Taxi Driver Online

I don't know why this situation has created such huge interest because we all know that every taxi licensing decision is subject to council policy. No doubt there is a reason why the council put a restriction on this type of vehicle but until we know the conditions of the council’s policy then proportioning blame is premature.

The aggrieved party has a case for judicial review if he disagrees with the policy but first he needs to find out what that policy is? I'm sure by now he does know what the policy is and whether or not he believes it to be unreasonable.

If someone can publish a copy of the vehicle conditions and a comment from the LO as to why this type of vehicle is restricted to a certain number of seats then all well good. Until such time that happens we have apply an open mind to the situation.

It is already established in law that a council need only justify their policy on the grounds that its purpose is to maintain the standard of hackney carriages in their area and to ensure the comfort and safety of passengers.

The aggrieved party is going to have to convince a court that the council fettered its discretion by adopting and applying its policy, whether the policy itself is unlawful by being unreasonable and irrational and whether the "application" of the policy was unreasonable and irrational.

If the application of the policy was unreasonable which seems to be the main contention of the applicant then he would no doubt have a case but we haven't yet heard the councils version?

A policy which is inflexibly worded is not necessarily fatal if the policy is flexibly applied. It is perfectly permissible for a council to apply its policy consistently without attracting the criticism that the policy was being applied inflexibly, provided that the council had an open mind as to the possibility of exceptions.

The policy needs to be arrived at after consultation and that it had reasonable objectives. There needs to be a rational basis for the policy in which case the council will no doubt point to the safety aspect.

A council policy that sets high standards on comfort and safety in my opinion would be hard pressed to be adjudged unreasonable.

We've been through this before when stinky Pete raised the subject in respect of an owner in or around the west riding of Yorkshire and nothing has actually changed since then.

I suggest the aggrieved party in this case starts a dialogue with the licensing officer and if there is any room for manoeuvrability then he should explore that. If there is no common ground then the aggrieved party should weigh his options regarding an appeal but that’s the best information anyone can really give him because we all know that litigation can sometimes leave you with a bitter financial pill to swallow.

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.

An excellent response.

CC

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

If you have given thought to your post before asking the question you would know the answer... obviously a driver would never change the seating arrangements to suit himself..

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

When the Government bring in new laws, whether you or I agree with them... we have to comply..... when a council licences a vehicle.. under its duty of care it is supposed to evaluate whether that vehicle is safe for the purpose it is licensed... the councils in my opinion should work together and set one standard.. if a council fails in its duty of care it is liable....

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

http://www.rhondda-cynon-taf.gov.uk/ste ... NodeID=632

No sizes mentioned here

Agreed.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

Good

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

http://www.shape-it.org/Business/Sh-ito ... aldsTaxis/

If they license one of these what is the problem with the transporter
There is less leg room in in a Sharon or the vw ford equivalent

plated for how many pax tho?

4 or more?

personally i wouldnt offer a galaxy/sharan up for the carriage of more than 4 persons, that back row is for the vertically challenged only

so this would also apply to untrained drivers handling wheelchair passengers?

But what is mentioned is this........

Before a vehicle is licensed it must pass a test/inspection at the authorities testing depot and a MOT (where appropriate) to ensure its safety.

Without knowing the terms of the condition as it applies then we are none the wiser. In the East or West riding situation the aggrieved party informed me that a certain licensing solicitor advised him that he might have a good chance of success. I took the alternative view that the odds were not in his favour. I notice that person didn't appeal, however he was in dialogue with the council so perhaps the situation was resolved without the need for litigation? Perhaps that is the route this gentleman should take.

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 placed that very argument in front of my council in 1998 . now in 2008 they have just made training compulsory

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

The advert says 6 seaters

How do you work that one out. My Galaxy has a centre row of 3 seats and they are the same size as the back row of 2 seats. The floor, when all the seats are out is flat and the roof is the same. In fact you could swap the 2 back row seats for the 2 outside seats in the middle row because they are exactly the same.

_________________
Grandad,

No one has shown him that the 2 outside middle ones fold to let punters in the back