Taxi Driver Online

But you are also 'Gamling' with the livlihoods of the existing drivers, whilst u and other people 'try it out'. Many who have operated taxis in districts for many years. Ive seen it here before, torridge were once deregged, all the part timers came out of the woodwork and there were 78 hackney vehicles. A lot of the necommers could't make a living or have there vehicles repaired and so the plates were given back one by one to the council who then made the decision to restrict them. Many owner drivers who had worked the district for years went out of business. I realise every district is different this relates to mine, i fully admit i have no idea wether there is or is not a need for more taxis in sussex. but then i dont compare every area in the country to be the same as ours.

Outrageous comments ................ utterly beneath you JD.

The trade offering to pay for a survey does not in any way constitute a bribe.

It is abhorrent that even the implication has been made.

I think an apology to both the council and the local drivers is due following these comments.

If the Oxford trade wish to pay for a survey whats the problem?

A licensing authority is not obliged to abide by the surveys findings anyway.

I think the council should personally pay and recoup the money through licensing fees over a set period.

The council in question is surely being fair to the trade by holding a supply and demand survey, as well as being responsible to tax payers in their duty to properly look at the issue.

regards

Captain cab

Of course most areas are different, but you have to wonder why any trade would need a restriction of numbers to survive? Could it be an in-efficient one that struggles to meet the requirements of today's customers? One that has lost huge chunks of trade to the PH and bus companies?

As for 'trying it out', well I suspect I've been in this trade a lot longer than most of those with plates, especially those that have bought them off the black-market.

_________________
IDFIMH

can i spend £35k on a TX2 to try it out too?

hehe

Captain cab

If you live in the Teignbridge area it may interest you to know, It was agreed on Monday 6th December 2004 that a survey is to be commissioned on unmet demand. Survey to be carried out Jan/Feb 05.

Best wishes

JD

They are going to ask the existing plate-holders for their views.

http://www.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/displ ... K=11480355

I wonder what they will say?

_________________
IDFIMH

lol sussex,

if you paid someone money for something, and were going to be asked by someone else your views on it not being worth anything, what would you say?

yeah great idea?

hehe

Captain cab

I think the most telling part of the article was:

The council's executive was told that 42 operators hold 82 taxi licence plates in the Teignbridge area..

_________________
IDFIMH

Kettering is the latest Authority to change their policy from one of Quantity to Quality control. The total number of Authorities that restrict licenses as of 14/12/04 is now 125. Sunderland and Knowsley have been amended to reflect their proper status. On the 9th December Chester voted to undertake an unmet demand survey in 2005.

The Total number of Authorities that restrict Hackney carriages is 125

The 21 Authorities that have changed their policy since before or after the publication of the OFT report and that of the recent November 2004 DFT amended report are as follows.

1 Adur
2 Amber Valley
3 Bassetlaw
4 Calderdale
5 Cardiff
6 Castle Point
7 Chelmsford
8 Crawley
9 East Lindsey
10 East Northants
11 Guildford
12 Harlow
13 Kettering
14 North East Lincolnshire
15 Selby
16 Slough UA
17 Solihull
18 Stratford-upon-Avon
19 West Somerset
20 Woking
21 Wycombe

Practically all of the above Authorities have or are setting a requirement that all future licensed vehicles must comply with the DDA good practice policy. It should be noted that the recently published DFT data in the November 2004 statistics of Taxi and Private hire vehicles is inaccurate and already out of date with regard to the Quota list.

The two Authorities that have re-restricted.

Bolton
Welwyn Hatfield

Of the 144 originally restricted Authorities the net reduction in numbers is 19 or 14.38%. The net percentage of Authorities who still restrict numbers is 36.02% or in numbers 125. Kettering is the most recent Authority to change their policy.

