Taxi Watch Dog – calls out like Moses – for Bridgend Taxis to be lead to freedom and out of bondage, a miracle for the Bridgend public to witness on your screen and across the borough – Wales too. Pull up that screen, catch that taxi driver miracle scene, with a thriller, and a knock out punch at the end, like Mike Tyson is in Town for some real heavy weight action
Christina hill of Vale of Glamorgan corporate complaints, gets an email message that goes back to Mosses and the Bible, and the parting of the sea, a true miracle today uncovered. Taxi Watch Dog takes the sign from God like Moses, and looks over Ogmore by sea from Angel St, to free Bridgend Taxis – Get the real story in today’s news as it ripples its way to Porthcawl Mid Glamorgan Wales
Do you get taxis? Have you read a biblical story? It’s a Bridgend first right here
Go Catch that BIT, of a biblical story to remember, and so it was written in Bridgend for you to witness
Is this the wrath of Moses and God’s Will, we ask the public, after many years under a slave master will they go free – Bridgend county borough council administration the pharaoh
Bridgend Taxis or Drive, is locked in, and we show you how, so maybe you too can unpick the lock we call a Bridgend council scandal, now out there, for you to realise, next time you see a Bridgend borough Cabbie
Cabbies need and want freedom, and a parting of the sea, as taxis must come home to the promise land they call – Bridgend their taxi economic survival, with all depending on that income, and so, it has been written just for you. They are shackled ladies and gentleman
A life in chains for all who dare to be a taxi drive in this Bridgend council land
Taxis and Bridgend Cabs need escape the evil policies. Is Bridgend County borough Council maladministration beliefs or pagan like taxi policies good today, we ask the public?
Let the public see the truth and the biblical proportions of it all
The struggle goes on to lead the Bridgend Taxi Trade into new pastures, even if it means new commandments for the trade, and a better way of life for taxi driver people or taxi trade people, to escape from the old ways under a Council leadership seen as a dictatorship and not democratic at all, with strange beliefs or pagan policies for the trade
The BIT organisation expose the complaint of biblical proportions that Christina Hill is now faced with, in an opening email in short, of the many complaints now on the tablet for all Bridgend council heads to consider including shared regulatory services.
We go live now with Bridgend county borough council legal department – Charlotte Branford, whilst Christina Hill Vale of Glamorgan complaints, has run silent or is still looking for Da Plane or on it to fantasy Island Bridgend borough one Cab driver said
This is a BIT NEWS Taxi News forensic Exposure for the file, in the public domain so you too can catch that BIT of action, even if you think, you think like an ombudsman or a Sherlock Holmes or a law man or law woman
We go back prior to an email which was triggered following lies from Bridgend Cabinet and Will Lane in writing to the BIT Senior Partner previously exposed on BIT NEWS
Mr MoneyPenny <email@example.com>
14 May at 03:30
Re: Stage 1 Complaint – constant delays and irregularities (public copy version)
Good day morning
I am astonished on how fast this complaint has been picked up after an email to Karen Williams that I will not tolerate any further communication from Will Lane after his unprofessional rant with irrelevance, given we are further down the line since my last stage one complaint where matters were supposed to be resolved going forward, For avoidance of doubt they have not
It is obvious to me now that both Will lane and Dave Holland have split standard’s, coupled with cllr Patel. At least that’s what we call it after investigating this unusual case
On doing some further research it is obvious to me that their are split standards as part of the way the taxi trade is treated and those standards are now obvious. One rule for one borough but a total contradiction when it comes to the other 2 even though the same personnel are involved. A clear case of denial if ever it was recorded
How the trade are expected to see a fair complaint process is beyond me under the circumstances as both parties are guilty of mal practice – Shared regulatory services, Bridgend county borough council-Cabinet and chief executive
The brief email complaint does not cover the slow and constant delay strategy applied by Bridgend Cabinet and Council operations.
It’s a farce. Not even Dave Holland can come on the record after writing to me in February this year, even though I asked for an explanation to the wording in his letter, which to date I have had no response now some 3 months down the road. A subject recorded on BITNEWS725
Cllr Patel is aware and so is licensing. The practices of the 3 are not only unfair but illogical under the circumstances if you take their own contradictions into account.
BIT was set up to investigate the irregularities that many have been complaining about and I have experienced over the years.
The trade is constantly manipulated. Shared regulatory service are part of that manipulation, all of which has been covered in Bridgend”s only taxi news. When a council is super busy and that little BIT extra
As a Bridgend taxi driver myself, I now fall foul of the same inconsistencies and it would appear licensing expect me to follow their mal practices and comply with it as part of having a Bridgend taxi badge even if it means – I must be singled out inappropriately.
