Displaying PH Licence and Touting

wannabeeahack · **Posted:** Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:09 am

Sussex wrote:

lfc_taxi wrote:

blimey, im finding taxi driving to be a bit of a mine field! Maybe i should of told them to just phone a local cab company rather than saying call our number.. ill have to button my lip in future

Can't see anything wrong with you saying ring this number, as long as they approach you for those details.

and if the number diverts to the drivers mobile?

arghhhhh, seize the infidel, hang by the neck until dead!

JD · **Joined:** Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm **Posts:** 10381

Tulsablue wrote:

1. Do I have to display my PH badge when driving the car on personal use i.e just going to the shop, going to the recycling site or away for a couple of days?.

Surprisingly there appears to be no related case law on that particular scenario and I've always thought that it would be a good excuse if you are ever caught without your badge, providing your for hire light was turned off.

I suppose one train of thought relies on the premise that if your not working you don't require your badge but another might suggest that while driving a licensed vehicle you need your badge at all times? Another ambiguity thrown up by outdated legislation.

Quote:

2. Is my vehicle parked outside my house (or friends house) displaying the name and phone number considered "touting" in the event that a neighbour or passer by asks for a quote/business card etc.

Oddly enough in years gone by drivers of empty vehicles have been deemed to be plying for hire when empty but those convictions were all down to the particular circumstances. Parking a vehicle outside your house or your neighbours house would not constitute plying for hire, unless you had a sign up saying vehicle for hire or something similar. I would however not leave your vehicle parked near to a hot dog stand adjacent to a taxi rank for any length of time otherwise you might get your collar felt as did one particular person.

In respect of giving your friend a business card at his request I would have thought it perfectly lawful and did not constitute touting but if you were to hand out your business card to a complete stranger while you were in your vehicle for the purpose of immediate hire then that might be another matter. I've always wondered why posting cards through letter boxes has never been challenged in court. If it had then we might have got an extended judgment giving guidance on the whole area relating to handing out business cards. Is there any difference in posting cards through a letter box and handing them out on the street?

All interesting stuff and it all boils down to advertising but if a private hire operator can legally advertise their business in the press and other forms of media including legitimately in telephone kiosks then is there any real difference between that and handing out cards on a public street? I suppose the courts might say yes and that it amounts to touting but there is not a lot of difference between that and posting cards through a letter box.

Regards

JD

MR T · **Joined:** Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm **Posts:** 8529

JD wrote:

Tulsablue wrote:

1. Do I have to display my PH badge when driving the car on personal use i.e just going to the shop, going to the recycling site or away for a couple of days?.

Surprisingly there appears to be no related case law on that particular scenario and I've always thought that it would be a good excuse if you are ever caught without your badge, providing your for hire light was turned off.

I suppose one train of thought relies on the premise that if your not working you don't require your badge but another might suggest that while driving a licensed vehicle you need your badge at all times? Another ambiguity thrown up by outdated legislation.

Quote:

2. Is my vehicle parked outside my house (or friends house) displaying the name and phone number considered "touting" in the event that a neighbour or passer by asks for a quote/business card etc.

Oddly enough in years gone by drivers of empty vehicles have been deemed to be plying for hire when empty but those convictions were all down to the particular circumstances. Parking a vehicle outside your house or your neighbours house would not constitute plying for hire, unless you had a sign up saying vehicle for hire or something similar. I would however not leave your vehicle parked near to a hot dog stand adjacent to a taxi rank for any length of time otherwise you might get your collar felt as did one particular person.

In respect of giving your friend a business card at his request I would have thought it perfectly lawful and did not constitute touting but if you were to hand out your business card to a complete stranger while you were in your vehicle for the purpose of immediate hire then that might be another matter. I've always wondered why posting cards through letter boxes has never been challenged in court. If it had then we might have got an extended judgment giving guidance on the whole area relating to handing out business cards. Is there any difference in posting cards through a letter box and handing them out on the street?

All interesting stuff and it all boils down to advertising but if a private hire operator can legally advertise their business in the press and other forms of media including legitimately in telephone kiosks then is there any real difference between that and handing out cards on a public street? I suppose the courts might say yes and that it amounts to touting but there is not a lot of difference between that and posting cards through a letter box.

Regards

JD

Some other variables might apply.... a Liverpool private hire will be tested and issued with a standard MoT regarding the mechanics of the vehicle and then pass the council's compliance test........... but in Sefton we are not issued with an MoT certificate.... the licence becomes the pass certificate or your MoT if you like. so if you have a MoT certificate and insurance that covers you for private use, would you be breaking the law even though we know that once a private hire vehicle has been Licenced, it is still licensed until the licence is surrendered or expires, now we know, that except for a few exceptions, only a Licence private hire driver can drive that vehicle, so it must come down to the conditions of Licence the driver operates under. whether or not your council states that you must wear your badge .. you could always remove your plate from your vehicle, but then you might be breaking another condition of Licence,ie your plate must always be displayed..IMO..

wannabeeahack · **Posted:** Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:20 pm

some (jobsworth) councils issue a "certificate of compliance" instead of a MOT pass cert..

and whereas some require brand new vehicles to be tested, this council (here) only require the vehicle have a current valid MOT certificate, and not even that till 3 years old...