Updated list of Authorities who restrict H/C Vehicles by numbers:


1. Ashford. Restricted, to be reviewed early 2005.
2. Aylesbury Vale. Restricted
3. Babergh. Restricted
4. Barnsley. Survey commissioned on unmet demand for the services of Taxis.
5. Barrow in Furness. Restricted
6. Basildon. Restricted.
7. Basingstoke. Restricted
8. Bath and North East Somerset ua. Restricted
9. Bedford. Restricted.
10. Blackburn Darwen ua. Consultation on deregulation underway, scheduled to finish end Nov.
11. Blackpool. 256 hacks, 44 horse drawn. Intention is to keep a numbers policy.
12. Blyth Valley. 41 hacks, decision on change of policy early 2005.
13. Bolton. Restricted.
14. Bournemouth ua. Restricted
15. Bradford. Restricted. Policy to be reviewed Before Jan 2005
16. Braintree. Restricted
17. Brighton and Hove ua. Restricted.
18. Burnley. Restricted
19. Carrick. Conducting a survey.
20. Cherwell. Policy currently under review.
21. Chester. Undertaking unmet demand survey 2005.
22. Chester le street. Restricted
23. Chorley. Review of policy early 2005.
24. Colchester. Restricted
25. Congleton. Restricted
26. Conwy. Restricted
27. Copeland. Restricted
28. Corby. Restricted
29. Denbighshire. Restricted
30. Dover. Restricted
31. Durham. Restricted. Recently issued a quota of new licenses. Policy continually under review.
32. Easington. Restricted
33. East Riding. Restricted
34. Eastbourne. Restricted
35. Eastleigh. Internal report under consideration.
36. Ellesmere Port. Restricted
37. Exeter. Decision imminent.
38. Fylde. Restricted. Unmet demand survey to be carried out, consultation process to follow.
39. Gosport. Restricted
40. Great Yarmouth. Restricted
41. Gwynedd. Restricted
42. Halton ua. A Recent licensing report stated that local plate values stood at 10/12k and this indicated no unmet demand. Possible flawed logic, which does not address DFT guidance.
43. Harrogate. Restricted
44. Hastings. Restricted. Policy change under review, decision imminent.
45. Havant. Restricted
46. High Peak. Restricted
47. Huntingdonshire. Restricted
48. Hyndburn. Restricted
49. Ipswich. Restricted
50. Kerrier. Restricted
*** Kettering. Implementing change of policy to one of Quality Control on 1/4/2005.
51. Kings Lynn. Restricted
52. Kingston upon Hull. Restricted
53. Kirklees. Restricted
54. Knowsley. Undertaking unmet demand survey
55. Lancaster. Restricted to 105 H/C/V
56. Leeds. Consultation on policy change currently underway.
57. Leicester. Restricted
58. Lincoln. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
59. Liverpool. Restricted
60. Luton ua. Restricted
61. Maidstone. Restricted
62. Manchester. Restricted. Has a policy of issuing 20/25 new licences annually.
63. Merthyr Tydfil. Decision imminent.
64. Middlesborough ua. Restricted
65. Mole Valley. Restricted
66. New Forest. Report for consideration to be presented to committee members in January 2005
67. Newcastle on Tyne. Restricted.
68. Newcastle under Lyme. Restricted
69. Nottingham. Undertaking an unmet demand survey.
70. Oldham. Restricted.
71. Oxford. Restricted. Recently voted to retain a restricted numbers policy.
72. Pendle. Restricted
73. Penwith. Restricted
74. Plymouth ua. Legal Challenge on refusal to issue H/C licence, Court hearing 2005.
75. Poole ua. Restricted
76. Portsmouth ua. Restricted
77. Preston. Restricted
78. Reading ua. Restricted. Policy change unlikely.
79. Reigate and Banstead. Restricted
80. Restormel. Restricted
81. Ribble Valley. Restricted.
82. Richmondshire. Restricted. Undertaking unmet demand survey. Halcrow.
83. Rochdale. Restricted
84. Rotherham. Restricted. 48 H/C. Currently undertaking an unmet demand survey.
85. Rugby. Conducting an unmet demand survey to consider options.
86. Salford. Presently addressing Government guidance could possibly commission local survey.
87. Scarborough. 97 H/C/V review in Early 2005.
88. Sefton. Restricted
89. South Bedfordshire. Restricted. Policy currently under review.
90. South Ribble. Restricted
91. South Tyneside. Restricted
92. Southampton ua. Restricted
93. Southend on sea ua. Restricted
94. St Edmundsbury. Restricted
95. St Helens. Unmet demand survey being conducted early 2005.
96. Stevenage. Restricted
97. Stockport. Restricted. Commissioning a Mori survey to determine future policy.
98. Stoke on Trent ua. Restricted
99. Sunderland. Restricted. 308 H/C/V
100. Swindon ua. Policy under review, consultations being conducted with relevant parties.
101. Tameside. Restricted
102. Teignbridge. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
103. Test Valley. Restricted to 34 H/C, policy to be reviewed shortly in line with DFT request.
104. Thanet. Restricted
105. Thurrock ua. Restricted
106. Torbay ua. Restricted
107. Torfaen. Restricted.
108. Torridge. Decision on quotas imminent.
109. Trafford. Restricted.
110. Tunbridge wells. Restricted
111. Wakefield. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
112. Walsall. Review expected on 25 November 2004 Licensing Committee meeting.
113. Wansbeck. Policy under review. 30 H/C vehicles.
114. Warrington ua. Restricted
115. Watford. Preference to maintain a managed growth policy, next survey scheduled 2005/2006
116. Welwyn Hatfield. Re Restricted late 2003. Were previously unrestricted.
117. Weymouth. Restricted
118. Wigan. Restricted
119. Windsor and Maidenhead ua. Restricted
120. Wolverhampton. Decision on quotas imminent.
121. Worthing. Managed growth policy. Wav only. Conducting survey to measure demand.
122. Wrexham. Restricted.
123. Wyre.160 H/C/V Survey commissioned for Jan 2005 final report to committee, Feb 2005.
124. Wyre Forest. Provisional decision to de-restrict numbers, ratification imminent.
125. York ua. Policy under review.

