Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Wed Apr 29, 2026 6:00 pm

Board index » General » News

All times are UTC [ DST ]



Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 5 of 21
  [ 314 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 21  Next
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
MR T
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 2:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
JD wrote:
MR T wrote:
JD.... back-to-front as usual.... it's your job to prove you're right


It seems rather odd that you make a statement alleging that I will present a version of the facts relating to the consequences of the meeting of minds proposals, which will be fictional but when you, Taxitalk, NPHA were given the opportunity to present your own facts relating to the subject you run and hide. I've already proven I'm right in everything I've said which is on record on this site. You haven't challenged it because you know it is correct.

I suppose you can't hide the truth but if it wasn't for the GMBPDB and this website the taxi trade would never have gotten sight of the truth.

You were offered the option to either pizz or get off the pot, obviously you decided that under the circumstances the latter course of action was the least ignominious.

Having no foundation to argue your point I'm not surprised you vacated the throne but we are still wondering why you and your mates don't have the balls to publicly tell the taxi trade how you are trying to stitch them up simply because you don't like hackney carriage vehicles from Berwick operating as private hire vehicles in Newcastle.

Your silence on presenting the facts along with all these so called trade magazines will certainly be noted by every taxi driver in UK.

What are you going to say when a cab driver asks you the the sixty four thousand dollar question of, "what do these changes mean for me Mr T"? I suppose you will say one of two things, either "I don't know" or "I can't tell you".

That about sums up both you and the meeting of mindless bunch.

Regards

JD



It's so nice of you to give me and everyone else the opportunity of replying to your allegations.... but to be truthful they are that silly they don't deserve a reply . your smoke and Mirror campaign is amusing.... a little tip .. buy a torch your wandering around in the dark....

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 6:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
GA wrote:
Like a knight in shining armour the GMBPDB walk into a meeting and then publish the minutes not to their members .................. but to the small online "community" which is TDO.

Not a knight in shining armour, just a union consulting it members. They put it on their site 3 or 4 days before it was on TDO.

What would you rather they do? :?

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 6:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
GA wrote:
They did not leave the meeting to consult with their members and obtain a mandate to take the action that they did ................. as the other groups did ............... and surely you cannot condone that from a representative organisation.

Well no doubt Mr BB who was there will clarify it for us all.

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 6:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
GA wrote:
The agenda that needs to be questioned is not that of the MOM group but that of those who are intent of destroying it.

Well you best tell your representatives to do that then.

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 6:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
GA wrote:
Is the answer that your offering us that a letter would .......... thats right WOULD ......... have been sent BUT for the fact that some trade representatives needed to consult with their membership.

So the answer to my question is that the MOM group has sent NOTHING to the DfT ..................... strange then that the GMBPDB sent a letter to the DfT dis-associating itself from a letter that hadn't even been sent.


The representatives were told that a letter (of sorts) was going in three days time, if it didn't then that's not fault of the representatives.

Again let Mr BB clarify.

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 6:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
GA wrote:
1. Has the MOM group sent the proposals to the DfT as published on this site?

2. Has the GMBPDB sent a letter to the DfT dis-associating themselves from the proposals of the MOM group as published on this site?

Even with my eyes shut my little southern softy mate ................. I can see that this whole MOM group is in some way a threat to you or to people you associate with .................. and you know I won't stop digging :shock:

1. No, but those proposals would have gone if certain representatives had acted like the others and rolled over.

2. Go on the GMB site and ask them.

As for your last lot of mumbo jumbo, the MoM is a threat to 250,000 licensed drivers, and the PH proposal by the NPHA is as blatent an attempt to multi-nationalize the PH trade, and f*** the self-employed driver as I have ever seen.

But the likes of you just want to concentrate on the meetings not on the proposals. [-X

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
GA
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 10:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:31 pm
Posts: 1761
Location: Commonsense Country
How can you possibly expect to be taken seriously with a comment like that .................... they would have done it .................... what a load of total garbage.

The problem doesn't now seem to be with the whole MOM group but with the NPHA ................ which is very interesting indeed.

Look Suspect, you insignifigant unfortunate ........................ the MOM group is THE MOST PRODUCTIVE thing to be achieved by the taxi and private hire trade EVER and the contiunuation of diolougue between them WILL be to the benefit of every licensed driver in England and Wales.

The only people that wish to see its demise are taxi-driver online, the gmbpdb in Brighton and other people who wish to make a living from the trade as professional consultees .......................... and you sunshine seem to have a foot in each of those camps.

I just wish that instead of playing the one up manship games, attempting to discredit others, certain people should look at working for the trade generally and not just those who choose to support them.

Apparently the ranks were busy in Brighton on Sunday .................... hope you had a busy one.

