Capital Call Service Changes - TfL Consultations...1.1 There are currently two subsidised taxi and minicab door-to-door transport services for Londoners who are unable to use public

Capital Call Service Changes Consultation Report October 2015

Capital Call Service Changes

Consultation report


Transport for London

October 2014

Steer Davies Gleave has prepared this work for Transport for London. This work may

only be used within the context and scope of work for which Steer Davies Gleave was

commissioned and may not be relied upon in part or whole by any third party or be

used for any other purpose. Any person choosing to use any part of this work without

the express and written permission of Steer Davies Gleave shall be deemed to

confirm their agreement to indemnify Steer Davies Gleave for all loss or damage

resulting therefrom. Steer Davies Gleave has prepared this work using professional

practices and procedures using information available to it at the time and as such any

new information could alter the validity of the results and conclusions made.


Consultation Analysis


October 2014

Prepared by:

Prepared for:

Steer Davies Gleave

28-32 Upper Ground

London SE1 9PD


London

+44 (0)20 7910 5000

www.steerdaviesgleave.com

October 2014

Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ i

1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1

2 Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 2

Consultation Questionnaire ...................................................................................... 3

3 Consultation findings ........................................................................................................... 8

Introduction .............................................................................................................. 8

4 Analysis of responses ....................................................................................................... 10

Q1. What do you think of the proposals to close Capital Call? .................................10

Q2. Please let us know if you think we could do anything further to help affected

users .......................................................................................................................15

Q3. If following this consultation TfL decides to close the Capital Call service, what

issues do you think we should be aware of and plan for? ........................................22

Figures

Figure 2.1: Map of respondents’ home postcodes ........................................................ 5

Figure 3.1: Support for the closure of Capital Call by London Borough ........................ 8

Tables

Table 2.1: Respondents by Geography ........................................................................ 4

Table 4.1: Question 1 Themes ....................................................................................10

Table 4.2: Question 1 Specific Unsupportive Comments.............................................11


Table 4.4: Question 2 Specific Suggestions ................................................................17


Table 4.6: Question 3 Specific Issues .........................................................................24

October 2014

Appendices A Consultation Communications

B Consultation survey

C Summary of response themes

D Question 1 responses

E Question 2 responses

F Question 3 responses

| Capital Call Service Changes

October 2014 | i

Executive Summary

Overview

TfL consulted users and stakeholders on a proposal to close the Capital Call service in

a consultation that ran from 21 January to 11 April 2014. There were 667 responses to

the consultation – 656 were from the public and 11 from stakeholders.

The consultation consisted primarily of three open questions:

1, Please use this space to let us know your thoughts about our proposal to close

Capital Call.

2, TfL has written to every active Capital Call member to explain what other door-to-

door services are available to them. Please let us know in the space below if you think

we could do anything further to help affected users.

3, If following this consultation TfL decides to close the Capital Call service, what

issues do you think we should be aware of and plan for? For example, would closing

Capital Call cause its members any particular difficulties that we should be aware of?

Not all respondents answered each question and respondents did not always follow

the structure of the questionnaire form, often answering the questions in an

unstructured way. Each response was assigned a flag to qualify the respondents’

degree of support for the closure of Capital Call. The categories of response were as

follows:

Yes: The respondent is fully in support of the closure of Capital Call.

No, unless: The respondent does not support the closure of the scheme unless a

certain condition or conditions are met.

No: The respondent does not support the closure of Capital Call.

90% of respondents opposed the closure of Capital Call and 8% supported it.

Additionally, 2% would support the closure if a certain condition or conditions were

met.

Summary of responses & issues raised

646 respondents answered question 1. Of these 581 were opposed to the closure of

the scheme. 403 (69%) of these respondents expressed a specific reason for

opposing the proposed closure, however 178 (31%) respondents did not give a specific

reason. The most frequently raised specific reasons for opposing closure were:

They found other Door-to-Door services more expensive for longer journeys;

They found other Door-to-Door services unreliable;

They find minicabs easier to board/alight;

They found Taxicard booking staff to be unhelpful; and

They thought alternative Door-to-Door services were not suitable for them. 519 respondents answered question 2. 346 respondents (67%) did not raise a specific

suggestion in regards to ‘anything TfL could do to help affected users’. 173


October 2014 | ii

respondents (33%) did include a specific suggestion. The most frequently raised

suggestions were:

Improve Taxicard services (eg. That member allowances be increased);

Expand the area that Dial-a-Ride serves (eg. To allow longer distance trips, or to

hospitals, etc.);

Improve Dial-a-Ride booking facilities;

Ensure taxis are punctual; and

Ensure members are dropped off/picked up from the address specified during the

booking, rather than somewhere nearby.

553 respondents answered question 3. Of these, 256 (46%) did not flag an issue that

‘TfL should be aware of and plan for’. 297 respondents (54%) did flag a specific issue.

The most frequently raised issues were:

Other Door-to-Door services are more expensive;

Members quality of life will be reduced if Capital Call is withdrawn;

Alternative Door-to-Door services are unreliable;

There are no suitable alternative Door-to-Door services for Capital Call members

to transition to; and

Other Door-to-Door services are limited geographically.


October 2014 | 1

1 Introduction

1.1 There are currently two subsidised taxi and minicab door-to-door transport services for

Londoners who are unable to use public transport due to a mobility impairment. These

are Taxicard and Capital Call. Also available is TfL’s Dial-a-Ride service, which is free

to the user, whilst the boroughs and NHS across London provide a range of statutory

and non-statutory transport services.

