Garrett Emmerson’s arrogant performance on London Live.
Members from both the licensed Taxi and Private Hire Trades are calling for the resignation or Garrett Emmerson, after his disastrous performance in an interview on London Live.
After being told by the elected members of Grater London Authority Transport Committee that TfL’s performance was woefully inadequate, Emmerson arrogantly refused to accept anything was/is wrong. He then added insult to injury by exaggerating past performance results and actually lied about manpower resources.
In the interview, Caroline Pidgeon stated cab enforcement in London is woefully under resourced. Garrett countered that the overhaul status of enforcement should include not only TfL’s impotent compliance, who have no authority over licensed or unlicensed touts, but also the whole metropolitan police force. He said the actual footfall of enforcement was more in the region of 400. He would have been more accurate had he said the region of Narnia.
The proof as they say is in the pudding:
Back in November, the Chair of the LCDC sent a Text to an enforcement officer he had met in a previous meeting. The text appertained to touting being carried out at the Walkabout Pub. The reply shown below shows the true extent of Cab Enforcement in London, on a Saturday night.
Text published on Twitter
The text is proof, Garrett Emmerson tried to mislead Caroline Pidgeon, chair of the London Assembly Transport Committee, over the issue of enforcement manpower.
>Amazingly he also said he finds it hard to recognise that TfL need to get the basics right. As an instance, he alleged illegal touting had reduced by 37%. This is nonsense, what he should have said is, the number of convictions for illegal touting fell by 37%, a completely different aspect.
He also tried to allude it is TfL’s regulatory service, that is the Gold Standard, when in fact it is the London Taxi Trade which is the Gold Standard, not because of TfL but despite TfL.
TfL never made the Taxi Service in London the best Taxi service in the world, they inherited us from the Met.
One thing that needs exploring is the splitting up of Taxis and Private Hire. They are two separate trades and have different operating needs and policies.
There is no way they should be under one directorate.
After all we don’t have London Underground and Buses. Both are separate divisions of Transport in London with two separate directorates and Managing Directors.
I seem to be agreeing more and more with what Jim Thomas is printing which is quite worrying…..lol
In this article that he posted on Taxi Leaks he makes some very good points that I have been saying for quite some time regarding PH and their using the word Taxi and London Taxi in their paid advertising.
Here is the article:
In my opinion, the @TfLTPH account is completely surplus to requirement.
With Oxford Street, recently reported as the most polluted street in the world, TfL have actually cut the number of taxi ranks spaces, forcing more Taxis to circulate.
And it’s about to get a lot worse.
Far from encouraging cabdrivers to rank, freeing up road space and cutting down on emissions, TfL constantly harrass drivers who queue to get on a popular rank.
Using the @TfLTPH Twitter account, Taxi drivers are bombarded with tweets warning of covert enforcement, directed solely at the licensed Taxi trade.
But Private Hire seem to get the all clear to;
* illegally ply for hire
* form unauthorised ranks
* park/double park, wherever they please
Just Block And a Forget a Them.
This account hardly ever gives out important information, just biased tweets aimed at discrediting and demoralising the licensed Taxi trade.
Lately they have been blocking drivers who only crime has been to comment adversely about their persistent belligerent bias aimed at Taxi drivers.
They also threaten to block and report to the police, drivers who use profanity in their tweets.
You Can Also Report a Them For Spam.
How many times have we seen @TfLTPH complain about over ranking at Harrods or Tooley Street.
All too frequently, we see them protesting about Taxis at Finsbury Part station blocking a badly placed 18 foot section of cycle lane.
Yet when there’s a bit of a “do” on at the old Billingsgate building in Lower Thames Street, cars from both RD2 and Addison Lee, are encouraged to form an illegal rank, completely blocking the cycle lane.
If this were Taxis ranking up waiting for passengers, they would be out in force, badge and billing and handing out Parking tickets as if they were going out of style.
Not one tweet from TfLTPH about the blocking of the bus lane on Regent Street/Swallow Street Arch, by private hire vehicles illegally plying for hire and touting.
Paddington has been a favourite target for TfLTPH.
When we have complained about minicabs illegally plying for hire outside night venues, we are told parking is a matter for the local council to deal with. But TfL continue to harrass Taxi drivers with threats of enforcement, while saying next to nothing to Private Hire drivers
One of TfLTPH most common tweets:
Yet they say nothing about this illegal PH rank at St Pancras, where minicabs park sometimes three abreast.
Complaints made to this account are completely ignored. None are answered. It is used by TfL solely to aggravate and annoy drivers.
Our advice is to block this account and forget about it. Any thing important issued by TfL will always be retweeted by others, so you won’t miss a thing. Leave them with just the PH drivers they seem to have most respect for.
Don’t give them an easy ride. Block them and report them for spam.
If Twitter get enough complaints they will remove the account.
Thought I would save TfL and yourself the cost of a judicial definition of the word Taximeter.
If you or your team of 76 lawyers and 11 outside legal consultancies (who by the way, cost the London tax payer £15 million a year) had taken the trouble to read the London Cab Act 1907, that you are so fond of quoting to the media, you/they would have been able to find, in section 6, a clear and concise definition that’s already available.
Editor Taxi Leaks.
London Cab Act 1907
(1)In this Act the expression “stage carriage” has the same meaning as in the M1Metropolitan Public Carriage Act, 1869, as amended by this Act, the expression “cab” has the same meaning as the expression “hackney carriage” has in that Act, the expression “fare” includes any payment to be made for the carriage of luggage on a cab, and any other payment to be made in respect of the hire of a cab, [F1the expression “London cab order” has the same meaning as in the Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869] and
the expression “taximeter” means
any appliance for measuring the time or distance for which a cab is used, or for measuring both time and distance, which is for the time being approved for the purpose by or on behalf of [F2Transport for London].
(2)It is hereby declared that for the purposes of any Act relating to hackney carriages, . . . F3, or cabs, in London, the expressions “hackney carriage,” . . . F3 or “cab” include any such vehicle, whether drawn or propelled by animal or mechanical power . . . F4
(3)In this Act the expression “London” means the Metropolitan Police District and the City of London.
[F5(4)Any power to make a London cab order under or by virtue of this Act includes power to vary or revoke a previous such order.]