Taxi Driver Online

A member sent the following advert, asking if it is legal.

I'm not sure if there is any restriction on what terminology can be used in adverts, as opposed to on a vehicle, say.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

I suppose he shouldn't use the word 'taxi' unless he really is.

If my memory serves me right, recently a London PH firm had to change their website because of a similar advert on it. They argued that they were advertising to foriegn customers and by using the word 'taxi' then customers knew what sort of service they were going to get i.e. a licensed vehicle that's able to take them from A to B.

The PCO disagreed.

_________________
IDFIMH

fancy that!

I think the problem is that advertising is specifically covered by the 98 London PH Act, possibly in response to the inadequacies in the provincial legislation, but obviously that has no application to the case in hand.

I don't have full copies of the provincial legislation, but is there anything in it that specifically addresses advertising, as in the London section below?

31. - (1) This section applies to any advertisement-

(a) indicating that vehicles can be hired on application to a specified address in London;
(b) indicating that vehicles can be hired by telephone on a telephone number being the number of premises in London; or
(c) on or near any premises in London, indicating that vehicles can be hired at those premises.
(2) No such advertisement shall include-

(a) any of the following words, namely "taxi", "taxis", "cab" or "cabs", or
(b) any word so closely resembling any of those words as to be likely to be mistaken for it,
(whether alone or as part of another word), unless the vehicles offered for hire are London cabs.

(3) An advertisement which includes the word "minicab", "mini-cab" or "mini cab" (whether in the singular or plural) does not by reason only of that fact contravene this section.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

many thanks t.d.o. for putting it on the board.my thinking is as they do not have a taxi it is incorrect advertising.but should a p/h be using the word taxi.it is licensed under east herts.

_________________
slogga

Section 48 of the 1976 Act is pretty clear in terms of what a vehicle must look like, and section 64 confirm the wording of roof-signs. But in terms of advertising it's less clear.

Maybe it's a Trading Standards issue. But if the chap has a number of vehicles, some of which are cabs, then he should be OK.

http://www.brighton-taxi.org.uk/LG(MP)A1976.PDF

_________________
IDFIMH

the problem is the adverising indudtry, take a peep for tour private hire companies name,

bet its under taxis?

and thats not thier fault

This is an advertisement for a private hire company. It is in no way, shape or form a TAXI.

A TAXI is a hackney carriage (that can pick up off the street). A private hire vehicle can only be pre - booked through an operator.

This company should not include the word TAXI in any advertisements.

A PH company in my LA got into trouble with the council for advertising TAXIS on their office window.

I don't know, but I suspect the Trade Descriptions Act may cover this sort of issue.

_________________
Visit TAXIPIX at www.taxipix.fotopic.net

You are more than likely right, but any court will decide on what Mr Average thinks. And as we know they class, rightly or wrongly, both PH and taxis in the same same boat.

_________________
IDFIMH