Taxi Driver Online

I need to submit to my local council as many valid reasons as possible, as to why it would not be in the consumers interest for them to De-Regulate.

Where can I find case history on councils that have De-Regulated in the past, and found it to have a negative affect for the consumer.

Many Thanks.

flech.

nowhere, you are stuck on this one pal.

...................But thats not what your council are asking, abondon this line as it will lead to heartache. because your council will check up and get another tale from the council concerned.

start by running off the OFT report, then run off the standing committee report, there you have all the answers and cross your fingures that you can win......................

I am at the moment try to get the council to issue some more plates we only have 50 HC with a population of 165,000 and i can not afford to pay £55,000

What council do you work with Fletcher?

_________________
IDFIMH

Well if you want impartial evidence on the consumer angle then don't bother with the Transport Committee report because it never even pretended to be impartial and didn't even bother inviting a consumer representative as a witness.

The T&G's journal Cab Trade News reported that T&G and Select Committee member Clive Efford was advising T&G members at the T&G-organised lobby of Parliament, so no prizes for guessing where his sentiments lie, and that was reflected in the Transport Committee's hearing and report.

Indeed, the Committee does not seem to have much knowledge of the myriad issues that they investigate, which is perhaps not surprising, but this is hardly satisfactory.

On publication of the Committee's recent report on the UK rail industry, a report in The Guardian as said:

Senior rail industry figures complained that the report oversimplified the network's problems and ignored complex legislation that tied their hands. One said: "This is the sort of thing you'd expect from a taxi driver or a hairdresser. It's lightweight and superficial stuff from a few old Labour warhorses."

Bit ironic that comment about taxi drivers!

Remember too that the Committee's report seemed to have zero impact with the Government, which said:

The Government agrees that consumers should enjoy the benefits of competition in the taxi market and considers that it is detrimental to those seeking entry to a market if it is restricted. The Government is therefore strongly encouraging all those local authorities who still maintain quantity restrictions to remove restrictions as soon as possible.

Go on and stick the knife in and twist, I suppose your advice is impartial?
the lad needs evidence to support restriction in numbers, whilst some of us dont agree with this it is fair that we tell him where to look and how to go about assembling his evidence.

your line Dusty, is just bloody unhelpful!

Geoff

I have been asking for many years why councils restrict, and have yet to receive anything near a reasonable justification.

So Fletcher, I believe you may have a struggle on your hands. But please don't do the usual thing and put your hard earned cash into the hands of solicitors promising you the earth.

The recent £25,000 bill the lads at Reading received, is proof enough that if a council wishes to de-limit, then they can and will very easily.

I would try and come to an accommodation with the council on standards, such as the taxi test, or compulsory WAVs. That way the trade will then be for the trade, not the hangers on that thrive on quotas.

_________________
IDFIMH

tHAT IS BECAUSE THE REASONS ARE NOW REDUNDANT!

When the first motorised taxi hit the road all justification went.

though one thing is clear Sussex you dont know your history!

Geoff

What do you mean stick the knife in and twist, you make it sound like the Govt de-limited nationally!

Since I can't for the life of me think of any way in which restricted numbers help consumers, or that de-restricting is detrimental to consumers, then I wasn't trying to advise the orginal questioner, and I can't see how you can possibly think that I was.

My point was regarding the efficacy of the Transport Committee report, since many in the trade seem to view it as the be-all and end-all of taxi regulation, while it's anything but.

The only credible bits of it report were the parts which largely parroted the T&G's criticisms of OFT study.

But the Govt was clearly unimpressed.

Justifications for keeping restrictions :
Whilst I dont agree with restrictions I can see the justifications :

Liverpool removed restrictions some time back and there was total chaos.
Drivers did not renew their badges, did not renew their plates (MOTs) and a lot drove without valid insurance.
Ripping off passengers was the norm.
It ended up that drivers worked only at weekends and had other jobs during the week.
The council had no control as they did not know who the drivers were and where they lived etc.
Vehicles were abandoned.
End result ?
Council restricted numbers again.

How many of those extra plates issued in Liverpool were handed back, if it was so bad? The ones that are currently valued at £30,000.

If the council had no control, then that is evidence of crap licensing officialdom, nothing else.

Surely no one can say that just because you stop at 1400 licenses, then everything is suddenly 'fine and dandy'.

By de-restricting, the council got more licenses issued over-night (I think it was about 800 extra) than they could have possibly got issued by the farcical 'managed growth' policy, in 50 years.

It's just a shame that Liverpool council lost their bottle.

_________________
IDFIMH

No,
I dont make it sound like that at all, a plea for help from a comerade could have been more sympathetic, he may have more in his car than in his house, whilst I am a sympathiser of abondoning restriction by numbers it does cost some individuals an intolable cost both financial and human and too many times we forget this.

you may lambast the standing committee all you want, and come out with mouthy words, the fact though is that despite it being government policy to remove restrictions, as witnessed by promises in regulatory reform they didnt.

please spare us from the bollox.

Geoff

Quite.

I REPEAT, the post in question was not directly in reply to the initial enquiry, but was on the sub-topic of the Select Comm hearing and report.

The site's postion on equitable de-limitation was outlined in the following piece several months ago, and there seemed to be no need for further comment on the subject now:

http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/money.htm