Addison Lee chairman provokes controversy with his views on London cyclist deaths

He's an arse - that's a given. Yet after reading all this, i can't help but be reminded of the ever increasing amount of idiots - on bikes- who cut me up - while i'm on my bicycle (commuting into London as I have been since1993), roll past me when i'm stopped in the correct position at a red light, forcing me to pass there wobbly selves again and again, as then persist in repeating there mistake, reach ridiculous speeds in any built up area ignoring pedestrian crossings, pedestrians and in general - rules of the road, all with only one selfish ignorant thought which is 'me me me', least not the canary brigade who think wearing brightly coloured garments is an excuse to not bother with common sense while on there bikes. Apart from that, he's an arse.

I think there is a big point to be made about training here.. why should road systems be places where the most vulnerable - the pedestrians, horse riders and cyclists - need to learn defensive techniques to accommodate the risks others pose?

Why can we not just engineer those risks out of the equation altogether!? That must surely be a massive solution, and Griffin's advocacy of infringing any safety margin cyclists have is simply wrong.

As I said elsewhere this week - licencing, insuring and taxation of motorists has not stopped an average of 2000+ people (not even cycling related) from dying on our roads.

I know I'm late to the party. Emailing the customer relations department is all well and good. But they don't sound like the sort of company that will take much notice. The sales line is another matter. sales [at] addisonlee.com spamming that and stopping sales would soon get someone's attention.

One for the more militant minded maybe.

All the best,

Bruce.

i was quite amused when addison lee popped up in the middle of this vid -> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00r6nxw

This gentleman should read rule 44 of the Highway Code:

You should never:
drive dangerously
drive without due care and attention
drive without reasonable consideration for other road users

Not to mention observe road signs!

God forbid that someone should be seriously injured by an Addison Lee vehicle whilst it is travelling in a bus lane, but if they were would that mean Mr Griffin personally or the company as a whole could be open to criminal charges.

I have never been able to understand why cabbies, who after all are just working like the rest of us, are able to use bus lanes to assist them to make money. They must be the biggest group of tax dodgers in the country and we are allowing them to get away with it. I did therefore agree with John Griffin when he felt it was totally unfair for only black cabs to have the privilege of using bus lanes, however he has proved himself to be unworthy of any support for his crass comments, and I sincerely hope his stupid remarks regarding cyclists will have a huge impact on the success of his company. I agree with OldRidgeback that Addison Lee drivers leave a lot to be desired and would like an investigation into how many have a UK licence and how many have actually taken a driving test.

Is this becoming Addison Lee's "Ratner" moment?

Maybe he should go out as a cycle courier for a month? I really think he should do that, because then he would be in a much better position to argue a viewpoint. Might be a good for him.

Why are taxis still allowed to use bus lanes? Why are they still allowed to drive around without any passengers wasting finite resources and polluting? Why are taxis still considered to be public transport when they are clearly private same as ordinary road traffic? Why dont we have a system of taxi stands like other large cities and banish taxis to the ordinary traffic lanes? Could it be something to do with money and politics???

Well written peace Simon.

Am no lawyer but was wondering if Mr Griffin has acted in a manor that could be regarded as incitement to commit a crime/illegal act. Further should an incident occur (due to his encouragement of an illegal act) is he then passably liable to prosecution under joint enterprise.

There can be no free speech defense as he committed his business resources to defending drivers who will intentionally commit an illegal act where they would not have done so if he had not made his promise. Therefore he must have intend people to brake the law in support of his business objectives.

Courier company boss is asshole! Shocker!

Not the first one and certainly not the last, in my experience.

Interview with the Addison Lee boss shortly to be broadcast on Radio 4's PM program

Cauld Lubter I was referring to their ability to control a vehicle, as in just being dragged from the past and dropped into one for the first time without any clue how to drive it. Perhaps I should have directed it towards the missing link, primordial ooze amoebas rather than our granite browed forbearers I apologise for any offence me bad.

Time for the " Politicians " to institute 10 year licences with a variety of grades as in Oz !
New drivers could even be required to re-licence after 2 years but having moved through the grades to " Gold " licence with some privileges attached , most motorists would be reluctant to find themselves downgraded through behaviour that only they control ?

SMIDSY is an unacceptable excuse , since all drivers with eyesight defects are legally required to use appropriate equipment to continue using their driving licence ! Think back to the truck driver who is now responsible for two deaths in less than two years ! Could it be that in the rush to reduce Departmental costs that the ministry involved with “ Road Safety “ cannot be bothered to be more effective on the roads ? Breath Testing , document checking , vehicle emission control , etc , in Random Road Control Exercises could quickly do “ Eye Test “ checks !

