Taxi Driver Online

Taxi drivers have organised a petition after the council rejected their request for a cap to be put on the number of drivers in the borough.

Licensed Hackney Carriage drivers say there is so little business in Bracknell that they have to work 60 to 70 hour weeks and customer safety could be put at risk if it gets worse.

Drivers have called on Bracknell Forest to reinstate a limit on the number of licence plates handed out until the town’s regeneration finally happens.

At the moment drivers say they are waiting up to two hours for a fare and are making so little money that rates will have to go up.

Last year drivers asked the council to put a hold on the number of licenses given out while the drivers paid for an ‘unmet demand survey’ to be carried to show that there is not enough demand for taxis.

The survey did not show an unmet demand but in July the council decided to lift the temporary limit on numbers saying it would not be beneficial to customers.

Now 70 drivers who are members of the GMB union have submitted a petition and formal complaint to the council’s environment, culture and communities department requesting the limitation be reinstated.

Mick Hildreth, southern region branch secretary for the GMB, said: “Currently drivers are working a 60 to 70 hour working week and I have concerns for the safety of the travelling public, which the licensing officers do not seem to have taken into consideration.

“Any more licences issued will force GMB members to work 80 plus hours which may put the public at risk.”

At the moment there are 86 licensed Hackney Carriage drivers in the borough.

Andy Watson, of the Bracknell Licensed Taxi Forum, said: “The fact that the town hasn’t been regenerated doesn’t seem to have been considered.

“The situation will not improve until it has been, and until that happens we want the number of taxis not to grow.

“Fares haven’t gone up since 2008 but any increase in the number of licences handed out will increase the pressure on fares going up.”

Vincent Paliczka, the council’s director of environment, culture and communities, said: “With the support of its members, the GMB union has made representation to the council about the decision to remove the limit on Hackney Carriage licences.

“I have written to the GMB asking it to detail its concerns in order that a comprehensive response can then be made.”

source: http://www.getbracknell.co.uk/news/

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

The number of hours worked by the drivers is no good without saying how much they earn in those hours.
Now let us say that the average take for their 70 hour working week is say £350 and as the report states, there are 86 of them. That means that the total pot for the week is £30,100.
Now let us say that the council adds another 10 plates.
now the report states that the drivers will need to work an extra 10 hours to take the same money.
WHERE HAS THE EXTRA WORK COME FROM?
Because now you have 96 drivers taking £350 per week so the total pot has gone up to £33,600.

_________________
Grandad,
To support my charity text MAYORWALK to 70085 to donate £5

That sounds like an argument for latent demand & even a judge has said that it should not be taken into account!!

In other words, it don't exist.

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.

I Agree, I did say where has the extra work come from?

_________________
Grandad,
To support my charity text MAYORWALK to 70085 to donate £5

Oh I see; you're agruing in reverse, to use a phrase.

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.

Really?

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2002/1526.html

_________________
IDFIMH

Yes really.

The 1989 case R v Brighton Borough Council ex p. Bunch (C.O.D. 558) found that the authority need only look at patent demand, and need not consider latent demand in the market place. Also, the authority should limit its consideration to demand for licensed taxis. It is not obliged to consider the presence or absence of PHVs in the market.

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.

In fact at 25. in the above the judge says;

25. I cannot see that the respondent went wrong in law in having regard to what Halcrow Fox termed "latent demand", although the phrase was perhaps, in the light of the case law, an unfortunate one. In my judgment this particular ground has no validity.

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.

If you open that judgment up, copy the whole of that judgment, transfer it into Word & then search the Word document for the term 'latent demand', you will see that the crux of the judges 'beef' is that what Halcrow have called latent demand in that report is in fact patent demand.

On a number of occasions in the judgment the judge disagrees with the terminology used by Halcrow. He even refers to the case law, which I assume is what I have posted above.

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.

Halcrow used PH pick ups in their calculation for taxi SUD.

The fact that the judges viewed this as 'patent' demand merely reinforces the point that illegal PH work is viewed as taxi work.

It's also worth noting that Halcrow now include 'latent' demand in their SUD calculations. If that was outside of the law do you think they would do it?

_________________
IDFIMH

I have no argument with the first two sentences & I agree that patent demand is evidence of unmet demand.

But after that, the question that has to be established is whether that unmet demand is significant. Just because there is unmet demand does not necessarily mean that it is significant. And as per the TA 1985 s 16 it has to be significant to trigger the issue of HCVL in a restricted LA.

And Halcrow have included latent demand for a number of years - it's extra bucks - & I only quoted what the judge said.

We don't have it in Brum SUD surveys because of that case law. I think you'll find that Halcrow can do what they like with latent demand surveys, but if anyone tried to rely on it legally, they would not be able to because of that case law. So the only reason Halcrow do it is for more bucks & if stupid LAs allow it to happen, then so be it.

It just like the old school days physics concepts of latent heat of vapourisation of water, latent heat of ice, latent heat of steam etc., etc. All bloody cattle dung!!

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.

Not so.
An LA is obliged by law to issue licences.
If they don't, it is for them to show a lawful reason not to.

The presence of no unmet demand, significant or otherwise, does not compel the LA to restrict or to maintain a restriction.
They have to choose this course and they must show that they have acted lawfully.
It is not for an applicant to show that there is demand. Demand is assumed unless the evidence is to the contrary.
It is for the LA to show that there is no significant demand which is unmet.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

That's right, there has to be significant unmet demand for a council that restricts to be compelled to issue licences, but they can if they wish issue licences regardless of any survey results or not.

If there is unmet demand but it is not deemed to be significant by the surveyors, the council can continue to restrict.

There is now an algebraic formula used by some survey companies to measure significant unmet demand & the trigger point is 80. Beyond that figure there is SUD, below that figure there is no SUD.

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.

80 What?

_________________
Grandad,
To support my charity text MAYORWALK to 70085 to donate £5

80 being the result of the calculation using the formula.

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.