Taxi Driver Online

Our trade has always been an easy target for sensational journalism. Has anyone ever read a headline that sounds like "Taxi fares increase approved"? No its usually "Taxi fare hike" or Fare hike fury".

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

You are right, but if you look at the initial report from Sussex you will see - Tyres close to the legal limit - defective lights - damaged cars - no insurance picked out. Out of four I can understand the last three, the first I cannot as you are either legal or you are not.

They also say that they warned 902 drivers, now is that warned or disciplined? they failed to point out that a lot of the warnings was for technical breaches. E.G they were for - wheel trim missing - leaving vehicle unattended at a taxi rank - not wearing I.D badge etc. I think you will agree, that it is certainly not compromising safety.

The other thing that was very damaging, was an inside editorial of the story ( I will try to get hold of a copy). The editorial went on to basically congratulate the discipline that had been taken, as it felt people needed to feel safe going home. Fair enough you might think, but most of the warnings/disciplines were of a technical nature and nothing to do with safety.

If you look at the first story posted and you are Mr and Mrs J Public - what would be your first impression?

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

Surprise surprise, it has gone from the editor not replying - to he would welcome a constructive letter outlining my grievance. He feels that they reported it accurately,I beg to disagree.

I have sent off for a copy of the entire article ( inclusive of the editors comment ) and I will respond accordingly.

At the moment I feel that I have rattled someones cage.

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

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

So tyres near the legal limit is justified is it?

_________________
Life? Don't talk to me about life!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjm2eslm6hI

yes. near or on the limit is legal. UNDER is not. next you will get done for doing 29 in a 30 zone

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

I meant in the context of getting done for it

_________________
Life? Don't talk to me about life!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjm2eslm6hI

I sent this off today, lets see what comes of it.

Dear Mr Cypher

I wrote to the "Echo" concerning the article " Safety rap for 1000 Taxi drivers".

Initially I was angry over what I see as sensationalism styled reporting, basically a no news day, so what can we fill the front page with!

As I see it one of your reporters has gleened a story from " The freedom of information archives", unfortunately the information along with the Editorial comment has been reported out of all context.

The headlines via your front page now stuck in the minds of your readers "Safety rap" futher enhanced by editorial comments " We say," "No room for error in safety".You state that 902 drivers were warned, wow 902 drivers now that is a lot, well it would be if they were prosecuted! but they were not they were warned, and I think that it is fair to say that there is a vast difference.

You then went on to list the reasons under the warnings and one of them being, tyres close to the legal limit. As I remember the law, it is either legal or it is not, so what is that all about as it was obviously legal. Or are we to live in state whereby you are driving at 29 mph in a 30mph zone and you then get a warning for being too close to the speed limit and that too gets reported in the "Echo"?

Other reasons listed 1) Wheel trims missing 2) Exterior of cab needed cleaning 3) failure to wear I.D badge 4) Cab left unattended on a Taxi rank etc etc.None of which, and I am sure that will agree comes under safety of the vehicle or compromises it in any way.The fact is that just over 1% of drivers were prosecuted for various offences that were not publicised now I am not saying that over 1% is satisfactory but neither are our cabs falling apart, with many drivers spending on them over £30000 just so they can make a living.

Why am I writing this, well as I said initially I was angry, which then turned to disappointment. I have read the "Echo" for well over 45 years and did not realise how misrepresented and damaging the reporting could be, your report has been on the internet with questions being asked, and as such is damaging to the City.It is also damaging from the public point of veiw and If I did not know better I would have the same reservations.

Criticism I can take, but the constant unjustified "journalistic" attacks is not acceptable.

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

It's amazing how a couple of words can make something sound worse than it is. I would guess that the original document should have read that drivers were ADVISED that their tyres were close to the limit and ADVISED that they had a wheel trim missing. But of course that would not make good copy would it.

_________________
Grandad,

Of course you are absolutely right ................. the defects must be legally defined and being close to being illegal suggest that they are still legal and therefore not a defect at all.

To many LO's are neither trained or qualified in the job that they do ................. and so as an unqualified person their opinion counts for little.

In Gateshead we will soon have the situation were some drivers will be in possession of a professional qualification, and whatever anyone thinks of driver training, putting drivers in a position where they are more qualified than the Councils Officers is something that will positively influence the people to which we complain to when the councils get it wrong.

NATLEO have a training course ..................... NATLEO can deliver the required levels of training FOR YOUR LO ................. maybe having everyone properly trained will benefit everyone.

B. Lucky

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.

Sorry to bore you guys, this is a follow up letter to the Editor, as I was not happy with his reply.


4th September 2007


Dear Mr Williams,

Thank you for taking time to reply.

Paragraph (2) of your letter and I quote “ The article made it clear that the drivers were all warned over safety issues and makes no claim that they were prosecuted”.

