Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Fri May 01, 2026 12:48 am

Board index » General » Licensing and legal

All times are UTC [ DST ]



Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 3
  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
wannabeeahack
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2009 9:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
This another "technology moves faster than legislation" thread, no-one can limit where a phone call comes from, or where an advert will be seen, an "office" is a building, not a handset/phone, typical cobblers...

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57350
Location: 1066 Country
grandad wrote:
Sussex wrote:
grandad wrote:
So the problem was not where the phone call was made but where it was answered.

I think in this case it was where the phone call was made, and the fact that it was answered in a different licensing district.

IMO the method of booking is irrelevant, all that matters is that the vehicle and driver carrying out the booking are licensed in the same area as where it was answered.


The calls were made from Birmingham, the cars and drivers were licensed by Birmingham. The calls were answered in Bromsgrove.

Your reply is slightly contradictory. In the first paragraph you say about where the call was made and in the second paragraph you change to where the call was answered. :?

I'm talking about the Liverpool/Sefton issue at hand.

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57350
Location: 1066 Country
streetcars wrote:
I have no idea if Delta, are even going to appeal.

Unless they are prepared to get rid of every freephone not based in Sefton, then they will have to appeal.

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
wannabeeahack
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2009 6:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
Sussex wrote:
streetcars wrote:
I have no idea if Delta, are even going to appeal.

Unless they are prepared to get rid of every freephone not based in Sefton, then they will have to appeal.


maybe not

as ive said, the boss starts a telecom business and owns the phones, then charges to route calls to subscribers, just like any freephone number, delta being his only customer....of course

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most
Top
 Profile  
 
captain cab
PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
streetcars wrote:
A ON 29 JUNE 09 a Sefton Private hire company, was fined for not having a operators license . The Private hire company, had installed a free phone, in the visitors centre, of neighbouring authority , Liverpool Walton prison.
Judge D J Clancy said (as i understand it ).That having a free phone was the same as having a booking office , and as it was not Licenced in Liverpool. The Sefton Private hire Company was breaking the Law. He fined the private hire company £500 and made them pay £4000 costs . :oops:



My question is what case law , did he use, to determine that a free phone was the same as a booking office. :?:



what was the final outcome of this case?

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin
Top
 Profile  
 
MR T
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 9:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
captain cab wrote:
streetcars wrote:
A ON 29 JUNE 09 a Sefton Private hire company, was fined for not having a operators license . The Private hire company, had installed a free phone, in the visitors centre, of neighbouring authority , Liverpool Walton prison.
Judge D J Clancy said (as i understand it ).That having a free phone was the same as having a booking office , and as it was not Licenced in Liverpool. The Sefton Private hire Company was breaking the Law. He fined the private hire company £500 and made them pay £4000 costs . :oops:



My question is what case law , did he use, to determine that a free phone was the same as a booking office. :?:



what was the final outcome of this case?

CC

It still applies...

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 3
  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Board index » General » Licensing and legal

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 163 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group