Taxi Driver Online

I think the fact that the council has referred it to OFT is quite telling.

I suppose it will be Yorkshire next.

Lets hope so, no fears at all.
dont read the local council refering it to OFT, as anything sinister, there is a conflict of interest as the council have a part to play in the transport authority that are involved so they had no choice.

However there is an hornest nest the last time OFT were in OLDHAM they were investigating private hire price fixing.

And I will tell you why there are no fears, they are two different markets one is controlled by the passenger at a didtance pod price the other is route and time fixed and at single fixed bus fares.

as I have said b4 its a big own goal, the complaintant would do well to look at his own buisness, and where its lacking as it is, without doubt to lose 25% to a bus! on a fixed timetable.

fellow guest please think, you think you have made a telling point OFT may not investigate yet!

I wonder how many cabs/PHs you could give FOC to customers with a £490,000 subsidy?

http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/ ... K=10826795

Madness, plain madness.

Probably none its hard to concieve to some city lads that vast areas of this country massive land masses have no taxis or private hire at all, and lots of communities have buses once or twice a week

those groups of taxis that say they want national coverage just cannot conceve what it means, the likes of taxibank show how little they know.

no its not madness to give money to get valuable services off the ground though rural and urban challenge is now finished as an annual round.

they have got thousands of buses on the roads and enabled the identification of laws to be changed to make buses more responsive to the needs of communities.

I don’t know which comments are misleading or inaccurate but if there is any ambiguity I have taken the time to chronicle the events from their inception.

I pointed out that the legislation by which this scheme is being run is the 1985 Transport act. I don’t think there is any ambiguity about that. A special committee was formed several years ago by the West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive to look into the feasibility of using Taxis as buses, under the 1985 act. The following link confirms that was indeed the case. This committee consisted of among others Councillors from Kirklees council.

Their terms of reference were as follows.

To discuss the relationship between public transport services and taxis and the opportunities for co-operation between the PTA and District Councils in exercising their functions in relation to passenger transport and taxi licensing respectively.

To consider the role of taxis in providing local bus services in accordance with Section 12 of the Transport Act 1985.

http://www.wypta.gov.uk/CommitteeStruct ... s/Taxi.htm

The very fact that this committee was set up to investigate how to implement the use of Taxis as buses in a way which would benefit the community, is not in itself untoward. However, when you bring into the equation the fact that Kirklees is a restricted Authority and you put all the pieces of the Jigsaw together you find that a decision to grant Hackney carriage licenses to these vehicles was a foregone conclusion.

Kirklees don’t have a waiting list mechanism “they just flatly refuse to grant every public application for a Hackney Carriage licence that comes before them”. So perhaps we should ask ourselves “why have Kirklees councillors” bent the rules in favour of the WYPTA?

In 2002 under the Government Rural bus challenge scheme the WYPTA won a grant for just over eight hundred thousand pounds, the grant is to supply the type of service which is soon to be implemented in Kirklees and Calderdale.

http://www.wymetro.com/AccessibleTravel ... yGrant.htm

The Rural Bus Challenge scheme amongst other things rewarded innovation for supplying bus services that benefit the public in rural areas. The Taxi bus scheme was highlighted as being a typical innovative service that would most likely succeed in funding.

Since 1998 the WYPTA have been granted nearly four million pounds, however the last and final round of Rural Bus Challenge funding was submitted in 2003. The Government is now considering what should replace this popular Rural-funding scheme.

It is now a matter of history that in 2002 the WYPTA were awarded over 800.000 pound in funding for the proposed Taxi Bus service in Kirklees and Calderdale.

One would assume however that the WYPTE would not have submitted the Taxi bus scheme if they were not confident that permission to licence these vehicles as Hackney carriages was going to be obtained. In fact I suspect they would have had to submit this information in their application.

Perhaps the conclusion can be drawn that the Kirklees councillors on the WYPTE Taxi liaison committee gave assurance that these vehicles would be granted hackney carriage licenses regardless of Kirklees council’s current policy on Hackney carriage numbers.

http://www.wymetro.com/AccessibleTravel ... axibus.htm

Kirklees Hackney carriage regulations are quite straight forward, their Hackney carriage policy is unambiguous when it comes to the likes of you and I but when it comes to the WYPTA the council are prepared to bend the rules.

http://www.kirkleesmc.gov.uk/you-kmc/km ... elines.pdf

If you phone up Kirklees licensing department and ask them for a Hackney Carriage proprietors licence you will be told Kirklees council are not issuing any proprietors licences. When you point out that the council have already agreed to issue two new licences to a yet unknown individual for the purpose of section 12 of the 1985 Transport act, you will be told that these licences are for a Taxi bus.

Kirklees licensing department don’t like it one bit when you point out to them that there is no such thing as a Taxi bus license and for a proprietor to be granted a special bus licence under the 1985 Transport act they are required by law to already have in place a Hackney carriage proprietors licence.

