Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sun Dec 08, 2019 3:46 pm

All times are UTC - 1 hour [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 44136
Location: 1066 Country
A council can legally require a licensed PH operator to only use locally licensed vehicles via it's advertised number. =D>

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Adm ... /2599.html

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:25 pm
Posts: 36950
Location: Wayneistan
Sussex wrote:
A council can legally require a licensed PH operator to only use locally licensed vehicles via it's advertised number. =D>

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Adm ... /2599.html


=D> =D> =D>

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 10:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:25 pm
Posts: 36950
Location: Wayneistan
I wouldnt normally say this but;

kiss my shiny white a** you b******* bunch of c**** I hope your next sh*te is a hedgehog - one for the good guys :wink:

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 4:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 2:22 pm
Posts: 14142
Location: On the move
Sussex wrote:
A council can legally require a licensed PH operator to only use locally licensed vehicles via it's advertised number. =D>

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Adm ... /2599.html


Is that just for now until the LC change things :?

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 7:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:17 pm
Posts: 2369
Having met one of the Blueline people concerned in the case at a meeting yesterday, he pointed out the law of unthought of consequences: he now basically cannot use a number he has used since 1958; his plans to create another 600 driving jobs will go out of the window; there is a likelihood that the operators at one of the office will lose their jobs.

Is that what localism really intended?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 8:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 44136
Location: 1066 Country
The law is the law, and this mob have been circumnavigating it for a very long time.

F*** the number, it's all about using inferior standards to undercut those who want better standards.

As for those 600 jobs, are Newcastle saying they won't license those 600?

Please don't be taken in by fat Northern spivs.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 9:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:25 pm
Posts: 36950
Location: Wayneistan
Sussex wrote:
The law is the law, and this mob have been circumnavigating it for a very long time.

F*** the number, it's all about using inferior standards to undercut those who want better standards.

As for those 600 jobs, are Newcastle saying they won't license those 600?

Please don't be taken in by fat Northern spivs.



=D> =D> =D>

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 10:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:25 pm
Posts: 36950
Location: Wayneistan
roythebus wrote:

Is that what localism really intended?



The judge answered that at 81;

However, as I have explained, localism is still a hallmark of the private hire vehicle regulatory scheme. The problem of localism – if problem it be – is not for Newcastle Council as licensing authority (which has a duty to perform the obligations the 1976 Act has placed upon it), but for Blue Line as operators.

The scheme with that hallmark not only has the endorsement of Parliament, but, generally speaking, it appears that the Law Commission Consultation Paper proposes that the regulation of minicabs should continue to be local. It is not for me to consider or comment upon the localism inherent in the regulatory scheme; except to say that it is a firm and clear characteristic of the scheme, which can only be changed by Parliament, if it considers such a change appropriate.


I would wonder why Blueline deemed it necessary to open an office in Newcastle when they already have an office in North Tyneside?

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 7:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:17 pm
Posts: 2369
I don't know, and I'm not taken in by the "northern spivs"!

The Blueline chap said yesterday that it is ironic that Newcastle council use a lot of North Shields (or whatever, out of area) ph cars for their contracts!

I don't see he wants to lower standards. My view on the lot is that the law is outdated and unfit for purpose in a lot of areas.

;put the boot on the other foot, if Blueline was a taxi company, would the members here have had the same response??


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 9:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 44136
Location: 1066 Country
roythebus wrote:
I don't know, and I'm not taken in by the "northern spivs"!

I know your not, I was just using one of those 'sound bite' thingys. :wink:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 9:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 44136
Location: 1066 Country
roythebus wrote:
I don't see he wants to lower standards. My view on the lot is that the law is outdated and unfit for purpose in a lot of areas.

Then why doesn't he get his drivers to license in Newcastle?

One has to remember this firm used more Berwick taxis than Berwick. :shock:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 9:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 44136
Location: 1066 Country
Re-reading the judgement it's striking how the judge thinks the LC report is about localism, when not one part of me shares that view. :?

It's also worthy of note to see how highly regarded the LC are by the courts. If this is shared by the rest of officialdom, then we are indeed in for major changes.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:17 pm
Posts: 2369
Having met with, and discussed such matters with the LC and made some more interesting proposals, I think we ARE in for major changes.

As a"for instance" taking the Blue Line case, he hadn't been trading since 1958 using the 6666 number, but just started and used an 0845 or even a mobile number. how would the LA find WHERE he is taking the calls? Newcastle? Berwick? Delhi call centre? Via Skype? That shows how irrelevant and outdated by technology the law has become. Even the author of the 1976 (?) Act admits it is no longer fit for purpose.

Why, when we have standardised testing and licencing for PSVs and HGVs do we have to have 300-odd different standards for hacks and PH? As I run a bus company, I can sub-contract buses from anywhere in the country to cover my work. Why can't I do the same for a car??


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 12:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:25 pm
Posts: 36950
Location: Wayneistan
roythebus wrote:
Having met with, and discussed such matters with the LC and made some more interesting proposals, I think we ARE in for major changes.

As a"for instance" taking the Blue Line case, he hadn't been trading since 1958 using the 6666 number, but just started and used an 0845 or even a mobile number. how would the LA find WHERE he is taking the calls? Newcastle? Berwick? Delhi call centre? Via Skype? That shows how irrelevant and outdated by technology the law has become. Even the author of the 1976 (?) Act admits it is no longer fit for purpose.

Why, when we have standardised testing and licencing for PSVs and HGVs do we have to have 300-odd different standards for hacks and PH? As I run a bus company, I can sub-contract buses from anywhere in the country to cover my work. Why can't I do the same for a car??



Taking the Blueline case as an example of you being deceived; he had basically the same case in front of the High Court a decade ago;

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j& ... dk2YN1Hw1w

and lost.

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 8:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:17 pm
Posts: 2369
Yes, you seem to be right there. I have a similar mindset to the gent from Blueline in some ways, challenging laws (that isn't going to cost me £50k :shock: ), but as you say, it appears he didn't learn from the earlier skirmish.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the Blueline case, merely stating what I had heard at a meeting at which he was present.

The laws need to be changed to get up to date with technology!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 1 hour [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group