Taxi Driver Online

Berkeley Square blocked as Addison Lee drivers protest over pay


Drivers from the minicab firm Addison Lee protested today over reduced rates introduced by the company.

The familiar black cars filled the famous square at lunchtime, hooting horns and hampering traffic.

London Live spoke to some of the drivers and representatives from the GMB Union, which was leading today's action.

In a statement, Addison Lee denied that the recently introduced changes had adversely affected drivers.

"Despite the number of private hire drivers in the London market increasing by over 50% in the past 2 years, our average driver earnings have increased by 5% compared to this time last year," said a spokesperson. "We can assure all our clients that our drivers are fairly compensated for their time and service."

source: http://www.londonlive.co.uk/news/2016-0 ... t-over-pay

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

Bet they haven't reduced the car rent

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

He should be employing them his cars, his insurance, and more than likely he pays the fuel or gets the VAT back off it

How does that work exactly?

If a driver is on a split bag or a deal that that also takes in splitting the fuel cost, is it right that the proprietor claims (all) of the VAT back (and keeps it), when in actual fact they are only entitled to half? On that basis shouldn't the driver should get back the other half of the VAT - or am I missing something?

_________________
Common sense........is just not that Common.

Possibly John, but AL drivers are defiantly not getting it back.

I am wondering as to whether they ( the drivers ) have a legal claim to half of the VAT! There would be a tremendous amount of money at stake all around the country.

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.

Al drivers aren't on split purse they RENT their cars at £350 a week

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Yep - It was a VAT thought that crossed my mind that I feel has NOT been asked/addressed. If true then how much money are drivers being deprived of.

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.

The driver could only claim their share of the VAT if they are VAT registered. It would be for the Revenue & Customs to check whether Addison Lee has over claimed its contributions to VAT thus entitling them a rebate. There may well be an opportunity to create mischief for Addison Lee but I doubt that any driver is entitled to any of the VAT reclaimed.

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

Thanks Toots I understand the VAT situation.

I am thinking that the VAT having being reclaimed is also in essence part of a 60/40 split that is a part of the pot. The agreement is basically a 60/40 split of what is left after all expenses - it is only the fuel being an expence - not the VAT as the VAT comes back. The driver imo is due a share of the reclaimed VAT, as he should only be charged on actual fuel costs.

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.

]


Toots is right

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

I am thinking that it is only actual expences that come out of the agreement. The driver has VAT (via fuel) included in the total cost of the expences - the VAT eventually comes back! To make the agreement a true split -then the driver is entitled to a percentage of the returned VAT.

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.

Only if the driver is vat registered....imo

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

I would say that the agreement/contract would supercede anything else.

When it has also been raised as to whether i.e "They are employed" or "Entitled national Minimum/living wage/holidays" then I think that it should be talked out.

Let us say that an office has an agreement in place that there is a 60/40 share of the takings - once the fuel is stripped out, as it is a cost. It can imo be argued that they (the office) should receive the higher percentage as maintenance is their responsibility/cost, which is fair enough.

We all know that if we received the VAT back from our fuel then we would all have more money in the pot/pocket e.g fuel @ £1.07 per litre, say £40 a time, is an additional £6.67 out of your pocket/takings and then claimed back. That could easily be done say 3 times a week, meaning that just over £20 a week is being claimed back by the operator i.e £1040 per year/per vehicle.

To simplify it let us say that the fuel is £5 a gallon = it is now a cost! However, out of that the operator gets back say £1 a gallon as a VAT return - the actual cost in reality is only £4 - the driver is not then getting his/her fair share as per agreement as the operator has now put it in his/her takings.I would guess estimate that it could be worth £400/500 ish per year to a driver

_________________
Common sense........is just not that Common.

what about drivers rent vat..

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!