1.2 Taxicard, although a London boroughs’ scheme, is primarily funded by TfL. It is

available across London and provides a subsidy for qualifying members to take trips in

taxis. In some boroughs, there have historically been fewer taxis in operation than in

other areas. For this reason, in 2003 TfL introduced the Capital Call service, providing

a subsidy for qualifying members to take trips in minicabs and supplementing Taxicard

in those boroughs where fewer taxis operated. These are the London boroughs of

Bexley, Hounslow, Ealing, Lambeth, Enfield, Lewisham, Haringey, Merton, Hillingdon

and Southwark.

1.3 To be eligible for Capital Call, a user must already be a registered member of Taxicard.

Capital Call members can therefore use either or both services.

1.4 Since 2003, the supply of vehicles to the Taxicard service has increased and the

service now meets the minimum performance standard required (which is that 95% of

taxis arrive within 15 minutes of the time specified by the user). For this reason, TfL

proposed that Capital Call be closed from April 2015. A consultation was held with

registered Capital Call users and other stakeholders from 21 January – 11 April 2014.


October 2014 | 2

2 Methodology

2.1 The consultation proposals and a survey to record feedback were made available via

TfL’s Consultation Portal at https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/assisted-transport/capital-

call. The proposals were also communicated by letter to every registered member of

the Capital Call service, comprising around 2,500 members of the public. The letter to

registered members enclosed exactly the same information as was available on-line

and included a survey form with an envelope pre-printed with TfL’s Freepost address.

2.2 An email was sent to selected stakeholders on the launch of the consultation, setting

out in brief detail the reasons for the consultation and including a link to the relevant

page on TfL’s Consultation Portal.

2.3 The letter to registered Capital Call members, the email to selected stakeholders and

the list of stakeholders invited to participate in the consultation are included in

Appendix A.

2.4 The consultation was promoted principally via the distribution of a letter to registered

Capital Call users, but also via a TfL press release.

2.5 Following a request for a public meeting of some kind from Transport for All1, TfL

organised a ‘deliberative engagement’ event, held on 8 April 2014. 50 registered

Capital Call members were invited to the event, drawn from respondents to the

consultation living in each of the affected boroughs. The purpose of the event was to

encourage debate on particular aspects of the proposal to close Capital Call, with the

comments made by attendees recorded in a minute and this submitted as a distinct

response to the consultation. Representatives from both TfL and Transport for All

gave presentations on specific aspects of the proposal to close Capital Call. The event

was chaired by Alice Maynard, chair of the charity Scope.

1 Transport for All campaigns on behalf of disabled Londoners for accessibility improvements to

London’s transport network.

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/assisted-transport/capital-call

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/assisted-transport/capital-call


October 2014 | 3

Consultation Questionnaire

2.6 The Capital Call Consultation questionnaire consisted of six questions, including the

following three open questions:

i. Please use this space to let us know your thoughts about our proposal to close

Capital Call?

ii. Please let us know in the space below if you think we could do anything further

to help affected users?

iii. If following this consultation TfL decides to close the Capital Call service, what

issues do you think we should be aware of and plan for? For example, would

closing Capital Call cause its members any particular difficulties that we should

be aware of?

2.7 In addition, respondents were asked how they had heard about the consultation, their

home postcode and, if they were responding on behalf of an organisation, business or

campaign group, the name of the organisation. A copy of the full consultation

questionnaire can be found in Appendix B.

2.8 TfL posted the consultation survey to all registered Capital Call members. Accordingly,

the majority of responses were received on paper. Responses were manually inputted

into the TfL online portal by TfL and shared with Steer Davies Gleave for analysis. A

breakdown of members contacted and response rates by borough is given in Table

2.1. Please note not all respondents gave their postcode - these people are not

included in Table 2.1. Some respondents have provided a postcode in a borough

which TfL did not contact; these respondents may have heard about the consultation

via another channel such as the press or through reference by a friend or stakeholder


October 2014 | 4

Table 2.1: Respondents by Geography

Area No. people

contacted No. responses % responded

LB Bexley 239 53 22%

LB Bromley 0 2 -

LB Ealing 348 69 20%

LB Enfield 226 64 28%

LB Hackney 0 2 -

LB Haringey 227 57 25%

LB Hillingdon 157 50 32%

LB Hounslow 247 58 23%

LB Islington 0 1 -

LB Kensington &

Chelsea 0 1 -

LB Lambeth 208 60 29%

LB Lewisham 299 57 19%

LB Merton 228 45 20%

LB Redbridge 0 1 -

LB Southwark 294 82 28%

LB Wandsworth 0 2 -

2.9 The map in Figure 2.1 shows the geographic spread of responses.

2.10 The consultation was sent to stakeholders as well as members of the public. Of the

664 responses received, over 99% came from the public.


October 2014 | 5

Figure 2.1: Map of respondents’ home postcodes

October 2014 | 6

Quantifying support

2.11 Each response was assigned a flag to qualify the respondents’ degree of support for

the closure of Capital Call, according to their answer to the first question (what are your

thoughts about our proposal to close Capital Call). In those instances in which

respondents did not answer the first question the flag was assigned according to their

response to the second or third question.

2.12 The categories of support are as follows:

Yes: The respondent is fully in support of the closure of Capital Call.

No, unless: The respondent does not support the closure of the scheme unless a

certain condition or conditions are met.


Coding

2.13 Code frames were developed for each of the open questions to classify the responses.

The code frames comprise several overall themes and specific comments within these.

Drafts of the code frames were shared with TfL for agreement throughout the coding

process.

