Taxi Driver Online

Some of the passages in the Maud case could well be construed as outlawing zoning.

But the judgement refers to a two-tier system of taxi licensing - zoning does not lead to a two-tier system of taxis with different powers, it just confines taxis to working in specified areas.

Thus although the case might support the view that zoning is not legal, it isn't really a direct precedent on the issue, because the matter addressed was not what we normally think of as zones.

It was the taxi trade's legal team that suggested the council could offer a zoned plate (non-station) to new plate holders.

The court said that a council could only issue taxi plates for the whole of it's district, not just part of it.

_________________
IDFIMH

I don't suppose you have an electronic transcript of this case Sussex? I cant find it anywhere on the net.

Best wishes

JD

It won't last 5 minutes.

Just to add a little more information on this subject for those who aren't familiar with PTA's throughout the country. Amongst other things PTA’s manage everything to do with buses, Bus routes and subsidies. The Executive is normally made up of elected councillors, sometimes council officials and sometimes executives from bus companies. Here is a brief introduction to the West Yorkshire PTA taken from its website. Apparently it calls itself Metro.

Metro is the West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Authority (PTA) and Executive (PTE). The Authority is made up of 22 elected councillors from the county’s five local councils, Bradford, Calderdale, Kirklees, Leeds and Wakefield.

The Authority sets policies to make public transport in West Yorkshire, reliable, easy to understand and use, accessible, attractive, affordable, safe and secure and efficient.

The Executive employs around 350 people, at Wellington House in Leeds, at Travel Centres and Bus Stations across West Yorkshire and at its South Leeds depot, to carry out the work required carrying out those policies.

It would appear that these so-called Hackney carriages are being subsidised by Metro connect. It would also appear that Metro knew they were going to be granted these so called special hackney carriage licenses before they even started the tendering proccess. I find it strange that an organistion would put out a tender without first having the necessary licence to carry it out.



There is no provision in Law for Kirklees council or any other council for that matter to issue a special license under these circumstances. So I'm sure it will be interesting to all of us to know which section, of which Law, kirklees council are implementing this special restricted Hackney carriage license? I'll have a very uneducated guess and say "section 47 of the 1976 act".

The 1985 act states the only person who can apply for a sepcial PSV licence to run a Taxibus service is the Hackney carriage Proprietor. The act also says that the vehicle must be driven by a person who holds a current Hackney carriage license. It goes on to say that the Hackney Carriage Taxibus in question must be run at separate fares and adhere to a timetable and bus route.

The 1985 act also states that a Hackney carriage when not being used as a Taxibus must revert back to a Hackney carriage.

The 1847 act states a Licensed Hackney carriage driver may ply for hire anywhere within the boundaries of the licensing Authority and that includes Taxi Stands. The act also states that a licensed Hackney carriage vehicle may ply for hire anywhere within the licensed Boundary and that includes Hackney carriage stands. That just happens to be statute Legislation, not local bye laws.

Kirklees council will most likely have in place a condition in common with most other Authorities, which says the proprietor of a Hackney carriage must own the vehicle, which is being licensed. So who is going to be the proprietor who holds the licence and do they in fact own the vehicle? It may even be the case that Kirklees council have in place a requirement that on all new licences granted the proprietor must drive the vehicle themselves.

This so-called special license is no such thing, it’s a Hackney carriage licence with conditions attached. That’s why Kirklees Council want the prospective license holder to sign away their rights, but I'm afraid its not that simple.



Would Kirklees have issued these licences without the proposed signed agreement and what does this agreement actually say?

A legal agreement that by law can only be entered into with the prospective proprietor, so who is going to be the proprietor. The council may well wish to blackmail the proprietor into signing this agreement but how sure can the council be that such an agreement is legaly binding. I have my doubts to its legal standing.

If a council is minded to grant a H/C licence to a proprietor and he is deemed to be a fit and proper person then he should be granted that license in accordance with the status of every other licence which is granted. Kirkless would have a very difficult time in a court of law explaining why one proprietor out of 256 has to sign away his rights just so he can be granted a licence.



Again, who is going to give this written undertaking? The only person who can give an undertaking is the proprietor, so I ask the question again, who is the proprietor?

Don't you find the different approach used by the two councils interesting? One restricted the other not.

But again I must ask the question, what section of which Law is this new Hackney carriage Taxibus service operating under. Because there are very specific does and don'ts of what a Hackney carriage vehicle can and cannot do. Will the proprietor of these new licences be applying for a special Hackney Carriage PSV licence for instance? If not, what section of which legislation allows a proprietor to call his Hackney carriage vehicle a Taxi bus?



So now we are getting down to the nitty gritty, the council is in effect licensing a bus to pick up off the street.



These two councils have abandoned the principle that all hackney carriages must be of a certain colour. They have conveniently allowed a Hackney carriage vehicle to be painted in the colour of a recognised bus company. I suppose the vehicle will also have the letters Taxibus written all over it.

If the cab owners in west Yorkshire are smart they will go to the council and request the same colour livery and the same markings so they can all run around in Maroon and white with Taxi bus emblazoned on the side.

Can anyone yet remotely see the comparison between this vehicle and a Hackney Carriage? Is anyone yet asking themselves why these vehicles are being granted a Hackney carriage license instead a bus licence?



In fact everything a Taxi can do, which a bus can't.

I have nothing against a Council providing good accessible transport for remote communities, subsidised or otherwise. In fact I have expressed my concerns in the past at the increased isolation these communities find themselves. The point in question here is not the service that is being provided but the legalities of using a Hackney carriage license in order to supply such a service.