Dave Holland himself ignores communication or even written communication sent to him directly. Yvonne Witchell taxi licensing the same and Cabinet, including complaints. There is a strong pattern which has occurred time and time again which has been reported in BIT News even recently and over the facebook time line
Will lane of shared regulatory services will state he hasn’t got the time to address the issues and will fabricate the truth of the matter and not even base his replies on real research, instead he will aid the problem by stating untruths or irrelevant comments as if he has a prejudice against the taxi trade. Which from his replies suggests he does otherwise we the trade would not face delays and inconsistencies that even amount to misrepresentation on how communications are dealt with or breaching the councils own charter or the wording stated on their website. All of which has been reported in Bridgend”s only taxi news.
The many complaint issues are detailed in the news and go back to the day BIT started compiling the events and subsequent irregularities that many have told us about which I have now experienced for myself and uncovered the same for the public to see.
It’s been an all to familiar pattern for cabinet to write something publicly, but act completely differently in practice when you either talk to licensing or read minutes relating to the taxi trade. Delays are the norm that goes far beyond reasonable, the tactics are effectively despicable if affecting a business or trade
What is clear – when the Bridgend county borough council want to act quickly they do.
When the Bridgend county borough council want to string you along and keep it under wraps with shared regulatory services involvement also, as they do, one can be waiting years for nothing to happen.
Only false promises by Bridgend county borough council’s administration or mal administration with Bridgend Cabinet firmly up for bat, that can adopt devilish strategies to see fare proposal delayed, fare proposals tampered with, consultations delayed, communications delayed, or just not replied to, or poor excuses to manipulate mal practices, that leave many taxis, Bridgend Cab driver’s and firms, not knowing what is going on if you are part of the local Bridgend taxi trade.
Not to mention special treatment for some, if they, the Bridgend Cabinet, licensing, Policy officer, shared regulatory services, see fit. Corrupt ways think many taxi drivers hardened to their borough’s taxi policy ways, over many years, and at the very least the last 7 years.
All you have to do is check the true account by the BIT Partner’s, compiled by the BIT organisation as part of their remit still today
In September last year if the process was fair or the administration not inept, a tariff would have been chosen, and put out for consultation for all to comment on. By now the matter would have been resolved
If we take the Cardiff example or an efficient example, which is not really needed, but required in this case, we would not be where we or the trade are today – Zip, nada, nothing accomplished, only lies as it turns out by the administration that is BCBC all the way to Cabinet and councillors if you go check the news file we call BIT NEWS since the lies started in 2016 as the BIT organisation see it since they set up shop. The first lies stick out since the BIT organisation met with Yvonne Witchell team head licensing. An episode we would love Yvonne Witchell to make a witness statement on given the chance
The string along and the revisiting is evident, even the request to submit a formula should you wish. Well we did that in 2017 and the document was tampered with and the formula removed – fraud I say. Why take the contents out a re word it and then quote someone as saying those things, unless you intent to tamper with the process and hide the facts, of which there were many hidden as a result
What 2nd time around you though we would not notice and so cancel out the first fraud. Well Bridgend Cabinet have had the first document, I suggest you resurrect it as stated in an email previously whilst we deal with this pass the buck game to delay a taxi fare increase for as long as you like. Never mind Cabinet Agenda’s and the BIT Agenda
It appears the council and Cabinet strategies even expose themselves as ridiculous 2nd time around or in general. When you ask will a revisited proposal be tampered with again, you get no reply.
However Premier cars can submit a proposal and it is not tampered with? I note the document is not available online.
Cabinet leader ordered that there should be a trade consultation after rejecting 3 fare proposals from the trade. The header – head of department, decided to waste time by only asking the same 3 people the same question, that being if they agreed with their proposal, or would they like to put in a new one, as the BIT investigation uncovered.
There was never a real consultation with the trade as the council leader would have it go down or the chief executive for that matter, not forgetting licensing and officers, with shared regulatory service headers in the mix too, all pretending there is this integral consultation going on with the trade that is taking much time to achieve or not achieve
Unusually no one else – Taxi firm or Taxi drivers were given the opportunity to submit a proposal or a new one, or give their view, You know, like in a public consultation, or given drive a dealing to do so. Not even BIT were given a deadline on when this Micky mouse process was to end . But yet on more than one occasion we were advised the proposal submission period had closed. That’s what is written in the file as evidence obtained from this administration in mal administration
But yet, others were really not even advised the consultation was opened or even closed. What would the public make of that?
