Taxi Driver Online

if everyone was hackney then the problem wont exist.
but nothing will change until premuins and restrictions go.
and chances of it happening even then is slim.

I dont think you understood my point cgull, illegal plying for hire by out of district PH has nothing to do with premiums, unless of course you mean just one nationwide taxi license and doing away with licensing districts?

Captain Cab

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

then you dont need any new laws.
just inforcement of existing ones.

exactly

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

Can someone remind me which section of which legislation do Liverpool want to change and why?

Regards

JD

I suspect more than wanting to change anything, they want to make sure section 16 remains.

_________________
IDFIMH

We have to thank Streetcar for posting this information but all I've seen so far is a reference highlighting the prevalence of private hire vehicles parking in Liverpool waiting for jobs and another reference that suggests Liverpool council assume many of these vehicles are plying for hire?

If anyone can put any meat on the dying bones of this thread I would appreciate it. In other words if anyone knows what Liverpool actually want and their legal proposals of how they aim to achieve it, then that would be a start. As it stands every authority has its own problem with private hire vehicles parking up waiting for jobs but as it stands this activity is not illegal if the person driving the P/H vehicle makes it known in someway that he is not for immediate hire. It is for Liverpool council to reconcile their own enforcement problems but just because they can't or won't, it doesn't mean that other authorities have the same problems.

If Liverpool want the law changed lets see what they propose in the way of legislation because any legislation that prohibits a P/H vehicle waiting for a radio job in another Authority will also apply to hackney carriage vehicles waiting under the same circumstances.

On a personal note I think Liverpool are going to have to put their own house in order by stepping up their enforcement activities because I cannot envisage Parliament passing any legislation that forces all vehicles to return to the authority they are licensed.

One further point, which puts matters in perspective, is that according to 2004 DfT stats Merseyside had 4,457 private hire vehicles but Greater Manchester had 7,357 so the scale of any potential activity of illegaly plying for hire in Manchester is far greater than that of Liverpool?

What is patently obvious is that Merseyside P/H vehicles must obtain a great deal of their work from Liverpool, otherwise it would be pointless sitting there. No matter what legislation is enacted those P/H firms on Merseyside and Sefton in particular who benefit from Liverpool custom, would simply open up an additional P/H office in Liverpool, so where does the problem go?

I don't know what proposals Damien Edwards put forward to David Farmer and I don't really care but perhaps someone could obtain a copy of the report, always assuming the report includes proposals for legislative change and is not just a rant about the negativity of Liverpool licensing enforcement?

Regards

JD

But isn't the root of the problem that there are fundamentally different standards in place between the various LAs, so the ops and drivers are just licensing in whichever areas have the most lax regime?

Of course, rectifying this would entail root and branch reform, and the impetus for this is unlikely to come from the LAs because it would entail a repatriation of powers away from the local towards the centre, a scenario that local licensing fiefdoms would no doubt recoil from.

And of course it's always difficult to take these things at face value anyway - Liverpool in particular seems more concerned with maintaining the plate cartel than things like enforcing the PH regulations. Indeed, in this regard there may be some merit to turning a blind eye to the PH issues, because otherwise more SUD could manifest itself if greater enforcement was undertaken, thus meaning more taxi plates, which would never do. Of course

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Perhaps, except I understand the costs and conditions are similar between the two districts concerned.




Errm in English please

Or perhaps the 1976 legislation has been outgrown by both technology that allows large fleets of PH.



I knew you'd manage to get that in, I dont agree (now there's a surprise)

Captain Cab

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

I think the biggest gripe is the 'out of Liverpool' firms are actually better than those in Liverpool.



I think its a case of Liverpool leaving it upto the DFT as opposed to having any ideas of their own. Although putting a recent letter in taxitalk and the DFT meeting together, I think the result would be a rule that PH have to return to their own district upon a hire terminating.



For every action there is a reaction JD.

