Taxi Driver Online :: View topic - CABforce's OFT response

Can I thank Jim from Cabforce for sending this.

If more drivers/drivers asociations joined the debate on this very important issue, then maybe a clear way forward could be found. :roll:

Alex

taking the [edited by admin] Alex taking the [edited by admin]

Anonymous wrote:

taking the [edited by admin] Alex taking the [edited by admin]

So you don't think the trade could or should work together?

Starting to sound a bit like me Wharfy.

Well I'm not quite sure what are Mick's proposals, but it wouldn't surprise me one little bit if in 10 year time the country was similar to what Gateshead is now, in terms of licensing condition.

No-doubt someone will tell me if I'm wrong, but a 'fit and proper' person can license a WAV HC on demand there.

I can seeing that being the norm nationally, the only change is the existing HC fleet will also have to convert.

Yes, even you Wharfie.

many licensing authorities are following London tests and the like, to own a cab in London aint that easy you have to proove you have the resources to maintain a cab, bank statements and the like,

Anonymous wrote:

many licensing authorities are following London tests and the like, to own a cab in London aint that easy you have to proove you have the resources to maintain a cab, bank statements and the like,

Is this the COF that is soon to be deemed un-lawful?

no it isnt the cof for christ sake man,
there are more rules in London than those you are over and unhealthily obsessed with.

Wharfie wrote:

no it isnt the cof for christ sake man,
there are more rules in London than those you are over and unhealthily obsessed with.

Such as the 3 year knowledge, is that what you want us all to do?

Author:	Taxi Driver Online [ Wed Dec 24, 2003 4:01 pm ]
Post subject:	CABforce's OFT response
Read CABforce's OFT response here: http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/cabforce.htm Post your views below!

Author:	Sussex [ Wed Dec 24, 2003 4:48 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote from Cabforce's article. It's also immediately apparent that the background to why the report was undertaken is not given. Those who prompted it remain anonymous, their interest protected. I'm not sure what relevance this has, or are we saying that everything in the taxi/PH trade is just fine and dandy? There are abuses of the taxi/PH system the length and breadth of the country. If anything, I would say the OFT study didn't go far enough.

Author:	Sussex [ Wed Dec 24, 2003 5:13 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote from Cabforce's article. The OFT proposes quantity de-restriction of taxis based on its premise of unmet latent demand, which they define as, the situation where consumers in areas with quantity controls are discouraged from using taxis by long waiting times and so do (not?) even bother to queue for a taxi. This type of demand is hidden because it does not present itself in the form of long queues but it is nonetheless an important source of unmet demand; (So, how do those who choose not to queue manage to get home in the wee small hours? - ed). The evidence they give, and the evidence I see, is that some flag down a PH vehicle (illegal), some flag down a non local taxi (illegal), some phone for a PH vehicle (legal), and some walk home (disgrace). The proof of the pudding, is where it's shown that legal flag downs increase following de-limitation. Latent demand is also when people get the late night buses instead of taxis. The only winners then, are those that wish to see the end of the taxi/PH trade.

Author:	Sussex [ Wed Dec 24, 2003 5:30 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote from Cabforce's article. The OFT has been selective in its case studies. They could have quoted the Bristol experience where the trade was de-restricted in 1997. Its success can be measured by the fact that quantity restrictions were re-imposed in 2002 - a lot of damage having been done in the interim. Or, they could have quoted the Dublin de-regulation experience, where taxis increased from 2700 to 8600. Pre-de-restriction 85% of taxis were double-shifted, now 99% are single-shifted with 25% of drivers now only working part-time. Only 11% of taxis are now wheelchair accessible. Earnings have dropped, drivers are working longer hours in older vehicles and the tariff has increased 16%. An unmitigated vandalism of Dublin's taxi trade. Doesn't this clearly demonstrate that this is not an objective report, simply one specifically designed to sell a particular flawed economic theory? I wonder who many of those extra Bristol plates have been handed back? Dublin was, and to a degree is, still a mess. But we are not dealing with the same issue here. Dublin got rid of all standards, not just number restrictions. Therefore anyone with two eyes and a nose could get a plate. What OFT has suggested is that every person with two eyes and a nose, can have a plate provided they are deemed 'fit and proper', and they drive a vehicle that's deemed 'fit and proper'.

