Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Fri May 01, 2026 9:15 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 17, 2010 12:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
On the subject of brand names. When I go to the pub I often ask for a diet coke. Many a time the person behind the bar has said we do diet pepsi is that ok. I asked once why the bothered to ask and I was told that if you ask for a diet coke and they give you a diet pepsi without telling you, they can be sued. :?

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 17, 2010 12:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 8:15 pm
Posts: 9170
grandad wrote:
On the subject of brand names. When I go to the pub I often ask for a diet coke. Many a time the person behind the bar has said we do diet pepsi is that ok. I asked once why the bothered to ask and I was told that if you ask for a diet coke and they give you a diet pepsi without telling you, they can be sued. :?


Never heard that before..but I dont do diet Coke... eusasmiles.zip


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 17, 2010 6:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:22 pm
Posts: 14152
Location: Wirral
Quote:
We're always receiving calls from customers who quite specifically state 'DONT SEND A HACKNEY.


So are we, but, unlike Delta we do have hackneys on our system. Passengers often say to me 'I'm glad they didn't send one of those black things', I am of course assuming they mean a hackney and not a hearse :D

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 17, 2010 8:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57355
Location: 1066 Country
deltastaff wrote:
18 years later, the 2003 Amendment to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, article 2 states...
(b) "taxi driver licence" means a licence granted under -

(i) section 37 of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847[5];

(ii) section 8 of the Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869[6];

(iii) section 9 of the Plymouth City Council Act 1975[7];

(iv) section 51 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976; or

(v) section 13 of the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998[8];".

If Harvey's drivers are licensed under the Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, then according to the most up to date legal definition available, they are TAXI DRIVERS.

I'm not sure I agree with that interpretation, but even if I did the section you mention deals with drivers, not taxis.

So even if Harvey's drivers were dual licensed, the vehicles they are driving aren't. So the offering/advertising issue is still the same in that they are supplying licensed private hire vehicles, not taxis.

I know some, including me, don't really give a stuff, but by having 'taxis' written on the door staff's jackets they are in my view committing a trading standards offence.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 4:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 4:50 pm
Posts: 19
Location: DERBY
Good point, I wonder if i can get trading standards to clarify their point of view regarding my vests. I'll let you know monday


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 6:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 5:46 pm
Posts: 1
Quote:
If thats the case then can you explain why the court seems to describe the following as PRIVATE HIRE DRIVERS and not Taxi drivers?

Case Reference: 96/5159 Mohamed Jaleel Hanaz Sefton Private hire driver
Date: 08 July 2010
Name: Mohamed Jaleel Hanaz
Address: Liverpool
Offence: (1)Sefton private hire plying for hire (2) No insurance
Sentence: £150 fine £95 costs 6 penalty points and £15 victim surcharge
Details: Guilty

Case Reference: 96/5157 Michael Joseph Lavelle Sefton Private hire driver
Date: 08 July 2010
Name: Michael Joseph lavelle
Address: Liverpool
Offence: (1)Sefton private hire plying for hire (2) No insurance
Sentence: £150 fine £95 costs 6 penalty points and £15 victim surcharge
Details: Guilty

Case Reference: 92/5137 James Le Surf Sefton Private hire driver
Date: 08 July 2010
Name: James LeSurf
Address: Liverpool
Offence: (1)Sefton private hire plying for hire (2) No insurance
Sentence: £150 fine £95 costs 6 penalty points and £15 victim surcharge
Details: Guilty

Case Reference: LCC v Ian Downey Sefton private hire driver
Date: 02 July 2010
Name: Ian Downey
Address: Liverpool
Offence: (1)Sefton private hire plying for hire (2) No insurance
Sentence: £290 fine £400 costs 8 penalty points and £15 victim surcharge
Details: Guilty

Case Reference: 91/5124 George Woods Sefton private hire driver
Date: 17 June 2010
Name: George Woods
Address: Bootle
Offence: (1) plying for hire (2) no insurance
Sentence: (1) £150 fine £95 costs (2) £150 fine 6 penalty points £15 victim surcharge
Details: Guiltyx2

Case Reference: 91/5124 George Woods Sefton private hire driver
Date: 17 June 2010
Name: George Woods
Address: Bootle
Offence: (1) plying for hire (2) no insurance
Sentence: (1) £150 fine £95 costs (2) £150 fine 6 penalty points £15 victim surcharge
Details: Guiltyx2