2.14 The primary themes raised across the three questions are as follows:

Supportive: Comments showing support for the Capital Call scheme closure;

Unsupportive: Comments opposing the scheme closure;

Improve Dial-A-Ride Service: Comments suggesting ways to improve Dial-A-

Ride services;

Improve Taxicard Service: Comments suggesting ways to improve Taxicard

services;

Improve Door-to-Door Services: Comments suggesting ways to improve taxi

services in general;

Improve Other Transport Services: Comments suggesting ways to improve

other transport services (i.e. not door-to-door services);

Economics: Comments regarding economic aspects of the proposal; and

Question: Questions raised by respondents.

2.15 The number of comments under each theme for each of the questions can be found in

Appendix C.

2.16 All open responses to the consultation were coded. During the process it was

necessary to add additional codes to the code frames as appropriate. Individual

comments were coded to one or many codes within the code frame as relevant.

2.17 To ensure consistency between the individuals coding responses the first 50

responses coded by each person were checked. A random check of coding on 5% of

responses was also undertaken.

2.18 To be concise, only the most frequently mentioned themes and comments for each

question are discussed in this report. A full list of themes and comments are detailed in

paragraph 2.10 and provided in Appendices C to E.

2.19 It should be noted that although the three open questions invite respondents to discuss

different aspects of the proposal (i.e. their thoughts on the scheme closure,

suggestions of what TfL could do to help affected users and any other issues TfL

October 2014 | 7

should be aware of and plan for), respondents have not always followed the structure

of the questionnaire form and have often answered the questions in an unstructured

way. As such, the topics covered in the three code frames overlap each other in

places. We have added a flag to each code frame to identify cases when respondents

do not directly answer the survey question.

2.20 Furthermore, many of the responses received were in-depth and made multiple points.

Where individuals made both positive and negative comments, the category of support

was assigned according to the number of positive/negative comments made as well as

the overall tone of the response. For this reason, some negative comments can be

found among ‘Yes’ respondents (in support of the scheme) and vice versa.

October 2014 | 8

3 Consultation findings

Introduction

1.1 In total there were 667 responses to the Capital Call consultation. Of these, 656

responses were from members of the public and 11 were provided by stakeholders. A

summary of responses from stakeholders is included in Appendix A.

3.1

3.2 Not every respondent answered every question:

646 responded to question one;

521 responded to question two; and

553 responded to question three.

Degree of support for Capital Call

3.3 To give a feel for the level of support for the closure of Capital Call, the responses to

the consultation were classified according to the response to the first question (what do

you think of the proposals to close Capital Call?).

3.4 The categories of support are as follows:

Yes: The respondent is fully in support of the closure of capital call.

No, but: The respondent does not support the closure of the scheme unless a

certain condition or conditions were met.


Figure 3.1: Support for the closure of Capital Call by London Borough

October 2014 | 9

3.5 Overall 90% of respondents oppose the closure of Capital Call and 8% support it. In

addition, 2% would support the closure if a certain condition or conditions were met.

3.6 There is no obvious geographical pattern of support or opposition in the respondents’

sentiment towards the withdrawal of Capital Call.

October 2014 | 10

4 Analysis of responses

Q1. What do you think of the proposals to close Capital Call?

Overall Results

4.1 646 out of 664 respondents answered the first open question in the consultation, which

asked members to share their thoughts on the proposal to close Capital Call. Of these,

581 people (90%) responded that they were opposed to the scheme’s closure, 15 (2%)

oppose the closure unless certain measures were put in place to mitigate potential

problems and 50 people (8%) were in support of the proposal.

4.2 The overall feeling towards Capital Call is positive with the following comments typical

of respondents’ views:

1. “Excellent service and very helpful”

2. “Excellent drivers and cars, we would truly miss it”

4.3 Table 4.1 illustrates the most commonly mentioned themes by respondents. The most

commonly noted themes are explored in more detail in the paragraphs which follow.

Please note that each respondent would usually include several individual ‘comments’

within their response. The table below shows the number of comments making up

each theme.

Table 4.1: Question 1 Themes

Theme Number of comments Percentage

Unsupportive 1,130 87%

Supportive 71 5%

Improve Taxicard Service 45 3%

Question 15 1%

Improve Dial-A-Ride Service 12 1%

Improve Door-to-Door Services 10 1%

Comments falling under other

headings 15 1%

Total 1,298 100%

A full breakdown of themes and detailed comments for question one can be found in Appendix D.

Unsupportive

4.4 Of the 581 respondents who oppose the closure of Capital Call, 570 made comments

illustrating their lack of support. 167 respondents (29%) made a general statement that

they are against the closure of Capital Call. Respondents primarily discussed the

October 2014 | 11

negative impact the scheme’s closure would have on their personal mobility, stating

that they would be unable to visit friends and family, attend appointments and go about

other personal business.

4.5 403 respondents (69%) gave a specific reason for being unsupportive of the proposal.

These specific reasons are listed in Table 4.2. In many cases, respondents gave more

than one specific reason for why they oppose the closure of Capital Call.

Table 4.2: Question 1 Specific Unsupportive Comments

Comment Number of

respondents

Percentage of all

respondents

who answered

question 1

Other services are more expensive for

longer journeys 267 41%

Other services are unreliable 199 31%

Minicabs are easier to get in and out of

than black cabs 43 7%

Taxicard central booking staff are not

helpful 28 4%

Concern about eligibility for other

services/other services are not

suitable for me

22 3%

Concern that money saved will go on

transport in general and won't be

spent on services for the

elderly/disabled

6 1%

Keep/expand Capital Call and close

one of the other services 3 <1%

Capital Call members have the ability to

manage their own budget 3 <1%

Need Capital Call because the Taxicard

credit is limited 2 <1%

If Capital Call closes there will be an

increase in demand for other

services, making it harder to get a

taxi

2 <1%

October 2014 | 12

Comment Number of

respondents

Percentage of all

respondents

who answered

question 1

Closing Capital Call will cause

problems for people who depend on

making advanced bookings

2 <1%

Closing Capital Call will deter people

from visiting and spending money in

central London, which will affect the

economy

1 <1%

Capital Call members will have to

register with new services 1 <1%

Other taxi firms will not take

companions e.g. carers 1 <1%

4.6 Members were primarily concerned about the financial implications of losing Capital

Call, commenting that they find it a less costly service compared to the alternatives,

particularly when making longer journeys (267 respondents) and at a time when the

cost of living poses a problem to many. Respondents highlighted the differences

between Capital Call, Taxicard and Dial-A-Ride services, stating that they do not agree

with the suggestion that Capital Call is a duplicate service. For these respondents,

Capital Call is an essential service in some outer areas where Taxicard services are

less available or when other services refuse to make longer trips.

