Why Air India flight to London was forced to abort take-off
Flight AI2017, scheduled to depart on Thursday, 31 July, returned to the bay after the cockpit crew discontinued the take-off run as a precaution.
Passengers were asked to disembark, and an alternative aircraft was subsequently deployed to complete the journey to London.
This incident follows a separate Air India flight crash on 12 June, which was bound for London Gatwick.
That crash in Ahmedabad, Gujarat, resulted in the deaths of 241 people on board and at least 29 on the ground, with an investigation into its causes ongoing.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
‘I was sunbathing topless when I heard a male voice': The trans row over women-only swimming
Janice Williams was first taken to the Kenwood Ladies' Pond on Hampstead Heath in the 1990s by a group of single mothers from a community project. 'Many were survivors of domestic violence, prostitution, trafficking etc and, for these women particularly, the single-sex status of the pond meant that it was not just a sanctuary, it was the only sanctuary, a place of freedom, healing and community,' says Janice, 69, a former training consultant who lives near the ponds in North London. 'We could picnic on the meadow, remove bra tops and – for the few who had learnt to swim – dip in the water while another mum watched our kids. There were women from all different backgrounds – Muslim, Jewish, Afro-Caribbean – it was pure and beautiful to be immersed in nature.' Today, the sign on the iron gate at the pond – the only natural women-only bathing pond in Europe – still reads: 'Women Only. Men not allowed beyond this point'. And for almost a century, since it opened in 1925, this rule was respected by the large majority of visitors. But recently, another sign appeared which reads: 'Those who identify as women are welcome to swim at the Kenwood Ladies' Bathing Pond.' The Ladies Pond is open to biological women and trans women with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment under the Equality Act 2010. The City of London Corporation is preparing a public consultation on the future admissions policy at the Ladies' Pond.' It seems that The City of London Corporation – the multi-billion-pound local authority that manages the site, and governs the Square Mile – is doubling down on its 2018 decision to update its 'Women Only' policy to include trans women (men who self-identify as women). When that update became public, protests ensued. One grassroots women's group took to wearing fake moustaches and went to the nearby men-only pond to raise awareness of the hypocrisy of the policy (they were thrown out). But in April, when the Supreme Court ruled that 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 meant biological sex and that even men with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) could be excluded from women-only services, the protesters hoped their fight was over. They were wrong. The City of London Corporation says it is 'currently reviewing its access policies'. It means that for now at least, it will still allow men who identify as women to swim at the women's pond. Campaign group Sex Matters is planning to make a £50,000 legal claim over the Corporation's failure to comply with the Supreme Court ruling. 'The Corporation has said this is not a single-sex service because it already lets trans women in,' says Maya Forstater, executive director of Sex Matters. 'They're basically saying that although the Supreme Court defined what 'man' and 'woman' means in the Equality Act, the words 'man' and 'woman' mean something completely different on their sign and therefore they don't need to use the Equality Act rules at all – which is extraordinary. 'We suspect that's what all other councils who are saying 'it is complex' are thinking as well. They're all biding their time while sticking 'to the pack' because they don't want to be sued. 'We've heard a lot from women who say they don't swim in the pond any more. They're self-excluding or changing their behaviour, such as going first thing in the morning when they believe fewer 'trans women' go because they feel it's safer. 'There are other women who say they have had bad experiences when trans women are there – one told us of an elderly transsexual asking young girls to do his bikini up for him and whether he could go naked into the female showers.' Forstater, who has campaigned for clarity on sex in law and policy since winning her own discrimination case in 2021, says that the law is clear and that the City of London is breaching the Equality Act 2010. 'We feel we have a clear-cut case,' she says. 'The ponds are already using sex discrimination because a mother can't take her five-year-old son to the Women's Pond yet a man claiming to be a woman is being allowed access. 'The City of London is a public body providing a public service and so we are bringing this as a public law case to show that here is an organisation breaching sex-based rules. It's irrational and we think it puts women at risk of harm. 'The ponds are an iconic space and the only outdoor women-only amenity in the country. But there's also a male pond and a mixed pond so there's no sense that anyone is not allowed to swim and between those three options, everyone is included.' In a statement, a spokesman for the City of London Corporation said: 'In line with other service providers, we are reviewing our access policies, including those at Hampstead Heath's Bathing Ponds. 'In doing so, we must consider the impact of current and potential future arrangements on all visitors, while ensuring we meet our legal duties and provide appropriate access. 