Taxi Driver Online :: View topic - Has the world ended?

When you say drivers surely you mean owners?

I suspect they are many more drivers happier than sadder.

Especially those that for many years have been told when and when not to work, and for that right have to give 50% of their earnings away to some fat lazy so and so.

Pedant. Owner/drivers then.

I would suggest that in Eastbourne YOUR world hasn't ended even though you STILL haven't got a plate.

Carry on driving PH Sussex .............. your obviously very good at it.

B. Lucky

The real losers in this are ultimately the public ............. deregulation forces lower standards and that's a point that has been missed by most.

The main posters on here are NOT opposed to restrictive practices, they just want the door open in a way that allows them a plate but still maintains restrictions through standards.

So can I just clarify.

The world hasn't f***ing ended.

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Sep 29, 2006 7:52 am ]
Post subject:	Has the world ended?
Since the OFT report was commissioned we have had hundreds of reports and articles about how bad de-limitation would be. Some said they would lose their houses, some said vehicles wouldn't be looked after, some say all the taxis would go PH; whilst others said all PH would go taxi. So, can someone please tell me if the world has ended, because it seems ok, in terms of the taxi/PH bit, from what I see and hear?

Author:	jimbo [ Fri Sep 29, 2006 8:40 am ]
Post subject:
Obvious, really. In de-limited areas, the drivers are working al hours to make ends meet, and are too knackered at the end of the day to look at the internet.

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Sep 29, 2006 11:47 am ]
Post subject:
When you say drivers surely you mean owners? I suspect they are many more drivers happier than sadder. Especially those that for many years have been told when and when not to work, and for that right have to give 50% of their earnings away to some fat lazy so and so.

Author:	jimbo [ Fri Sep 29, 2006 5:50 pm ]
Post subject:
Sussex wrote: When you say drivers surely you mean owners? I suspect they are many more drivers happier than sadder. Especially those that for many years have been told when and when not to work, and for that right have to give 50% of their earnings away to some fat lazy so and so. Pedant. Owner/drivers then.

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Sep 29, 2006 7:30 pm ]
Post subject:
jimbo wrote: Pedant. Owner/drivers then. And they suddenly can't work anymore? Or do they know have to work as hard as the people who use to drive for them?

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

Has the world ended? http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4464	Page 1 of 3

Author:	GA [ Fri Sep 29, 2006 9:29 pm ]
Post subject:
Sussex wrote: When you say drivers surely you mean owners? I suspect they are many more drivers happier than sadder. Especially those that for many years have been told when and when not to work, and for that right have to give 50% of their earnings away to some fat lazy so and so. This identifies where Mr Sussex has a real problem with the actual reality of the trade. Because he works in an area which has retained a restricted policy, and because in his area people buy plates as an investment rather than as a means of self employment he considers that all areas are the same. The actual reality is quite different, I cannot comment on other areas (unlike most on here) but in my own area OWNERS ARE DRIVERS. The effect of deregulation of numbers has had an effect on practically every aspect of the professional trade. In areas where local councils are not phased by threats of legal action by PH operators who see deregulation as an opportunity to increase profits, the adoption of the word "managed" seems to be a better description of what is actually required. The use of the word "taxi" is no longer used to define a Hackney Carriage as is required by Law. Ask someone if they think there is enough taxis and they will tell you they cannot get one when they want one, supporters of deregulation will lay the blame squarely at the number of Hackney Carriages where in reality at least 80% of their contact with what they perceive to be taxis actually involves Private Hire. Loopholes in the law which allow this kind of activity must be closed. I have read with interest the support against section 75 1B as it could easily be compared with the correct use of language when referring to a legitimate licenced vehicle. Perhaps as part of this campaign the correct use of the word taxi should be clearly defined and the PH operators in this country should have to name their organisations to properly describe the service they provide. The world has not ended, it is not to late to rescue the profession. Councils should be encouraged to fully manage because another threat to our profession is looming and its implications are far more restricting than limiting numbers ....................... that is the DDA. B. Lucky

Author:	Guest [ Sat Sep 30, 2006 8:55 pm ]
Post subject:
cant see it being the end of the wprld for me. i didnt buy my plate. so i have nothing to lose. plenty of people who dont drive yet own multiplates have got loads to lose. oh dear what a shame.