Kerrier have dissapeared from the list making it 124 Authorities that now restrict entry into the Hackney carriage market. 35.73%

Updated list of Authorities who restrict H/C Vehicles by numbers:

1. Ashford. Restricted, to be reviewed early 2005.
2. Aylesbury Vale. Restricted
3. Babergh. Restricted
4. Barnsley. Survey commissioned on unmet demand for the services of Taxis.
5. Barrow in Furness. Restricted
6. Basildon. Restricted.
7. Basingstoke. Restricted
8. Bath and North East Somerset ua. Restricted
9. Bedford. Restricted.
10. Blackburn Darwen ua. Consultation on deregulation underway, scheduled to finish end Nov.
11. Blackpool. 256 hacks, 44 horse drawn. Intention is to keep a numbers policy.
12. Blyth Valley. 41 hacks, decision on change of policy early 2005.
13. Bolton. Restricted.
14. Bournemouth ua. Restricted
15. Bradford. Restricted. Policy to be reviewed Before Jan 2005
16. Braintree. Restricted
17. Brighton and Hove ua. Restricted.
18. Burnley. Restricted
19. Carrick. Conducting a survey.
20. Cherwell. Policy currently under review.
21. Chester. Undertaking unmet demand survey 2005.
22. Chester le street. Restricted
23. Chorley. Review of policy early 2005.
24. Colchester. Restricted
25. Congleton. Restricted
26. Conwy. Restricted
27. Copeland. Restricted
28. Corby. Restricted
29. Denbighshire. Restricted
30. Dover. Restricted
31. Durham. Restricted. Recently issued a quota of new licenses. Policy continually under review.
32. Easington. Restricted
33. East Riding. Restricted
34. Eastbourne. Restricted
35. Eastleigh. Internal report under consideration.
36. Ellesmere Port. Restricted
37. Exeter. Decision imminent.
38. Fylde. Restricted. Unmet demand survey to be carried out, consultation process to follow.
39. Gosport. Restricted
40. Great Yarmouth. Restricted
41. Gwynedd. Restricted
42. Halton ua. A Recent licensing report stated that local plate values stood at 10/12k and this indicated no unmet demand. Possible flawed logic, which does not address DFT guidance.
43. Harrogate. Restricted
44. Hastings. Restricted. Policy change under review, decision imminent.
45. Havant. Restricted
46. High Peak. Restricted
47. Huntingdonshire. Restricted
48. Hyndburn. Restricted
49. Ipswich. Restricted
50. Kings Lynn. Restricted
51. Kingston upon Hull. Restricted
52. Kirklees. Restricted
53. Knowsley. Undertaking unmet demand survey
54. Lancaster. Restricted to 105 H/C/V
55. Leeds. Consultation on policy change currently underway.
56. Leicester. Restricted
57. Lincoln. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
58. Liverpool. Restricted
59. Luton ua. Restricted
60. Maidstone. Restricted
61. Manchester. Restricted. Has a policy of issuing 20/25 new licences annually.
62. Merthyr Tydfil. Decision imminent.
63. Middlesborough ua. Restricted
64. Mole Valley. Restricted
65. New Forest. Report for consideration to be presented to committee members in January 2005
66. Newcastle on Tyne. Restricted.
67. Newcastle under Lyme. Restricted
