Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sun Apr 22, 2018 12:32 pm

All times are UTC - 1 hour [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2018 9:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:06 pm
Posts: 21359
Location: A City near Birmingham
ill 5hit up county and ask for any contact details for this "fund"

_________________
Freedom is never free


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2018 10:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:17 pm
Posts: 2115
Sounds like a good plan. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2018 9:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:06 pm
Posts: 21359
Location: A City near Birmingham
cant be "by price" that 1 CT wins about 10 runs out the same school on a fleet of 2017 plated lwb buses and cant be coincidence...


10 drivers and 10 Escorts dont come cheap either

_________________
Freedom is never free


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:17 pm
Posts: 2115
Okay, having done a bit more digging around, I remember reading a case regarding Glockner Ambulanz in Germany dating back to 2001. The similarity there was a private ambulance company providing urgent and non-urgent patient transport, competition laws and the like. a paragraph in that case stuck in my mind defining what is construed in the UK as "hire and reward". It is defined as "economic activity regardless of the status of the operator".

The Glockner case relied on case law dating back to the case of Pavlov & others in Holland, which then relied on earlier case law dating back to 1978. This link is from the Pavlov case"

74 The Court has consistently held that, in the context of competition law, the concept of an undertaking covers any entity engaged in an economic activity, regardless of the legal status of the entity or the way in which it is financed (see, in particular, Case C-41/90 Höfner and Elser [1991] ECR I-1979, paragraph 21, Joined Cases C-159/91 and C-160/91 Poucet and Pistre [1993] ECR I-637, paragraph 17, Case C-244/94 Fédération Française des Sociétés d'Assurance [1995] ECR I-4013, paragraph 14, Albany, paragraph 77, Brentjens', paragraph 77, and Drijvende Bokken, paragraph 67).

75 It has also been consistently held that any activity consisting in offering goods and services on a given market is an economic activity (Case 118/85 Commission v Italy [1987] ECR 2599, paragraph 7, and Case C-35/96 Commission v Italy [1998] ECR I-3851, paragraph 36).



So as these CT outfits are working for "economic activity" they come under the same competition laws as the rest of us! No ifs or buts, it is cast-iron case law.
It could also be argued that volunteers providing patient transport for 45p a mile and doing taxi/ph drivers out of fares are an undertaking engaged in economic activity. What they are doing is anti-competitive by avoiding licencing regulations.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2018 4:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:17 pm
Posts: 2115
There's actually several aspects to this matter. First, hire and reward. There is a basic misunderstanding across the board of the meaning of Hire and Reward. Some think if the driver isn't being paid then it's not for hire and reward, as the driver isn't being rewarded. The other is "is the vehicle being used for hire and reward?" So we can have the situation of a volunteer driver driving a CT minibus that people have paid the CT operator money to travel in. Is it hire and reward? The answer is Yes, because the operator is making a charge for it. If a PSV driver volunteers to drive a minibus for free, is he driving for hire and reward? Again the answer is Yes because the operator is getting paid for hiring the bus out.

It is only if the minibus is operated and owned by something like a scout group and makes no charge for anyone travelling that it is not for hire and reward, regardless of whether or not the driver is being paid. If the scout group charges its scouts for going out, then it is hire and reward as it is for financial activity, regardless of the status of the operator.

The operator will need a PSV O licence, a transport manager, be of financial standing and obey all the PSV regulations. the only slight difference is on a restricted licence where running a minibus is not a major part of the business. So the old folks luncheon club will need a restricted O licence if they only have one minibus, more than one is not allowed.

The other major factor is the various competition Acts both in European and UK law. As I pointed out in my previous post there's case law going back to 1979 which defines that. So when it comes to the UK Government arguing the case for keeping the s19 minibuses, case law from all round is against them. They don't have any idea of their own laws.

The simple answer for the CT operators is obey the law, get properly licenced. There's currently an unknown amount of c19 permits in issue, the DfT haven't got an idea of how many, possibly up to a million not all in use. As for drivers, they haven't got any idea. How many minibuses? Again not a clue!

As for licenced PSVs, theres about 90,000 PSVs licenced at the moment with around 120,000 psv drivers and about 70,000 operators on the books. So that gives some idea of the scale of the problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 1 hour [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 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