Dusty Bin wrote:
By the way, Brummie Cabbie, I'm not sure what you mean by the person in question having 'controversial views' or 'strong opinions on things', but having thought about what the whole thing may have been about I doubt if the views that have been witheld have to be particularly controversial or strong.
For example, they may have been about things like drug dealing or money laundering, or other patent illegality such as unlicensed drivers and vehicles. Or other regulatory issues that don't involve such obvious criminality but which can often lead to threats and violence, as indeed demonstrated online. That category could include things like quantity controls, fare discounting and the black economy.
There are other slightly more mundane issues that can nevertheless set pulses racing such as cherry-picking and queue-jumping.
And some people even get uppity about softer issues still such as dress codes and advertising.
Those are just views that can and have be expressed by many in the trade. Views to stimulate discussion. All relevant to the person making them and to all sane licensed people. What is ther not to discuss in that list? What is there in that list to get violent about?
Dusty Bin wrote:
Of course, it all comes down to money, and the first time I was expressly threatened was due to a contractual dispute; basically I decided to end our relationship, but the numpty in question thought he would help himself to the money he owed me. The second time was after the only official complaint I've ever made in relation to someone else in the trade.
And this is in a small town, so I'm quite sure in a big, mean city like Birmingham you must be well aware to these kinds of thing.
We don't get much of the mean and nasty stuff in Brum. But the one and only guy who tried it on me about five years ago had his licence suspended for six months. Driving a taxi at another cab and trying to force it into a six foot high wall with 3 CCTV cameras recording events wasn't very clever.
Dusty Bin wrote:
Thus I suspect you're trying to spin the issue here because things like money laundering or drug dealing aren't really what could be called 'controversial', unless of course you're one of those benefitting from these things.
'Controversial'? You must mean criminal; don't you? And the rest sounds a bit 'Rumsfelfdy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&v=_RpSv3HjpEwDusty Bin wrote:
And for the avoidance of doubt, the individual in question isn't me.
Your right, it isn't you. That is a fact! The individual's identity has been alluded to in another TDO thread.
Dusty Bin wrote:
I sent something to the DfT when they were consulting on the OFT report around eight years ago, and didn't even receive an acknowledgement.
So I've never actually received any kind of communication from the DfT at all, never mind meeting up with them.
Then I suspect you couldn't have written to them nicely enough.