Taxi Driver Online

Yet another instance where a license application was determined without the insistance that a suitable vehicle be presented beforehand.

Minutes: Licensing Committee 11/06/1999

5 REQUEST TO TRANSFER TAXI LICENCE - PHILIP CAPALDI

A request had been received from Mr Philip Capaldi to transfer a taxi operator’s licence held by his deceased father to his own name. The applicant and his representative were heard and outlined the special circumstances which they felt would permit the Committee to grant the licence sought.

The Committee were reminded of their previous decision that they would normally regard the spouses, sons or daughters of a taxi licence holder who had died, or who intended to surrender their licence to the Council, as being in circumstances that could be regarded as special where they held a current taxi driver’s licence and did not already have a taxi operator’s licence. The Council Solicitor confirmed that Mr Capaldi held a taxi driver’s licence.

DECISION

Having taken into account the special circumstances outlined, to grant Mr Capaldi a taxi operator’s licence subject to the Council’s standard licensing conditions.

(References - Licensing Committee 17 October 1997 (Item 6); report by the Council Solicitor 11 June 1999, submitted.)

The following method is the criteria used when Edinburgh council last issued new licenses. You will no doubt notice that the successful applicants were offered the licenses without having to first submit a vehicle for testing.

It is quite clear by now that Edinburgh council deployed unreasonable delaying tactics by insisting on pre conditions which were not previously applied to past applicants. Did the respondent's solicitor ever highlight this discrepancy?

Minutes: Regulatory Committee minutes 22/05/2002

4 Taxi Licensing – Survey of Demand 2001

Decision

1) To recommend that the Executive of the Council approve the issue of 49 new taxi licences.

2) That the Executive of the Council note that should approval be given, the Regulatory Committee would intend that

(i) the 49 licences be issued to the first 49 persons on the list of parties interested in obtaining a taxi licence as the list stood at the day any decision of the Executive became final;

(ii) the issue of licences be phased over a period of 6 months at the rate of 8 a month;

(iii) the 49 individuals affected be invited to submit an application for licence, accompanied by the appropriate fee, within one month of the date of invitation and any individuals who indicated that they did not wish to apply for a licence in that time be treated in accordance with current procedures applying to the list;

(iv) any licences available as a result of such as refusal should be offered to the next person on the list as at the date any decision of the Executive became final;

(v) once this procedure had been completed, the remaining persons on the Council’s waiting list be consulted for representations with a view to the Council abolishing the list and in future allocating licences by public advertisement on the basis of criteria adjusted at the time.

(References – Regulatory Committee 13 March 2002 (Item 4); report by the Acting Director of Corporate Services, submitted.)

This is the last example I'm going to post on the isolated pre conditions policy adopted specifically by Edinburgh council in order to hinder the applicants chances of obtaining a license in the case of 3maxblack v CEC. It is quite clear that a policy of discrimination was adopted to set up a financial barrier in order to make obtaining a license more difficult than it has been for past applicants.

It is also noticeable from the other examples I have posted that no previous applicant had to part with any money before they were "notified" they had been granted a license, or they had been "invited" to apply for a license.

These two considerations are the "only" reasons given as to why Edinburgh council could not process the remaining applications within a six-month time frame. The Sheriff stated that in 2003 the reason for the delay in processing the 49 new licenses was because of the administration policy of the council. She went on to add that the process was drawn-out because it involved the consideration of several committees.

If the process involved scrutiny by several committees why did the applications of 3maxblack not progress beyond the first committee stage?

We can see by the application submitted below that the licensing committee does have the power to issue licenses independently of other committees, so why did the 2002 decision need to go through all those other committees which also included the executive? Well that is a simple question to answer, in order to adopt the findings of the survey and issue 49 new licenses, committees such as Scrutiny, policy and resources and the Executive, have to scrutinise and sanction the new policy.

The new policy adopted in late 2002 meant a new limit was placed on numbers control. The council informed applicants who applied after 2002/3 that they are not issuing any new licenses because they had a policy of limiting licenses to their present level. Evidence of this refusal policy was highlighted in the evidence presented by Edinburgh licensing staff. What is even more alarming is that the applicant on 5th November 2004 was given a letter confirming the advice given by the person who refused to accept the application.

The intention of the advice given was to deter any applicant from submitting an application and hope they ask to be placed on a waiting list rather than pursue their statutory right of appeal. We must assume that there had been other applications for licenses in the year 2003/4 that the lady in question might have dealt with, even though she said in court she hadn't. If the respondents could have found just one person who had submitted an application through this lady then the council's case may have been irretrievable.

A very lame excuse was given as to why the New Zealand educated solicitor made her damaging statement. Since 1989 New Zealand has not restricted Taxi numbers so you might think she would be more inclined to accept the application than refuse it.