4.7 Members also mentioned problems of reliability with alternative services (199

respondents), including:

Long wait times;

Missed appointments;

The lack of ability to make bookings at short notice;

The geographical limitations of other services (e.g. only serving a 5 mile travel

radius); and

A lack of black cabs in the outer London boroughs.

4.8 The third most common specific comment was in relation to accessibility and in

particular, difficulty entering and exiting back cabs (43 respondents) – respondents

requested that if Capital Call is closed the alternative services be easily accessible for

wheelchair users.

4.9 Respondents compared and contrasted the customer service provided by Capital Call

and Taxicard. 28 respondents mentioned that Taxicard central booking staff are not

helpful when booking cabs and they find them often unpleasant to deal with.

October 2014 | 13

Conversely, a similar number of respondents praised Capital Call for the excellent

customer service it offers, as booking staff are helpful, courteous and understanding.

4.10 A handful of members are concerned that they are will not be considered eligible to

use alternative schemes if Capital Call closes (22 respondents).

4.11 Finally, some members feel that government cuts to transport services unfairly

penalise people with disabilities. Members questioned the reasons behind the

proposed scheme closure and more specifically whether it was due to Government cut

backs. Other respondents expressed a concern that the money saved in closing

Capital Call will be reallocated to public transport and not spent on transport services

for persons with disabilities (6 respondents).

Supportive Comments

4.12 Not all respondents were against the closure of Capital Call. Several respondents felt

that as long as there is an alternative service in operation, closing Capital Call will not

pose a great problem (19 respondents).

4.13 Of the respondents who demonstrated support for the removal of Capital Call, 17 noted

that they do not use the service so the scheme closure will have no direct impact on

their mobility. In contrast to opinions above, some members felt it will be beneficial to

remove Capital Call as it is a duplicate service.

4.14 In addition to 12 generally supportive comments, other points in support of the

proposal include:

The assertion that Taxicard is a better or good alternative (9 respondents);

The complaint that Capital Call booking staff can be rude and the quality of the

booking line is not good (7 respondents);

That Capital Call has a lack of available vehicles (4 respondents); and

The concern that some minicab companies are exploiting Capital Call (2

respondents).

Improve Taxicard Service

4.15 A number of Capital Call users stated that if the service should cease, improvements to

Taxicard services should be made (18 respondents). It was suggested that the number

of Taxicard travel allowance swipes should be increased or the travel allowance

increased to ensure users have sufficient credit to last the month and meet personal

travel needs.

4.16 Other Taxicard improvements noted by respondents include:

Reinstate weekend bookings to allow for easy travel every day of the week (5

respondents);

Simplify Taxicard to make it easier for members to use (i.e. clarify swipe system)

and reduce the cost of the service (4 respondents);

Suggestion to incorporate Capital Call into Taxicard (2 respondents); and

Request for Taxicard (or other services) to provide a set fare/charge structure if

Capital Call is closed.

October 2014 | 14

Improve Dial-A-Ride Service

4.17 Some members (12 respondents) suggested that improvements to Dial-A-Ride should

be made if Capital Call is discontinued. The most frequently cited problem with Dial-A-

Ride is the size of the fleet, which prevents the operator from being a reliable and

dependable service (9 respondents).

4.18 Another issue discussed by respondents is the inability to use Dial-A-Ride for medical

appointments (3 respondents). Respondents suggested that Dial-A-Ride should offer

this service in future, if Capital Call is to be discontinued.

Improve Door-to-Door Services

4.19 Under the theme Improve Door-to-Door Services we grouped comments on the

alternative taxi services where operators were not expressly named. Some members

suggested that the money saved in removing Capital Call should be reinvested in the

other existing door-to-door services for disabled people (e.g. expanding fleet size and

reducing costs of travel) (7 respondents). In addition, 3 respondents highlighted that if

Capital Call is closed, TfL will need to ensure that other transport options are

accessible i.e. public transport, footpaths and bus stops amongst others.

Questions

4.20 Some respondents posed specific questions regarding the closure of Capital Call. The

most frequently asked question was what other services would be available should

Capital Call be removed (5 respondents). Other respondents asked whether it would

be possible to set up a customer complaint call centre so members can report issues

with the alternative services should they have any problems after Capital Call has

closed (3 respondents).

4.21 Additional queries were raised concerning the financial costs associated with the

closure of the Capital Call service, including:

What will the cost of travel be once Capital Call is discontinued? (1 respondent);

Will financial assistance be offered for travelling with other services? (1 respondent);

and

Will a travel budget be put into place for Capital Call users who will have to use

other services? (1 respondent).

General Comments

4.22 Some members made comments which fell under a General category (6 respondents).

These included comments about the consultation, for example “the meaning and

purpose of the consultation is unclear” (6 respondents).