'This summer we will engage with our service users and other stakeholders to ensure we understand their needs and can take properly informed decisions. 'In considering the way forward, we have taken, and will continue to take, specialist legal advice. The current arrangements remain in place during the review. 'Our priority is to provide a safe and respectful environment for everyone.' Hairy bodies in bikinis The reaction to the news that biological males are still allowed in the Ladies' Pond is mixed. One woman who asked not to be named says she has felt as though her privacy has been breached since the rules changed. 'I was sunbathing as usual, topless,' she says. 'I suddenly heard this male voice next to me and he said: 'Do you know what time the pond closes?' Even though I consider myself a broad-minded person, it really freaked me out because I heard a male voice. The idea that someone was there when I was not being modest or protected by any clothing felt wrong. Even though I thought I was a liberated person, I realised I'm not.' The whole experience made her 'very uncomfortable' she admits. Coming out of the pond, another woman wearing a linen shirt and carrying a swimming bag over her arms says that she once saw two men using the pond which made her 'despair'. 'At the time I was very distressed because I thought: 'Oh that's the end of women-only spaces then,' she reflects. The guys I saw were very much a provocation. They had big hairy bodies and were wearing bikinis. It was very aggressive, very much an attack. I felt it was sad… I felt angry. 'The beauty of women-only spaces is that you don't have to think about what your body looks like in a costume or whether you want to take your top off when you sunbathe,' she says. 'There's a lovely freedom there and I think it's instantly contaminated, even if you're liberal-minded about the trans issue.' But not all bathers today are concerned. Alba Hernandez, 28, a theatre usher from north-west London is more accepting. 'I feel very safe and I don't think I would feel threatened,' she says. 'If anything happened that would endanger somebody, the pond is a very strong community and it would be stopped very quickly.' Barbara Massey, 76, another regular, holds a similar view. 'There was one person who was a man and became a woman, she was always coming here,' she says. 'But she sat with us up on that bench and everyone accepted her as a woman. As long as they don't feel you up or chat you up. 'But if it's a guy who's sneaking in here, saying: 'I identify as a woman' and he's actually eyeing women up, we wouldn't like that.' Yet other women point out that erasing women-only spaces excludes certain religions. 'It's very important for some people to have space for women-only,' says 75-year-old Daphne Grey. 'Certain religions would not be allowed to swim at all if they had to go mixed, so I think it's important. They've got mixed ponds and men-only ponds, so why not women-only?' Protesters against the recent policy claim that one of the main figures driving the charge to allow trans-identifying men into the ponds is Edward Lord, an elected member of the City of London Corporation since 2001. Lord identifies as non-binary and goes by they/them pronouns. It was Lord who, in 2018, oversaw a consultation by the City of London Corporation about its trans policy, including in relation to women's and men's ponds and changing rooms on Hampstead Heath. Promoted mostly on his Twitter account, Lord launched the consultation, saying: 'It shouldn't be controversial. It shouldn't be a debate. Trans women are women, trans men are men.' Yet when Forstater polled her Twitter followers in 2019 to see how many people said they had been blocked by Lord in the past – and therefore would have been less likely to see the survey he was promoting – it appeared that 83 per cent of the 1,821 blocked were women. However, some women on the online forum Mumnset did see the survey and sensed problems straight away. 'No mention of sex, no mention of impact on any stakeholders, all leading questions, and horrible clear intention to filter,' wrote one. The survey found that 60 per cent of respondents appeared to support the inclusion of trans-identifying men in the ponds. Yet critics argued that it was 'a sham'. Alice Sullivan, professor of sociology at University College London's Social Research Institute and author of a recent independent review assessing how sex and gender identity are recorded in public data, statistics, and research commented at the time. She said the consultation had been handled in an 'oddly discreet way'. Today, her views are even more robust. 'This is a strong contender for the worst questionnaire I have ever seen,' she says. 'Instead of asking users of local services concrete questions about whether males should be allowed into women's spaces, the City of London asked pure gobbledygook questions such as: 'Do you agree or disagree that: 1/ a person may come to feel that their gender is different from that assigned to them at birth. 2/ A person who consistently identifies in a gender which is different to the one they were assigned at birth should be accepted by society in their stated gender identity etc. 'To add insult to injury, there were 39,650 responses, but half of these responses were deemed invalid, with analysis only carried out on the remaining 21,191 cases. The exercise was a sham from start to finish.' However, the trans-inclusive policy was adopted, leading to women's rights campaigners to lead several protests. 'The moment a man was allowed in, [the atmosphere at the women-only pond] changed at a stroke in a short-sighted move designed to bolster the already overinflated ego of Edward Lord,' says Janice Williams. 