cabbyman wrote:
....In borough other than their licensed area. Legal or Not? Any court cases?
In my view it matters not where the phone is, just where it is answered.
| Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| PHV freephones http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=14897 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | cabbyman [ Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | PHV freephones |
....In borough other than their licensed area. Legal or Not? Any court cases? |
|
| Author: | Nigel [ Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: PHV freephones |
cabbyman wrote: ....In borough other than their licensed area. Legal or Not? Any court cases?
Sticky wicket time. |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Wed Sep 15, 2010 7:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: PHV freephones |
cabbyman wrote: ....In borough other than their licensed area. Legal or Not? Any court cases?
In my view it matters not where the phone is, just where it is answered.
|
|
| Author: | mancityfan [ Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
BROMSGROVE VS MURTAGH |
|
| Author: | mancityfan [ Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
She was wholly licensed in Bromsgrove, but had nine freephones across the border in Birmingham. Birmingham City Council maintained and insisted that those freephones had to be served by Birmingham licensed drivers and vehicles. Acting under some pressure, Mrs Murtagh acceded to Birmingham's request to obtain an operator licence from Birmingham, and licensed half her vehicles and drivers with Birmingham. Birmingham and Bromsgrove then embarked on a squabble as to who had the right of it, with Mrs Murtagh in effect being treated as pig in the middle. After some ten years Bromsgrove successfully prosecuted Mrs Murtagh, who then promptly moved her entire operation into Birmingham. |
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
mancityfan wrote: She was wholly licensed
in Bromsgrove, but had nine freephones across the border in Birmingham. Birmingham City Council maintained and insisted that those freephones had to be served by Birmingham licensed drivers and vehicles. Acting under some pressure, Mrs Murtagh acceded to Birmingham's request to obtain an operator licence from Birmingham, and licensed half her vehicles and drivers with Birmingham. Birmingham and Bromsgrove then embarked on a squabble as to who had the right of it, with Mrs Murtagh in effect being treated as pig in the middle. After some ten years Bromsgrove successfully prosecuted Mrs Murtagh, who then promptly moved her entire operation into Birmingham. Q. if she had NO licensed vehicles, ONLY operated a 0800 number booking service and only passed work to hacks ANYWHERE would she still have been illegal? |
|
| Author: | mancityfan [ Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
a hack does not need a op licence ,the case refers to private hire and the question was is their any court cases? |
|
| Author: | cabbyman [ Wed Sep 15, 2010 8:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Cheers MCF. To reiterate: PHV licensed area A, company Operators licence area A, freephone Area B. Jobs likely area B to area B. Legal precedents? Please, no conjecture; Facts would be wonderful... 
|
|
| Author: | mancityfan [ Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
In the East Staffordshire case, Mr Rendell was wholly licensed by Derbyshire Dales. His partner Mrs McCartin lived 50 yards away from him, but on the other side of a bridge which marked the boundary between East Staffordshire and Derbyshire Dales. The two partners, McCartin and Rendell, were in the habit in the daily course of their business of transferring their telephone line between each other when they were out on a job. The courts held that transferring the line from Derbyshire Dales to East Staffordshire without having an East Staffordshire operator licence, and consequently vehicles and drivers also licensed by East Staffordshire, was unlawful |
|
| Author: | mancityfan [ Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
In the case of Mr Powers, all his vehicles and his office were licensed in Stratford-upon-Avon, but because this was not a 24-hour operation Mr Powers diverted his telephone number to his house in Bromsgrove, and was therefore making a provision in Bromsgrove, for which he required an operator licence. This worked fine, as long as Mr Powers had some vehicles licensed by Bromsgrove. However, once he had got rid of those licences and concentrated on Stratford alone, the council at Bromsgrove refused to renew his operator licence because under such licence he could only use Bromsgrove licensed vehicles and drivers, and has he had none of those it was inappropriate to give him a licence. His appeal against that decision failed. |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
cabbyman wrote: Cheers MCF.
To reiterate: PHV licensed area A, company Operators licence area A, freephone Area B. Jobs likely area B to area B. Legal precedents? Please, no conjecture; Facts would be wonderful... http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/vie ... php?t=4660 |
|
| Author: | MR T [ Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/vie ... ight=delta |
|
| Author: | cabbyman [ Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks for that, Peeps, particularly Mr T. Do we know if Delta ever appealed their case? |
|
| Author: | MR T [ Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
cabbyman wrote: Thanks for that, Peeps, particularly Mr T.
Do we know if Delta ever appealed their case? Not that I know of.
|
|
| Author: | cabbyman [ Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thank you. That is a great help. Cheers everyone. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|