Case Reference: 93/5142 Alexander Moon Sefton Private hire driver
Date: 03/06/2010
Name: Alexander Moon
Address: Liverpool
Offence: Plying for hire
Sentence: Guilty
Details: £150 fine £95 costs and £15 victim surcharge

Case Reference: 93/5143 Colin Gerrard McDonald Sefton private hire driver
Date: 03/06/2010
Name: Colin Gerrard McDonald
Address: Seaforth
Offence: Plying for hire
Sentence: Guilty
Details: £170 fine £95 costs and £15 victim surcharge

Case Reference:90/5116 Paul Francis Tumilty Sefton Private hire driver
Date: 06/05/2010
Name: Paul Francis Tumilty
Address: Liverpool
Offence: (1) Plying for hire (2) No Insurance
Sentence: (1)£400 fine(2)£400 fine £95 costs 6 penalty points and £15 victim support charges
Details: Guilty

Case Reference: 89/5109 Samuel Francis Smith Sefton private hire driver
Date: 8 April 2010
Name: Samuel Francis Smith
Address: Thornton
Offence: (1) Plying for hire (2) No Insurance
Sentence: (1) £50 fine £95 costs (2) £150 fine and 6 penalty points
Details: Guilty x2


Any of those folks yours?



CC


The lack of respeonse would suggest so :lol:

CC


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 8:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
our PH regs state quite clearly "no PH vehicle shall carry the words CAB or TAXI (or any word which could be mistaken for them) in any sign or advertising"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 9:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 4:50 pm
Posts: 19
Location: DERBY
wannabeeahack wrote:
our PH regs state quite clearly "no PH vehicle shall carry the words CAB or TAXI (or any word which could be mistaken for them) in any sign or advertising"


But is using the word 'taxi' on clothing a form of sign or advertising? I presume if you do a google search for taxis in your area, most of your PH's will have linked themselves to the word 'Taxi'. So should they all be prosecuted??

See how vague they make the law? Its there to be used whem the LA doesn't like you by the sounds of it!! :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 3:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 4:50 pm
Posts: 19
Location: DERBY
:roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 3:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 8:15 pm
Posts: 9170
wannabeeahack wrote:
our PH regs state quite clearly "no PH vehicle shall carry the words CAB or TAXI (or any word which could be mistaken for them) in any sign or advertising"


I assume that refers to advertising Livery/signage on the vehicle itself...least thats how it reads to me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 3:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 4:50 pm
Posts: 19
Location: DERBY
Our LA's legal advisor has informed me due to a law from 200 yrs ago we won't be able to use the word 'Taxi' and if we went to court they would win. So I've accepted defeat and decided to change the print to 'TACSI' :lol: with the letter C above S so they take up the space where the letter X would have been. The legal advisor has agreed to this . \:D/

Sometimes you just have to know when it time stop arguing and wind people up with a new strategy :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57355
Location: 1066 Country
harvey wrote:
But is using the word 'taxi' on clothing a form of sign or advertising? I presume if you do a google search for taxis in your area, most of your PH's will have linked themselves to the word 'Taxi'. So should they all be prosecuted??

See how vague they make the law? Its there to be used whem the LA doesn't like you by the sounds of it!! :?

A court will decide on what the average man thinks.

Would the average man think a chap walking down the road, with a taxi t-shirt on, was touting for taxi work? Probably not.

But would the average man think a chap standing outside a PH licensed office think the man with the taxi t-shirt was touting for taxi work? Probably yes.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57355
Location: 1066 Country
harvey wrote:
Sometimes you just have to know when it time stop arguing and wind people up with a new strategy :lol:

Why not just put you firm's name and number on the shirts? :?

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 4:50 pm
Posts: 19
Location: DERBY
We was already advertising our company name and number and the hackney drivers were not happy (To say the least) So out of principal for their arrogance towards us, i wanted to use the word taxi and thats why i'm gonna use the word 'TACSI'. They need to release they're not the law and threatening to go on strike if we're allowed to work our business in this manner is prehistoric and good for the PH business. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 7:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
good luck

Quote:
our PH regs state quite clearly "no PH vehicle shall carry the words CAB or TAXI (or any word which could be mistaken for them) in any sign or advertising


harvey wrote:
We was already advertising our company name and number and the hackney drivers were not happy (To say the least) So out of principal for their arrogance towards us, i wanted to use the word taxi and thats why i'm gonna use the word 'TACSI'. They need to release they're not the law and threatening to go on strike if we're allowed to work our business in this manner is prehistoric and good for the PH business. :wink:


the HCs arent the law, but your LO certainly IS


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 540 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group