Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:57 am

All times are UTC - 1 hour [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2003 7:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 43924
Location: 1066 Country
BigEdd wrote:
Quote:
as the regulatory regime virtually exempts PH from carrying them. Thus, an unfair disadvantage.


This May Be the case in some areas but our L.A. insists that any business with more than 4 PH vehicles must have 1 WAV in each 4, are you saying this is unenforceable in law :?:


I believe that quite a few councils have looked at going down this route. Some are brave enough to do it, like yours. However some are not, like mine.

Is it legal? I think it's 50/50, alas only the courts with there big fat bills (if you lose), will decide.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2003 8:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 2:20 pm
Posts: 3272
Sussex Man wrote:
That's a valid point. If councils wish to have an opt out, they have to prove that there would be drastic fall in the number of HCs. In a restricted area, that ain't going to happen. :wink:



So is the opt-out procedure still the same then Andy?

I assume that it may be different, because the basic ethos originally envisaged (ie 100% WAV HCs everywhere) has clearly been changed fundamentally.

Indeed the DfT clearly gone through what is effectively an opt-out procedure already by weeding out these LAs that aren't in the first phase.

Funny as well that the statement didn't mention opt-outs.

Dusty


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2003 8:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 2:20 pm
Posts: 3272
Sussex Man wrote:
Wharfie wrote:
well its the secretary of state that does exemptions not daptac, but authorities first have to prove steps taken like swivel seats and opening up the market,

Wharfie


That's a valid point. If councils wish to have an opt out, they have to prove that there would be drastic fall in the number of HCs. In a restricted area, that ain't going to happen. :wink:



This whole test is a bit of a nonsense.

If you've got two identical towns, town A with PBs and town B with saloons, then currently you'll have a large PH sector in the town A, but a small one in town B.

Thus with the DDA implemented in the town A the numbers would status quo would prevail, but in town B there would be a significant move to PH.

Thus in terms of the opt-out, town B might get an opt-out because of the reduction in the number of HCs in the area.

But the two towns are identical, but the test has resulted in fundamentally different outcomes.

The point is that in areas with PBs already then the 'unacceptable reduction' has already happened.

So anywhere that currently has PBs has effectively suffered an 'unacceptable reduction' in the number of HCs!!

I'd be interested to what 'unacceptable' means as well, this could be anything.

Dusty


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2003 1:06 am 
Dusty Bin wrote:
Sussex Man wrote:
That's a valid point. If councils wish to have an opt out, they have to prove that there would be drastic fall in the number of HCs. In a restricted area, that ain't going to happen. :wink:



So is the opt-out procedure still the same then Andy?

I assume that it may be different, because the basic ethos originally envisaged (ie 100% WAV HCs everywhere) has clearly been changed fundamentally.

Indeed the DfT clearly gone through what is effectively an opt-out procedure already by weeding out these LAs that aren't in the first phase.

Funny as well that the statement didn't mention opt-outs.

Dusty


no they havnt dusty, there are rural areas tucked into that lot including mine.

Wharfie


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2003 7:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 43924
Location: 1066 Country
Dusty Bin wrote:
So is the opt-out procedure still the same then Andy?

I assume that it may be different, because the basic ethos originally envisaged (ie 100% WAV HCs everywhere) has clearly been changed fundamentally.

Indeed the DfT clearly gone through what is effectively an opt-out procedure already by weeding out these LAs that aren't in the first phase.

Funny as well that the statement didn't mention opt-outs.

Dusty


Well I'm not so sure now.

I think Phase 1 was most probably rushed out pre OFT, so they may have forgot about it, or they may just have decided that the opt out is no-more.

To be honest, I'm not really sure. :? :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2003 2:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 2:20 pm
Posts: 3272
Wharfie wrote:
no they havnt dusty, there are rural areas tucked into that lot including mine.

Wharfie


Haven't what Wharfy, weeded out??

Which of the three criteria does yours come under then??

The population one is very arbitrary - presumably there are plenty of rural-ish areas with a population over 120,000, but fairly large urban areas under 120,000 that are not in the first phase.

I think we mentioned that with regard to our mate from Herts further up the thread.

Dusty


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2003 3:18 pm 
Dusty Bin wrote:
Wharfie wrote:
no they havnt dusty, there are rural areas tucked into that lot including mine.

Wharfie


Haven't what Wharfy, weeded out??

Which of the three criteria does yours come under then??

The population one is very arbitrary - presumably there are plenty of rural-ish areas with a population over 120,000, but fairly large urban areas under 120,000 that are not in the first phase.

I think we mentioned that with regard to our mate from Herts further up the thread.

Dusty



we are a metropolitain district, all are included, our land mass is three quarters rural.

wHARFIE


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 43924
Location: 1066 Country
Wharfie wrote:
we are a metropolitain district, all are included, our land mass is three quarters rural.

wHARFIE


Well Wharfie, I think you best start looking for WAVs or Skodas, depending on what colour plate you wish to put on the back.

I think by the time Phase 1 comes in, I doubt the zoning issue will still be in play. The way I see it panning out, is the urban trade will be served by HC WAVs and PH saloons, and the rural trade by PH saloons.

Lets face it, most people living in the sticks (or caves :D ) ring for a car now. So what difference will it make to them?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2003 10:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 2:20 pm
Posts: 3272
Sussex Man wrote:
I think by the time Phase 1 comes in, I doubt the zoning issue will still be in play. The way I see it panning out, is the urban trade will be served by HC WAVs and PH saloons, and the rural trade by PH saloons.

Lets face it, most people living in the sticks (or caves :D ) ring for a car now. So what difference will it make to them?


How can it if Wharfy's zone is part urban but mostly urban?

Halifax is quite a large urban area, but if Calderdale is dezoned then most of the area will be rural.

Dusty :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2003 10:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 2:20 pm
Posts: 3272
Wharfie wrote:

we are a metropolitain district, all are included, our land mass is three quarters rural.

wHARFIE


So presumably Calderdale is included because its population is over 120,000?

But since Calderdale is mostly rural then this shows the arbitrary nature of the test.

Dusty


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 05, 2003 1:28 am 
Dusty Bin wrote:
Wharfie wrote:

we are a metropolitain district, all are included, our land mass is three quarters rural.

wHARFIE


So presumably Calderdale is included because its population is over 120,000?

But since Calderdale is mostly rural then this shows the arbitrary nature of the test.

Dusty



perhaps what you dont know is that britain is divided up in such a way as geen belt divides urban settlements.

My patch is the belt that divides Halifax from Huddersfield Oldham Rochdale and Burnley

Wharfie


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 43924
Location: 1066 Country
["Dusty Bin"]
How can it if Wharfy's zone is part urban but mostly urban?

Halifax is quite a large urban area, but if Calderdale is dezoned then most of the area will be rural.

Dusty :?[/quote]

Well we go back to the part of clause 1.4..... in the RRA.

The only taxi part that no-one really took much notice of, was the ending of zones within a district.

Put that with the no zoning judgment in Castlepoint, and a certain avenue is forming. :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 1 hour [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group