Taxi Driver Online :: View topic - NTA's response to DfT draft best practice

The premiums that are said to change hands do of course reflect a goodwill element often e.g. membership of a radio circuit.

The premiums that are said to change hands do of coursereflect a goodwill element

The premium is essentially irrelevant.

Can't remember if this has been posted before, but I can't recall it offhand:

The Association believes that there is a burden now being placed on local authorities to delimit. That is not in accordance with the statement made by Mr Rupert Cope of the Department for Transport following the OFT report nor paragraph 5 of the Government's Response to the OFT report dated 18th March 2004. A recent statement by his successor is placing a burden that was not originally imposed. Local authorities ought to have sole discretion although they should of course justify themselves. The Association believes that surveys are just as important in deciding whether to issue licences as they are in deciding whether not to issue licences. The premiums that are said to change hands do of coursereflect a goodwill element often e.g. membership of a radio circuit. They do show a commitment to the trade and heighten standards. The question of course is not whether a premium is paid but whether there are sufficient taxis to meet public demand. The premium is essentially irrelevant. The Association strongly disagrees with the proposition that peaked demand should be looked at very seriously when looking at numbers. It is rather like saying that a department store, which brings in Christmas staff ought to keep the same staff all year round.

The Association believes that there is a burden now being placed on local authorities to delimit. That is not in accordance with the statement made by Mr Rupert Cope of the Department for Transport following the OFT report...

...nor paragraph 5 of the Government's Response to the OFT report dated 18th March 2004.

A recent statement by his successor is placing a burden that was not originally imposed.

Local authorities ought to have sole discretion although they should of course justify themselves. The Association believes that surveys are just as important in deciding whether to issue licences as they are in deciding whether not to issue licences.

The premiums that are said to change hands do of coursereflect a goodwill element often e.g. membership of a radio circuit.

They do show a commitment to the trade and heighten standards.

The question of course is not whether a premium is paid but whether there are sufficient taxis to meet public demand.

The premium is essentially irrelevant.

The Association strongly disagrees with the proposition that peaked demand should be looked at very seriously when looking at numbers. It is rather like saying that a department store, which brings in Christmas staff ought to keep the same staff all year round

why has this post occured now months after the information was made public?

Captain Cab

I'm surprised the NTA mentioned plate premium Goodwill, especially after Bellamy spelt it out in no uncertain terms in the Royden case. There are one or two issues that I disagree with in the NTA response but there are also several items that are neutral as far as I'm concerned and I wouldn't disagree with them just for the sake of being argumentative.

I don't agree with them on the 12 month driver license proposal, my own opinion is that there is no reason why a license should not run for for two or three years or even longer. The NTA position is that they fear criminals may slip through the net by not disclosing offences but there is nothing to stop the local authority issuing yearly statutory declaration forms, which is the case now in many authorities.

This response is now water under the bridge and the best guidance will be issued soon so the input from the NTA would have already been digested and so would that of my own.

Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 5:43 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i see three times as many people have looked at the big brother thread than this nta one.
_________________

Author:	TDO [ Mon May 29, 2006 11:05 pm ]
Post subject:	NTA's response to DfT draft best practice
Can't remember if this has been posted before, but I can't recall it offhand: The Association believes that there is a burden now being placed on local authorities to delimit. That is not in accordance with the statement made by Mr Rupert Cope of the Department for Transport following the OFT report nor paragraph 5 of the Government's Response to the OFT report dated 18th March 2004. A recent statement by his successor is placing a burden that was not originally imposed. Local authorities ought to have sole discretion although they should of course justify themselves. The Association believes that surveys are just as important in deciding whether to issue licences as they are in deciding whether not to issue licences. The premiums that are said to change hands do of coursereflect a goodwill element often e.g. membership of a radio circuit. They do show a commitment to the trade and heighten standards. The question of course is not whether a premium is paid but whether there are sufficient taxis to meet public demand. The premium is essentially irrelevant. The Association strongly disagrees with the proposition that peaked demand should be looked at very seriously when looking at numbers. It is rather like saying that a department store, which brings in Christmas staff ought to keep the same staff all year round.