68. Nottingham. Undertaking an unmet demand survey.
69. Oldham. Restricted.
70. Oxford. Restricted. Recently voted to retain a restricted numbers policy.
71. Pendle. Restricted
72. Penwith. Restricted
73. Plymouth ua. Legal Challenge on refusal to issue H/C licence, Court hearing 2005.
74. Poole ua. Restricted
75. Portsmouth ua. Restricted
76. Preston. Restricted
77. Reading ua. Restricted. Policy change unlikely.
78. Reigate and Banstead. Restricted
79. Restormel. Restricted
80. Ribble Valley. Restricted.
81. Richmondshire. Restricted. Undertaking unmet demand survey. Halcrow.
82. Rochdale. Restricted
83. Rotherham. Restricted. 48 H/C. Currently undertaking an unmet demand survey.
84. Rugby. Conducting an unmet demand survey to consider options.
85. Salford. Presently addressing Government guidance could possibly commission local survey.
86. Scarborough. 97 H/C/V review in Early 2005.
87. Sefton. Restricted
88. South Bedfordshire. Restricted. Policy currently under review.
89. South Ribble. Restricted
90. South Tyneside. Restricted
91. Southampton ua. Restricted
92. Southend on sea ua. Restricted
93. St Edmundsbury. Restricted
94. St Helens. Unmet demand survey being conducted early 2005.
95. Stevenage. Restricted
96. Stockport. Restricted. Commissioning a Mori survey to determine future policy.
97. Stoke on Trent ua. Restricted
98. Sunderland. Restricted. 308 H/C/V
99. Swindon ua. Policy under review, consultations being conducted with relevant parties.
100. Tameside. Restricted
101. Teignbridge. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
102. Test Valley. Restricted to 34 H/C, policy to be reviewed shortly in line with DFT request.
103. Thanet. Restricted
104. Thurrock ua. Restricted
105. Torbay ua. Restricted
106. Torfaen. Restricted.
107. Torridge. Decision on quotas imminent.
108. Trafford. Restricted.
109. Tunbridge wells. Restricted
110. Wakefield. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
111. Walsall. Review expected on 25 November 2004 Licensing Committee meeting.
112. Wansbeck. Policy under review. 30 H/C vehicles.
113. Warrington ua. Restricted
114. Watford. Preference to maintain a managed growth policy, next survey scheduled 2005/2006
115. Welwyn Hatfield. Re Restricted late 2003. Were previously unrestricted.
116. Weymouth. Restricted
117. Wigan. Restricted
118. Windsor and Maidenhead ua. Restricted
119. Wolverhampton. Decision on quotas imminent.
120. Worthing. Managed growth policy. Wav only. Conducting survey to measure demand.
121. Wrexham. Restricted.
122. Wyre.160 H/C/V Survey commissioned for Jan 2005 final report to committee, Feb 2005.
123. Wyre Forest. Provisional decision to de-restrict numbers, ratification imminent.
124. York ua. Policy under review.

Middlesbrough have been removed from the list, their policy is no restriction but wav vehicles only, no saloons. Typical of the trend throughought the country. Quality control rather than qauntity control.