Minutes: Licensing Committee 23/01/98

5 application for taxi licence - george gardner

An application for a taxi operator’s licence had been received from solicitors acting on behalf of Mr George Gardner. Mr Gardner had previously held a taxi licence but had lost it as a result of a civil dispute with his former business partner. He was now submitting a further application and detailed the special circumstances which he felt would permit the Committee to grant him the licence sought.

DECISION


Having taken into account the special circumstances, to grant a taxi licence to Mr Gardner (previous plate number to be issued, if available).

(Reference - report by the Council Solicitor 30 December 1997, submitted).

No, they did not have to provide a vehicle "before" the were notified they had been granted a licence.

You are also correct in every other aspect of your posts. One thing was very apparent in this whole affair. When you are up against the authority you have to knock them out to get a draw.

Edinburgh council's version of keeping itself informed as to the up to date presence or absence of unmet demand.

1. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN April 2003

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN April 2003

2. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN May 2003

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN May 2003

3. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN June 2003

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN June 2003

4. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN July 2003

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN July 2003

5. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN August 2003

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN August 2003

6. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN September 2003

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN September 2003

7. STANCE SURVEYS RESUMED IN October 2003
Stance surveys are conducted over fifteen minute periods and during this time a number of measurements are recorded including number of taxis/passengers/hires and waiting time of both passengers and taxis. There was a total of 11 surveys completed in October: 3 at the High Street (Crowne Plaza), 2 at North Bridge East, North Bridge West and Waverley Bridge, 1 at both South St David Street and North St Andrew Street. Only during one survey (Crowne Plaza, 16: 10,28 October) were passengers seen to be waiting: the longest waiting time was 5 minutes for a group of 2 passengers. The number of taxis decreased to zero
during one survey of North Bridge East, Crowne Plaza and North St Andrew Street. No taxis were observed to use the stance at North Bridge West. Taxis exceeded the authorised number for the stance during four of the surveys conducted.

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN October 2003

8. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN November 2003

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN November 2003

9. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN Dec 2003

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN Dec 2003

10. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN Jan 2004

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN Jan 2004

11. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN Feb 2004

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN Feb 2004

12. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN March 2004

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN March 2004

13. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN April 2004
.
NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN April 2004

DEMAND April 2004
The tender for the last survey of demand was completed in January 2001. More than three years have passed since then. On 2 March 2001 the Council licensed 445 private hire cars; there are currently 707. Growth in the number of private hire cars may be indicative of a latent demand for taxis. The Council may therefore, in light of the above, consider commissioning a further independent survey to assess demand for taxis in the City.

14. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN May 2004

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN May 2004

DEMAND May 2004.
The tender for the last survey of demand was completed in January 2001. More than three years have passed since then. On 2 March 2001 the Council licensed 445 private hire cars; there are currently 713. Growth in the number of private hire cars may be indicative of a latent demand for taxis. The Council may therefore, in light of the above, consider commissioning a further independent survey to assess demand for taxis in the City.

15. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN June 2004

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN June 2004

Demand June 2004
The Regulatory Committee of 16 June 2004 decided to refer the Taxi Licensing Officer's Monthly Report covering May 2004 to the next meeting of the Hire Car Licensing Consultation Group to discuss commissioning of an independent survey of demand for taxis in Edinburgh. The date of the next Consultation Group meeting has yet to be confirmed.

16. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN July 2004

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN July 2004

17. NO STANCE SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN August 2004

NO STREET SURVEYS CONDUCTED IN August 2004

18. UNCLEAR IF STANCE SURVEY WAS UNDERTAKEN? Sept 2004

NO STREET SURVEY CONDUCTED September 2004

SURVEYS September 2004.
Stance and street surveys have been conducted in order to assess demand for taxis in the City. The principal responsibility for the conduct of such surveys will rest with independent transport consultants. The Council’s Licensing staff will monitor the situation and identify conditions that would suggest a further survey is appropriate. Following discussions at the Hire Car Licensing Consultation Group meeting on 27 August a draft of a specification for a Survey of Demand has been completed. This specification will be forwarded to members of the trade for comment before tenders are invited.

Stance and Street surveys were curtailed in September 2004 after conducting only one but possibly two in a documented period spanning 26 months. Documents prior to April 2003 are not held in the database so there is every possibility that the time frame goes back further than 26 months.

Here is a typical Monthly report made by the licensing officer.

On the one occasion when a so called stance survey was conducted over this two year period from April 2003 to June 2005 there was little or no evidence to determine the time of day the survey took place or indeed the weight applied to the survey in terms of mapower and man hours. The survey was limited to observations in a limited area within a limited time frame. There is no suggestion by the Licensing officer that such an observance was meant to substitute for a professional survey of unmet demand.

http://cpol.edinburgh.gov.uk/getdoc_ext.asp?DocId=54134

Regards

JD

Big Jim gives his views.

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/lette ... 1712772005

_________________
IDFIMH

This is a valid point.

Finally, how can it be, when the council continually tells us the local economy is burgeoning and the new Parliament is known to have stimulated more demand for taxi services, that the taxi sector is the only one where the market isn't increasing and necessitating a restriction of supply?

