Taxi Driver Online

Cross-legged cabbies face loo ban

BBC News!


David Finnegan has been a taxi driver for 24 years (pic Northern Echo)
A Darlington taxi driver says he is prepared to go to jail rather than accept a 160-year-old law banning him from leaving his cab to spend a penny.

David Finnegan was threatened with disciplinary action by council staff after he used a public toilet while parked up at a town centre rank.

He was told he breached an 1847 law introduced for horse-drawn carriages.

Darlington Council said it had since reviewed the situation and decided to handle the matter informally.

Mr Finnegan, 62, who has been a cabbie for more than 20 years, said he was confronted by a council enforcement officer after he left his cab to walk 9ft to a public toilet in Darlington town centre.

He said: "This is ridiculous. It all has to do with horses and carts.

"According to this law I can never, ever leave my vehicle.

Enforcement action

"I have had a week of mental and physical torture after all this, I'm not joking.

"I was even told I could be made to sit in my cab if it was left unattended outside my house at any time of day or night."

The law in question is the Town Police Clauses Act 1847, which states "If the driver of any hackney carriage leave it in any street or at any place of public resort or entertainment, whether it be hired or not, without some one proper to take care of it, any constable may drive away such hackney carriage and deposit it."

In a statement, Darlington Council said: "When considering enforcement action, we assess each case on its merits and have regard to the quality of evidence and whether it is in the public interest to pursue the matter.

"In this case, taking this into account, we have decided to deal with this matter informally."

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

The two cases are slightly different. One relates to the 1976 act and the other relates to the 1847 act.

The section in question is section 62 of the 1847 act which relates to horse and carriage being left unnattended. The emphasis is obviously on the horse and the section obviously relates to the welfare of the horse and the possible danger that presents itself when a horse is left unnattended. The section is obsolete and was never meant to relate to a motor vehicle. It was made obsolete on the introduction of the 1976 act which has its own remedy for leaving a vehicle unnattended for any period of time.

Along with many other outdated and obsolete references to the taxi trade this is one that should have caught the imagination of the so called "meeting of minds bunch". However it has long been established that furthering the cause of cab drivers is not a priority for this bunch.

Readers can judge for themselves the relevance of this section now that we live in a modern age.

62 Penalties in case of carriages being unattended at places of public resort

If the driver of any such hackney carriage leave it in any street or at any place of public resort or entertainment, whether it be hired or not, without some one proper to take care of it, any constable may drive away such hackney carriage and deposit it, and the horse or horses harnessed thereto, at some neighbouring livery stable or other place of safe custody;

and such driver shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding [level 1 on the standard scale]1 for such offence; and in default of payment of the said penalty upon conviction, and of the expences of taking and keeping the said hackney carriage and horse or horses, the same, together with the harness belonging thereto, or any of them, shall be sold by order of the justice before whom such conviction is made, and after deducting from the produce of such sale the amount of the said penalty, and of all costs and expences, as well of the proceedings before such justice as of the taking, keeping, and sale of the said hackney carriage, and of the said horse or horses and harness, the surplus (if any) of the said produce shall be paid to the proprietor of such hackney carriage.

1 Maximum penalty increased by the Criminal Law Act 1977, s 31(6), and converted to a level on the standard scale by the Criminal Justice Act 1982, ss 37, 46.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

Attridge vs. Attwood?

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

1964, prosecuted before the 1976 act came into force but the rationality is this, if the driver had left someone in attendance of the vehicle then he wouldn't have committed an offence. So implied the divisional court.

01 January 1964

Case Analysis

[1964] Crim. L.R. 45

Subject: Road traffic

Offences; Parking; Taxis

Taxicabs; leaving in street without proper care

The defendant left his taxi-cab with the engine switched off and handbrake applied, and went into a nearby office. He was convicted by justices of leaving the cab in a street without someone proper to take care of it, contrary to the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 s.62 . On his appeal, the contention that s.62 of the Act applied only to horse-drawn vehicles was abandoned. The Divisional Court, dismissing the appeal, held that the question whether the defendant had taken sufficient precautions to satisfy the requirements of s.62 of the Act was one of degree and fact for the justices.

Legislation Cited

Town Police Clauses Act 1847 s.62

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

Well found JD, I'm quite astonished you found that gem!

regards

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

By that do you mean it will now appear in the next edition of the BOOK? lol

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

Perhaps someone will look it up

I have the Rogers vs. Taylor one here, but its in PDF format.

regards

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

I wonder what the divisional court had in mind when they stated the defendent had not taken "sufficient precautions"?

Should the driver have left a bale of hay and a bucket of water for the person he relied on to attendent the vehicle in order that he could feed it if it got hungry? should the driver have attached a reign to the vehicle for the attendent to hold in case the vehicle got exited and bolted? Should the driver have told the attendent to give the vehicle an occasional stroke to keep it pacified?

Rather a bizzare and meaningless section in this day and age especially when the 1976 act already caters for the offence.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

The taxi ranks up here have double yellow lines on them....I wonder if this is the case in Darlington, if it is then surely the RTO would cover unattended hackney carriages as per Rodgers?

Seems a strange one.

regards

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

I have it ty. I thought I put it on TDO, perhaps not?

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

A bit of a drama Queen methinks.

_________________
IDFIMH

In most of the UK, parking on a cab rank has been decriminalised. It is now a parking offence.

Why can't this meeting of minds bunch open their closed minds and get down to some serious business?

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

It was Obaid who was prosecuted under the 1976 act and not Rodgers. Rodgers was prosecuted under the Section 5(1) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 which provides:

‘A person who contravenes a traffic regulation order … shall be guilty of an offence.’

Article 3 of the City of Gloucester (Eastgate Street) (Waiting Regulations) Order 1982 provides:

‘Save as provided in article 5 of this Order no person shall … cause … any vehicle to wait on the sides of lengths of road specified in Part 1 of Schedule I to this Order.’ etc etc etc.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

Nothing could be more fluid than this section which is all that is required in this day and age.

LGMPA 1976 section 64 Prohibition of other vehicles on hackney carriage stands

(1) No person shall cause or permit any vehicle other than a hackney carriage to wait on any stand for hackney carriages during any period for which that stand has been appointed, or is deemed to have been appointed, by a district council under the provisions of section 63 of this Act.

(2) Notice of the prohibition in this section shall be indicated by such traffic signs as may be prescribed or authorised for the purpose by the Secretary of State in pursuance of his powers under [section 64 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984].

(3) If any person without reasonable excuse contravenes the provisions of this section, he shall be guilty of an offence.

(4) In any proceedings under this section against the driver of a public service vehicle it shall be a defence to show that, by reason of obstruction to traffic or for other compelling reason, he caused his vehicle to wait on a stand or part thereof and that he caused or permitted his vehicle so to wait only for so long as was reasonably necessary for the taking up or setting down of passengers.
_____________________________

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.