'I later joined the committee of the Kenwood Ladies Pond Association (KLPA) hoping to explain all this to them but to no avail. They refused to even discuss it. I proposed the AGM motion to return the pond to women-only but a lot of young students appeared to have been drafted in at the last moment to vote against it and the meeting was abandoned in chaos because speakers in favour were refused a hearing. This was pre-Supreme Court clarification.' A spokesman for the City of London Corporation said: 'Edward Lord has had no direct involvement in shaping the City Corporation's response to the Supreme Court decision. Our position is guided solely by our legal obligations under the Equality Act and our interpretation of the Court's judgment.' Supporters of the trans-inclusive policy cite the positive vote to include trans women from members of the KLPA as a reason why Sex Matters should drop any case. But Sex Matters dismiss this. 'You can't vote to discriminate and obviously if you've caused lots of women to self-exclude and then you take a vote amongst those who didn't self-exclude, the answer will be: 'We think it's fine,'' says Forstater. 'But it's not up to them to vote, it's up to the City of London to provide a service that is lawful. 'People still have freedom of association to vote to live their life in a particular way and if there is a group of women who want to swim with trans women then they are free to do that. 'But they need to do that in the mixed pond. What they can't do is vote that a public service that is spending public money and is required to comply with the Equality Act doesn't do that.' Venice Allan is another supporter of Sex Matters' legal action and will be a witness for their case. She has taken part in several protests since 2018 to keep the pond women-only. 'In a women-only pond you're free to be semi-naked in the pool and naked in the shower, but there's a joy and physical peace to being there because there are no men or boys splashing around,' says Allan, 50. 'I have two sons myself and there's nothing wrong with that kind of swimming but to have a peaceful space like this was wonderful.' Venice says she has encountered men claiming to be women swimming in the pond on at least two occasions. 'There were two men who were clearly 'transitioning' because they had little 'moobs' and several years later there was a man with a woman who was on some kind of hormonal treatment. They were sitting there topless just watching the women. 'Some elderly lesbians I was with actually complained to the lifeguard and at the time I was quite timid and felt: 'Was this the right thing to do?' 'But now I feel completely differently. The men who go now, particularly after all the publicity with the Supreme Court judgment, are deliberately violating our boundaries. When one man comes into a space with lots of women the atmosphere completely changes. 'I was absolutely thrilled when Sex Matters said they were going to take this action. There are three ponds where these men could swim – it's literally the most progressive, inclusive and welcoming space in London – and there is no reason on Earth as to why these men can't use the mixed pond. For me it's the perfect court case.'
The Independent
7 hours ago
- The Independent
What exactly your landlord should be doing for you
For many not yet on the property ladder, renting offers appealing advantages: the flexibility to save, freedom from mortgage burdens, and the absence of home improvement hassles. However, this often comes with the looming stress of a rent review letter, prompting tenants to question whether their landlord is adequately fulfilling maintenance responsibilities. This concern is particularly acute for long-term renters whose properties are in need of repairs. Before simply accepting a higher rent, Jonathan Rolande, a prominent property expert and commentator on the UK market, advises tenants to critically assess: "What exactly is my landlord doing?" Here's what every tenant should expect as standard – not as a favour, and certainly not as some kind of generous gift, underlines Rolande. Basic maintenance that actually happens 'Your landlord should fix things when they break,' says Rolande. 'So not in six weeks, not when it's convenient, but promptly.' Boilers that pack up in winter, leaking roofs, faulty electrics – these aren't tenant problems to endure, says Rolande, they're landlord responsibilities to resolve. He says too many tenants live with dodgy heating systems or dripping taps because they're afraid to 'bother' their landlord. 'But you're paying rent for a functioning home, not a DIY project,' highlights Rolande. 'If something's broken, it should be fixed properly by qualified professionals, not bodged with temporary solutions that'll fail again next month.' The same goes for annual safety checks… Gas safety certificates, electrical inspections, and alarm testing aren't optional extras – they're legal requirements that protect the lives of tenants and neighbours, outlines Rolande, and any landlord skipping these checks is cutting corners with safety. 'The one thing I would mention though is that tenants should be realistic about repairs, and the lack of decent, prompt tradespeople about these days. ' Landlords can't perform miracles and teleport a plumber to you in minutes, but they should make a strong effort to resolve problems as soon as they arise, or ideally before they crop up – prevention is better than the cure,' he says. Proper communication and respect Your landlord should respond to messages within a reasonable time frame… 'Radio silence for weeks when you've reported a problem is unacceptable,' says Rolande. 'You deserve updates on repair schedules and honest timelines for when issues will be resolved.' He says surprise visits are a thing of the past. ' Landlords must give 24 hours notice before entering your home, except in genuine emergencies.' 