123 or 35.44% of councils now restrict.

Updated list of Authorities who restrict H/C Vehicles by numbers:


1. Ashford. Restricted, to be reviewed early 2005.
2. Aylesbury Vale. Restricted
3. Babergh. Restricted
4. Barnsley. Survey commissioned on unmet demand for the services of Taxis.
5. Barrow in Furness. Restricted
6. Basildon. Restricted.
7. Basingstoke. Restricted
8. Bath and North East Somerset ua. Restricted
9. Bedford. Restricted.
10. Blackburn Darwen ua. Consultation on deregulation underway, scheduled to finish end Nov.
11. Blackpool. 256 hacks, 44 horse drawn. Intention is to keep a numbers policy.
12. Blyth Valley. 41 hacks, decision on change of policy early 2005.
13. Bolton. Restricted.
14. Bournemouth ua. Restricted
15. Bradford. Restricted. Policy to be reviewed Before Jan 2005
16. Braintree. Restricted
17. Brighton and Hove ua. Restricted.
18. Burnley. Restricted
19. Carrick. Conducting a survey.
20. Cherwell. Policy currently under review.
21. Chester. Undertaking unmet demand survey 2005.
22. Chester le street. Restricted
23. Chorley. Review of policy early 2005.
24. Colchester. Restricted
25. Congleton. Restricted
26. Conwy. Restricted
27. Copeland. Restricted
28. Corby. Restricted
29. Denbighshire. Restricted
30. Dover. Restricted
31. Durham. Restricted. Recently issued a quota of new licenses. Policy continually under review.
32. Easington. Restricted
33. East Riding. Restricted
34. Eastbourne. Restricted
35. Eastleigh. Internal report under consideration.
36. Ellesmere Port. Restricted
37. Exeter. Decision imminent.
38. Fylde. Restricted. Unmet demand survey to be carried out, consultation process to follow.
39. Gosport. Restricted
40. Great Yarmouth. Restricted
41. Gwynedd. Restricted
42. Halton ua. A Recent licensing report stated that local plate values stood at 10/12k and this indicated no unmet demand. Possible flawed logic, which does not address DFT guidance.
43. Harrogate. Restricted
44. Hastings. Restricted. Policy change under review, decision imminent.
45. Havant. Restricted
46. High Peak. Restricted
47. Huntingdonshire. Restricted
48. Hyndburn. Restricted
49. Ipswich. Restricted
50. Kings Lynn. Restricted
51. Kingston upon Hull. Restricted
52. Kirklees. Restricted
53. Knowsley. Undertaking unmet demand survey
54. Lancaster. Restricted to 105 H/C/V
55. Leeds. Consultation on policy change currently underway.
56. Leicester. Restricted
57. Lincoln. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
58. Liverpool. Restricted
59. Luton ua. Restricted
60. Maidstone. Restricted
61. Manchester. Restricted. Has a policy of issuing 20/25 new licences annually.
62. Merthyr Tydfil. Decision imminent.
Middlesborough ua. Wav only
63. Mole Valley. Restricted
64. New Forest. Report for consideration to be presented to committee members in January 2005
65. Newcastle on Tyne. Restricted.
66. Newcastle under Lyme. Restricted
67. Nottingham. Undertaking an unmet demand survey.
68. Oldham. Restricted.
69. Oxford. Restricted. Recently voted to retain a restricted numbers policy.
70. Pendle. Restricted
71. Penwith. Restricted
72. Plymouth ua. Legal Challenge on refusal to issue H/C licence, Court hearing 2005.
73. Poole ua. Restricted
74. Portsmouth ua. Restricted
75. Preston. Restricted
76. Reading ua. Restricted. Policy change unlikely.
77. Reigate and Banstead. Restricted
78. Restormel. Restricted
79. Ribble Valley. Restricted.
80. Richmondshire. Restricted. Undertaking unmet demand survey. Halcrow.
81. Rochdale. Restricted
82. Rotherham. Restricted. 48 H/C. Currently undertaking an unmet demand survey.
83. Rugby. Conducting an unmet demand survey to consider options.
84. Salford. Presently addressing Government guidance could possibly commission local survey.
85. Scarborough. 97 H/C/V review in Early 2005.
86. Sefton. Restricted
87. South Bedfordshire. Restricted. Policy currently under review.
88. South Ribble. Restricted
89. South Tyneside. Restricted
90. Southampton ua. Restricted
91. Southend on sea ua. Restricted
92. St Edmundsbury. Restricted
93. St Helens. Unmet demand survey being conducted early 2005.
94. Stevenage. Restricted
95. Stockport. Restricted. Commissioning a Mori survey to determine future policy.
96. Stoke on Trent ua. Restricted
97. Sunderland. Restricted. 308 H/C/V
98. Swindon ua. Policy under review, consultations being conducted with relevant parties.
99. Tameside. Restricted
100. Teignbridge. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
101. Test Valley. Restricted to 34 H/C, policy to be reviewed shortly in line with DFT request.
102. Thanet. Restricted
103. Thurrock ua. Restricted
104. Torbay ua. Restricted
105. Torfaen. Restricted.
106. Torridge. Decision on quotas imminent.
107. Trafford. Restricted.
108. Tunbridge wells. Restricted
109. Wakefield. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
110. Walsall. Review expected on 25 November 2004 Licensing Committee meeting.
111. Wansbeck. Policy under review. 30 H/C vehicles.
112. Warrington ua. Restricted
113. Watford. Preference to maintain a managed growth policy, next survey scheduled 2005/2006
114. Welwyn Hatfield. Re Restricted late 2003. Were previously unrestricted.
115. Weymouth. Restricted
116. Wigan. Restricted
117. Windsor and Maidenhead ua. Restricted
118. Wolverhampton. Decision on quotas imminent.
119. Worthing. Managed growth policy. Wav only. Conducting survey to measure demand.
120. Wrexham. Restricted.
121. Wyre.160 H/C/V Survey commissioned for Jan 2005 final report to committee, Feb 2005.
122. Wyre Forest. Provisional decision to de-restrict numbers, ratification imminent.
123. York ua. Policy under review.