Whilst these random exercises will not punish the driver , since these are only control tests , it would be a case of issuing a notice requiring the driver to take an eye sight test within 7 days and produce same at the Police station or other such venue . Of course Drivers licences state the holder should be wearing “ Glasses “ and “ Blind Freddy with his white stick “ should having stopped a driver be able to see if that driver is wearing “ Glasses or contact lenses ,etc “, of course , no Police Officer can tell if they are currently sufficiently effective !

As for the excuse , the sun was in my eyes , would any driver deliberately drive towards a tree knowing that it will damage their vehicle ? So what is the hurry to drive at speed , into an area that you cannot see , in the hope you will remain unscathed ?

“ Licensed to Kill ” is not printed on the “ Driver’s Permit ” in ANY Country , so why do the authorities assume that the V R U is in part , the major part , responsible for their misfortune ?

" MY comment to the IAM report " lost by the internet shuffle !

Time for the " Politicians " to institute 10 year licences with a variety of grades as in Oz !
New drivers could even be required to re-licence after 2 years but having moved through the grades to " Gold " licence with some privileges attached , most motorists would be reluctant to find themselves downgraded through behaviour that only they control ?

SMIDSY is an unacceptable excuse , since all drivers with eyesight defects are legally required to use appropriate equipment to continue using their driving licence ! Think back to the truck driver who is now responsible for two deaths in less than two years ! Could it be that in the rush to reduce Departmental costs that the ministry involved with “ Road Safety “ cannot be bothered to be more effective on the roads ? Breath Testing , document checking , vehicle emission control , etc , in Random Road Control Exercises could quickly do “ Eye Test “ checks !

Whilst these random exercises will not punish the driver , since these are only control tests , it would be a case of issuing a notice requiring the driver to take an eye sight test within 7 days and produce same at the Police station or other such venue . Of course Drivers licences state the holder should be wearing “ Glasses “ and “ Blind Freddy with his white stick “ should having stopped a driver be able to see if that driver is wearing “ Glasses or contact lenses ,etc “, of course , no Police Officer can tell if they are currently sufficiently effective !

As for the excuse , the sun was in my eyes , would any driver deliberately drive towards a tree knowing that it will damage their vehicle ? So what is the hurry to drive at speed , into an area that you cannot see , in the hope you will remain unscathed ?

“ Licensed to Kill ” is not printed on the “ Driver’s Permit ” in ANY Country , so why do the authorities assume that the V R U is in part , the major part , responsible for their misfortune ?

COMMENT TO THIS ARTICLE ! hope it works ! Didn’t make it into the comments either !

"Didn't realise that the " Cameron Administration " could be bought for a mere £100k ? Sounds like the 1% getting their way once again !

Mr-andrew's POV of 14:17 says it all ! Jack of 15:58 is spot on !

Glad i am living in Europe , this week riding at the Giro Del Trentino , where miserable snowy weather would have been intolerable in London !

Comment on “ Addison lee chairman “ article :
good job I am able to save and post from “ Microsoft Works Word “ !

Appears that “ al cabs “ are about to find they are being driven into the ground by a “ would be if he could be “! Time that cyclists became active in letting Vehicle Owners know what their employees are doing to their reputation on a daily basis !
Been cut up recently by a placarded vehicle ? Then let the owner company know about it ! Most large vehicles have “ free phone nos “ to express your POV on the driver !

This time the driver missed you , but will you be so lucky next time ?

Hurray this time success !!

Can we have Mr Griffin's email address please?

Being cyclist and a driver, and therefore up in arms about the cost of fuel, £10 a gallon wouldn't be the end of the world for me, but it would for this cretin's empire. (No, I'm not condoning higher fuel prices, but every cloud and all that....)

'The rest of us occupying this roadspace....are paying extortionate amounts of taxes on our vehicle purchase, parking, servicing, insurance and road tax.'

Eh? But cyclists don't use up parking space! They DO pay for servicing (??? - what a weird comment) and often insurance as well. They don't need the same insurance as car drivers anyway. And, as mentioned above, there's no such thing as 'road tax': there is 'excise duty' which you pay to use certain damaging vehicles on publicly funded roads. Bikes are not included in this, they don't pollute or use the same roads or features of roads that motor vehicles do. These comments don't make any sense.

I dont expect I shall add any more to the justifiable outrage over this. It has been my experience as a cyclist and a motorist in London that since the Addison Lee cabs took to the roads London has gained a public enemy. I would also note that incitement to break the law is itself breaking the law - why hasnt Mr Griffin been locked up?

I've just posted a brand new blog entry looking (tangentially) at this issue and what it can tell us about the complex relationship between cyclists, motorists and money. It's here: http://invisiblevisibleman.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/general-theory-of-cycl...