Not related to the consultation

4.23 Four responses were not related to the consultation. One respondent noted that prior

to the consultation they were unaware of other alternative services, so will now enquire

into these. Conversely, another respondent stated that they were unaware of the

October 2014 | 15

Capital Call service, but would find it a useful service should it continue. Finally, two

respondents made unclear responses which we were unable to categorise.

Q2. Please let us know if you think we could do anything further to help affected users

Overall Results

4.24 519 people answered Question 2. 346 of these respondents (67%) did not give any

suggestions of what TfL can do to help minimise the impact of closing the Capital Call

service, but wrote additional comments reinforcing their responses to the previous

question. Many of these responses focused on praising the current Capital Call

service, or simply asking for the service not to be cut. They are explored in the section

‘General Comments’ below.

4.25 173 respondents (33%) provided a specific suggestion and these are explored in the

‘Specific Suggestions’ section.

4.26 The most frequently mentioned themes amongst all respondents to Question 2 are

shown in Table 4.3.


Theme Number of

comments Percentage

Unsupportive 404 52%

Improve Dial-A-Ride Service 124 16%

Improve Taxicard Service 100 13%


headings 149 19%

Total 777 100%

A full breakdown of themes and detailed comments for question one can be found in Appendix E

General Comments

Unsupportive

4.27 Overall, 404 comments were unsupportive of the proposal to close Capital Call, with

114 respondents generally stating they are against the closure of the service.

Respondents feel that the Capital Call service works well and should not be removed.

Many respondents suggested reviewing the Capital Call service on a borough by

borough basis, with a particular focus on ensuring good coverage in the outer

boroughs.

October 2014 | 16

4.28 As highlighted under Question 1, one of the most common concerns was that other

companies providing a similar service to Capital Call are unreliable i.e. Dial-A-

Ride/Taxicard/Black Cabs (98 respondents). Reasons included:

Black cabs often arriving late as they have to travel from central London and get

delayed in traffic;

Taxicard failing to provide appropriate types of vehicles for users’ needs even when

a particular vehicle is requested;

The Taxicard call centre being difficult to contact;

Taxicard drivers not being punctual, even when booked in advance. It was

suggested that Taxicard should allocate drivers to a job earlier so that an alternative

driver can be found if necessary;

Dial-A-Ride and Taxicard not having a big enough fleet to be a reliable alternative

service – users mentioned that Taxicard often do not have any vehicles available

when they call;

The lack of Taxicard vehicles in the outer boroughs, in particular in the Hounslow

area; and

Dial-A-Ride often takes much longer to make a journey than other services as

there are so many passenger stops. It was suggested that this is not a practical

service for users with certain disabilities as prolonged periods of sitting down can

be uncomfortable and some users may be unable to travel with others due to

mental health conditions. Suggestions to relieve these problems included

increasing the Dial-A-Ride fleet to include some smaller vehicles with fewer

passengers for those with a physical or mental disability that deter them from using

the regular service.

4.29 The cost of Taxicard services was a common complaint within the Unsupportive theme

(87 respondents). More detailed comments included suggestions for fixed tariff prices

like Capital Call, so users have a clear idea before starting a journey how much it will

cost. High volumes of traffic across London can increase taxi prices and there were

suggestions to base prices on the distance travelled rather than by time/meter. There

were also suggestions to reduce the cost of Taxicard so it is in-line with the current

Capital Call prices. The perceived high costs of Taxicard means it is not a feasible

service for longer journeys, and there were many comments requesting an affordable

long distance service.

4.30 35 respondents stated that closing Capital Call will affect users’ ability to travel due to

the alternative services being unsuitable. Suggestions point to the need for an

improved door to door service that is affordable, easy to book, appropriate for those

with physical and mental conditions that render them unable to use group travel (e.g.

Dial-A-Ride) and allows users to travel outside their borough/the 5 mile radius of Dial-

A-Ride.

Improve Dial-a-Ride Service

4.31 One respondent was concerned that the Dial-A-Ride number is a high-charge number

and this will increase users’ telephone bills if lower rate alternatives such as Capital

Call are removed.

October 2014 | 17


4.32 These comments all raised a specific point and are included in the next section.

Specific Suggestions

4.33 5.33 The comments from the 173 respondents (33%) who provided a specific

suggestion are listed and grouped by theme in Table 4.4.

