Taxi Driver Online

The case I refer to is Castlepoint,

so whats the solution? well I confess I cant think of one, (except single code)
we are knackered where an illegle act gives rise to legitamate trade in this way, your posting works it all the way through.

just hope the judgement is overturned, round here the touting goes to the point of lying, you are waiting for the taxi from the rank? they are busy they have sent me!

many driving off as we fly up the hill,

Wharfie

I don't think you are going to view this in a good light Mr Cruisin', but I believe a review of the length of the knowledge could help out.

Reading what the Editor of Callsign Mag says, it appears that the knowledge took on average 15 months in the 60s and 70s. If that's true, then one wonders why it takes so long now?

I fully understand London cabbys wanting to keep their existing earnings, but perhaps the market in the past has increased at a very higher rate, than the taxi trade. Thus giving customers no option at night, but to take a tout.

But what do you do now? Perhaps the Taxi Radio firms need to gain more of the cash work. Because I can't believe that all those people who currently use minicabs, are happier with them, then a fully licensed, fully checked Black cab and driver.

Or is it too late for that?

I think perhaps you are making too much of what you've read in Call-Sign. The editor works for those who were campaigning for a "Quickie Knowledge." You seem to have got your wires crossed on what the real problem is in London. The time taken to do the Knowledge has, indirectly, no relation to the number of licenses being issued. The LTDA are actively campaigning to keep the numbers down as the points I raised in my response to Wharfie are relevant. Contact their General Secretary on bob@ltda.co.uk or on 020 7286 1046 (www.ltda.co.uk) and he can give you a complete run-down on the subject. He is likely to have a completely different view to that of the Editor of Call-Sign and he (the Gen Sec)speaks for over 7,000 licensed London cab drivers.

At the moment the PCO, under current legislation, does not have the legal power to prevent anyone applying to go on the Knowledge. They are obliged to accept anyone who applies and the police and CRB check can filter out those who do not qualify.

There is considerable debate as to how many licences there really should be. The vital point is one that provincial taxi drivers are more familiar with than we are in London, UNMET DEMAND.

At present we have no way of knowing, as I indicated to Wharfie, how many licences we need to meet this unmet demand, as no survey has ever been carried out. So to issue licences without knowing this could have catastrophic consequences for existing licence holders if they are churned out willy-nilly. It has to be regulated on a scientific basis.

In order to get this right an annual survey of such unmet demand (including that where mincab touts are taking up the so-called short-fall) should be undertaken. How else can this be measured? The results of the survey would enable TfL/PCO to determine how many licences in a given year are necessary to meet the demand. The KOL examination process and the number of examiners required, would have to be geared in a flexible way to take account of any fluctuations in the annual demand. Now that's a way for Tfl/PCO to run the taxi side of an integrated transport system for London, isn't it?

This is a very emotive subject where employing full-time staff at the PCO is concerned - pension, job security etc, so the true number of licences issued is seemingly determined by the wrong factors. A change of the Legislation is required and I (amongst others) have written to TfL over this to make changes in the Law and for surveys to take place.

As for radio taxi circuit cash work, some have opted out of this in various ways, as they claim it does not bring them in any revenue (This is a whole different subject on its own). Some will not take cash bookings though some would wish to convert the cash callers to pay by credit card so that they can raise some revenue. The making of money is seemingly the problem rather than the giving a service, though this isn't true of all of them.

Two new circuits have just been formed with one determined to generate more cah work. (Call-a-Cab) Cash work has been a declining market (in relative terms) for several years for taxis in London as the tendency has been more towards a lucrative income from corporate clients (account work) than to the cash work. In my opinion we reject or reduce the amount of cash work taken, at our peril. It plays straight into the hands of our competitors.

The Knowledge is our safeguard and some people (including the Editor of Call-Sign) may want it shortened, but why? It doesn't seem to deter applicants in any way and many argue that we have far too many cabs out at the moment (peak periods excepted, as it is impossible to meet that demand - anywhere). If the KOL could be undertaken in say 15 months we may have 20,000 queing up at the doors of the PCO, goodness knows it is large enough now, even though new applicants have to pay to enrol now (£100 I believe it is - or is going up to).

The number of applicants for the KOL bears no relation to the number of touts on the streets. Once the tout problem has been eradicated we can then enjoy a properly regulated system of licensing drivers based on a scientific and proven criteria that is acceptable to all parties concerned.

Regards,

Cruisin' Cabby

Just to clarify, the 'touting' referred to in the Castlepoint case was in fact 'plying for hire' IIRC.

Neither taxi drivers nor PH/minicab are allowed to tout.

Anyway, the plying for hire going on in Castlepoint was only relevant insofar as it evidenced unmet demand for taxis, and thus to that extent the restricted number of licensed couldn't be sustained if the law was to be complied with.