All this may sound incidental because it has been mentioned that an agreement in writing is to be entered into stating that these vehicles will not ply for hire in the normal way a Taxi plies for hire. That only applies to Kirklees but how tenable is this proposed agreement? What happens if the licence holder decides the Taxibus scheme is uneconomical? Does he change his vehicle for the more traditional type Taxi? Or does he hand back both proprietors licenses, which have a current total black market value of around 40 grand?

The whole gamut of Taxi = Bus legislation is totally up in the air. You have councils throughout the country that are bending the rules to suit there own flexible transport needs.

The 1985 Transport act is specific in what a Taxi can and cannot do under section 12. The Government has acknowledged that legislation is needed to bring about cohesion in the Taxi bus market.

Not so long ago the DFT brought out an information booklet that outlined some local transport issues. It was called Flexible Transport Services. As per usual it failed to take account of the Law governing Hackney carriages and vehicles prohibited from plying for hire. In fact one of the very first paragraphs states.

The purpose of this booklet is to give a brief overview of the options for flexible services currently available. It does not give a description of the law, and should not be relied on for that purpose.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/d ... p#P53_3698

The document goes to some length in explaining the flexible powers bestowed on a Transport commissioner with regard to bus timetables and routes. The document would seem to imply that the commissioner’s powers of flexibility are boundless. However, on taxis it does state the following.

Special bus licence for taxi holders: taxibuses

(Section 12 of Transport Act 1985.)

4. If you have a taxi licence and wish to run your taxi like a bus as a local service with separate fares along a route registered with the Traffic Commissioner, either wholly or for part of the time, you can apply for a special bus licence. You will be required to register a route with at least one stopping place within the area of the local authority, which granted the taxi licence. Your vehicle will need to be one for which you hold a taxi licence, display a 'BUS' sign (not an illuminated 'taxi' sign), and display a table of fares; the driver of the 'Taxibus' must be licensed as a taxi driver by the same licensing authority as the vehicle.

5. Provided your taxi licence is valid, the issue of the special bus licence should be a formality.

Requirements
apply to local Traffic Commissioner (details at Annex 1)
register the route with local Traffic Commissioner (details at Annex 1)

Benefits
increased flexibility for taxi operators
vehicle can be used for normal taxi services when not being run as a bus service
provides passengers with a bus service when a larger vehicle would be uneconomic
where appropriate, cheaper for local authority to subsidise a local Taxibus service at specific times than a larger bus service
Taxibus licence holder can qualify for Bus Service Operator Grant (fuel duty rebate) when running local bus service.

What we have here is basically what it says in the 1985 act but the so called Taxi buses earmarked for Kirklees won’t be running at separate fairs or indeed sticking to a route and timetable. They will be deviating off a route picking up anyone who happens to flag them down, or book by phone. Under those circumstances and under the provision of the 1985 act the Kirklees Taxi bus won’t be performing as a bus at all, it will be a Taxi.

Perhaps the licensed proprietor of these Taxi buses is relying on the Traffic Commissioners flexible powers to circumvent the law?

Another aspect of the 1985 act is the section on Taxi sharing this idea was brought in to enable the public to share a Taxi and lesson the expense of getting from A to B.

Countrywide, It has very rarely been put into practice but it seems to me that the experiment in Kirklees is based on a mixture of the two totally different sections of the 1985 act. In order to perform the duties of section 10 of the 1985 act you don’t need a special bus licence from the Traffic Commissioner. If the council set up such a Taxi sharing scheme under section 10 it means any Hackney carriage proprietor may avail themselves of that scheme.

Taxi sharing from designated places

(Section 10 of the Transport Act 1985.)

1. Local taxi licensing authorities (in rural areas, usually a district or borough council) can set up a taxi sharing scheme so that passengers, who would not normally travel together but who are going to the same or similar destinations, can travel in the same taxi and pay separately. Passengers must all board the taxi at a designated place, usually a taxi rank. Where a rank is also in use for a regular taxi service, passengers can make their own choice on whether they wish to hire the vehicle as a whole or if they wish to share the journey and pay separate fares.
2. If you are a taxi owner and wish to operate such a scheme or a member of the public who would like their area to have such a scheme, then you can ask your local council to set up a scheme and discuss the best places within your area for the service. The decision to establish a taxi sharing scheme is for the council, but if the holders of at least 10% of taxi licences ask for one, the council must set one up. The licensing authority is required to consult local taxi owners and drivers and other interested parties, such as the chief constable and the county council or Passenger Transport Authority.

3. The council will lay down operating conditions, such as special signs at appointed places and on vehicles, the number of passengers - up to a maximum of 8 depending on local licensing requirements - which the vehicle can carry, and maximum fares, which must be lower than an exclusive fare.

Finally there is no new legislation beyond 1985 on what duties the law actually allows a Hackney carriage to perform.

The Government recognises the need to remove barriers in order that Community and Rural Transport can become more flexible but they also realise the need to balance current legislation with any changes that may effect competition.