We asked are all the current fare proposals live including the Burke proposal and what was said given licensing were instructed to contact those that submitted a fare proposal that was rejected by Cabinet. No answer to that question either.
Our investigation found that at least one of the people that had submitted a proposal was no longer a taxi driver working in the trade and therefore we saw the proposal as dead. As usual when it suits licensing or shared regulatory services or Cabinet they get inventive to slow matters down or ignore matters or just plain manipulate the trade or just get plain unprofessional or unreasonable.
Your letter states it will take you 10 days to investigate.
It”s amazing how when people that are responsible for taXi policies, they can go hide when they are asked to account the irregularities, and can also become bullish as a result if they feel cornered because they are used to messing the taxi trade about as if they don’t matter or the taxi trades economic survival does not matter.
But yet you can conclude an investigation within a few days of an email being sent in.
Dave HOLLAND is head of shared regulatory services, and also part of the problem and therefore cannot possibly be involved in dealing with any complaint stage and nor can Will Lane. In reality neither can shared regulatory service if the past problems for the taxi trade are anything to go by.
My last complaint touched on the irregularities, which continue, and more. When you ask simple questions there is a habit of ignoring, the delays or the poor practices continue to show ongoing, and so we are forced to revisit all as the council’s administration dupes the taxi trade over time and over much time to the point no progress has been achieved or even implemented in good or efficient time frames deemed practical under the taxi trade’s circumstances
As a result of the now obvious failings, and poor excuses, BIT found it necessary to visit or revisit these issues that keep rearing their ugly head time and time again as the Bridgend administration shows no mercy or sign or change . It’s apparent Cardiff don’t suffer the same problems. We have taken an objective comparison given shared regulatory services and licensing are involved not forgetting cllr Patel and the policy officer for the vale of glamorgan, Cardiff and Bridgend – Daniel Cook
You are a 3 borough unit and a management system for the 3 with a committee for the 3. But there are split standards for the taxi trade and false accounting and reporting which does not balance out if you look at taxi economics today, and taxi policies, and the actions taken as a 3 borough unit, or even separately. There is no excuse for what we call foul play by way of mal administration practices of inept delays and as much as BCBC can throw into the mix of delay dictating the automatic economic demise of the taxi trade because of an administration across the board that fails the cab driver with it’s policies causing unnecessary hardship to far to many licensed by the borough
One would have to complain when matters of change are not implemented in good time, but pushed back or just left. A problem Cardiff taxi trade do not have..Fact.!
Our investigation shows Bridgend council refuse to look at the facts and so refuse to answer relevant questions when you go compare other taxi trades and borough actions which include boroughs under shared regulatory jurisdiction/s with heads responsible for the same boroughs
For example the taxi age and testing policy consultation:
This consultation is to invite views on proposals to change the age policy guidelines and hackney carriage and private hire vehicle testing regime. It also seeks views on the provision for disabled taxi services in Bridgend.
Background and information
The current age policy requires all hackney carriage and private hire vehicles to be new when first licensed. There are some exceptions currently which relate to private hire vehicles, wheelchair accessible vehicles or specialist vehicles.
The Council currently issues MOT exemption certificates following each test.
This proposal will primarily affect applicants for new hackney carriage and private hire vehicle licences. The Council is proposing that the existing age policy be changed as follows:
Two classes of vehicles will be introduced, Class 1 being a standard saloon, multi-purpose vehicle (MPV) or wheelchair accessible vehicle not fitted with an automated wheelchair lift, and Class 2 being a wheelchair accessible vehicle that has been fitted with an automated wheelchair lift.
It is proposed to amend the current age policy for both hackney carriage and private hire vehicles so that Class 1 vehicles, when presented for their first licence, will be under 5 years old and Class 2 vehicles, when presented for their first licence, will be under 10 years old.
In addition it is proposed to change the frequency of testing as follows:
It is proposed to amend the policy so that vehicles up to 10 years old will be tested twice per year and vehicles 10 years or older will be tested 3 times per year.
In addition it is proposed that the current testing regime be revised so that:
hackney carriage and private hire vehicles will be tested in accordance with the MOT regime administered by the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA). Alongside the MOT test, it is also proposed that vehicles will be required to undertake an additional compliance test, in accordance with the Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Vehicles National Inspection Standards, produced by the Freight Transport Association, that includes items that would not be covered by an MOT test (such as a taxi roof-light).
