Taxi Driver Online
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

test purchases
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=25153		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  grandad [ Fri Sep 19, 2014 12:30 pm ]
Post subject:  test purchases
A couple of weekends ago our Council conducted some test purchases on taxis.
One driver was given 3 penalty points for "refusing a fare without suitable justification".
The situation was this. The driver was on one of our ranks with his topsign illuminated,indicating that he was available for hire. However he had a booking to go to in around 5 minutes time when he was approached by 2 people asking to be taken to a village 2 miles in the wrong direction from his booking so he informed the customers that he was unable to take them because he had this booking in the opposite direction. Does this constitute "refusing a fare without suitable justification"?
Author:  MR T [ Fri Sep 19, 2014 1:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
grandad wrote:
A couple of weekends ago our Council conducted some test purchases on taxis.
One driver was given 3 penalty points for "refusing a fare without suitable justification".
The situation was this. The driver was on one of our ranks with his topsign illuminated,indicating that he was available for hire. However he had a booking to go to in around 5 minutes time when he was approached by 2 people asking to be taken to a village 2 miles in the wrong direction from his booking so he informed the customers that he was unable to take them because he had this booking in the opposite direction. Does this constitute "refusing a fare without suitable justification"?




It certainly does..
Author:  grandad [ Fri Sep 19, 2014 1:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
MR T wrote:
grandad wrote:
A couple of weekends ago our Council conducted some test purchases on taxis.
One driver was given 3 penalty points for "refusing a fare without suitable justification".
The situation was this. The driver was on one of our ranks with his topsign illuminated,indicating that he was available for hire. However he had a booking to go to in around 5 minutes time when he was approached by 2 people asking to be taken to a village 2 miles in the wrong direction from his booking so he informed the customers that he was unable to take them because he had this booking in the opposite direction. Does this constitute "refusing a fare without suitable justification"?




It certainly does..

That's a bugger then. eusasmiles.zip
Author:  sasha [ Fri Sep 19, 2014 3:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
At the time he was indicating he was available for hire, but when a hire was attempted he refused. He should have pulled off the rank (or would turning the top light off suffice?), gone to the back of the queue or waited somewhere else.

In short he shouldn't have been plying for hire if he wasn't available.
Author:  wannabeeahack [ Fri Sep 19, 2014 5:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
what was he expecting a job to take him to his booked pickup?
Author:  grandad [ Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
wannabeeahack wrote:
what was he expecting a job to take him to his booked pickup?

It is (was) common practice here to wait until you need to leave the rank in case someone is going in the same direction.
Author:  Sussex [ Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
I think he isn't buggered and that defence, if true, is a good one.

The council are indicting his should have breached his contract with the other customer, and a court will not be happy with that.

There is no law to that says it illegal to have a roof light.
Author:  Sussex [ Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
wannabeeahack wrote:
what was he expecting a job to take him to his booked pickup?

Why not?
Author:  Chris the Fish [ Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
grandad wrote:
wannabeeahack wrote:
what was he expecting a job to take him to his booked pickup?

It is (was) common practice here to wait until you need to leave the rank in case someone is going in the same direction.

It is common practice here as well, but the Driver with the booking always tells the one behind the situation in advance and then it causes no problem. In the case of Test Purchasers they could then clarify with the next Driver.

Our byelaws, at 12, include this:

The proprietor or driver of a hackney carriage who has agreed or has been hired to be in
attendance with the carriage at an appointed time and place shall, unless delayed or
prevented by some sufficient cause, punctually attend with such carriage at such appointed
time and place.


So if I was pulled up on this I would be asking which law I should comply with, and which I should break.
Author:  sasha [ Sat Sep 20, 2014 7:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
The issue here is that the driver was indicating they were available for hire (by being on a rank with their toplight on) when they were'nt.
I could be wrong but I don't think you're even allowed to wait on a rank unless you're available for hire? :?: :?
Author:  grandad [ Sun Sep 21, 2014 1:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
sasha wrote:
The issue here is that the driver was indicating they were available for hire (by being on a rank with their toplight on) when they were'nt.
I could be wrong but I don't think you're even allowed to wait on a rank unless you're available for hire? :?: :?

There could be another twist to this in that although there are signs that say it is a taxi rank, the lines on the floor are the wrong colour.
Author:  roythebus [ Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:21 am ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
Is there a Traffic Regulation Order for it as a taxi rank? Are the signs and lines compliant as Grandad says? Look in TSRGD for the answer.
Author:  wannabeeahack [ Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:30 am ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
grandad wrote:
sasha wrote:
The issue here is that the driver was indicating they were available for hire (by being on a rank with their toplight on) when they were'nt.
I could be wrong but I don't think you're even allowed to wait on a rank unless you're available for hire? :?: :?

There could be another twist to this in that although there are signs that say it is a taxi rank, the lines on the floor are the wrong colour.




straws


clutching at
Author:  grandad [ Sun Sep 21, 2014 2:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
wannabeeahack wrote:
grandad wrote:
sasha wrote:
The issue here is that the driver was indicating they were available for hire (by being on a rank with their toplight on) when they were'nt.
I could be wrong but I don't think you're even allowed to wait on a rank unless you're available for hire? :?: :?

There could be another twist to this in that although there are signs that say it is a taxi rank, the lines on the floor are the wrong colour.




straws


clutching at

Not really.
The driver has been issued with 3 Council penalty points. He is unlikely to receive any more in the relevant period. We would, however like some clarification that the Council have done everything by the book, not forgetting that there is still some doubt as to whether our district is a controlled district under the 1976 LGMP act.
Author:  Sussex [ Sun Sep 21, 2014 5:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: test purchases
grandad wrote:
sasha wrote:
The issue here is that the driver was indicating they were available for hire (by being on a rank with their toplight on) when they were'nt.
I could be wrong but I don't think you're even allowed to wait on a rank unless you're available for hire? :?: :?

There could be another twist to this in that although there are signs that say it is a taxi rank, the lines on the floor are the wrong colour.

Then it's not a rank.
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/