B. Lucky :D

_________________
"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.
Top
 Profile  
 
gusmac
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 11:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Aberdeen
GA wrote:
The representatives that needed to consult with their members were the GMB, NTA,T&G, NPHA and NATLEO ...............


Have they now done this?

_________________
Image
http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/
Image
Top
 Profile  
 
GA
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 11:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:31 pm
Posts: 1761
Location: Commonsense Country
gusmac wrote:
GA wrote:
The representatives that needed to consult with their members were the GMB, NTA,T&G, NPHA and NATLEO ...............


Have they now done this?


The point gusamc is that all the representative groups stated they would need to consult with their membership ..................... not just one as has been suggested by Suspect.

I have no idea whether the consultations have been held ............ but I bet they will have been done before the next meeting.

We will see how this story develops .................... but as I'm no longer a member of any representative oprganisations I'm glad that they are all disussing issues regarding the whole trade and that can only be good for the trade generally.

B. Lucky :D

_________________
"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.
Top
 Profile  
 
JD
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 4:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
MR T wrote:
It's so nice of you to give me and everyone else the opportunity of replying to your allegations


Which Allegations.

Quote:
but to be truthful they are that silly they don't deserve a reply.


In other words, as per usual you make allegations without foundation and when asked to substantiate them you run a country mile. Its good to know that you unconditionally accept all these proposed changes without understanding what they mean.

Quote:
your smoke and Mirror campaign is amusing.... a little tip .. buy a torch your wandering around in the dark....


I was under the impression it was the GMBPDB and TDO who published these minutes for the benefit of the taxi world so how can I be engaged in a smoke and mirrors campaign if what is being proposed is out in the open? Rather a silly statement to make on your behalf but when your stuck down a cul de sac your options are limited.

I just wonder where we would be if the GMBPDB hadn't been a part of this little gathering, which one of your motley crew would have published the minutes for the benefit of the UK taxi trade, certainly not you.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.
Top
 Profile  
 
JD
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 4:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
GA wrote:
The point gusamc is that all the representative groups stated they would need to consult with their membership


Who told you that?

Quote:
I have no idea whether the consultations have been held


Tell me, who is the Liverpool T&G going to consult with? Who is Taxi Talk going to consult with? Who is the NNTTG going to consult with? Who is the NPHA going to consult with and who is the NTA going to consult with?

When you find out the answers let us know.

Quote:
but I bet they will have been done before the next meeting.


Sounds as though you already know who these guys are going to consult with therefore we shouldn't have to wait long for your response.

Quote:
but as I'm no longer a member of any representative organisations


Welcome to the silent majority, I was informed that Gateshead T&G members and Gateshead NTA members were excluded from the consultation process. Therefore it is no wonder that not one taxi driver in Gateshead has heard of these proposals or what they mean for them but maybe you can inform the local cab trade at some stage of the game just why they are being excluded?

Quote:
I'm glad that they are all discussing issues regarding the whole trade and that can only be good for the trade generally.


What issues are they discussing that are beneficial to the Taxi Trade? I'm keen to know what you mean by, "can only be good for the trade", especially after you reading the minutes of these meetings and then showing your ignorance as to the content.

Maybe you can out-do Mr T and explain to the taxi trade just what he, taxitalk and every other entity involved in these closed shop proceedings have so far failed to do and that is explain to the taxi trade the "positives" and "negatives" of these proposals?

Or perhaps you, like all the rest, don't have a clue?

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.
Top
 Profile  
 
MR T
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 4:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
I am more than happy to leave you wandering around in the dark.... :lol:

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 6:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
GA wrote:
How can you possibly expect to be taken seriously with a comment like that .................... they would have done it .................... what a load of total garbage.

What on earth are you on about, what's your point?

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 6:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
GA wrote:
Look Suspect, you insignifigant unfortunate ........................ the MOM group is THE MOST PRODUCTIVE thing to be achieved by the taxi and private hire trade EVER and the contiunuation of diolougue between them WILL be to the benefit of every licensed driver in England and Wales.

Ok then, tell me how these proposals help the trade?

If you want to start up another thread on who's who on the MoM then please feel free, but leave this thread to the proposals.

Or are you content with them all?

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 6:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
GA wrote:
The only people that wish to see its demise are taxi-driver online, the gmbpdb in Brighton and other people who wish to make a living from the trade as professional consultees .......................... and you sunshine seem to have a foot in each of those camps.

Professional consultees, remind me and anyone else who gets paid for what?

Or are we back to the Manchester Sports lawyer farce? ](*,)

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 5 of 21
  [ 314 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 21  Next

Board index » General » News

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 240 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group