Table 4.4: Question 2 Specific Suggestions

Suggestion Theme

Number of

respondent

s

Percentage

of all

respondent

s to

question 2

Increase the number of

swipes/allowance

Improve Taxicard

Service 70 13%

Expand the area/trip types that

Dial-A-Ride serves

Improve Dial-A-Ride

Service 53 10%

Improve booking facilities for

Dial-A-Ride

Improve Dial-A-Ride

Service 47 9%

Ensure taxis are punctual Improve Door-to-

Door Services 15 3%

Ensure members are

collected/dropped off to the

specified address

Improve Door-to-

Door Services 14 3%

Retain Capital Call in outer

boroughs where there are

fewer black cabs

Change the Capital

Call Service 13 3%

Allow all licensed and

registered taxis to sign up to

the Taxicard scheme

Improve Taxicard

Service 13 3%

Improve the geographical

coverage of other similar

services

Improve Door-to-

Door Services 12 2%

Cut the Taxicard service

instead of Capital Call Unsupportive 11 2%

October 2014 | 18

Suggestion Theme

Number of

respondent

s

Percentage

of all

respondent

s to

question 2

Dial-A-Ride should be

available for medical

appointments

Improve Dial-A-Ride

Service 11 2%

Train drivers to ensure they

are courteous to

disabled/elderly users

Improve Other

Transport Services 10 2%

Increase the Taxicard fleet so

taxis are readily available

Improve Taxicard

Service 9 2%

Make Dial-A-Ride a 24 hour

service

Improve Dial-A-Ride

Service 8 2%

Require members to pay more

per trip in order to keep

Capital Call open

Change the Capital

Call Service 7 1%

Ensure there is a quick and

user-friendly booking service

open 7 days a week

Improve Door-to-

Door Services 7 1%

Stop drivers charging

members for the part of the

journey before they get picked

up

Improve Taxicard

Service 4 1%

Improve efficiency of Dial-A-

Ride

Improve Dial-A-Ride

Service 4 1%

Ensure taxis are available to

take members on both/all legs

of their journey to prevent

them getting stranded

Improve Door-to-

Door Services 4 1%

If Capital Call does close, offer

discounts to disabled people

for other local taxi companies

Improve Other

Transport Services 3 1%

Make the Taxicard logo bigger

and more visible on the taxis

Improve Taxicard

Service 2 <1%

October 2014 | 19

Suggestion Theme

Number of

respondent

s

Percentage

of all

respondent

s to

question 2

Reinstate Saturday/weekend

bookings

Improve Taxicard

Service 2 <1%

Provide step free access to

tube/rail services

Improve Other

Transport Services 2 <1%

Inform organisations who

deal/interact with Capital Call

members about changes

Suggestion for

Further

Communications

1 <1%

Provide members with an

annual budget

Improve Other


Consult with members Suggestion for

Further

Communications

1 <1%

Reduce the amount of walking

required at public transport

interchanges

Improve Other


Unsupportive

4.34 A small number of respondents (11) suggested that TfL should withdraw the Taxicard

service instead of the Capital Call service. This included a suggestion to streamline

services on a borough by borough basis and retain the service in those boroughs with

fewer alternatives.


4.35 70 respondents suggested that the overall allowance for Taxicard users should be

increased from its current level and that users should be able to use more than one

swipe per journey. This would help users continue to make longer journeys if Capital

Call was withdrawn, with particular benefit to those living in the outer London

boroughs.

4.36 It was suggested by 13 respondents that the Taxicard service should allow users to

access the service via their local minicab services because these are more reliable

than the taxis sent by Taxicard, would help increase the Taxicard fleet, and are often

the same price.

4.37 Other specific suggestions for improving the Taxicard service were:

October 2014 | 20

Stop drivers charging members for the part of the journey before they get picked up

(4 respondents);

Make the Taxicard logo bigger and more visible on the taxis (2 respondents); and

To reinstate Saturday/weekend bookings (2 respondents).

Improve Dial-A-Ride Service

4.38 The most common suggestion from respondents (53) was that the geographical

coverage offered by Dial-A-Ride needs to be expanded if Capital Call is to be

withdrawn. The prevailing view was that the current 5 mile journey maximum is too

limiting and users often choose the Capital Call service instead. It was suggested that

the journey maximum should be increased to approximately 10 miles. There were also

suggestions to expand the type of trip Dial-A-Ride can be used for, for example travel

to rail and coach stations, trips to medical appointments and trips to other boroughs. 11

respondents suggested that Dial-A-Ride should be made available for medical

appointments.

4.39 47 respondents stated that they have faced issues when booking a journey with Dial-A-

Ride. These included trouble getting through to the Dial-A-Ride call centre and poor

availability of taxis. It was suggested that the Dial-A-Ride service is not flexible enough

as users cannot make advanced plans and are therefore heavily dependent on when

Dial-A-Ride has availability. Other suggestions included allowing users to book a

specific pick-up time slot, allowing users to book at short notice and allowing carers to

travel with service users.

4.40 Other suggestions to improve the Dial-A-Ride service included making the service

available 24 hours a day and on national holidays such as Christmas Day (8

respondents), and improve the efficiency of the service by grouping similar trips

together (4 respondents).


4.41 Punctuality was the most common suggestion for improving door-to-door services (15

respondents). Respondents complained that even though taxis must be booked in

advance they do not arrive on time as drivers are only made aware of the journey 15

minutes before the pick-up time. There was also a complaint that if users decide to

cancel a journey as the driver arrives very late, this is recorded as a ‘cancellation’ and

the user is still charged for the journey.

4.42 Another request was to ensure that service users are collected and dropped off at the

specified addresses, not just nearby. This was linked to a more general suggestion to

improve door to door services. Several respondents suggested that drivers help should

help users to get from the taxi to their door, which is something Capital Call drivers are

often happy to do when required.

4.43 12 respondents suggested that the geographical coverage of alternative services

needs to be widened, and that more needs to be done to improve long distance travel

if Capital Call is to be withdrawn.

October 2014 | 21

Improve Other Transport Services

4.44 11 respondents suggested that drivers of taxi vehicles and other modes of public

transport should be trained to ensure they’re courteous to and respectful of disabled

and elderly users. This includes not questioning people about their disability. With

regard to buses, one respondent suggested bus drivers should be trained to recognise

green mobility cards and understand the actions to be taken i.e. lowering the bus for

entry/exit and stopping nearer the curb.

4.45 Other suggestions included offering discounts to disabled people for local taxi

companies if Capital Call closes (3 respondents), providing step-free access to

tube/rail services (2 respondents) and reducing the amount of walking required at

public transport interchanges to enable disabled people to be more independent (1

respondent).

Suggestion for Further Communications

4.46 Two suggestions for further communications focused on the need for TfL to inform

members (and organisations who interact with members) of their decision; specifically,

making it clear how TfL will mitigate the loss of the service and where the money saved

will be invested.

Further Comments

Request for More Information

4.47 A number of respondents (23) requested further information regarding alternative

services that would be available should Capital Call be withdrawn. Requests included:

More information about alternative services, with particular mention of Dial-A-Ride

and Taxicard;

More information about alternative door to door services;

Information to be sent in alternative languages if English is not the first language;

Making users aware of the Taxicard symbol and where this can be found on the

taxis; and

Detail on the exact issues that will result from closing Capital Call. One suggestion

was to publish a comparison chart of the different alternative services, how to

book, prices, availability etc.

