Skull never wrote, but Alan G did:
Quote:
He is currently behind the Taylor licence application and opines that this will succeed to the detriment of every area in Scotland which restricts numbers.
I know what you mean though
| Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| JD - I think you've got them worried http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6187 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Skull [ Tue May 22, 2007 2:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | JD - I think you've got them worried |
Alan G writes on fasties: The following was sent to me by PM. It is an extract from a post made by the resident Juris Doctor (Graham Ansboro) on the dark orifice. I believe he is a taxi driver in Manchester; perhaps some of our colleagues from down south could confirm this? Anyhow, this is the extract:- "I shouldn't say this but I really cant hold it in any longer. I'm sorry for the English and welsh contingent who frequent this forum but this post concerns Edinburgh yet again. For those who don't know, a gentleman named Alan G who apparently runs, or used to run a forum called fastblacks, wrote a post on that forum in respect of Jacob's consulting. He offered the opinion that figures can be made out to be what anyone wants them to be. His post was basically about my demolition of the Jacob's survey and the inaccurate figures they presented in that survey. Mr Alan G and many of his staunch followers voiced their opinion that the City of Edinburgh council would wipe the floor with those who had dared to apply for hackney carriage licenses in that fair city. I responded to Mr Alan G with the statement that the City of Edinburgh Council would not win any more license applications from that day on. Naturally I was proven correct. The reason I made that statement was because I was extremely confident of my ability to convince the courts that the law should be applied as per the statutory requirements as laid down in the act of 1982. The rest is now history and the court of appeal has set the precedent as I said it would. What all this is alluding to is the fact that there is another case upon us that is more important than all those previous appeals put to together. This particular case has far reaching consequences for those councils in Scotland who practice quantity controls. It is patently obvious that those of you who hold hackney carriage licenses in restricted areas are oblivious to what this case means to every licensing area in Scotland? When this particular appeal is won and I am in no doubt whatsoever that it will be won, then from that day on restrictions in scotland will be a thing of the past. You can thank Edinburgh Council for that scenario and if you don't know why then you can ask your local Taxi association or perhaps Mr Alan G?" It is obvious that he credits himself with the recent Court of Session opinion which led to the issue of 6 taxi licences. We know this is not the case since the court opinion exposed the errors made by all parties and made their decision for different reasons. The only precedent set was that waiting on up to date information was not to be regarded as "good reason" for failing to consider licence applications within the statutory period. What could be regarded as "good reason" was not given. He is currently behind the Taylor licence application and opines that this will succeed to the detriment of every area in Scotland which restricts numbers. As for who to thank for this, I think we are all adult enough to realise that any blame, should derestriction happen, lies at the feet of those seeking to destroy the system rather than any taxi association. Finally, contrary to his statement, I have no "staunch followers," nor do I lead anyone. I state my opinion, as do most who post on here, and I resent those who are currently attempting to ruin the current high level of service which the trade in Edinburgh currently give to the public. Admin |
|
| Author: | JD [ Tue May 22, 2007 2:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: JD - I think you've got them worried |
Skull wrote: He is currently behind the Taylor licence application and opines that this will succeed to the detriment of every area in Scotland which restricts numbers.
________________________ I think Mr Taylor would be a little miffed at the suggestion that I was behind his current appeal. Mr Taylor's efforts in this appeal are all of his own making. The fact that I support his appeal is academic, the simple fact is that Mr Taylor has his own team behind him and any advice I might give him is neither here nor there? The point I raised relates to the consequences of measuring demand. CEC refused Mr Taylor's application on supposed evidence that pointed to no unmet demand. If Mr Taylor wins his appeal of which I am extremely confident that he will then the question of the quality of regular or interim demand observations will be at the forefront of the successful appeal. In short this means every restricted authority in Scotland will have to question their method of demand observations to make sure they meet the required standards which I fully expect the sheriff court to set out. Just how far the applicants would have got without my submission is anyones guess, therefore I'm not going to harp on about my submission? The appeals Mr Alan G refers to were given short shrift by the court of session who said what I and many others have always said and that is there is no provision in Scottish law that allows for an extension of time beyond the six month statutory process in order for a council to wait on a survey of demand and that is basically all the Sheriffs court had to determine in every case that came before them I might add this was adequately pointed out in the submission placed before the courts by two of the applicants. Therefor, what came out of these appeals is the precedent that awaiting a survey of demand is not a "good reason" to be granted an extension of time. This means no other council in Scotland can use this excuse as a reason to delay a license application. Considering restricted councils have no other weapon left in their arsenal to use as an excuse for an extension of time then normal circumstances permitting license applications must be disposed of within six months. I think that is a momentous precedent and one which I predicted would come about. I am making the same prediction with regard to unmet demand observations, should Mr Taylor win his appeal? If he does win his appeal then it will be the fault of Edinburgh council for not doing their job correctly. However the floodgates in Edinburgh will be open if such a scenario does happen and the responsibility for that lies firmly at the door of Edinburgh council. By the way Mr G, wrong initials, wrong name, keep on guessing. lol Regards JD |
|
| Author: | Skull [ Tue May 22, 2007 3:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Skull never wrote, but Alan G did: Quote: He is currently behind the Taylor licence application and opines that this will succeed to the detriment of every area in Scotland which restricts numbers.
I know what you mean though
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|