Taxi Driver Online
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

rural council rip off
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1561
Page 1 of 1

Author:  steveo [ Tue Mar 01, 2005 5:30 pm ]
Post subject:  rural council rip off

http://makeashorterlink.com/?L1E12559A

CABBIES' ANGER AT CHARGES


12:00 - 01 March 2005
Caradon

Caradon cabbies are fuming because some licensing charges are set to treble from April 1.

Caradon District Council is planning to raise annual vehicle licence charges for private hire cars and taxis from £66.50 to £185, increase the cost of a three-year taxi driver's licence from £128 to £240 and raise several other charges.

Warwick Belfitt, who runs the district's biggest company, the 22-vehicle Caradon Cabs, said today: "These increases will have a big effect.

"So far we have had no explanation, just a letter detailing the increases."

Mr Belfitt said fares had risen in Caradon just once since 1998, while running costs such as diesel and insurance had rocketed.

He added: "We are not dealing with clubbers here but elderly people, the disabled and children.

"Unlike firms in Plymouth, 50 per cent of our journeys are dead mileage, returning empty from rural areas.

"We are baffled how Caradon can justify a 200 per cent rise."

Hugh Francis, Caradon's deputy leader, said: "Faced with a shortfall in funding of nearly £1 million for the coming financial year, the council took a long and hard look at all of Caradon's services and spending and voted to deal with this shortfall by a combination of efficiency savings, cuts in services, charging realistic fees and a council tax increase of 4.9 per cent. Increased taxi licensing charges form part of these measures.

"In the past, our taxi licensing charges for vehicles and drivers did not cover the full costs of providing this statutory service; last year's hackney vehicle licence charge was less than half of what most other Cornish district councils were charging, and our auditors recommended that we bring our charges in line with them.

"The increase is higher than in previous years, but taxi drivers are simply being asked to cover the costs of the services they receive."

.......................................................................................................

for those who dont know Caradon is South East Cornwall

Author:  Sussex [ Tue Mar 01, 2005 5:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: rural council rip off

steveo wrote:
Mr Belfitt said fares had risen in Caradon just once since 1998, while running costs such as diesel and insurance had rocketed.

I think the answer to his woes are for all to see. :shock:

Author:  Fae Fife [ Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:35 pm ]
Post subject: 

I don't think fuel prices have risen as much as is thought.

But anyway, given the increased fuel efficiency of cars there may well have been no rise in fuel costs since the date mentioned.

In my area in 1998 the standard car was the Granada, and most were petrol returning 30 mpg at best for taxiing around town.

Most are now diesel (406's and the like) and will be returning more like 40.

So the average driver is probably spending less on fuel than back in 98.

As for insurance, my first premium was not much more than 500, again in 98, and now it's 800 so although premiums have risen, the story is often exaggerated a bit.

Author:  Sussex [ Tue Mar 01, 2005 7:53 pm ]
Post subject: 

I agree, in the grand scale of things our running costs haven't shot up as high as some may try to say they have. My insurance has gone up a bit, clearly petrol has gone up, but as FF says, cars are far better drinkers of the stuff. Except LTI that is.

However what has shot up is living costs, so the chap in the South West may have a point, but he needs to address it and stop moaning about it.

Author:  agabbycabbie [ Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:13 pm ]
Post subject: 

i am sure i have read some where that revenue raised from licencing department cannot be use for any thing else but licencing, ie cant be syphoned off to prop up council cock ups in other areas, this is to stop councils doing this sort of thing

Author:  TDO [ Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:23 pm ]
Post subject: 

I think that the problem in this case seems to be that the taxpayers were subsidising taxi licensing, so in this case that's the cock up being propped up by syphoned off money :?

Author:  Yorkie [ Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:36 pm ]
Post subject: 

agabbycabbie wrote:
i am sure i have read some where that revenue raised from licencing department cannot be use for any thing else but licencing, ie cant be syphoned off to prop up council cock ups in other areas, this is to stop councils doing this sort of thing


Yes that is so in fact its a missunderstood piece of legislation.

it can cover upkeeps of ranks and the like, but some councils interpret it weirdly, for instance they pay for surveys out of a joint taxi.private hire fund.

this means private hire drivers and owners pay for the priveladge of their taxi counterparts limiting by numbers, pay for ranks they cannot use, and sometimes pay for fare cards they cant have.

I say this is not as the para was intended.

Author:  Guest [ Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:12 pm ]
Post subject: 

Yorkie wrote:
agabbycabbie wrote:
i am sure i have read some where that revenue raised from licencing department cannot be use for any thing else but licencing, ie cant be syphoned off to prop up council cock ups in other areas, this is to stop councils doing this sort of thing


Yes that is so in fact its a missunderstood piece of legislation.

it can cover upkeeps of ranks and the like, but some councils interpret it weirdly, for instance they pay for surveys out of a joint taxi.private hire fund.

this means private hire drivers and owners pay for the priveladge of their taxi counterparts limiting by numbers, pay for ranks they cannot use, and sometimes pay for fare cards they cant have.

I say this is not as the para was intended.





YORKIE
You say that it's not as the para was intended ,obviously not ,The taxi trade has evolved since then ,we use cars instead of boats and horses,manchester st traders case made it clear that a council could only charge a fee to cover the cost of issuing a licence .

but a lot of councils go a lot further, they use licence fees to generate a PROFIT.

If a council works in partnership with the hackney and private hire trade ,and come to agreement between all parties that revenue received will be spent in a certain way ,then that is the action of a responsible council.

As I have said before in other posts, we have clawed back 270,00pounds out of council coffers, back into a ringfenced taxi account....mr T..

Author:  Yorkie [ Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:26 pm ]
Post subject: 

GATESHEAD HAVE claimed this, it should not happen,

I suspect my authority ringfensed all licenses, not only that each one is given a V.A.T RECIEPT

i TOLD THEM AFTER GETTING a license from another council, that there was no Vat on licenses they aggreed, but still the vat recipts are spitted out

no profit is lawful, a balance maybe, but no profit

Author:  Yorkie [ Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:29 pm ]
Post subject: 

by the way you are quite wrong to say fees are only covered in issuing a license, very wrong

it covers all costs enforcement, committee costs, everything.

Author:  Guest [ Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:15 am ]
Post subject: 

Yorkie wrote:
by the way you are quite wrong to say fees are only covered in issuing a license, very wrong

it covers all costs enforcement, committee costs, everything.


Yorkie. yes you are quite right on this point,it has to cover the whole cost,I should have been more explicit, did not think it was needed because I was speaking to you,seem to remember a council getting it's bum kicked for charging v.a.t. it was on m.o.t. tests
...mrT....

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/