Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Thu Apr 30, 2026 5:54 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 9:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
when the restrictions on PH-PH jobswapping out of areas is gone (and seeing as there never has been any on hacks) will TDO get a "cover this job" section of members?

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 1:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
Blueknight wrote:
The person who accepted the booking in Melton (presumably that person not being dead at the time) would be guilty of "operating a private hire vehicle without a private hire operators licence" under section 46(1)(d) LG (MP) Act 1976. The operators licence in the deceased persons name is null and void.
The booking was made AFTER the license holder had died.

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 2:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:15 am
Posts: 79
Then whoever is the owner (responsible for the day to day running) of the (Melton) company when the booking was accepted and sub-contracted should be prosecuted for "operating a private hire vehicle without a private hire operators licence" under section 46(1)(d) LG (MP) Act 1976.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 4:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
grandad wrote:
Blueknight wrote:
The person who accepted the booking in Melton (presumably that person not being dead at the time) would be guilty of "operating a private hire vehicle without a private hire operators licence" under section 46(1)(d) LG (MP) Act 1976. The operators licence in the deceased persons name is null and void.
The booking was made AFTER the license holder had died.


Post Mortem even.....lol

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 4:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
Blueknight wrote:
Then whoever is the owner (responsible for the day to day running) of the (Melton) company when the booking was accepted and sub-contracted should be prosecuted for "operating a private hire vehicle without a private hire operators licence" under section 46(1)(d) LG (MP) Act 1976.


Bearing in mind that the operator died on 15 June, this was the response from the council when I asked about the operators license on 22 July.

Mr XXXXXXXX
This Operator’s Licence was applied for and granted before Mrs XXXXXXX died.
In these sensitive circumstances, changes to any licences are made in due course.

This was their response when I questioned the validity of the license on 24 July

Mr XXXXXXXX
The Operator’s Licence for XXXXX Taxis is still valid and therefore this company are able to take bookings for their Private Hire Vehicle.

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 6:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
grandad wrote:
Blueknight wrote:
Then whoever is the owner (responsible for the day to day running) of the (Melton) company when the booking was accepted and sub-contracted should be prosecuted for "operating a private hire vehicle without a private hire operators licence" under section 46(1)(d) LG (MP) Act 1976.


Bearing in mind that the operator died on 15 June, this was the response from the council when I asked about the operators license on 22 July.

Mr XXXXXXXX
This Operator’s Licence was applied for and granted before Mrs XXXXXXX died.
In these sensitive circumstances, changes to any licences are made in due course.

This was their response when I questioned the validity of the license on 24 July

Mr XXXXXXXX
The Operator’s Licence for XXXXX Taxis is still valid and therefore this company are able to take bookings for their Private Hire Vehicle.



sorted then

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Aberdeen
I have to wonder how a licence in the name of a corpse can possibly be valid :?

And if it is, how said corpse can then be guilty of an offence?

_________________
Image
http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 8:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57349
Location: 1066 Country
gusmac wrote:
I have to wonder how a licence in the name of a corpse can possibly be valid :?

And if it is, how said corpse can then be guilty of an offence?

World's gone f***ing mad.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 11:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
Sussex wrote:
gusmac wrote:
I have to wonder how a licence in the name of a corpse can possibly be valid :?

And if it is, how said corpse can then be guilty of an offence?

World's gone f***ing mad.

Nah, just our Council.

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2014 8:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
gusmac wrote:
I have to wonder how a licence in the name of a corpse can possibly be valid :?

And if it is, how said corpse can then be guilty of an offence?


Hope hes paying his income tax and stamp

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 1:39 pm
Posts: 1582
grandad wrote:
Sussex wrote:
gusmac wrote:
I have to wonder how a licence in the name of a corpse can possibly be valid :?

And if it is, how said corpse can then be guilty of an offence?

World's gone f***ing mad.

Nah, just our Council.



If you get no joy from licensing,complain to legal,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
make a citizens arrest

:lol:

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yet again
PostPosted: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 1:39 pm
Posts: 1582
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And if it is, how said corpse can then be guilty of an offence?

World's gone f***ing mad.

Nah, just our Council.



If you get no joy from licensing,complain to legal,[/quote]

You should ask,
On the basis that the council has a duty of care not only as a public body but under the corporate manslaughter act would you please explain how it is possible for a dead person to hold an operator licence in a business that is running under that licence issued by yourselves.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 198 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