Nuxx:0673b22b-9783-4c0d-bcfc-fb1aacaf7d93@w19g2000yqa.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!w19g2000yqa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <0673b22b-9783-4c0d-bcfc-fb1aacaf7d93@w19g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: cam.transport,uk.legal,uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Taxi licensing and complaints Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 21:55:09 -0800 (PST) References: <24d9ca87-7d9c-4fdd-a796-e0a4f79ba8da@y36g2000pra.googlegroups.com>   <2s2mk6treuao9eofefvar1jki6o3ini4bb@4ax.com>  Lines: 89 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.71.49.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1297058110 32238 127.0.0.1 (7 Feb 2011 05:55:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 05:55:10 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: w19g2000yqa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.80 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5.8; U; en) Presto/2.7.62 Version/11.01,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 5136 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:798614

On Feb 6, 1:24=A0pm, Paul Clarke  wrote: > On Feb 3, 8:13=A0pm, Phil W Lee  wrote: > > > > > > > Mark Goodge  considered Thu, 03 Feb > > 2011 18:42:09 +0000 the perfect time to write: > > > >On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 08:12:54 -0600, rosenst...@cix.compulink.co.uk put > > >finger to keyboard and typed: > > > >>In article > > >><24d9ca87-7d9c-4fdd-a796-e0a4f79ba...@y36g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, > > >>rthripple...@gmail.com (Richard Thrippleton) wrote: > > > >>> My long memory of this group informs me that a few people here have > > >>> madecomplaintsabouttaxidriver conduct to the city council'staxi > > >>>licensingdepartment in the past. I'm wondering if their experiences > > >>> tally with mine. At the start of the year I tried writing to compla= in > > >>> about some poor driving I'd witnessed by an identifiabletaxi, and g= ot > > >>> the response that as I wasn't a ``fare-paying passenger'' my compla= int > > >>> could not be taken. > > > >>> What I recollect from older threads on here is that they used to > > >>> happily takecomplaintsfrom members of the public and use patterns o= f > > >>>complaints(not single allegations) to decide on formal action. Do I > > >>> remember wrong, or has there been some bemusing change of policy? > > > >>> I've already advised the Cambridge Cycling Campaign about this, as > > >>> their ``problems'' webpage refers people to thelicensingdepartment > > >>> forcomplaintsabout bad driving. > > > >>The Council tends only to act on convictions orcomplaintsfrom > > >>passengers. So if you weren't a passenger and the driving was crimina= l, > > >>you'll have to complain to the police, I fear. > > > >That's not entirely unreasonable, really. It's consistent with how any > > >other professional driver is regulated. If, for example, the driver of= a > > >courier firm drives so badly that my package is damaged in transit, th= en I > > >can take it up with his employer and get redress. Equally, if the driv= er of > > >a courier firm drives so badly that he breaks the law then the police = can > > >take action. But if I merely happen to see a van being driven badly, b= ut > > >not quite criminally, and it isn't carrying any of my goods, then ther= e > > >isn't necessarily anything I can do about it. Some trucks and vans, of > > >course, have contact numbers on to report instances of bad driving, bu= t > > >that's equivalent to reporting ataxidriver to the firm he works for. T= he > > >council isn't the employer oftaxidrivers, and therefore it doesn't hav= e > > >any reason to intervene unless ataxidriver is either driving illegally= or > > >is generatingcomplaintsfrom his customers. > > > Bullshit. > > > The council is the REGULATOR, and has a duty and an obligation to > > REGULATE. > > > If the bastards won't do anything about thetaxidriver risking > > people's lives by dangerous driving, book him to take your kids on a > > trip, then report him for kiddy-fiddling. =A0He'll never drive ataxi > > again. > > Incitement to comit illegal act reported.

Who to? The police or his ISP? Just curious.

I see that Ian Jackson hasn't yet commented...I wonder whether he condones Lee's suggestion? I suppose that if he does, he might not want to say so in public...probably wise :-)

I still can't find the words to properly express how disgusted and appalled I am at what Lee has said. Just when you think you've seen it all from the car-haters. This surely shows that for some of them,
 * anything* goes when it comes to punishing those awful awful drivers.