| Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| New proposed fess (as if they wont change) http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=28548 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Sun Feb 14, 2016 11:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
|
|
|
| Author: | grandad [ Sun Feb 14, 2016 11:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
The DVLA check is now available as a free online check. |
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Sun Feb 14, 2016 11:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
The "2nd badge" was going to cost £10.....now its not mentioned but the replacement is £28.50 |
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Sun Feb 14, 2016 1:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
grandad wrote: The DVLA check is now available as a free online check. same answer as with DBS updates.......not in our manor |
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Sun Feb 14, 2016 5:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
Not the cost of a PH ops licence.....£70 per vehicle to 7 cars then £40, isnt this an unfair advantage to fleet owners vs owner drivers? |
|
| Author: | jimbo [ Sun Feb 14, 2016 7:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
One year operator licence? |
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Mon Feb 15, 2016 10:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
jimbo wrote: One year operator licence? is that odd? |
|
| Author: | grandad [ Mon Feb 15, 2016 1:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
wannabeeahack wrote: jimbo wrote: One year operator licence? is that odd? The deregulation act says that it should be 5 years. |
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Mon Feb 15, 2016 6:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
grandad wrote: wannabeeahack wrote: jimbo wrote: One year operator licence? is that odd? The deregulation act says that it should be 5 years. really? email ready................lol |
|
| Author: | jimbo [ Mon Feb 15, 2016 7:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
grandad wrote: wannabeeahack wrote: jimbo wrote: One year operator licence? is that odd? The deregulation act says that it should be 5 years. My turn for pedantry, grandad, not should be, must be. |
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Mon Feb 15, 2016 7:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
ACTUALLY, there is a cop-out clause... Ref last line Quote: 10 Taxis and private hire vehicles: duration of licences
(1)The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 is amended as follows. (2)In section 53 (drivers’ licences for hackney carriages and private hire vehicles)— (a)in subsection (1)(a), for “for such lesser period as the district council may specify in such licence” substitute “for such lesser period, specified in the licence, as the district council think appropriate in the circumstances of the case”; (b)in subsection (1)(b), for “for such lesser period as they may specify in such licence” substitute “for such lesser period, specified in the licence, as the district council think appropriate in the circumstances of the case”. (3)In section 55 (licensing of operators of private hire vehicles), for subsection (2) substitute— “(2)Every licence granted under this section shall remain in force for five years or for such lesser period, specified in the licence, as the district council think appropriate in the circumstances of the case.” |
|
| Author: | jimbo [ Tue Feb 16, 2016 8:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
wannabeeahack wrote: ACTUALLY, there is a cop-out clause... Ref last line Quote: 10 Taxis and private hire vehicles: duration of licences (1)The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 is amended as follows. (2)In section 53 (drivers’ licences for hackney carriages and private hire vehicles)— (a)in subsection (1)(a), for “for such lesser period as the district council may specify in such licence” substitute “for such lesser period, specified in the licence, as the district council think appropriate in the circumstances of the case”; (b)in subsection (1)(b), for “for such lesser period as they may specify in such licence” substitute “for such lesser period, specified in the licence, as the district council think appropriate in the circumstances of the case”. (3)In section 55 (licensing of operators of private hire vehicles), for subsection (2) substitute— “(2)Every licence granted under this section shall remain in force for five years or for such lesser period, specified in the licence, as the district council think appropriate in the circumstances of the case.” On an individual basis, not as a blanket policy. Your council is not even offering a five year operator licence as an option. Surely someone in licensing has access to a calculator and can multiply the one year cost by five... |
|
| Author: | grandad [ Tue Feb 16, 2016 8:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
jimbo wrote: Surely someone in licensing has access to a calculator and can multiply the one year cost by five... That was not what Government intended. If you read the transcripts from the debates on the deregulation bill as it was then it is made clear that one of the reasons for making the 5 year operators license and the 3 year drivers licens mandatory was to reduce the workload on the Councils and reduce the cost for the driver and operator. |
|
| Author: | jimbo [ Tue Feb 16, 2016 9:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
grandad wrote: jimbo wrote: Surely someone in licensing has access to a calculator and can multiply the one year cost by five... That was not what Government intended. If you read the transcripts from the debates on the deregulation bill as it was then it is made clear that one of the reasons for making the 5 year operators license and the 3 year drivers licens mandatory was to reduce the workload on the Councils and reduce the cost for the driver and operator. I was being ironic, grampy... |
|
| Author: | jimbo [ Tue Feb 16, 2016 9:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: New proposed fess (as if they wont change) |
grandad wrote: jimbo wrote: Surely someone in licensing has access to a calculator and can multiply the one year cost by five... That was not what Government intended. If you read the transcripts from the debates on the deregulation bill as it was then it is made clear that one of the reasons for making the 5 year operators license and the 3 year drivers licens mandatory was to reduce the workload on the Councils and reduce the cost for the driver and operator. I was being ironic, grampy... |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|