The Flexible future was a consultative document on behalf of the DFT its conclusion gave a broad outline of how the Government should proceed in future legislation. It made a great effort in pointing out the restrictions that buses, Taxis and Private hire vehicles face under current legislation.

It proposes sweeping changes in future flexible transport policy, changes which, if implemented would bring about greater and perhaps unfair competition to both sides of the Taxi and private hire industry. The following links may be entertaining for some.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3513431.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/3418139.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3417533.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3202313.stm

http://www.travelwithdoris.co.uk/aboutDoRiS.htm

http://www.wigglybus.org.uk/

The Governments blue print for the Future of Transport can be found here. It mentions nothing of Taxis from what I can see.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/strategy/futureoftransport/

Best wishes

JD

John,
Can I commend you on your hard work, regretfully you have not addressed section 27 of circular 3/85 which gives anyone the right to apply for taxi licenses for taxis to be used on section 12, I have mentioned this earlier and am baffled as to why you ignore the point, its printed earlier in the thread.

I also think you are wrong that there has been no new legislation since 85
I seem to remember new regs earlier this year.

so what happens to the licences when the buses are no longer economic, I can answer that one without ambuigity I will hand them back the value of £40,000 makes no difference to this argument at all.

Geoff

I was going to mention this previously because it is exactly how you point out. There is a presumption that a council would have to prove that there was no demand for the service or services being applied for. I am fully aware of the implications and i'm pleased you are also on the ball.

Back in the late 1980's I perceived this as perhaps one way to gain access into a restricted market. Please correct me if i'm wrong but as far as I can gather a hackney carriage licence in Kirklees hasn't been applied for under these conditions. You are right to make the point but I don't think an application has ever been tested in the courts, or has it? Perhaps sussex can answer that one?



In February 2004 there was the The Public Service Vehicles (Registration of Local Services) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2004

The Bus Service Operators Grant (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2004. Which can be found here.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/d ... sp#P23_577

There has been no legislation or ammendments with regard to Hackney carriages.

The February ammendments are mainly about "DRT" Demand Responsive Transport.

One of the best and most liberal reports I have read recently on the type of transport under discussion is the one commissioned in 2002 and published in June this year.

In 2002, the Department for Transport (DfT) and the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE) commissioned the Open University (in collaboration with the University of West of England and Loughborough University) to determine the market potential for DRT systems in the UK.

The report can be downloaded here in pdf format.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/d ... 030325.pdf.



I suspect that lays to rest any theory that Temptation may play a part in retaining these licenses. But will you become the proprietor and if not can you speak on behalf of the person who will become the proprietor? After all, there is no Guarantee that the services will be viable long term.

One thing in your favour is the ever increasing flexible transport thinking, eminating from the DTF and other prominent bodies. Flexible Transport is here to stay and in some areas it will only make life tougher for the Taxi and private hire industry. I suppose thats the competition element but on the other hand there may be some voices out there who think subsidised competition is a little hard to swallow.

Best wishes

JD

Read that pdf file on Intermode Innovations in DRT. You will find it very interesting.

But would anyone else?

_________________
IDFIMH

I haven't come across any such applications, which bearing in mind most rural areas loath quotas, isn't surprising.

The problem those councils have is that they haven't got enough taxis, thus we have subsidised taxi-buses.

The fun will start when some bright spark applies for another taxi-bus license, and never uses it for taxi-bus work.

Instead they use it for taxi-taxi work, or sell it for £40,000 straight away.

_________________
IDFIMH

Reply I read it some time ago, you are correct its interesting

Save me reading it, tell us what's so interesting please.

_________________
IDFIMH

Yes Sussex loathsome isnt it how this trade behaves
I applied for 6 from Calderdale Council if you remember I WROTE AT THE TIME SO THEY DID AN UNMET DEMAND SURVAY AND LIFTED THE QUOTAS FULL STOP.

the fun came if you remember when I submitted vehicles and they were refused.

up shot was the transport manager left the new one, is much more realistic

2 of the 6 were for Halifax which still has quotas I have yet to recieve a decision notice, but after 6 years I think well when I am ready to appeal I will ask for it.

as time has gone on I have lost interest in the urban sprawl.

but yes Sussex you have identified the spoiler, the gold diggers!

I t gives a critique to how demand services have been run, and how the most succesfull ones were run.

an issue is how the calls were recieved, some to councils were recieve by clerks who had other jobs and so were inefficient others spent so much they might as well have run the bus all day.it reccomends a national call centre, and I understand some are looking at Newcastle for this.

the most successful demand led were indeed to railway stations and to bus routes filled in the middle with doctors ect.

Sussex now is the time to get on the bottom rung, this matey is for you.
the future transport growth will be in demand led.

So why did you need to set up a limited company on 05/08/2004 for this operation.?

We were advised by our legal representative, that we needed to be more open and to bring in management, to cover skills we did not have.

thats the justification for the limited company, the decision was made in April, our accountant was instructed to set up the company.

by August this had not been done, so a company was set up at that point at companies house,and we will be appointing more directors, very shortly, John