For every PH parked illegally in Liverpool waiting for a fare, theres many more waiting at airports legally for fares.

Hurried legislation is usually rubbish legislation.




I tend to think the stats are not to be believed JD, Greater Manchester has surely more small towns in its area than Liverpool?

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

I perhaps had in mind the knowledge test in particular, at least I remember that when Mike Dicko was sitting his in Liverpool it seemed reasonalby tough, for a PH badge at least. (Assuming the dramatic portrayal was accurate).




As I've said in the past regarding zoning, LA boundaries (whether the whole LA or zones) aren't drawn up with taxi markets in mind, thus in local areas they may seem somewhat arbitrary and unaccomodating as regards market forces, thus there may be some attempts to 'buck' the licensing regime to bring it more into line with what market forces require. I think Brighton and Hove is a good example, because in the past they were zoned whereas the two of them form a reasonalby distinct urban area, thus dezoning brought the licensing regime more into line with the market.

I don't know the Merseyside area well, but I suspect that these kind of anamolies may be at work, and perhaps it's a combination of these factors and the licensing conditions? And any large urban area which is split into numerous zones and/or licensing authorities is likely to see the same scenario arising - of course, the cause celebre in this regard was the Shanks case in the urbanised Tyneside area.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

But if you look at Liverpool per se then it's historically always had a relatively small PH sector as compared to other major UK cities - I think only Edinburgh is anything like it numbers wise - in both taxis decisively outnumber PH vehicles, but normally the opposite is the case.

But as regards the extent of illegal plying for hire, whether these numbers are relevant I don't know. After all, it goes on everywhere to a greater or lesser extent, and to outsiders the problem may just seem more significant in one particular location if the local trade manages to kick up a stink about it, and to the extent that the Liverpool trade have managed to get the trade elsewhere to discuss it then in that regard the problem can be perceived as greater there.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

I tend to think TDO that licensing laws are there to be adhered to, not for people to circumvent.

If Liverpool City Council see the need for a rigourous regime (which I understand is not unlike seftons) people shouldnt be able to set up in the most lax area and operate freely in Liverpool.

Liverpool and sefton are different areas, the zoning thing aint an issue.

It seems to me to be a case where certain firms have outgrown their own areas and need to expand into others. This was never accounted for in legislation, and perhaps this is what Liverpool CC have stated. Although I do actually doubt that.

I thiunk its more a case of an hysterical reaction to something being highlighted in a national trade magazine (which wasnt even intended to be liverpool, but there must be an obvious guilt trip )

Unfortunately, and as I have already stated, rushing into legislation via an RRO, without thinking about the consequences is to me just plain dumb. I dont really want the dinasaurs in charge.

Captain Cab

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

I'm inclined to agree, and my earlier ramblings were merely trying to rationalise what was going on rather than condone it. They may not be adhering to the spirit of the law, but they do seem to be adhering to the letter.



Well yes, I agree, and that's why I'd like to see more uniform national standards, which would obviate the need to 'do a Sefton'.

And to the extent that this 'standards shopping' is undesirable then it's a loophole in the licensing regime that should be closed.




My point was that zoning presents similar issues since I can't really see the difference between a zone and an LA as far as the issues under discussion are concerned. I mean, if Hove and Brighton were divided for licensing purposes but PH in Hove had an easier knowledge test so most PH drivers took the Hove test then worked for circuits that covered the whole of Brighton then would it make any differnce if the Brighton/Hove division was due to two separate LAs or if they were merely two zones within in the one LA?



Yes, that's kind of what I was getting at before - the geographical area that suits the market in which the firms operate won't necessarily concur with the geographical areas delineated by LA boundaries.




Well root and branch reform would certainly be preferable to me - as mentioned above, more uniform standards and licensing areas appropriate to taxi markets rather than the politics of local governemnt would probably have prevented the Liverpool/Sefton scenario.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

I think we agree on most of this TDO

yes, I know, its a strange feeling

Captain Cab

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