Taxi Driver Online

I wonder why Berwick will prepare a new policy .................. they cease to exist as a regulatory authority very early next year.

The non-result is being spun and the we told you so or we told you first brigade are spinning their own heroic tales as well.

Loads of tosh.

B. Lucky

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.

How the hell did Newcastle win and in what way the judgment went in Berwicks favor, bad reporting if you ask me
now whats ofcoms addy

If Berwick won skip how come they've got to pay 50% of Newcastle's costs?

The judgement effectively told Berwick to reconsider how it issues taxi licenses.....which Berwick has apparently agreed to do (according to the report).

CC

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

A simple extra question on the application paper where do you live, that is even covered by name and address, and it does not matter where a person lives or comes from, as long as they are fit and proper,
If they where to include where do you intend to work it still would not matter.
Take a street trader as an example they are free to trade where they like once licenced, we have market stall holders working all over Scotland even though the licence has been issued by BRC all they do is pay a rent to the land owner or organiser,in that area, the same as a PH would do to an office.
If i was MR Wilson, I would carry on regardless, and just to hiss of Newcastle even further I would cut the price of a licence even further, this would generate the moneys required as even more owners throughout the Uk would apply for a licence, to pay the 50% costs should the appeal fail

I disagree with you.

An application form already asks where you live, the question should be phrased along the lines of 'where do you intend to work'.

If a person has no intention of working the plate in the area it is licensed then it should not be granted.

The judge stated;

It seems to me that it must be desirable for an authority issuing licences to hackney carriage to be able to restrict the issuing of those licences to proprietors and drivers which are intending to ply for hire in that authority's area. Similarly it must be desirable to be able to refuse to issue licences to proprietors and drivers who do not intend to ply for hire, to a material extent, in the area of the licence grantor.

If I was Mr Wilson I think I'd be looking for another job, due to his intransigence he has cost Berwick's tax payers thousands of pounds. And besides, Berwick wont be here as a council much longer anyway, cant see him getting another job in licensing after this though can you?

You seem rather keen on Berwick plates...have you got one?

You mention PH....why? A person with a HC license doesnt need a PH license at all to accept pre booked work, and never has.

In theory anyone could start a 'taxi' company operate a completely HC fleet and not be subject to any licensing requirements at all.

CC

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

It was a trick question

By Jove I think the penny has finally dropped
Could it be that the Newcastle licencing officer could be out of a job for bringing this case in the first place, Mr Wilson has the option of appeal
and I hope he applies for the same position when the amalgamation comes in.
Just as a mater of interest CC how many owners work in Carlisle that come from say Gretna or Dumfries?????????????or from any area close to you from south of the Border

Is it not also possible for a licensing authority to include a condition of Private Hire Operators licence that only vehicles and drivers licensed by the same authority can operate under that licence.

I know that there is no legal requirement to have a licence to accept bookings on behalf of a HC, but the PH operator is making provision for the invitation or acceptance of bookings for PH vehicles.

I believe that the new Northumberland Authority will introduce some kind of driver testing as part of the application process, and will possibly only consider applications made in person.

I believe the appeal against costs will be successful, after all the judge didn't rule that Berwick have broken the law, instead choosing to advise Berwick that, perhaps only morally, their policy was not in the best interest of the public and should therefore be reviewed.

B. Lucky

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.

GA How many councils are involved between Berwick and say South Shields
I was thinking along the the lines of Zones but they have been ruled out by Best practice

Hackney Carriage condition of licence. (Lincoln)

2. "The proprietor shall be in direct control of the day to day running of the vehicle, and shall make that vehicle available for hire at all reasonable hours"

_________________
Former taxi driver

It doesn't matter one iota what this judge thinks is "desirable", what matters is the law and he predictably lost site of the law.

The fact of the matter is that he got it wrong and he knows by law that he cannot tell elected councillors from Berwick or anywhere else for that matter how to run their policy. What this guy did was to try and invent a remedy for a solution to a perceived problem where no remedy short of legislation exists.

He made a complete fool of himself and his lack of understanding of taxi legislation was most evident as I always thought it would be. His justification for half costs was not based on law but a concocted fabrication of how the law might be applied. The problem is that he is totally ignorant of how the law should be applied in relation to section 37.

I wonder why he only awarded 50% costs agaisnt Berwick? I'll tell you why, because his judgment was half hearted and having found Berwick had done nothing wrong he had to invent a way of justifying costs, hence his nonsensical statement about section 37.

Tell me, how much did it cost Newcastle council and the Berwick Taxi trade? I bet they are twenty grand light this morning and they still have 500 cabs on the town and Newcastle still have their illegal plying for hire headache. So whats changed? Certainly not the law.

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.

Isn't there something missing from that passage?

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 who do you refuse and who don't you refuse? The judge never got around that, perhaps he hasn't a clue?

How about you, do you care to tell us what the judge failed to tell Berwick?

And on what grounds do Berwick give for a refusal?

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.

Full costs applied for, only 50% granted. That tells its own story.



The learned judge might not realise that under section 37 the licensing authority has no statutory discretion because the discretion to refuse a license was taken away by section 16, exepting for the fact that the person is not fit and proper. The true construction of section 37 is that a council is obliged to issue licenses if they have a policy of no restrictions subject to the applicant being a fit and proper person. And who said that?

Lord Woolf, Lord Parker, Judge Nolan and many more.

In 160 years of case law there has never been any reference made to any of the comments made by this judge. Thats not a coincidence but considering private hire was common place even in those days then I'm not surprised no refereence was ever made.

So tell me when has any judge ever said or where can it be found in legislation or case law that,

under section 37 of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 a licensing authority is obliged to have regard (a) to whether the applicant intends that the hackney carriage if licensed will be used to ply for hire within the area of that authority, and (b) whether the applicant intends that the hackney carriage will be used (either entirely or predominantly) for private hire remotely from the area of that authority.

This judge goes to the trouble of highlighting multiple sections of the 1847, 1976 and 1985 acts but when it comes to referencing his reasoning he can't find any case law to back it up.

Remarkable.

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.

I find it remarkable that without any case law to back up his opinion this junior judge who obviously knows very little about taxi licensing law can opine that a council can refuse a license on the basis that the licensed vehicle might be lawfully used under a contract of private hire.



No doubt the applicant will say that the vehicle will only be used in accordance with that which is allowed under current legislation.

I find this judge clutching at straws and I am sorry that Berwick didn't appeal the costs.

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.

What other reason?

The law states a license can only be refused if the applicant is not a fit and proper person, or it has a policy of restricting numbers and it can prove there is no unmet demand, so whats the other reasons? Berwick doesn't have a policy of restriction which it is quite entitled to have.



Well you were wise to mention section 16 because the law states a council has no discretion to refuse and is obliged to issue licenses in the absence of evidence of demand subject to the applicant being a fit and proper person.

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.