A three party unanimous decision.

http://www.basildonmeetings.info/ieList ... 2004&Ver=4

_________________
IDFIMH

I need Mr Sussex help and Mr Yorkies help.

What I need to know Sussex, is this.

What do we know about Chelmsford? didn't chelmsford recently say they were de restricting? What do we know about Crawley didn't they say they were de restricting? Same goes for chelmsford? and what of Cardiff we all read both court cases but I have been informed by a man in a grey suit that they are subject to another legal challenge over de restriction. I must admit I havent heard anything about a challenge so I think this bod at the ministry may be four months behind the times. Can you jog your memory and see what you can come up with please, otherwise I'll have to start digging myself.

I need Yorkies help because I need to know what the connection is between Calderdale and Halifax? Are these Zoned areas and who actually issues the Hackney carriage licenses? I always thought Halifax had nothing whatsoever to do with Calderdale but it seems they do. Do Calderdale issue there own licenses or are they administered by someone else. Who issues the licences for Halifax? Can you also tell me what you know about Amber Valley Yorkie, have they decided to de restrict?

Best wishes

JD

Crawley have de-limited on the basis of WAVs, as per everyone else. There was a delay because the council wanted to wait for the Wirral outcome. So thanks to Mr Royden of the Wirral T&G, Crawley de-limited.

The local Ass have a site, which might throw a little light on the issue, but it's not that good.
http://www.crawley-taxi-association.org.uk/

Cardiff might well have an appeal against the Judical Review, in some ways Mr Loads of Plates has not a lot to lose by doing this. Maybe the money he will get from his restricted plates in the meantime will fund an appeal.

Chelmsford seem to be doing the hoeky coeky, but a press release the other day points towards an iminent de-limit http://www.chelmsfordbc.gov.uk/news/dec04/taxis.htm

It may even have been made, but the minutes are not up yet. But Wednesday's agenda report is http://www.chelmsfordbc.gov.uk/democrac ... riages.pdf

_________________
IDFIMH