Taxi Driver Online

I’ve checked out the legal position regarding the Interested Parties List (IPL) and the lawyer agreed wholeheartedly with JD. The IPL is nonsense and has no provision in law.

The lawyer stated that “the C.E.C cannot refuse on the grounds of “no significant unmet demand” and then grant from the list in isolation while stating “there is a significant demand”. It’s that simple.

If anyone has any doubt you can check this out with your own lawyer. I would choose one with Council Licensing experience.

In short, the C.E.C doesn’t have a leg to stand on.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

Make a request through the F.O.I to have any survey demand information sent to you the minute it becomes available to those on the IPL.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

You asked your lawyer the wrong question then.
The IPL is not nonsense. Whilst there is no provision in law for it neither is there any provision which prevents a council fron using ANY list as an aid in its deliberations.
Why would any council tell one group that no demand existed whilst telling another that there was unmet demand?
It is well established that a council cannot grant from the list in isolation BUT it can use any additional information to help it in deciding which applicants may be granted a licence and that could include information from a list. And knowing your short attention span, I know, from previous court cases, omission from the list cannot be used as a reason for refusing a licence but equally applications do not require to be decided in chronolological order. (Just for you Skull that means it isn't first come, first served).
Let's assume that 20 licences were to be issued and there were 40 applicants, how does a council decide who gets and who doesn't? They discuss and judge each individual case on its merits. What the deciding factors are may be arguable but it won't be you that does the arguing!!
I would imagine it will also be perfectly legal thus rendering it safe from legal challenge.

The C.E.C under normal circumstances (the exception being a person's fitness) can only refuse a licence on the grounds of “no significant unmet demand”.

The fact that a “significant demand” is recognised, it then applies to everyone with a live application. It doesn’t say only for those on the IPL. Not being on the IPL is NOT grounds for refusal.

They would be contradicting their own information by claiming on one hand there is a demand but on the other, there isn’t.

As for your “chronological order”; you cannot have one application falling before another and the demand at the time being different i.e. this is why applications are dealt with on a first come first serve bases. The demand doesn’t change depending on the applicant - this would be discrimination.

Tell me John T. are you really that stupid or is it just an act?


BTW, the IPL is not a waiting list but a list of those who MIGHT be interested - you don't have to be on the IPL to show you are interested, you do that by applying.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

That'll be the end of John T. then?
what a numpty

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

Am I missing a point here, I have read somewhere that a council cannot refuse to grant a licence as long as there criteria of fit and proper is met.
so why are councils still trying to limit the number of cabs

You and you wee mates are the only ones with so little going on their life's that you expect a reply within hours of you posting.

My life is only occassionally so dull I pop in here

As for the IPL (and NO I'm not on it - before you start) my understanding is that it can be used as an aid in deciding who gets a license SHOULD they find evidence if significant unmet demand, but not WHOLLY the basis for deciding who should get a license (SHOULD etc)

BTW - are you on the list Slapheid

_________________
Keyboards and Cretins : Facts - not opinions - are the only truths

Damascus Moments - easy excuses for a sociopath

TDO the website of double standards and changing identities

Councils have the option to restrict licenses if they can prove there is no demand that isn't being met but it is only an option and they have to prove it, not you.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

The C.E.C under normal circumstances (the exception being a person's fitness) can only refuse a licence on the grounds of “no significant unmet demand”. Correct!

The fact that a “significant demand” is recognised, it then applies to everyone with a live application. It doesn’t say only for those on the IPL. Not being on the IPL is NOT grounds for refusal. I just wrote that too or did you miss it?

They would be contradicting their own information by claiming on one hand there is a demand but on the other, there isn’t.Correct!

As for your “chronological order”; you cannot have one application falling before another and the demand at the time being different i.e. this is why applications are dealt with on a first come first serve bases. The demand doesn’t change depending on the applicant - this would be discrimination.Seems you haven't quite grasped it yet. Applications are decided at Council meetings, where, as I said, any issue of licences that is oversubscribed requires some to be refused and some to be accepted. Get it now? I am not suggesting that applications be rejected whilst unmet demand exists

Tell me John T. are you really that stupid or is it just an act? Seems it's you that's stupid since you appear unable to read.


BTW, the IPL is not a waiting list but a list of those who MIGHT be interested - you don't have to be on the IPL to show you are interested, you do that by applying. Does that make your mate a liar then, since he says elsewhere that he's not interested in getting a licence?

John T. Writes:



No my auld son it is you who doesn’t grasp it, and oversubscription has nothing to do with it.



Oh yes you are.

Who gets a licence depends on the conditions of “demand” at the time the application is made. It has nothing to do with the applicant or what list he is on. Nor do the council have grounds to refuse a licence on the bases of oversubscription, the fact is, the application was made at the time a “significant demand” was recognised-end of. The council would be deciding on what application to apply the “significant demand”.

In short; their decision to grant or deny a licence would be based on who was applying and not the conditions of “demand” contradicting their own demand survey.

If I apply before someone on the IPL and there is a “significant demand” my live application is up and running – licence granted-end of.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

Let me make it easy for you John.

I apply before someone on the IPL and the council refuse the licence on the grounds of “no significant unmet demand”. A couple of weeks later someone on the IPL who applied after me is then granted a licence on the bases that a “significant demand exists”.


You don’t see a problem with this John?

Get this through you thick head you numpty – “significant demand” and no significant demand” cannot coexist in the same time and place, it’s either one or the other.


I can just see it now; yes your Honour, a “significant demand” did exist at the time the application was made but we refused it on oversubscription and then granted a licence a couple of weeks later

The C.E.C are fecked John T. If we don't scupper them on Taylor's Licence we will nail them to the floor on the IPL.

BTW, we have one more little trick up our sleve if the do go to that list, just wait and see.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

John T. Writes:

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

John T, can you point to the part in the Civic Act (1982) where it states that "a council may refuse a licence on “oversubscription” while a “significant demand” existed.

Or how about the part that says; "the C.E.C can pick and choose the applicant to apply the demand regardless of when the application was made".

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

John T is the very reason no cabby should be allowed to spend 50K on a licence plate and call himself a businessman.


What they can't accept they just make-up.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

Picture this John T.:

You appear at the RC meeting and the Chairman states that:

Although you applied when a “significant demand existed” that demand did not apply to you.

You then ask:

How can that be Mr. Chairman?

Mr. Chairman then replies: We are oversubscribed but we intend to issue licences to those who applied after you when we were not oversubscribed. As those who applied after you were more interested than you.


Brilliant

I think fasties would be better off with you posting over there John I would put you at about the same level as Alan G.

You might want to keep him company

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"