Comments on the Consultation

4.48 Finally, a small number of respondents (8) commented on the consultation as detailed

below.

“I am concerned that the consultation and notification of changes have not been

easy to understand for people with learning disabilities. I think there should be more

easy-read material available.”

“I would suggest you telephone each member of the scheme to inform them of the

current consultation. You should also find out what members preferred format is to

receive information. I am registered blind and cannot read standard print. So in

many respects you have failed to consult adequately. You should also follow up with

members, just one letter in January is simply not good enough.”

October 2014 | 22

“Being totally blind and not having access to a computer giving a list of websites is

hardly helpful to the blind or visually impaired…”

“Make sure you provide Easy-Read2 info.”

“So, this isn't a consultation or proposal? You could run a better service for disabled

people and invest in them! Find an alternative service that doesn't have a Scotland

call centre with no idea of London!”

“Personally I think this is a done deal. TfL are cutting back. Like the Government of

day.”

“This is tantamount to saying "we're going to cut your service, how can we make

this nice for you?" The answer is, if there are fewer cabs available we will be able

to get out less. People will be more isolated. You can't sugar that pill.”

Q3. If following this consultation TfL decides to close the Capital Call service, what issues do you think we should be aware of and plan for?

Overall Results

4.49 553 respondents answered the question inviting respondents to raise any issues TfL

should be aware of and plan for if Capital Call is closed. 256 of these respondents

(46%) did not flag up specific issues, but wrote additional comments reinforcing their

responses to the previous questions. These are explored in the section ‘General

Comments’ below.

4.50 297 respondents (54%) raised a specific issue and these are explored in the ‘Specific

Issues’ section.

4.51 The most frequently mentioned themes amongst all respondents to Question 3 are

shown in Table 4.5.

2 "Easy Read" is a concept which turns complicated information into clear and simple English

for those with learning difficulties.

October 2014 | 23


Theme Number of comments Percentage


Economics 196 27%

Improve Door-to-Door Services 36 5%

Supportive 14 2%


headings 45 6%

Total 733 100%

A full breakdown of themes and detailed comments for question 3 can be found in Appendix F

General Comments

Unsupportive

4.52 Over half of all comments were unsupportive of the proposal to close Capital Call.

4.53 The most common non-specific comment under the Unsupportive theme was praise for

Capital Call (52 respondents). Members noted that the taxis are regularly on time and

can be booked at short notice, there is the option of a ‘low-step’ cab, it is easy to make

bookings and members feel safe and secure using the service. In addition, there was

particular commendation reserved for the drivers whom members find courteous (ring

members’ doorbell to let them know they’ve arrived), helpful (assist with

shopping/luggage), familiar, experienced with members’ disabilities and knowledgeable

of local areas.

Economics

4.54 Non-specific comments grouped under the Economics theme included ensuring that

members could make longer journeys, at a reasonable cost, without needing to change

vehicles (15 respondents). This could be achieved through allowing additional ‘swipes’

4.55 A handful of respondents (4) suggested that if Capital Call is closed, members should

be allowed to transfer their personal Capital Call budget/allocation to alternative

services.


4.56 In relation to other taxi services, the most common assertion amongst members was

that, if Capital Call was to close, personal allowances for services must be increased:

both swipes per trip and the number of annual journeys (23 respondents).

4.57 Other comments included a request for more control for members over their accounts

(6 respondents) including more freedom on the use of personal allowances, and to

October 2014 | 24

ensure there is a quick and user-friendly booking service (2 respondents). In relation to

the former, members stated that they rarely use Taxicard because of its restrictive

nature i.e. the distances they can travel on a subsidised rate are too short.

4.58 Finally, there was support for making other taxi services 24 hours to alleviate concerns

of being stranded in the evening (4 respondents).

Supportive

4.59 3% of members (14 respondents) who answered Question 3 are supportive of the

proposals to close Capital Call. Over three quarters of these stated that the changes

would not make a big impact on their daily lives (12 respondents), primarily because

they don’t use Capital Call very much. Some members stated that they had no problem

with the proposed closure provided that alternative operators ensure a similar service.

Two respondents stated that they thought Taxicard offered a better, more ‘efficient’

service.

Communications

4.60 Members requested to be kept up-to-date with any changes made to the Capital Call

service (6 respondents) Easy-Read versions of communications. Respondents

highlighted that some users could find changes difficult to cope with due to their

disabilities.

Other

4.61 A small number of comments fell under the themes of “Improve Taxicard Service”,

“Improve Other Transport Services” and “Question”. These are explored below:

Improve Taxicard Service – comments related specifically to members’ frustration

that drivers are allowed to charge run-in and for time stuck in traffic. Furthermore,

there were requests for Taxicard to reinstate the option for weekend bookings.

Improve Other Transport Services – comments included a request for more staff

on station platforms to help elderly/disabled passengers with boarding/alighting

trains and travel planning (i.e. offering support to those unable to access written

information such as train times on screens) and more parking for blue badge

holders. There was also support for providing training for drivers to ensure they’re

courteous, helpful and understanding of elderly/disabled passengers (6

respondents).

Question – three questions were specifically posed by members:

“Will Taxicard confirm the booking and state the name of the cab company (coming

to collect the passenger)?”;

“How many of Hounslow's customers will still be able to access services?”; and

“Please can you let me know more about the travel mentoring service”.

Specific Issues

4.62 The comments from the 297 respondents (54%) who raised a specific issue are listed

and grouped by theme in Table 4.6 below. Error! Reference source not found.