How to respond
This consultation period will begin on the 18th December and close on the 31 January 2018.
In Nov 2016 we were told a report will be written up by shared regulatory services policy officer Daniel Cook, so like Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan the Bridgend taxi trade would have the same taxi vehicle age policy, or in this case a used car, if you buy one car for taxi use.
To date that has not been implemented although the consultation has now been put out and ended without any rigmarole. But nothing else, no action
There was no we need to talk to the trade at the time, and so it was put out for consultation for everyone to comment on including the Bridgend taxi trade. As in the case of the Intended use policy it was action-ed without the need to play games or choose unethical routes of delay that are effectively inept practices now witnessed and confirmed as the same
But since the consultation the process was or has been put on the back burner: Drivers being told we just need to do the paper work, said one licensing officer when asked what is going on.
A delay that is something that does not happen in Cardiff if you examine trends or good practices for the taxi trade. The practice adopted by BCBC is unjustifiable to many in the trade including BIT. What 18 months to delay the implementation and counting? Is that not irresponsible and unreasonable? Thus forcing guys to buy new cars as a result. That would be a complaint matter to be included.
It was BIT that demanded Parity as a result of unfair bias to private hire vehicles which prompted the council’s surge to produce the elusive report finally be written up quickly, and the consultation be put into action. After that it stopped. yet again, another example of how licensing and the council’s administration manipulate the taxi trade: by as usual delaying the process without good sensible reason, other than the consistent pattern of delay even if it means years to the taxi driver in costs with their ultimate costs implications.
Then you have the taxi fare rigmarole which again Cardiff do not have that problem. CARDIFF Proposal is put out for consultation quickly and universal taxi costs are taken into account and subsequently Cardiff jump 100 places in the national fare table. Within months, WITHOUT THE NEED TO FOLLOW THE SAME RIDICULOUS STRATEGY THAT BRIDGEND WITH SHARED REGULATORY SERVICES INVOLVEMENT have adopted as if we are on another planet a few miles down the road that does not have the same costs implications including taxi insurance. In the last fare proposal taxi insurance costs and repair costs were not taken into account when Dave Holland’s department manipulated the proposal or facts including taxi costs, nor was the minimum wage increase above 23%.
Again this issue was covered in the BIT NEWS diary file of events and facts over a time line, with so much to chew on
One would have to complain that shared regulatory services not only hinder the process but Bridgend Cabinet also not forgetting the 3rd Amigo called licensing. The direct result is fare proposals are manipulated by both parties and the trade suffers as a result over many years, and as a result drop 47 places in the national hackney carriage fare chart
Cardiff can put out a fare consultation the same way Bridgend can put out an age policy consultation, but Bridgend won’t put out a fare proposal consultation in the same way they did the age policy consultation thus complicating the process and leaving the trade out of pocket for years if we take the current practices into account. – A definite serious matter for a complaint or this complaint stage one complaint
When you ask Cabinet questions based on the unusual methods of contradiction, they eventually get bullish as in the case of Will Lane (shared regulatory services) and Councillor Dhanisha Patel; as only recently claimed that the document – THE BIG TAXI ISSUE- which formed part of – BIT NEWS diary – exposure, which highlight the wasting of time which is detrimental to the trade had already been answered, when they had not.
A clear lie for even the public or an ombudsman to recognise if they go check the NEWS DIARY or Bridgend’s only Taxi News
Overall the current questions relevant now have not been answered and that is clear given the response. BIT Partner’s were of the opinion given the content Cabinet would avid answering the questions at any cost if they were playing games.
The communication from Will Lane is disturbing under the circumstances and therefore unprofessional. A fact described in the latest BIT NEWS diary and to Karen Williams also.
The method used by both parties involved in the process is hindering the taxi trade and their economic survival. In comparison the council’s strategy with licensing is inconsistent and now shown to be unfair in comparison to how even Cardiff work recently. It’s just not good business for the taxi driver or the taxi trade or even for a council who regulate the taxi trade
The trade are being manipulated to their detriment and that is apparent and clear. BIT set out to establish that was the case and have discovered after going through the motions; the trade are in a bad place as a result of the bullish and unusual practices that give not only BIT reason to complain but many others that do not have the time to complain, because they know what they are up against after suffering these poor practices by BCBC and personnel in high places; like shared Regulatory services, including Cabinet and cllr Patel in this case as it turns out.
When Cabinet and others breach their own communication charter that is a serious matter. When licensing ignore emails or fail to answer them that is a serious matter.