Author:	GA [ Sun Oct 01, 2006 7:48 pm ]
Post subject:
I think your right. Most people who have bought their plates to provide a self employed income will be of the same mind. The real losers in this are ultimately the public ............. deregulation forces lower standards and that's a point that has been missed by most. The main posters on here are NOT opposed to restrictive practices, they just want the door open in a way that allows them a plate but still maintains restrictions through standards. That's whats sick. B. Lucky

Author:	Sussex [ Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:57 pm ]
Post subject:
So can I just clarify. The world hasn't fing ended.*

Author:	GA [ Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:37 pm ]
Post subject:
How can you say the world hasn't ended when your ideal world never even started in your area. Some argument that mind. B. Lucky

Author:	GA [ Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:39 pm ]
Post subject:
I would suggest that in Eastbourne YOUR world hasn't ended even though you STILL haven't got a plate. Carry on driving PH Sussex .............. your obviously very good at it. B. Lucky

Author:	jimbo [ Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:55 pm ]
Post subject:
GA wrote: I would suggest that in Eastbourne YOUR world hasn't ended even though you STILL haven't got a plate. Carry on driving PH Sussex .............. your obviously very good at it. B. Lucky Well said,that man.

Author:	Sussex [ Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:12 pm ]
Post subject:
jimbo wrote: Well said,that man. I've got no problem at all driving a PH. My issue is that it should be me that chooses which mode of licensed vehicle I drive and own, not an out-dated piece of legislation, supported by a two-bob union and a two-bob national association.

Author:	JD [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 4:00 am ]
Post subject:
GA wrote: The real losers in this are ultimately the public ............. deregulation forces lower standards and that's a point that has been missed by most. You conveniently omit the fact that standards have always been the domain of every licensing authority in the UK and no one else. Blackpool is no doubt a shining example of the failure of a restricted authority to maintain quality vehicle standards, amongst other things but as per usual your message is full of holes and lacks the combination of both substance and fact. I think your post will be seen as following the party line of the T&G and the NTA who said exactly the same thing in 2003 and 2004 as you're saying now. However as usual the fact remains that you are a firm believer in the T&G/NTA diktat that "councils know best" so any quality control failings on behalf of Authorities such as restricted Blackpool are in complete agreement with your own philosophy. Quote: The main posters on here are NOT opposed to restrictive practices, they just want the door open in a way that allows them a plate but still maintains restrictions through standards. It is unusual to read in print the views of a local branch official of the T&G or NTA either past or present, stating that limiting numbers by way of quantity control is a "restrictive" practice? Your comments have been noted. This sites philosophy is that quantity control of vehicle licenses should be abolished. It also has a philosophy that driver licenses should be the subject of higher quality entry standards. There is a distinct difference between your philosophy and that of this site. you want to restrict vehicle licenses, where this doesn't. I doubt I am speaking out of turn when I state this site places the emphasis on "higher quality entry standards" of drivers but as yet I have yet to see proof that suggests this is what you or the two organisations I mentioned, want? I can't see any relation in this sites philosophy of high quality driver standards and that of a restrictive practice? Perhaps you can point out the defining points that make the two compatible because to me they are as different as chalk and cheese? Your quantity control philosophy in every sense of the word is without doubt a restrictive practice, as you unwittingly remind us. Aren't you glad I set your record straight? JD

Page 1 of 3	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Stinky Pete [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 4:35 am ]
Post subject:
Sussex wrote: So can I just clarify. The world hasn't fing ended.* No you got it wrong, it has ended,[for me] we are filling up with taxi drivers, Greek, Iraqi ,Turks, and Poles who are starting to rip the job apart, overchargings is now the name of the game, Councils won't get involved as the race card will be held high, standards are gone, its now dog eat dog.