Table 4.6: Question 3 Specific Issues

October 2014 | 25

Issue Theme Number of

respondents

Percentage

of all

respondents

answering

question 3

Other services are more

expensive, particularly for long

distance journeys

Economics 192 35%

Members' quality of life will be

reduced Unsupportive 144 28%

Alternative door-to-door services

are unreliable (Dial-A-Ride,

Taxicard)


No suitable alternative services Unsupportive 33 6%

Other services are limited

geographically (Taxicard, Dial-A-

Ride)

Unsupportive 29 5%

Minicabs/minibuses are easier to

get in and out of than black cabs Unsupportive 23 4%

Dial-A-Ride does not allow

members to be as independent

Improve Dial-A-

Ride Service 3 1%

Dial-A-Ride should be available for

medical appointments

Improve Dial-A-

Ride Service 2 <1%

Other services do not ensure

members are collected/dropped

off to the specified address

Improve Door-to-

Door Services 1 <1%

Economics

4.63 The primary specific issue raised by members and included under the Economics

theme was the concern that Dial-A-Ride, Taxicard and black cabs are more expensive

than Capital Call, particularly for long (i.e. non-local) journeys (192 respondents).

Members like the certainty of fixed fare journeys which are currently available through

Capital Call. In contrast, they felt that taxis on meters are invariably more expensive,

particularly in heavy traffic, for journeys to central London from the outer London

boroughs and for journeys to the London airports. Members were worried for their

financial security, commented on how they would be confined to their local area and

described Taxicard’s ‘two-swipe rule’ as prohibitive.

October 2014 | 26

Unsupportive

4.64 The most common specific concern in the Unsupportive category was that removing

Capital Call would have a detrimental impact on members’ quality of life (144

respondents). Many members commented that without the service they would be

unable to visit friends and family, make leisure trips to central London or engage in

other social activities or personal business. Members noted that the consequences of

limited transport options would include restrictions on their independence and freedom,

increasing social isolation and deteriorating mental health.

4.65 The second most common concern was with the unreliability of companies providing a

similar service i.e. Dial-A-Ride and Taxicard (126 respondents). Particular mention is

made of both Taxicard and Dial-A-Ride failing to turn up on time or reneging on

bookings, a lack of confirmation of advance bookings, only being able to book Dial-A-

Ride one day in advance (rather than on the day) and Taxicard failing to provide

appropriate vehicles for users’ needs. Members also referred to the lack of availability

of Dial-A-Ride, Taxicard and black cabs, particularly in the outer London boroughs. It

was noted that in some areas the demand for taxis is already outstripping demand.

Closing Capital Call would exacerbate this problem and reduce the level of choice

currently available to members. A number of respondents (33) stated that without

Capital Call there are no suitable alternative services and other services are limited in

the areas that they serve (29 respondents). With regard to insufficient alternatives,

comments included a lack of wheelchair accessible vehicles, the view that Dial-A-Ride

is impractical for certain disabilities and the fact that many members are unable to take

advantage of public transport. In relation to where alternative taxi services are

available, members commented that Dial-A-Ride rarely serves some of the outer

London boroughs and that black cabs do not like to travel too far out of central London.

4.66 Further to the point above regarding accessibility, 23 respondents specifically stated

that minicabs and minibuses are easier to get into and out of than black cabs despite

the fact that minicabs are not always wheelchair accessible.

Improve Dial-A-Ride service

4.67 Specific comments regarding Dial-A-Ride focused on the inability to book

doctor/hospital appointment trips in addition to only being allowed to bring one other

person: a particular frustration when the minibuses are otherwise empty.


4.68 One respondent noted that other services do not ensure that members are

collected/dropped off from/to the specified address, just somewhere nearby.

Suggestions for improving Capital Call

4.69 5 respondents to question 3 suggested a change or improvement to Capital Call. .

Due to the level of detail provided we have paraphrased these comments below:

“Many people have two main requirements: appointments and shopping. These two

requirements are the most important and Capital Call services should be available

for them…. Perhaps there are areas where Capital Call could cease operations

October 2014 | 27

though? All areas where Capital Call operates should be assessed for levels of use

and services ceased in least used areas”;

“I will be unable to use the Taxicard service as frequently as I do Capital Call due to

cost, and this means less access and visits to family and friends, increased

isolation, loneliness…. I recommend not offering subsidies to new users and

gradually the number of users will reduce by natural attrition”;

“Some people who are not disabled are getting the benefit of Capital Call and this

should be stopped - scrutinise it”;

“I think you can upgrade Capital Call by having a wheelchair-accessible little van so

more disabled chair users can travel. At the moment you can only use Capital Call if

you are on your feet or a carer takes you in a manual wheelchair”; and

“My social life consists of a yearly meeting in central London. Without Capital Call I

can only attend by booking privately. People who have a Freedom Pass enjoy free

bus, tram and train travel throughout the country, yet some still use Capital Call,

Taxicard etc. I feel that either Freedom Pass holders should be excluded from these

other activities or that non-Freedom Pass holders should have extra Capital Call

journeys.”

October 2014 | 28

A Consultation Communications

October 2014 | 29

October 2014 | 30

October 2014 | 31

October 2014 | 32

October 2014 | 33

October 2014 | 34

October 2014 | 35

B Consultation survey

October 2014 | 36

C Summary of response themes

October 2014 | 37

D Question 1 responses

October 2014 | 38

E Question 2 responses

October 2014 | 39

F Question 3 responses

Documents

Capital Call Service Changes - TfL Consultations...1.1 There are currently two subsidised taxi and minicab door-to-door transport services for Londoners who are unable to use public