All these matters are a serious matter of complaint or stage one complaints, especially when there is a pattern over time.
We can no longer stand by and tolerate the consistent abuse of the taxi trade for years when we go compare shared regulatory services in action with licensing and Cabinet decisions involved.
The BIT organisation was set up to target the problems, so they can be exposed, and become a genuine case for complaint.
We have never set out to target people personally but their conduct has been in question as a result of either their remit in office or their behaviour in office or the lack of professionalism as a result or the constant delays by an administration called BCBC
It has been common place for licensing to try and either ignore the problem or just try and manipulate the problem that overall is not only unfair, but also undemocratic but yet evident as a practice or policy or standard procedure
Taxi drivers have a say and those bodies responsible should not make it look like they have a say and then deny them of it or force those that do have a say to turn the other cheek. Certainly delays costly to the taxi trade should not be a benefit to the BCBC administration or Bridgend Cabinet
Again BIT was set up to seek out those bits of unfair play and expose them and all those that participate in ensuring fair play is not exercised.
Our news may not be to everyone’s liking but it does serve as a warning to those that think there is democracy for taxi drivers, who are thinking of applying for a taxi badge. It is a warning for those that think Parity is exercised by licensing. It’s a warning to those that think fair play is common place. It’s a warning to those that think they will be dealt with fairly by taxi licensing and Cabinet. It’s a warning to those that submit proposals or are thinking of them. It’s a warning of what to expect from individuals in office as part of a BCBC administration in mal administration, if you are a taxi driver. It shows the facts to the best of its ability in the public interests in the public domain for even you to understand
It’s a fair way of getting to the problem and exposing the same. It shows the poor practices of an organisation/s and their administration connected to the potential well being of a taxi driver. It is a account of who, what, when and why. It shows the irregularities and unfair practices of BCBC and shared regulatory services day by day, that have affected taxi drivers for years, if not decades under BCBC administration, including council leaders and Cabinet leaders, chief executives and those heads of departments responsible for taxi matters or decisions that affect the industry ot local taxi trade
The news shows a forensic account of the difficulties the Bridgend taxi driver and trade must endure unfairly and the injustices as a result.
I hope you will investigate it all and find a resolution for the trade that will correct the many failures we have uncovered during our almost 2 year investigation that brought us to the most recent communication which has not been addressed, because that would not sit right with an unprofessional of shared regulatory services, and any others that aid the poor practices today that hinder the well being of the Bridgend taxi trade, compared to others under the same 3 boroughs.
We don’t live in a bubble in Bridgend and therefore must speak out as we are no different to Cardiff as we have costs and expenses, but have found it impossible to get any sense from those that dictate our business demise.
I trust this clarifies the matter.
I trust you will dig deep and report what else has not been rectified which is covered in BITNEWS725.
AS IT IS A DEPRESSING SUBJECT THE NEWS ADDS HUMOUR, SO TAXI DRIVERS DON’T COMMIT SUICIDE LIKE THEY DID IN AMERICA
FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE BIT ORGANISATION
Tel: 0871 789 1234
A live recording with Bridgend county borough council telling them the BIT organisation have been compiling the forensic file for the ombudsman to catch the council in the act
Martin Luther king had a dream and got shot for it.
Nelson Mandela had a dream and got jailed for it.
Who was it that said – let my people go
Dear Mr Nelson,
My apologies for the delay in respect of the completion of my investigation of your complaint, you will appreciate that you have brought a number of significant matters to my attention which has required thorough investigation along with meetings of officers involved.
My email is to advise that I am yet to conclude my findings and due to pre-planned leave arrangements I am unlikely to be in a position to provide a response until Friday 29th June.
I can assure you I am looking into the matters you have raised and hope you will find my conclusion helpful.
Christina Hill | Operational Manager Commercial Services
Shared Regulatory Services / Gwasanaethau Rheoliadol a Rennir
Bridgend, Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan
The public and you should take special note – the full stage one complaint/s of mal administration with the examples for the same will be reported or and published in the taxi news- file Diary, for the public to see and the ombudsman, as we release the facts into the public domain for the hard cold truth of it all as Bridgend county bourogh council fiddle the taxi driver for years and much more. Fact, ladies and gentleman. Is it a case of the games that people play? That is the message that goes out to you
There is no missing that one if you look back 7 years and in between or check BIT NEWS by TAXI WATCH DOG Wales – BIT organisation, for the file facts on the Bridgend taxis Case by The Taxi Watch Dog team