If I was in a court action with the council, I would call as witnesses any council official that has said, on record, that Edinburgh is booming and ask them how that can be, if they also say there is no SUD.

_________________
IDFIMH

A Hornets nest springs to mind!

From a purely english point of view, has the number of taxis in Scotlands captital any bearing on the number of world cups the football team has won?

also, if the number of taxis at some point equates to demand, can they at some point send a cheque (or preferably cash) for that lovely Parliament building the english paid for.

regards

Captain Cab

ps

thanks for the oil

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

I explained the position on the street cars further up, but since that's twice you've ignored the blatantly obvious, can I assume that you are just trying to deliberately ignore the points people are making?

In case you genuinely do not understand the point, I'll try a hypothetical example.

There are three ranks, A, B & C. The town has 100 cabs, thirty of which are street cars, with ten working each rank. Thus there are 70 radio cars, with on average 40 employed on radio work and 30 at the ranks.

So at each rank there are 10 street cars and 10 radio cars. The council officer is surveying rank B, so the radio firms can direct the other 20 radio cars to that rank, resulting in 40 cars at the rank, and only 10 street cars left working the other two ranks, which are clearly not being surveyed at that time.

So there are twice as many taxis working the rank being surveyed than usual, thus the results are being manipulated to show less unmet demand, I think the appropriate word is cheating.

Hope that explain things

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Well I think the concept of supply and demand predicates Adam Smith's 'invisible hand', whereas what was clearly evident in Edinburgh was the 'audible instruction'

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Who mentioned cars ignoring their radios?

The example I provide above does not assume that radios are being ignored.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Well all businesses are regulated, but you're confusing qualitative, safety, environmental etc restrictions rather than the more arbitrary quantitative restrictions imposed on the taxi trade.

Anyone who knows anything about the real work of commerce, business and regulation will appreciate the difference, that's why so few people other than the vested interests have anything good to say about restricted taxi numbers.

But I suspect you know that, but admitting the truth clearly wouldn't be in your interest.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

You quote 2 extremes. Few would ever claim to have a better command of case law than a Sheriff, however most draw their own conclusions from ALL the evidence available. which obviously includes the Sheriff's views.
Since this was an application for more time to make a decision, 3maxblack missed the point by attempting to bulldoze their applications through whilst the real issue was whether there was reasonable cause to allow the council more time and yes, i believe there is a fine difference between the two.
The onus of monitoring demand is the contentious point. What is a reasonable frequency for surveys? How can a council assess demand continuously? Obviously these are the points that are the subject of opinion.
The evidence of demand is required, as I understand it, at the time the application is considered by the authority. Given the red tape that binds local government it is not unreasonable for the processes to take longer than one would expect in other fields. Look at the timescale for the last survey, from commissioning to final implementation.

Given your support for this gang, I hope your trawl through Edinburgh's online doc store eventually uncovers the most important documents which will be used to repel these parasites.

Your other posts, quoting apparent anomalies in their decisions merely serve to prove that every case is judged on its own merits - the authority use their discretion where and when they deem it appropriate.

Well let me answer a few of the points you mention TDO, first off was my reply to Ali, he was saying that you would not be refused permission because there were other business's in the area, I knew what Ali meant, he was meaning that you could not be refused simply because there was deemed too many, I was merely stating the fact that they can and often do refuse Licenses for all sorts of premises, what has to be remembered TDO is that Edinburgh is a World Heritage site, I will provide a link for those interested.

http://www.ewht.org.uk/

http://www.ewht.org.uk/Documents/Edinbu ... 20Site.pdf

Enjoy your visit


It needs special consideration and careful managment most of the people who come to visit Edinburgh realise this, and respect our right to determine how the Heritage site is going to be preserved for future Generations to enjoy it as well, of course this is what I was meaning when I wrote my reply to Ali, I did not say it was right or wrong , just that in a World Heritage site there are other considerations to be taken into account, do you understand this concept, and of course there are people who can object for a whole variety of reasons that can stop you obtaining a License for say a pub, at least that's how it works up here.

It was only an opinion, nothing sinister was meant or implied.


So I was not "confusing qualitative, safety, environmental etc restrictions" I am well aware of the arguments and concepts behind the two issues you mention , but in a world heritage site the considerations may be more involved as the two could be closely linked, cause and effect if you like, so Anyone who knows anything about the real work of commerce, business and regulation in a world heritage site may have to approach these issues from a different perspective than people who do not live and work in an WHS.

You once again allude to the fact that I must be one of the vested interests in the taxi trade, I am not , but I do have an interest and opinions on it, as I do on the City I live in and work in, get used to it, I do not concern myself at all times with the minutia of Legal points and precedence, sometimes it's worth remembering that we are human beings first and Taxi drivers second, not the other way round.

frankly I do not care about your cause, it matters not a jot to me what happens, but I wish you all well with whatever you do.