Taxi Driver Online

Well that's just plain madness.

A driver needs to know what vehicle is acceptable to a council before he buys it.

A council needs to have a list of vehicles acceptable, and these can only be acceptable if they meet whatever conditions councillors have decided on.

Your way would keep the courts full for the next twenty years.

But even if it didn't go to court and each application was decided on it's own merits by a committee, as some committees only meet twice a year, are you saying that drivers can just wait?

Or what are you saying?

_________________
IDFIMH

Section 47 gives the council a right to impose "reasonable conditions" on issuing a hackney carriage proprietors license. There is ample case law supporting this fact.

47 Licensing of hackney carriages

(1) A district council may attach to the "grant" of a licence of a hackney carriage under the Act of 1847 such "conditions" as the district council may consider "reasonably" necessary.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing subsection, a district council may require any hackney carriage licensed by them under the Act of 1847 to be of such design or appearance or bear such distinguishing marks as shall clearly identify it as a hackney carriage.

(3) Any person aggrieved by any conditions attached to such a licence may appeal to a magistrates' court.

Regards

JD

What i'm saying is if someone wanted to challenge the legitamacy of a pre condition such as "new cars only" then the argument is there to use, i.e. "Ultre Vires" council acting outside it's delegated powers to inflict unfair and unenforcable conditions, if the case was won, and in my opinion it has a good chance, it would not effect any other fitness of use conditions

I am not going to help councils out on a public forum am i? it's up to them to provide a counter argument

Good argument though innit

Well someone did challenge the 'new car only' policy and they lost.

But what happens when the TX4 or the new Mondeo came/comes out? Are you saying the council will have to approve it via the courts?

_________________
IDFIMH

No, it will be new, no need to challenge it, until they come onto the second hand market

I do have some sympathy with what you're trying to get across, but it would be better to get licensed and then fight the good fight, rather than fight the good fight before getting licensed.

_________________
IDFIMH

I wish it was in black and white.

_________________
Former taxi driver

In 2003 Julie Jones used to be a prominant member of the Swansea TOA, perhaps she still is? If she cares to pass any comment on this thread she is most welcome.

Regards

JD

A 1991 vehicle from Plymouth is more than likely a shed to be honest.

At the time the vehicle was presented for test it was only three years old but the point of my post was to highlight the ever increasing incursions of "conditions of license" rather than the mechanical state of the vehicle.

Regards

JD

Oooop, sorry, thought this was a recent case, didnt notice 1996.

Hi, my name is Julie Jones from Swansea I challenged the council on the by law stating a taxi will only be licensed if new. The reasoning for this was you can only tell a vehicle is roadworthy if it's new....
I was was already a licensed taxi driver in Plymouth my vehicle was 18 months old when I applied to the council for a Swansea taxi licence so I could transfer my business back to Swansea where my mum had just been diagnosed with cancer. After going through all the proper channels they agreed if it past the plating procedure they would licence it, so I put it in for test it's passed the test with flying colours and then they refused to plate the vehicle saying that because it wasn't NEW they couldn't tell if it was roadworthy...bullshit! And as for saying it might be a shed , Plymouth had the hardest test in the land , I was an owner driver and I looked after my vehicle meticulously never let anyone else drive it. After they lied and try to cheat me out of my fee I had to go through all the court system over an 18-month period using every penny I had only to end up at Queen's bench in London... The last court case did not end up on whether they broke the aggrement and my cab did fit the criteria cos it was in pristeen condition , it ended up on the word "Reasonable" a whole court case and the judge found that one person's reasonable it's not an others , it's a case of how long is a piece of string ....if you have any questions please contact me... Thank you

Hi Julie.

For Time Elapsed between postings on the same string this one must be a TDO record Breaker


14 years, 8 months, 17 days

And Ironically after all that time the mindset of many Council officials with regards the age of Fit for Purpose Vehicles has hardly changed....many of them still think Age trumps Vehicle roadworthyness, even though you can get clapped out newish Vehicles and Pristine Older ones.....and only a Proper Taxi Vehicle test can ascertain whats fit for purpose or not regardless of age.

Thank you Julie for adding a bit of info to this thread.

Your story is a lesson to us all that the courts don't always follow the logic of the ordinary person, and councils will act in a stupid way when quite often common sense is by far the best way forward.

The DfT has said age limits 'may be arbitrary and inappropriate' but sadly said that in 2010. If they had said that in 2005 then I suspect we would have seen a different outcome.

My view is to never go to court against a council unless your driver's license is in peril, but I applaud you for the way you fought for what you believed was right.

_________________
IDFIMH

Oh and I love the 14 year gap.

_________________
IDFIMH