Another questionable (in my opinion) article on seatbelts on TaxiPoint. Just skim read it for the thing I always look for, namely:
https://www.taxi-point.co.uk/post/drive ... -belt-lawsTaxiPoint wrote:
Licensed taxi drivers, when engaged in the act of 'plying for hire' or when ferrying passengers, are uniquely exempt from the requirement to wear a seat belt.
In fact, I'm quite sure the actual wording of the exemption in the regulations is:
In an earlier article, TaxiPoint wrote:
a licensed taxi while it is being used for seeking hire, or answering a call for hire, or carrying a passenger for hire
Which to me reads a bit differently to 'plying for hire'. In particular, plying for hire is defined by case law, etc, so if the regulations really do mean 'plying for hire' then why not use those words rather than 'seeking hire'?
In particular, why also make HCDs exempt when 'answering a call for hire', which presumably means a pre-booked run, and thus the HCD could be out-of-area?
To that extent I'd guess seeking hire also includes a working HCD travelling back to Fife from Dundee (say) having dropped in Dundee.
Otherwise, that would mean that if I drop drive in Dundee with POB I don't have to wear my belt, but have to put it on immediately they leave the car, because I can't ply for hire in Dundee. A couple of minutes later I could take the belt off when on the Tay Bridge, because at that point I can legitimately ply for hire
(Not sure where the Dundee/Fife boundary is, because there's no signage on the bridge itself. So presumably it's half way across, but who knows, precisely

)
And even if you assume 'seeking hire' does mean precisely the same as 'plying for hire', TaxiPoint completely fails to mention the 'answering a call for hire' exemption