'Your rental property is their house, but your home, and you have the right to peaceful enjoyment without unexpected intrusions. This really shouldn't need explaining in 2025,' states Rolande. When rent reviews come around, he says landlords should justify increases with clear explanations – 'market rates have gone up' isn't good enough. He says to ask: What improvements have been made? What additional services are being provided? What similar properties have been used as a comparison? But he says there are two sides to the story. 'Landlords have faced rocketing increases in things they spend out on too, such as insurances, maintenance fees and repairs.' Rolande continues. 'They probably aren't putting much rent in their pocket at the end of each month, even if it seems like they are.' Energy efficiency improvements With energy bills soaring, landlords should be investing in property improvements that reduce tenant costs… 'Proper insulation, efficient boilers, and draught-proofing aren't luxuries – they're necessities that make properties cheaper to live in and more comfortable,' says Rolande. ' Smart meters, thermostatic radiators and energy-efficient appliances should be standard. These improvements benefit everyone – tenants get lower bills and landlords get more attractive properties. Simple.' Professional property management Landlords should maintain accurate records of all interactions, repairs and condition of the property… 'Professional landlords document everything, making the rental relationship smoother for everyone involved,' notes Rolande. 'This is basic business practice, not advanced property management theory.' He goes on to say regular property inspections should be scheduled and conducted professionally. 'These aren't opportunities to criticise the housekeeping, but chances to identify maintenance issues before they become major problems – it should be a property inspection, not a lifestyle judgement.' Landlords should also understand their legal obligations around things like mould, damp, and pest control, says Rolande. 'These issues often stem from property defects, not tenant behaviour, and should be addressed accordingly.' He continues: ' Tenants should also play their part and do what they can to eliminate condensation, the most common (and often easily remedied) property issue.' At the end of the day… The rental market works both ways, highlights Rolande. 'Landlords want reliable tenants who pay on time and look after properties. 'Tenants want reliable landlords who maintain properties and treat them fairly. It's not complicated – it's just business done properly, though it seems all too often, that's asking for too much.'
BBC News
11 hours ago
- BBC News
Brent housing: Mum with disabled son says home is rat-infested
A mother has begun legal proceedings against her local authority over the conditions in her council house, which a pest control report found was uninhabitable due to a rat Eniola – who preferred that her first name not be used – has lived in the property in Neasden, north London, since 1992. She shares the house with her adult daughter and her son, who is severely said: "My family is struggling to breathe in the house, we have rat bites all over our body [and] I have no good drinking water as the kitchen sink is busted."Brent Council said it was unable to comment on the case at this time due to the legal proceedings. 'Tired of being ignored' The family described feeling "depressed" living in the damp and rat-infested property and said they were desperate for the council to move them out. Ms Eniola told the Local Democracy Reporting Service she was now taking the matter to court because she was "tired of being ignored" and the house was beyond repair. She said: "The council never wanted to remedy the situation as it's expensive due to the major works that the house needs."I don't want to die early; who will take care of my disabled son? I just want to leave Brent permanently and move to another [area] for a fresh start. "Brent Council has terrorised me and my family by keeping us in dangerous housing despite reports saying it's not safe."Since first raising the issues more than three years ago, Ms Eniola claims the council has sent a number of surveyors round to the property but the reports are never followed up on. She said: "[The council] say they have no record of it and just book another one in. "In one year alone we had six surveyors come round but they refuse to acknowledge the reports." 'Not fit to live in' Brent Council's pest control service inspected the property on 12 November 2024, and confirmed the presence of a "rodent infestation". In a report seen by the LDRS, the officer believed the home to be "fully infested with mice and rats", with mould and damp having "overtaken the entire house".The report concludes: "Considering the current rodent infestation and mould... it is highly advisable to move out tenants due to the vulnerability of the son as it is not fit to live [in]. [The whole] house needs refurbishing due to historical mould and rodent infestation in the property."In her legal case against the council, Ms Eniola cites ongoing disrepair issues, which include sewer damage allowing rats to enter the property, damp and mould growth, and damage to the kitchen sink that causes "foul odours" to spread throughout the said her son's asthma had worsened in the house and he had had to be taken for emergency medical treatment. She added: "We're all inhaling black mould and we're depressed due to living here."Ms Eniola's solicitors are awaiting a date when the case will be heard at the county court.