Author:	Alex [ Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:15 pm ]
Post subject:
Can I thank Jim from Cabforce for sending this. If more drivers/drivers asociations joined the debate on this very important issue, then maybe a clear way forward could be found. Alex

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

CABforce's OFT response http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=204	Page 1 of 3

Author:	Guest [ Thu Dec 25, 2003 4:43 am ]
Post subject:
Alex wrote: Can I thank Jim from Cabforce for sending this. If more drivers/drivers asociations joined the debate on this very important issue, then maybe a clear way forward could be found. Alex taking the [edited by admin] Alex taking the [edited by admin]

Author:	Sussex [ Thu Dec 25, 2003 12:48 pm ]
Post subject:
Anonymous wrote: taking the [edited by admin] Alex taking the [edited by admin] So you don't think the trade could or should work together? Starting to sound a bit like me Wharfy.

Author:	Guest [ Thu Dec 25, 2003 12:59 pm ]
Post subject:
Sussex Man wrote: Anonymous wrote: taking the [edited by admin] Alex taking the [edited by admin] So you don't think the trade could or should work together? Starting to sound a bit like me Wharfy. depends, work together on Micks proposals, well no all the country would be like Gatehead, and even Mick is trying to arange that again. Work on your proposals? no brings too much bitterness, too much vindictiveness. Work together on Dusties proposals, well that would end in disaster. work on my masterplan, well it will work! Kevin Yfahw

Author:	Sussex [ Thu Dec 25, 2003 1:16 pm ]
Post subject:
Well I'm not quite sure what are Mick's proposals, but it wouldn't surprise me one little bit if in 10 year time the country was similar to what Gateshead is now, in terms of licensing condition. No-doubt someone will tell me if I'm wrong, but a 'fit and proper' person can license a WAV HC on demand there. I can seeing that being the norm nationally, the only change is the existing HC fleet will also have to convert. Yes, even you Wharfie.

Author:	Guest [ Thu Dec 25, 2003 1:40 pm ]
Post subject:
Sussex Man wrote: Well I'm not quite sure what are Mick's proposals, but it wouldn't surprise me one little bit if in 10 year time the country was similar to what Gateshead is now, in terms of licensing condition. No-doubt someone will tell me if I'm wrong, but a 'fit and proper' person can license a WAV HC on demand there. I can seeing that being the norm nationally, the only change is the existing HC fleet will also have to convert. Yes, even you Wharfie. Well I cannot, many licensing authorities are following London tests and the like, to own a cab in London aint that easy you have to proove you have the resources to maintain a cab, bank statements and the like, so you finish up with 2 trades the opperators and the renters. if that happened all over tha high fares will wipe the trade out. Kevin

Author:	Sussex [ Thu Dec 25, 2003 3:48 pm ]
Post subject:
Anonymous wrote: many licensing authorities are following London tests and the like, to own a cab in London aint that easy you have to proove you have the resources to maintain a cab, bank statements and the like, Is this the COF that is soon to be deemed un-lawful?

Author:	Yorkie [ Fri Dec 26, 2003 2:46 am ]
Post subject:
Sussex Man wrote: Anonymous wrote: many licensing authorities are following London tests and the like, to own a cab in London aint that easy you have to proove you have the resources to maintain a cab, bank statements and the like, Is this the COF that is soon to be deemed un-lawful? no it isnt the cof for christ sake man, there are more rules in London than those you are over and unhealthily obsessed with.

Author:	Guest [ Fri Dec 26, 2003 3:33 am ]
Post subject:
Still browns me off where CabForce cannot see the difference between de limitation and de regulation.

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Dec 26, 2003 2:08 pm ]
Post subject:
Wharfie wrote: no it isnt the cof for christ sake man, there are more rules in London than those you are over and unhealthily obsessed with. Such as the 3 year knowledge, is that what you want us all to do?

Page 1 of 3	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Yorkie [ Fri Dec 26, 2003 2:46 pm ]
Post subject:
Sussex Man wrote: Wharfie wrote: no it isnt the cof for christ sake man, there are more rules in London than those you are over and unhealthily obsessed with. Such as the 3 year knowledge, is that what you want us all to do? I dont want us to do anything particularly I was commenting on your playing with London numbers and your conclusions which I thought was very flawed, over simplistic you added 2 and 2 and got 5. since this was pointed out you have made eroneous statements, like am I refering to cof, no I wasnt, now its do you want 3 year knowledge, no there wont be a trade left, this will be followed by anither wild suggestion no doubt. but London asd has been pointed b4 is different you want to adopt our norms to thier trade, so of course does licensing departments. its a mistake they have rules relevant to thier area, I d like rules relevant to mine.