Petition to City of York Council
York Uber's Operator's License renewal to be denied
An international tax dodging company is making a mockery of the laws laid down for passenger safety in York and doing the local economy a huge disservice.Taking fare-money out of the York community by using Out Of Town cars who do not meet the standards set for local taxis, who rely on a SatNav which rarely goes the shortest distance, and who loiter in the York Licensing Area illegally after their job has ended, needs to come to an end.The small number of drivers licensed by CoYC who work for this company do not justify the danger to road users from all the OOT cars going the wrong way on one way streets, the ripping off of passengers, the extra vehicles creating pollution, and the deleterious effect of London, Leeds, Wakefield, Newcastle, Bradford, Calderdale, Kirklees, Rossendale and a raft of other LA vehicles making their way to York every week to flout the Law of the Land with regards to Touting, picking up from Hackney Carriage Ranks, stopping for flags, and many cases of driving without insurance, MOT, road fund licence, and even the odd case of no PH Licence at all! Uber are not necessary in York; they are taking money out of the economy, their drivers are breaking the law, the company has lied to the Council, operates illegally, and continues to do so with impunity because the police pass the buck to the Council, the Council pass the buck to the LA granting the driver's licence, the foreign LA often passes the buck back to the Council because it's not happening in their area.Until Uber arrived, York didn't have an "Enforcement Officer" because we're a small city with a self-policing cab trade. Each driver was recognisable personally by the staff of Taxi Licensing. Now we have an enforcement team who are still unable to police the hundreds of OOT cars because they're not licensed by York. A hitherto unnecessary post, created in response to the hundreds of complaints about an avoidable problem.The problem is Uber. Deny them the renewal of their PH Operator's Licence.Please.For the good of customers, road users, and on behalf of an overwhelming majority of the cab trade in York.
Petition to Sadiq Khan
Renew Uber's licence in London
The sudden removal of 40,000 Uber drivers from the road will increase unemployment and affect the lives of so many people. As a young woman, I feel that without Uber I will be more likely to walk home after a night out, rather than pay an extortionate amount for a black cab. This puts me in serious danger. - why is this considered better than getting in a car when you know who is driving you, can share location and can track your entire route? I urge Sadiq Khan and TFL to reconsider their decision, renewing Uber's licence, but ensuring that regulations are being followed appropriately.
Petition to Sadiq Khan, Transport For London
Overturn Transport for London decision on Uber operations in London
Stopping Uber operations in London is detrimental to the city and UK 'Open for Business' attitude at best. This will affect not only the users and providers of Uber, which in itself directly affects millions of people, and over 40,000 driver whom make a living or suppliment their income from it. Stopping Uber will be a clear signal that international investment and job opportunities are not welcome in the UK as whole and that our localised and wider government can be easily swayed by the minority, and or other 'connected' interests in the country, simply put its a disgrace to curb innovation and local economic growth. If Uber are breaking rules, fine them, manage them, but to stop them with the stroke of a pen to which only causes economic and international investment to retract, is just short sighted and comes across as someone has their own agenda. Overturn this decision.
Petition to Steve Rotheram, Merseytravel combined authority
Fair tunnel tolls for minibus passengers and drivers
I am a private hire taxi driver operating an airport transfer business from the Wirral and occasionally working as a general private hire driver. A year ago I invested in an 8 passenger minibus to offer greater comfort and flexibility to my customers. I charge my customers fairly and in line with colleagues and fellow drivers. A large part of my business involves regular journeys through both Mersey tunnels. Up to 6 trips both ways a day at times, taking people to Liverpool John Lennon Airport, Lime St station and, frequently, visitors to the fantastic city of Liverpool. However, it was after purchasing my minibus that I discovered that I would incur tunnel tolls of twice the rate normal car drivers pay. This is because my vehicle is a 9 seater (including the driver). That puts my vehicle in Class 2 in terms of tunnel tolls. If the vehicle was a van of the same size and weight, rather than a minibus, it would fall into the normal car class, being under 3.5 tonnes. My vehicle is under 2 tonnes unladen and the maximum laden weight is approximately 3.05 tonnes. This is typical of all 9 seater minibuses. So if I make 6 return trips through the tunnel in a day I am paying over £40 in tolls. Which I might or might not be able to pass on to my customers. I can use a fast tag which reduces the cost to £2.40 per trip, which is still too high. In addition, as a Class 2 fast tag user I would still need to queue to go through the manned toll booths. This adds insult to injury as there is no "fast" in that process! The level of these tolls is now leading me to refuse trips through the tunnel unless I can pass on the cost to my customers, making me uncompetitive when I am carrying less than 5 passengers. I also have to pay the increased fare when travelling without passengers. I know that fellow minibus drivers face the same dilemma. The only other option we have is to price trips to Liverpool to a level where customers consider going elsewhere. I believe that this anomaly in the toll classes is simply a way of making unfair profit from a class of business that the combined authority know will be forced to use the tunnels, and incur these costs, or face a long detour over the Runcorn Bridge. Why else would we be charged twice the level of toll of a similar sized and weight vehicle which happens to have no passenger seats or less than 9 seats? Clearly it is not on the basis of increased wear and tear on the tunnel infrastructure. I feel extremely frustrated at this unfair treatment of a minority but important group of tunnel users, who I feel the tunnel operators are treating with contempt on the basis that their hands are tied. I am therefore urging Steve Rotheram, the newly elected Mayor of the Merseyside region, to force an urgent review and action to quickly remove this extremely unfair charge on a group of tunnel users who are, at the end of the day, bringing customers to Liverpool who are an important part of the city economy. I would urge not only fellow minibus drivers but also anybody who is proud to promote Liverpool as the go to city for business, leisure and as a travel hub to other parts if the country, and indeed,the world, via John Lennon Airport, to sign this petition and share it as widely as possible. Thank you in anticipation of your support. Adrian Pattinson. Proprietor, AP Airport Cars.
Petition to Rochdale Council
I want the council to make a bylaw which would make it illegal for a taxi to operate within the borough without CCTV installed
In light of the grooming scandal which shook the town I think it essential that all taxis operating within the borough are fitted with CCTV, in order to protect children and also the drivers themselves. Cost is not a reason for this not to happen I asked this question of the council and they have replied that they're are waiting to see what happens in Rotherham before they act here. I do not think this is good enough and want the council to take a lead in the fight to prevent this happening again