Some might wonder why the West Yorkshire PTA doesn't just improve the bus service instead of conniving with Kirklees council to illegally drive a coach and horses through current Hackney Carriage legislation.

I wonder how long it will be before Airport carz Taxibus apply to Manchester city Council for a dozen hackney carriage licences to service those areas of Manchester which are being starved of a service. I can't think of any starved areas off hand but I'm sure Airport carz might, lol.



These meters wil consist of what? The local Hackney fare tariff? and what else?



So they are performing private hire duties also. Does that mean when this Taxibus is in the process of performing its Taxibus services it can suddenly deviate from its route and pick up Joe Bloggs at the local pub?

Isn’t that against the law? Or has section 12 of the 1985 act been changed, perhaps it has?

If this vehicle can deviate off route at any given time it is not running under the 1985 legislation is it? I know there are schemes around the country where they do deviate off route so perhaps the legislation has changed, so if it has will somebody please enlighten me as to what it has changed to? Perhaps Sussex might now?



http://www.vehiclesource.ltd.uk/renault ... _main.html

How many seats will these vehicles have?



Do Ryburn Taxibus have a history, or is it a newly formed company?



I think you should be proud of this statement, reading between the lines you have brought a certain amount of expertise to these negotiations.

My only concern as always is how the law is applied, rightly or wrongly. I believe in this case that the council have gone beyond the letter of the law and are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

The proprietor of these new vehicles should be granted a full H/C licence without restrictions or they should not be granted at all. After that It will be up to the proprietor to avail himself of any legal Taxibus activities that he wishes. Providing he remains within the law.

Furthemore a council should treat every application for a Hackney carriage licence on its merits, thats is how a court of law sees it. It is not open to a council to blackmail, coherce or alter the conditions of an indivual licence holder just because other licences holders might take offence.

There is no such thing as a hackney carriage special licence except where a council may wish to issue a licence under a special time frame. The legal department of both these authorities should well know this.

What we actually have here is a deliberate abuse of office. In the past, these abuses have only been remedied by a court of Law. However, because of the high cost in achieving justice in this country the man in the street rarely gambles his hard earned cash into challenging such erroneous council decisions.

Best wishes

JD

John.
that is offensive and much michchief and guess work.

I am very sorry you of all people have chosen to behave like this

your reputation is for accuracy not guess work.

by the way this of a government experiment and will opperate within the law some of the new ones which you are not up to date with.

Geoff

I most certainly do, and if you e-mail me, I will return a copy.

_________________
IDFIMH

Wharfie, will the 'taxi-buses' just be operating in one district, or will they run though a number of different ones?

If it's the latter, will they have taxi licenses for all of them?

_________________
IDFIMH

I opologise if you found my commments offensive they weren't meant to be.

However, the main point of my opinion Geoff is that Councils abide by the law and not mould the law to suit themselves. I don't have a problem with any vehicle that is licensed as a Hackney carriage and used as a taxi bus under the law.

I do however have a problem with councils who try and lay down arbitrary conditions to Hackney carriage proprietors and make them sign agreements that excludes them from certain activities that everyone else freely enjoys. That is my point in a nutshell.

Best wishes

JD

Are these buses wheel chair acceptable?

Well John,
I think this is a difficult one especially when licenses can be pulled for single fare services and Kirklees have my sympathy.

as you can see I am not bothered, but can see your point

buses are protected from me and I cant see why taxi drivers should not be
Geoff

can I state the rules then what I will be doing.
a taxibus can run for 15 miles even if it runs though districts but it cannot start a new route in any other districts, so if you encroach make sure its a circular and can get back.

i will be serving 2 districts all Calderdales will be in Calderdale

one of the Kirkless buses routes breaches calderdales boundaries by 10 yards.

all vehicles will be licensed in the districts they run on this experiment save the example above.

yes, and all metro connect buses are.

Fair Trade chiefs probe taxi scheme

A GMPTE-backed taxi scheme has been referred to the Office of Fair Trading over alleged anti-competitive behaviour.

Oldham Trading Standards officers have asked the government body to investigate Saddleworth Local Link, which offers subsidised minibuses in the town, after a complaint from a rival firm.

Customers can book the service over the phone like a normal taxi, while paying much cheaper fares.

But Saddleworth County Cars claim it is undermining their business by providing a state subsidy exclusively to a rival operator, Ashton-based Radio Cabs, which they are unhappy that GMPTE is also publicising.

According to co-director, Tom Howarth, business has been down by a quarter since the service began.

They are also challenging the way Radio Cabs were accepted as sole provider of the Local Link Service.

Tony Allen, Head of Oldham Council Trading Standards, said: “Free and fair competition is vital to ensure choice and that markets work well for customers. For the best of intentions, it is possible that the Passenger Transport Executive has entered into an agreement that is having an adverse effect on competition in the private hire and taxi market in this area.

“For this reason, we have asked the Office of Fair Trading to review the case and reach a decision on the future of the scheme.”

He stressed the council was not saying the practise was unlawful but would like the Office of Fair Trading to take a ‘competitive test’, to determine whether the scheme is fair.

Michael Renshaw, GMPTE’s Interim Service Delivery Director, said they had always promoted the Local Link service, rather than Radio Cabs themselves.

“GMPTE does not believe that the Saddleworth and Mossley Local Link scheme is anti-competitive.

“We are confident that the Office of fair Trading will agree.

“GMPTE examined the provisions of competition legislation before introducing Local Link and carefully considered whether the service could be deemed ‘anti-competitive’.”

Mr Howarth said: “I am pleased that this has happened. It is now a case of wait and see.”

a waste of time but will keep oft off other peoples backs.