispute over the fare, people running off without paying or damage to the taxi.”

Do the maths, because I don't think West Yorkshire Police receive the level of reported crime that the chair of licensing reckons goes on.

The council don't even seem to recognise there's a difference in what private hire is - executive hires - airport transfer businesses - minibus work - limousine hire - but then again - neither do the law commission.

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57377
Location: 1066 Country
captain cab wrote:
So a council appearing to make the facts up to suit them as they go along shouldn't be challenged?

Far from it, we have a situation down here with the f***ing Greens, and we might end up where the Sheffield lads are aiming.

Big difference here is we have the right people in charge. :wink:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 7:24 pm
Posts: 6755
Personally dont reckon the legal route, to me the political and industrial route will do the trick perhaps 800 or so of the Drivers suddenly appearing in the Labour Party and the GMB might ring some alarm bells :D :D plus of course a 48 hr cab PH strike along with a blockade of the city center :D :D

It seems to me this council are gormless go for IT BROTHER AND SISTERS =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

_________________
All posts by this contributor are made in a strictly personal capacity

I AM PROUD TO BE A CITIZEN NOBODY'S SUBJECT http://www.republic.org.u

F88K EM ALL WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND

BOOZE BOOZE BOOZE


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 61 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 511 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group