Of course, there could be any amount of unmet demand in London since any response to this would be a policy decision, not a legal requirement.

Indeed there was a policy response in London a couple of years ago, namely an increase in the night time fares intended to alleviate the supply/demand mismatch.

From the provincial perspective there are two interesting points here:

1 That there's unmet demand evidenced even without quantitative restrictions in place, caused by qualitative restrictions (primarly the KOL in this case).

2 That an unmet demand test could be manipulated, in this case by raising fares.

Which just goes to show what nonsense the unmet demand test really is!

Dusty

I suspect that the OFT are about to throw the book at the unmet demand test used in the provinces, Mr Cruisin', so I suspect that the chances of such a test being introduced in London are minimal.

For example, there's no supply of black cabs in many parts of London, AFAIK, so there's no demand. So if there's no demand there can't be any unmet demand, so any survey wouldn't pick it up.

But I think that from a rational economic and public interest point of view it would be considered that the fact that demand is supressed by supply restrictions, and thus there's less unmet demand evidenced, is not a good thing.

Dusty

Mr Cruisin', the difference between the provinces and London, is that out here they assess/restrict the amount of vehicles, whereas I assume in your manor, they would assess/restrict the amount of drivers coming through the KOL.

To me both are folly, and the latter possibly illegal under Euro law.

However, if say a survey came out in London saying that another 2000 Black Cabs or drivers were needed in London, one must ask where they would come from?

[/quote]

I suspect that the OFT are about to throw the book at the unmet demand test used in the provinces, Mr Cruisin', so I suspect that the chances of such a test being introduced in London are minimal.

For example, there's no supply of black cabs in many parts of London, AFAIK, so there's no demand. So if there's no demand there can't be any unmet demand, so any survey wouldn't pick it up.

Dusty[/quote]

Dusty,

I'm not too concerned with what you may think of the test used in the provinces, but I'm sure TfL being the big organisation that they are, will devise their own with London's particular needs in mind. (Hopefully)

I'm not sure where you get your information from but no matter where a licensed cab goes in the GLA area he may get hailed. This area covered by 'green' badges is about 620 sq miles. Where you said AFAIK, you have simply got this wrong - unless you work London and know different.

The further away from the city centre, obviously the lesser the demand, and if you get into the suburbs there are 'yellow' badge drivers servicing these areas. There are certain areas where demand is not being sufficiently met (due to these areas becoming more affluent in recent years) and there is a pilot scheme being conducted by the PCO in some parts of South London where the 'green' & 'yellow' badge areas will overlap to try and give a better service to the public in those areas.

I hope this pilot is successful and introduced in other ares where the supply may be considered insufficient, as it may help us recover some of the work lost to LPH and prevent touts getting even more ill-gotten gains and continue to be a scourge on the public.

Regards,

Cruisin' Cabby

well you know dont you, you are taking the [edited by admin], or testing even I cannot believe you are that thick, are you trying to tease Mick out for an intelectual debate?


the wording is significant unmet demand, and only applies where there are limits by number

which is but a fraction of british taxis.

Wharfie

They already have that many (at least) signed on the Knowledge at the moment - so don't worry on our behalf they'd find the numbers no trouble at all. There are already 24,000 Licensed drivers with about 22,000 Licensed cabs.

There are about 44,000 registered minicab drivers, with about 2,200 licensed minicab operators/offices. They are starting to licence the minicab drivers now - over a 3 year period. Trouble is, so many of don't want to go legit and many are probably considering that if they are to be legit, they'd rather be taxi drivers.

It's been like Blackpool on the streets of London tonight - a sea of lights - all orange with the word TAXI and FOR HIRE lit up and driving in convoy. And some idiot says we need more cabs. He's either blind or singing from somebody else's song sheet - or he's got a day job and only drives the cab to take a bit of pocket money and not for making a living.

Regards,

Cruisin' Cabby

My point is not whether you need an extra 2000 or not, but where you get the drivers from.

Say you have an annual survey, as you mentioned recently. As the KOL takes 3 years (approx), you aren't going to meet that demand for the extra, for at least those three years.

Then what happens if the survey says you have more than enough. Do you stop the KOL schools, do you stop the PCO passing drivers out?

Would you make the KOL harder if no un-met demand, and easier if there is un-met demand. What about those drivers near the end, will there return dates get longer, even though they are getting better at the KOL.

How will they assess the Yellow Badge areas? As the Green boys can pick up there, how will they know who is meeting that demand i.e. what licenses will they issue to meet the suburbs demand, more green or more yellow?

From my experience, surveys are just a sop to help gutless councils maintain the status quo. But even if London took the provincial way, that way assess vehicles, so you could still have no un-met demand, but more drivers coming into the trade. They just share the existing fleet.

