Taxi Driver Online

Is this a victory?

Two tests a year after five years?

Age Limit

I am bemused as to why this is even being discussed! Approximately 6/7 years ago, it was deemed that the rules that we had at that time covering the age and safety was for around 450 cars/cabs with an approximate 1900 seating capacity was adequate. Fast forward 6/7 years to the present date, and you will find that the work of Cardiff Taxi cabs has been slashed by a massive amount due to (deregulation) that put approximately a further 500 cabs on the road. This action has added roughly an additional capacity of 3000 seats on top of what we already had, if you then add in the recession, then I think that it is fair to say that the cars/cabs are doing substantially less mileage than 6/7 years ago by a long way due to less work. I am aware that I use the words “approximately and roughly”, the reason being is that I do not have the exact figures, but I am sure that you can see that there is some merit in my reasoning. Taking into account the fact that the cars/cabs are doing a lot less mileage, I believe that it is also fair to say that the vehicles are not ageing in terms of wear and tear as much as they were 6/7 years ago.

If this is not to be seen as a cosmetic exercise, then the question should be asked, as to why this consultation is taking place? It does not seem to make sense as the vehicles are not suffering the wear and tear of 6/7 years ago; in many respects today we have a younger fleet in terms of wear and tear.

Failing my above reasoning then I would say that it should also be seen that the trade are not being penalised whatsoever by the L.A./Council. For example; school contracts and contracts in general that cover able bodied and for that matter disabled persons.

Many of them are of school age or are seriously incapable of looking after themselves, and yet they are often being allowed to be carried in vehicles that are well over the proposed 10 year limit. These vehicles are Buses, Mini Buses, etc, in fact many different types of motor vehicles that carry passengers for remuneration in vehicles over twice the limit being proposed! It would be fair to ask the question is this about safety! Are they also going to be brought into line with Taxis as each and every vehicle is made and tested for safety for the number of passengers of that given vehicle?

The argument being put forward to justify the older vehicle i.e shall we say a bus, is that they are better maintained or sturdier! That is clearly not the case with buses often belching out enough pollution that would shame Beijing. With regards to them being more sturdy then I would say that a piece of metal is a piece of metal, as all vehicles have to go through rigorous tests, to determine whatever numbers of passengers that the vehicle in question is allowed to carry before they are allowed out onto the roads. To clearly demonstrate that the trade is not being discriminated against then surely all must be treated the same, and to all come under the same ruling, as it is being claimed that the changes are on the grounds of safety of which I am very sceptical about.

You may ask as to why I am sceptical? Then I would like the opportunity to give you an example or two if I may, maybe you will see them as extreme, but nevertheless they are feasible.

Example 1. You go out and purchase a brand spanking new vehicle, exclusively for Taxi work! The next day you have a better offer to do something else allowing you to earn a more lucrative income – so you mothball the cab for the next 10 years, taking care at regular intervals to plate and service the vehicle to keep the cab in a roadworthy condition. I then decide after that time lapse that I wish to resume my occupation, unfortunately under the proposed age limit although this cab would be in mint condition, it would not be allowed to be plated under the proposed ruling – so I would ask the question what would age really have to do with it?

Example 2. A driver purchases a new vehicle and solely drives it himself clocking up shall we say 20,000 miles per year, this over a 10 year period will give him (stating the obvious) 200,000 miles on the vehicle! Today’s technology will allow vehicle’s to have a life span of many times that mileage as proven by other Licensed Authorities allowing them to be plated up and down the country – I think that it is fair to say that age in this instance has very little to do with safety.

Example 3. A family purchases a new vehicle but decide to triple shift it, in turn they are now clocking up in excess of 50/60,000 miles per year. Over the same 10 year period they will clock up in excess of 500/600,000 miles – this in reality is over three times as much as example number 2 working in the same Borough, proving and illustrating quite clearly, that age cannot be the deciding factor.

To reiterate the above; Age has got very little to do as to how safe a vehicle is, hence the reason as to why I am a sceptic. I believe that this is more about it being cosmetic, and not safety as it is being purported. To put safety on the map as we all want that one, then what is wrong with carrying on with the regular spot checks that we now have from Licensing and the Police? This could go along the lines of i.e should a car/cab driver be found to be seriously neglecting his/her vehicle then that driver should be made to go along to the “Cardiff Buses MOT Station” for up to three times per year, (I believe this is the maximum checks to be legally enforced), for regular checks to see that they are looking after their vehicle.

To wind this up, I would like to say that I believe that it is not the age of the vehicle that should be the criteria of safety, but that strict maintenance should always be the yardstick. Ask yourselves this! In the interest of safety – would you rather travel in a badly maintained new vehicle, OR one that is older but well maintained?

CC you are slipping.............."Fresh off the press"!!!!

Three tests a year after ten,beats buying a new vehicle

Rightly or wrongly this is the way that I think.

Back around 7 years ago the plating was deregulated providing you/I purchased a WAV under three years of age.

The criteria was, purchase a WAV and you only have to plate it once a year for the first 10 years! Other vehicles were on the road older than that, so I think as far as I can remember that your/my vehicle after the 10 year period would go onto two MOTs yearly...........so happy days!!

My thoughts are that basically we had a contract of a fashion i.e I adhere to the conditions of purchase...........and they the L.A give me xxx time to get a decent return!

Would I be correct to say that they are in some way breaching that agreement, and would I have a good chance of challenging the decision and winning in court?

I would also question the reasoning of the committee who seem to be of the opinion that maintenance is the key.

Example !

For the first 5 years they are saying that only one MOT a year is needed! And yet that policy is contradictory in the sense that those vehicles in theory could be triple shifted, thus allowing them to put say 70,000 miles P.A on the clock equaling 350,000 miles over a 5 year period - an 8 year old vehicle could have less mileage on the clock i.e half of that mileage - but is subjected to two MOTs P.A - making a complete mockery out of the policy.

Do I have a legal case.......that is winnable - as far as winnable goes?

I reckon if the vehicle is safe, well maintained and visually presentable no matter what the mileage, it should be licensed. I do think that vehicles no older than three years at initial plating should be national. LA Policy in the ancient Capitol of England says after six years a visual check before annual Hackney MOT should be passed. If not, to be taken away and repaired to the required standard, that criteria being would you as a punter want to get into a cab that wasn't. ALL cabs are inspected visually after MOT before the six year business comes into force..... Strict quality control and high standards seems to have worked here which has completely slowed down the issue of driver and vehicle license to a halt . The only way to get a saloon H plate is when somebody sells up which would equate to more than getting a WAV...... Hence the number OF PH we have here which is around 218 compared to 130 Hacks....

Do I have a legal case.......that is winnable - as far as winnable goes?

Yes you do have a good case, but it will cost you a lot of money, time and stress, so don't bother.

Cardiff saturated

I think decimation is the word.