Author:	Sussex [ Tue May 30, 2006 8:19 am ]
Post subject:	Re: NTA's response to DfT draft best practice
TDO wrote: The premiums that are said to change hands do of course reflect a goodwill element often e.g. membership of a radio circuit. Well I'm a member of a radio circuit, there are cabs in 70% of the country on radio circuits, and none of them have nor need a premium to answer the radio.

Author:	Sussex [ Tue May 30, 2006 8:20 am ]
Post subject:	Re: NTA's response to DfT draft best practice
TDO wrote: The premiums that are said to change hands do of coursereflect a goodwill element I was going to go into detail on this one, but perhaps 'lying c***s' best sums it up.

Author:	Sussex [ Tue May 30, 2006 8:23 am ]
Post subject:	Re: NTA's response to DfT draft best practice
TDO wrote: The premium is essentially irrelevant. So we will now have no more scare-mongering and doom-mongering when a council de-limit.

Author:	captain cab [ Tue May 30, 2006 8:38 am ]
Post subject:
http://www.national-taxi-association.co ... dlines.pdf the complete response Captain Cab

Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

NTA's response to DfT draft best practice http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3768	Page 1 of 1

Author:	JD [ Tue May 30, 2006 9:30 am ]
Post subject:	Re: NTA's response to DfT draft best practice
TDO wrote: Can't remember if this has been posted before, but I can't recall it offhand: The Association believes that there is a burden now being placed on local authorities to delimit. That is not in accordance with the statement made by Mr Rupert Cope of the Department for Transport following the OFT report nor paragraph 5 of the Government's Response to the OFT report dated 18th March 2004. A recent statement by his successor is placing a burden that was not originally imposed. Local authorities ought to have sole discretion although they should of course justify themselves. The Association believes that surveys are just as important in deciding whether to issue licences as they are in deciding whether not to issue licences. The premiums that are said to change hands do of coursereflect a goodwill element often e.g. membership of a radio circuit. They do show a commitment to the trade and heighten standards. The question of course is not whether a premium is paid but whether there are sufficient taxis to meet public demand. The premium is essentially irrelevant. The Association strongly disagrees with the proposition that peaked demand should be looked at very seriously when looking at numbers. It is rather like saying that a department store, which brings in Christmas staff ought to keep the same staff all year round. I'm surprised the NTA mentioned plate premium Goodwill, especially after Bellamy spelt it out in no uncertain terms in the Royden case. There are one or two issues that I disagree with in the NTA response but there are also several items that are neutral as far as I'm concerned and I wouldn't disagree with them just for the sake of being argumentative. I don't agree with them on the 12 month driver license proposal, my own opinion is that there is no reason why a license should not run for for two or three years or even longer. The NTA position is that they fear criminals may slip through the net by not disclosing offences but there is nothing to stop the local authority issuing yearly statutory declaration forms, which is the case now in many authorities. This response is now water under the bridge and the best guidance will be issued soon so the input from the NTA would have already been digested and so would that of my own. Regards JD