If you wanted to limit driver numbers, I feel that would would be classed as a restraint of trade.

OK, the legal wording includes the word 'significant' but from the point of view of the discussion above I don't think the inclusion or otherwise of the term is...er...significant.

Other than that I haven't a clue what you're on about Wharfy.

Dusty

As regards the 'unmet demand' test, I'm not sure that you could apply it to London in any way that makes up for its inadequacies elsewhere, but I'm keen to hear any suggestions.

The point I was trying to make (perhaps not too clearly) is that the unmet demand test in the provinces largely favours the status quo and can be manipulated in the interests of whatever vested interests happen to benefit from it, and to that extent I don't think your proposal is realistic in policy terms, assuming that the interests of London cabbies are balanced against the wider public interest.

I haven't been in London for over a decade, but stayed there for over around three years, in Herne Hill, Sydenham and Walthamstow.

Now I don't know if these are yellow or green badge areas, but my recollection is that they were not really served by black cabs, and as far as I know pre-booking with one of the circuits would be the only option, and this would be quite expensive.

But whether these areas are green or yellow badge, my point is that if you look at demand from the standpoint of the current situation then the unmet demand test tends to favour the status quo.

For example, if the London trade had been lightly regulated then I'm quite sure there would be taxis dotted around areas like Walthamstow, and there would be ranks and plenty of opportunity for the public to hail taxis.

Looking at it another way, I'm fairly sure that there are some yellow badge areas without any taxis at all, in which case since there's no supply there's no demand, and therefore can be no unmet demand?

But why's there no taxis in these areas - well, presumably it's because even the yellow badge and the PB requirement are sufficiently restrictive to stifle numbers completely.

From a provincial perspective, the numbers I posted in another thread recently are perhaps instructive:

Slough 108,000 HC 66 PH 712
Reading 145,000 HC 138 PH 400
Dundee 150,000 HC 507 PH 130
Swindon 177,000 HC 138 PH 468

Dundee is clearly the odd man out here - probably because they de-limited numbers there fairly recently, and since it's easy to run a taxi there and get a badge, there's little point in running a PH.

But the 507 taxis in Dundee are deemed to meet the unmet demand test, so why do the other similarly sized locations demonstrate such small taxi numbers and still meet the unmet demand test - probably because the work that the taxis can't/won't do is done by PH instead, and as far as ranks and hailing is concerned the taxis in these places 'cherry pick' where they want to work, and where people who might hire a taxi in Dundee they have no option but to phone PH in the other three locations.

Then there's the point about the fact that unmet demand can be manipulated by other means. For example, if TfL implemented such a test, and no unmet demand was found, but it was in the future, then this could be eliminated by raising fares sufficiently to stifle demand. Of course this would be in the interests of the current green badges, but would it be in the interests of the successful Knowledge boys or the general public?

By the same token, if unmet demand is manifested in future, and there ere no 'spare' knowledge boys available then would it be appropriate for TfL to water down the knowlege test, or is the unmet demand test only relevant when those who want it deem it necessary?

In this vein, T3 was introduced to alleviate unmet demand at night, and as well as encouraging drivers to change their shifts in the short term, it was inevitable that in the longer term there would be a higher number of drivers. So to that extent is it fair that the then cabbies got the short term benefit from T3, but not the longer term detriment?

Taking the unmet demand test to its ultimate conclusion, the London black cab trade would be about the only economic sector not to suffer the consequences of recession - no job losses and no drop in income either.

My point is that considering the various interests involved and the somewhat cack-handed nature of the test I think it's unlikely that an unmet demand test will be introduced in London, particularly with the OFT due to report this week(?)

Indeed, with many regarding the KOL as over-restrictive generally, it will be interesting to hear what the OFT have to say about it, but I suspect that they would view an additional arbitrary element to the issue of green badges with some horror, even assuming that the KOL remains unscathed.

Please note that the above is not intended to be a judgement on the various issues and interests involved, but an objective analysis of the way I see things going.

Dusty

Incidentally, Mr Cruisin' Cabby, I haven't read much about what the London trade thinks the impact of the OFT report might be on the capital.

Cab Trade News, for example, has had plenty to say about de-limitation in the provinces, but no mention about anything London related. Ditto Taxi Talk.

Is the OFT study regarded as a big issue in London??

Dusty

No, not yet. As far as I am aware this has not been reported in our trade press. If it does become an issue we'll get TfL on the case!!!!

Regards,

Cruisin' Cabby

Couldn't help seeing your photograph in the margin - didn't you use to hang around with Ted Rogers? 3-2-1, distorted fingers and all that?

Cruisin' Cabby