Taxi Driver Online

Some case law

http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/vie ... hp?t=16051

http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/vie ... ht=telford

oops double post

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

Failure to disclose a material fact.

And therefore not insured....?

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

Your insurance policy should state; 'For hire and reward by pre-booking only' for a PHV, or 'For hire and reward by public hire' for a Hackney Carriage, or words to that effect and not both wordings or a mixture of those words.

Brum's licensing department INSIST on the wording being that precise, otherwise you don't get a vehicle licence.

Your licensing department should be doing similar.

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.

Brummie Cabbie is correct. If you check your cert it will specifically say something like " Carriage of passengers for hire and reward by arrangement prior to the coomencement of the period of hire. Excluding standing or plying for hire" for a PH policy.

Wordings do vary slightly but the certificates are very specific these days. If someone has a fleet policy the wording may me slightly different in that it may say Public and or Private Hire.

I think were getting somewhere, it appears it comes down to the wording of each insurance policy, and as there is some variation between each company it may mean that illegal pickups may not neccesarily invalidate insurance.

If it DOESN'T say 'For hire and reward by pre-booking only' or 'For hire and reward by public hire' but is a hire and reward policy then would you still be covered ?

In one of the links provided it says the driver was guilty because his policy specifically excluded public hire, if it hadn't would he still have been guilty (of having no insurance) ?

I think I've taken this thread as far as I can, apologies if I've gone on a bit, but I've sure learnt a lot about insurance - even if I don't quite understand all of it !

Just an afterthought, if a hackneys policy states 'For hire and reward by public hire' and takes a private pre-booking are they insured ?

Yes.
Hackney insurance needs to cover both immediate and prebooked hiring.
If it doesn't, the policy wording is wrong, the insurance would be unfit for purpose and it shouldn't be accepted by the LA.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

So again down to the small print !

It may therefore be possible that on some hackney policies that if there isn't a clause stating they are allowed to do pre-bookings that they may not be insured to do so, even though they have public hire cover ?

If that is the case then it's not just PH who would have no insurance if doing public hires but also hacks doing private hires !

I have to wonder why any insurance company would put out a hackney policy which doesn't cover booked hires.

I would also have to wonder why any broker wouldn't notice or why any LA would accept such a policy.

Yes I suppose it is possible. It is also possible that I may be elected pope next week.



If that is the case.............and it's a big IF.

BTW, why are you so fixated by this?

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

It's not possible because all hackney work is viewed as being the same, i.e. taking people from A to B, the nature of how the people get the vehicle is totally irrelevant.

_________________
IDFIMH