Author:	TDO [ Tue May 30, 2006 6:13 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: NTA's response to DfT draft best practice
NTA wrote: The Association believes that there is a burden now being placed on local authorities to delimit. That is not in accordance with the statement made by Mr Rupert Cope of the Department for Transport following the OFT report... I can't remember that one Quote: ...nor paragraph 5 of the Government's Response to the OFT report dated 18th March 2004. Of course, no mention of para 4 which said: The Government is therefore stronly encouraging all those local authorities who still maintain quantity restrictions to remove restrictions as soon as possible. Quote: A recent statement by his successor is placing a burden that was not originally imposed. The only incosistency subsequent to the Govt's response has been when statements have been made there are a bit less hawkish than the response itself, so I don't think the NTA should be complaining. Quote: Local authorities ought to have sole discretion although they should of course justify themselves. The Association believes that surveys are just as important in deciding whether to issue licences as they are in deciding whether not to issue licences. So that's a brief statment of the applicable law, so why make it sound like something else? Quote: The premiums that are said to change hands do of coursereflect a goodwill element often e.g. membership of a radio circuit. Slight contradiction - one minute they are just 'said' to change hands, but then they become a bit more concrete. OK, membership positions in radio circuits may be traded, but who has ever mentioned them and who has a problem with them? To equate this with plate premiums is to mislead. Quote: They do show a commitment to the trade and heighten standards. They certainly show a financial committment, but this can just as well exist alongside an endless treadmill of part-time/'between jobs' drivers. As for standards, what about places like Blackpool? Or the watering down of standards to facilitate the treadmill mentioned above? Quote: The question of course is not whether a premium is paid but whether there are sufficient taxis to meet public demand. A premium reflects excess profits, which means they are coming out of someone's pocket, so isn't that a question that should be addressed as well? Quote: The premium is essentially irrelevant. So NTA members in restricted areas are selling plates for Jack? Quote: The Association strongly disagrees with the proposition that peaked demand should be looked at very seriously when looking at numbers. It is rather like saying that a department store, which brings in Christmas staff ought to keep the same staff all year round So the NTA thinks that government should allow market forces to dictate shop staff numbers, but not as regards the taxi trade. I wonder why that is? I love it when analogies like this are used, because quite often it just underlines the hypocrisy of those drawing them. $\:D/$

Author:	captain cab [ Tue May 30, 2006 8:03 pm ]
Post subject:
why has this post occured now months after the information was made public? Captain Cab

Author:	TDO [ Tue May 30, 2006 8:16 pm ]
Post subject:
captain cab wrote: why has this post occured now months after the information was made public? Captain Cab I personally hadn't seen it before, but your new signature prompted me to visit the shiny new NTA website, where I found the document. So thanks for that

Author:	JD [ Tue May 30, 2006 8:41 pm ]
Post subject:
captain cab wrote: why has this post occured now months after the information was made public? Captain Cab First time i've seen it, where and when was it published and who wrote it? You have to admit that Dusty has raised some valid points, maybe the gentleman who wrote this NTA response could answer those points raised? To be quite honest in many respects I think the author is being economical with the facts. I suspect that's understandable when you a have an agenda to follow but it does not make it right? Regards JD

Author:	captain cab [ Tue May 30, 2006 9:00 pm ]
Post subject:
TDO & JD the response was a result of the consultation being sent to individual member associations, with the result being the accumulated or majority view. It was then sent to member associations prior to being sent to the DFT and was discussed during the closed session of the AGM during October 05. regards Captain Cab

Author:	captain cab [ Tue May 30, 2006 10:17 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: I'm surprised the NTA mentioned plate premium Goodwill, especially after Bellamy spelt it out in no uncertain terms in the Royden case. There are one or two issues that I disagree with in the NTA response but there are also several items that are neutral as far as I'm concerned and I wouldn't disagree with them just for the sake of being argumentative. I don't agree with them on the 12 month driver license proposal, my own opinion is that there is no reason why a license should not run for for two or three years or even longer. The NTA position is that they fear criminals may slip through the net by not disclosing offences but there is nothing to stop the local authority issuing yearly statutory declaration forms, which is the case now in many authorities. This response is now water under the bridge and the best guidance will be issued soon so the input from the NTA would have already been digested and so would that of my own. However, going back to JD's remarks. It may shock you to find out that my views are exactly the same as yours in view of stat decs. Just goes to show how much influence I have Captain Cab

Author:	Guest [ Wed May 31, 2006 5:43 pm ]
Post subject:
i see three times as many people have looked at the big brother thread than this nta one.

Author:	captain cab [ Thu Jun 01, 2006 1:03 am ]
Post subject:
Quote: Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 5:43 pm Post subject: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i see three times as many people have looked at the big brother thread than this nta one. _________________ I see three times as many watching Carlisle as opposed to Brighton and I dont go ranting and raving about it Captain Cab

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/