I would assume that the breakdown column of offences including Cardiff, Caerphilly, Rhondda Cynon Taf and other boroughs were included in the article. Cardiff figures as per article show that 18 drivers were reported for prosecution (under the banner of safety), unfortunately the report did not say why they were, or for what. With all due respect, the prosecutions might not have anything at all to do with safety, but were nevertheless included.

Your claim, “that there was no claim that they were prosecuted,” would seem to be a bit off track to say the least

I agree that in the right context that for 902 drivers to be warned would be an important story, but I would ask you to bear in mind that the headline and inside editorial was safety. Your paper did not attempt to put the (warnings) into perspective, with many of the alleged infringements in no way compromising safety, and if I may say so the story was most certainly misleading to the public, and damaging to the trade.

With regards to the story meriting front page treatment, I have no problem providing that it is accurate. Unfortunately, the story did not give a balanced picture, and as such when it attracts out of City internet comments, and adverse inner City reaction from passengers it does more damage than good and adds credibility to what I am saying.

Accurate reporting is good for everyone, but when something goes wrong, we for example often have the headline “Rogue Taxi Driver”. In actual fact the headline I believe should read more often or not “Member of the public masquerades as a Taxi driver”, but maybe that does not sell as many papers. As such “Rogue Taxi Driver” is misleading, and damaging. I am not claiming for one minute that all is well in the taxi trade, as a lot is brought upon the trade by the very people who over see it.


I am sure proper investigative journalism would be more productive in unearthing the causes of the problems within the trade.

For example why are private hire vehicles allowed to trade uninsured off the streets? In the event of an accident, this without question could be one of the most damaging and life threatening things that could happen to you. It would be very easy to gather a story such as this that does compromise safety, and yet nothing is done by you and very little by Licensing Authorities.

The reporting side as I see it is very one sided, “always protective of the public” with very little support for the drivers. ”We are always the bad guys. “ Whatever happened to reporters championing the cause of “Taxi drivers?” As it is we are very much treated as the poor relations, 46 murders in the U.K over the past 12 years, thousands of assaults over the same period, and tens of thousands over the U.K not even reported because we do not get the back up that everyone deserves.

The police response down here to runners is, (sorry sir it is a civil matter), yet in other parts of the country they will prosecute. With that type of policing, the runner moves on to the next higher level of crime, with the barriers of decency being pushed further away.

We have numerous Councils in the U.K installing free and subsidized CCTV in cabs; this is for the protection of the public and the drivers. What do we have down here? nothing, not even a mention.

Mr Williams I have probably bored you to death which was not the intention. Unfortunately the story put out was factually disproportionate and most certainly gave out the message that 902 drivers were disciplined for safety reasons, which was not the case.

The proof is in the total story that your paper put out, along with the misuse of facts gleaned from the “Freedom of Information”. Some of the reasons listed were for very minor infringements of which your newspaper did not elaborate, so did for example 890 out of 902 have a warning for a wheel trim missing? I would say probably not and hardly headline grabbing, but I am sure you can see where I am coming from.

Please do the right thing and put it right.



His Reply

He is very sympathetic, but states that will will agree to disagree as to how the article was read/perceived . He also goes on to say that various points that I have raised does merit further investigative journalism. However there is not going to be a retraction.

What really gauls me, is that a local councillor his written in complaining about the same reporter who distorted fiqures regarding attendances of councillors. His letter was published and the record put staight.

Do I? Follow this up with a complaint to the PCC! Or do I let it go in hope/possibility that further investigative journalism might take place.

In my own mind I think I know, but I would appreciate your views.

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

I would say that you have made your point with this guy so leave it at that. Don't forget that papers are very powerful. If you upset the editor to much he may sugest to one of his investigative reporters that there may be some dirt to dig up about you. It doesn't have to be true, the word allegedly is used a lot and mud sticks if you see my point.

_________________
Grandad,

Sounds like good advice to me fella

_________________
Legal and proud

Loads a love from BERTIE !!

On balance I couldn't see it coming to that, but you never know, but I wouldn't rule out a complaint to the PCC if he won't publish even a brief letter?

The first paragraph of the article quotes the figure of 1,000, and the infringements mentioned in the context of this figure seem to just cover a fraction of the total.

And of course the 'tyres close to the legal limit' one is a nonsense.

And even the actual infringements listed in the first paragraph are of a relatively minor nature.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

I sent a letter back to the editor stating that I was still not happy with his reply. I also put in the letter that I was quite prepared to go to the PCC unless this was rectified,as I felt that the trade was being treated differently to others who had cause for complaint. My final words on the matter to him were "It is your call".

Some days later a watered down/censored version of my letter appeared in the "Echo. " It was nothing more than a form of appeasement, and editorial wise stating that they had got the fiqures from proper sorces.

They did not try to rectify the distortment, so I went to the PCC and they are now looking into it.

I am keeping my fingers crossed on this one. In the past whenever I have gone to a complaints body, I have found them to be nothing more than a softener to take the sting out of things.

I will keep you posted.

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