MR T · **Joined:** Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm **Posts:** 8529

[quote="wannabeeahack"]some (jobsworth) councils issue a "certificate of compliance" instead of a MOT pass cert..

](*,)

And what disadvantage do you see this to be..

Sussex · **Posted:** Wed Jul 02, 2008 7:07 pm

MR T wrote:

And what disadvantage do you see this to be..

Saved me asking.

wannabeeahack · **Posted:** Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:10 pm

from my perspective it introduces another level of unwanted paperwork and blood-minded beurocracy, this "trade" is split in two already (PH vs Hack) then also about 2000 variations of fees and other bickering and back stabbing caused by regionalised red tape, divide and conquer? you bet, plus make 100's or 1000's of jobs for council staff who basically just juggle paperwork at YOUR expense...

a car gets a test, it should get a vosa test certificate.....instead of the owner having to go cap in hand for a MOT certificate should he decide to take the vehicle off the circuit/trade/job...

face it, we have a 2008/new millenium trade with the highest tech vehicles and equipment (gps, tracking, phones, PDA's) and are governed under pony and trap legislation which MUST be coming to the end of its days...

captain cab · **Posted:** Thu Jul 03, 2008 9:16 pm

JD wrote:

Tulsablue wrote:

1. Do I have to display my PH badge when driving the car on personal use i.e just going to the shop, going to the recycling site or away for a couple of days?.

Surprisingly there appears to be no related case law on that particular scenario and I've always thought that it would be a good excuse if you are ever caught without your badge, providing your for hire light was turned off.

I suppose one train of thought relies on the premise that if your not working you don't require your badge but another might suggest that while driving a licensed vehicle you need your badge at all times? Another ambiguity thrown up by outdated legislation.

Quote:

2. Is my vehicle parked outside my house (or friends house) displaying the name and phone number considered "touting" in the event that a neighbour or passer by asks for a quote/business card etc.

Oddly enough in years gone by drivers of empty vehicles have been deemed to be plying for hire when empty but those convictions were all down to the particular circumstances. Parking a vehicle outside your house or your neighbours house would not constitute plying for hire, unless you had a sign up saying vehicle for hire or something similar. I would however not leave your vehicle parked near to a hot dog stand adjacent to a taxi rank for any length of time otherwise you might get your collar felt as did one particular person.

In respect of giving your friend a business card at his request I would have thought it perfectly lawful and did not constitute touting but if you were to hand out your business card to a complete stranger while you were in your vehicle for the purpose of immediate hire then that might be another matter. I've always wondered why posting cards through letter boxes has never been challenged in court. If it had then we might have got an extended judgment giving guidance on the whole area relating to handing out business cards. Is there any difference in posting cards through a letter box and handing them out on the street?

All interesting stuff and it all boils down to advertising but if a private hire operator can legally advertise their business in the press and other forms of media including legitimately in telephone kiosks then is there any real difference between that and handing out cards on a public street? I suppose the courts might say yes and that it amounts to touting but there is not a lot of difference between that and posting cards through a letter box.

Regards

JD

I think I disagree with you on the first point JD.

The vehicle is always a licensed vehicle and therefore the answer must surely be that the driver must wear the badge.

And the guy shouldnt have a hire light if he's a PHV?

I do agree with your second point though :shock:

CC

Boggins · **Joined:** Fri Apr 18, 2008 9:30 am **Posts:** 141

I cant see the need to wear a badge if your not on Private Hire work...its you that is Badged to drive any Private Hire Vehicle as long as your Insured to do so, its quite seperate from the Vehicle being licenced, its you that has the PH Driver Licence that goes with that badge. If you looked at it that way itd would mean youd eat, sleep, bathe, hump and live with your badge on as it states Badges must be worn at all times...this only applys of course to when your Working...and in the same way if your PH vehicle is not "Working" you shouldnt need to wear a drivers Badge. I have taken my Vehicles on holiday several times and for about 5% of the time its used for my Personal use and my accountant allows for this and the Vehicle Insurance also allows personal and Pleasure use. so its only a A badge of Status if your actually taking Passengers...after all you know who you are and you dont need a badge to prove to yourself in the rearveiw mirror that it really is you.....

captain cab · **Posted:** Fri Jul 04, 2008 1:24 am

Boggins wrote:

I cant see the need to wear a badge if your not on Private Hire work...its you that is Badged to drive any Private Hire Vehicle as long as your Insured to do so, its quite seperate from the Vehicle being licenced, its you that has the PH Driver Licence that goes with that badge. If you looked at it that way itd would mean youd eat, sleep, bathe, hump and live with your badge on as it states Badges must be worn at all times...this only applys of course to when your Working...and in the same way if your PH vehicle is not "Working" you shouldnt need to wear a drivers Badge. I have taken my Vehicles on holiday several times and for about 5% of the time its used for my Personal use and my accountant allows for this and the Vehicle Insurance also allows personal and Pleasure use. so its only a A badge of Status if your actually taking Passengers...after all you know who you are and you dont need a badge to prove to yourself in the rearveiw mirror that it really is you.....

Very true, but as I am sure JD will point us to Benson vs. Boyce somewhere along the line.

CC

captain cab · **Posted:** Fri Jul 04, 2008 1:25 am

Hump ?

and here's me a nice catholic boy, perish the thought :lol:

CC

grandad · **Joined:** Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm **Posts:** 20130

captain cab wrote:

Hump ?

and here's me a nice catholic boy, perish the thought :lol:

CC

If "nice catholic boys" don't hump, how come "nice catholic girls" have so many kids? :wink:

JD · **Joined:** Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm **Posts:** 10381

captain cab wrote:

I think I disagree with you on the first point JD.

Why would you do that? lol

Which point, This one?

I suppose one train of thought relies on the premise that if your not working you don't require your badge.

Or this one....

but another might suggest that while driving a licensed vehicle you need your badge at all times? Another ambiguity thrown up by outdated legislation.

I merely presented two scenarios, each posing a difference of opinion that people might harbour. I don't have a rigid opinion on the matter myself because I don't know the answer. However if we care to examine the legislation a little further you will notice that provision is made for private hire licenses in section 51 to 54 of the l1976 act and it relies on councils to place their own conditions on the wearing of badges, therefore I'm minded to believe that a court of law would lean towards what is stated in the conditions of license. I wouldn't mind betting that nearly every council in England and Wales has a reference to badges in their private hire conditions stating when a badge must be worn. Likewise hackney carriage driver byelaws.

What do you think?

Quote:

The vehicle is always a licensed vehicle and therefore the answer must surely be that the driver must wear the badge.

I'm not as sure as you for the reasons I have just mentioned, for example a condition of license might say the following.

"driving for Private Hire purposes a driver must at all times keep his photo badge and licence number on display so that passengers in the vehicle can clearly confirm the status of a licensed driver to their satisfaction, Such badge must be produced to a Police Constable or Officer of the Council for inspection on demand."

Now to me, that suggests that there are other purposes a driver might drive for other than private hire. One of those purposes in fact the only purpose would be for pleasure and according to that paragraph you don't need to wear a badge. In fact the purpose of wearing a badge is recognised as only being for passenger identification purposes.

A hackney carriage byelaw might state something like this.

"If a badge has been provided by the Council and delivered to the driver of a hackney carriage, either with the licence granted to him by the Council or afterwards, **he shall, when standing, plying or driving for hire,** wear that badge in such a position and manner as to be plainly and distinctly visible".

If the byelaw says he shall wear the badge **when standing or plying for hire** then one might rightly assume that he need not wear the badge for any other purpose including when he is not standing or plying for hire.

All that is by the by because like I said as far as I'm aware there has never been a court case where a driver has been prosecuted for not wearing his badge while he was driving for pleasure. Perhaps you know of one?

Quote:

And the guy shouldnt have a hire light if he's a PHV?

Naturally but if he just happened to be a hackney?

Quote:

I do agree with your second point though

And I suppose now you agree with my first point? lol

Regards

JD

wannabeeahack · **Posted:** Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:16 am

dont forget :-

Quote:

"All drivers of carriages for the transportation of the public shall carry a shovel and brush and sufficient containers to remove the output of the horses"

1776 AOP and still in force....and just as relevent as most of the antiquated R&R's applicable

JD · **Joined:** Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm **Posts:** 10381

captain cab wrote:

I think I disagree with you on the first point JD.

The vehicle is always a licensed vehicle and therefore the answer must surely be that the driver must wear the badge.

And the guy shouldnt have a hire light if he's a PHV?

I do agree with your second point though :shock:

CC

The nearest thing we have in respect of case law is probably the Hussain case. I don't know how many people share your opinion about a private hire or hackney carriage driver having to wear their badge when they are driving for pleasure but I'm sure the Hussain case may solve a few misgivings.

http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=4646

Regards

JD

Taxi Driver Online

Displaying PH Licence and Touting

Who is online