Taxi Driver Online

Thank you for correcting my english John, those arguing to keep the status quo have a vested interest but those seeking plates still have an involved interest, am I digging myself a hole here ............... knew I should have studied harder at school.

You know what I mean though, everyone wants to win the plate argument who stands on one side of the other, I just call for proper investigation with adequate provision matching demand ................. can't decide what side that puts me on though

What was this thread about again

Charlie,
I don't wear a vest so I don't know if you are right or wrong.
Ged

_________________
taxi driver @manchester airport

It was about how a justification can be made to discriminate against some licensed drivers.

If it could be proved that this discrimination was in customer's interests, then that would be one thing.

But when the only justification goes against logic i.e. saying cabs would rather sit earning nothing whilst ignoring huge demand elsewhere, then you have to wonder if that council really do care about their residents.

Still you never know one day they might actually do what the gov suggested and ask customers for their views.

_________________
IDFIMH

Not me Charlie, I only post under one name.

Best wishes

JD

I havent seen anyone argue against a persons rights. What I have read on the other hand is people arguing, "for" equal rights.

I would wager there aren't many owners who are sat on a vested interence in those regulated Authorities who wish to see an equal rights policy introduced. Although when it comes to other matters they probably want their daily dosage of equality along with everyone else.

Each elected Councillor has to state his or her vested interest at every committee meeting before proceedings can take place, If their vested interest is one of financial reward they are normally excluded from participating in the proceedings. Perhaps the same should apply to us Cab owners.



The only example I've seen, is that in the past P/H drivers move over to Hackney Carriage when deregulation takes place. Thats an accepted fact on what has happened in the past.

There has been no Factual evidence or examples given about P/H and unmet demand. If I was P/H driver I would love unmet demand 7 days a week.

Anyway, I think the onus is on you to tell us where this unmet demad for P/H exists.



A High court Judge back in 1986 or thereabouts said the very same thing about Cab drivers who tried to stop a council issuing more plates. The only difference between the Judges reasoning and your own, was that "he, only saw the Cab drivers as having a vested interest". No one else.

Best wishes

JD

No he didnt John, if I remember correctly he said "the council should not rely on the assertion of taxi drivers, they only see the demand they meet"

a comment that found its way into circulars.

very different to what, our friend here is saying, "dont listen to taxi drivers"

a council must take views from all parties and take them into account, when making a decision giving and judging due weight in each circumstance.

the dont listen to him because, is a load of nonesense

you dont vote for somebody for them to turn a deaf ear.

Unless you are of course a Brighton Councillor that still wants to stick his nose in the trough.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/the_argus/arc ... S30ZM.html

_________________
IDFIMH

John has interpreted it a bit wrong

s/he is required to declare the interest on each agenda item an interest relates to, or as soon as practicable should an issue arise in debate affecting interest.

declaring interests at the beggining of committee, if no items of interest are likely to arise, is not something thats required.

as for Brighton thats a law free zone, the councillors and police attend the taxi cartel apparently?

If you read anything from the DfT you'll see that they always use the term taxi to mean what you call an HC - they don't use the term generically.

Whatever the terminology used what's abundantly clear is that one sector has access to the rank and hail market, to which the other is excluded - that's why some plates can be worth tens of thousands, while the others are always worth zilch.

But if the minister didn't know the difference (as you seem to be saying) then why would she ask the question? Why would she ask it if she thought that everyone COULD start their own taxi service?

The answer is that she knew what she was on about, and probably thinks it is wrong, hence the question:

Is it really right to bar those who meet the application criteria and want to run their own taxi service?

Providing a taxi service doesn't restrict the operator to using Hackney Carriages.

Where I live every single Private Hire office is called "taxis", we have "Charlies" TAXIS when we should have "Charlies" Private Hire.
THIS IS BECAUSE THEY ALL OFFER A TAXI SERVICE

When a punter phones such offices they ask for a TAXI, not a private hire vehicle.
THIS IS BECAUSE THEY OFFER A TAXI SERVICE

The simple fact of the matter is that the term "TAXI SERVICE" cannot just be undertaken by the HC sector, you choose to interpret it as such to strengthen your argument.

With our office letting so many people down recently I'm considering getting an operators licence and running my private hire car from home, the questions I would like you to answer are,
WOULD I BE PROVIDING A TAXI SERVICE?
WOULD I ENCOUNTER RESTRICTION IN DOING SO?

They should then leave the room not sit at the back.



Yeah Right.






Do you mean the monthly meetings the association has with the Council? The Police are invited along with the pub trade.

Charlie you are a laugh a minute.

word of advice dont run your private hire from home, you will lose your sanctury of life and you will never get peace and quiet, nor will your family your life will be invaded every time the phone rings and you will never know when its bedtime

and you will let down loads.
one man bands from home end family life and your family will begin to hate you.

think this one through.

private hire are not taxis. dont wanna argue the point but its law sorry but there it is, nor do you do the same job as a Hackney, bit like comparing a midwife with a peadtrician, a brain surgeon with a psychitrist, or a fast tan salesman with a beutician.

if you were a taxi. you would not dream of running it from home.

Jesus christ , just how many are involved in this conspiracy?
it gets worse every posting

Well my post was cleary a complete waste of time.

The point is surely, that it's not the terminology that's in issue, it's the fact that only one sector of the trade has access to the rank market, and consequently plates are worth tens of thousands, drivers are being fleeced and/or treated like second-class citizens etc.

You seem to be just using the confusion over the terminology to dodge the issues. There is no doubt confusion over terminology, but that's a seperate issue.

You answered the first question before you even asked it - you would be providing a private hire service.

As for the second question, the answer is no unless you want to access the rank and hail market, in which case you would encounter a restriction called a cartel.

Hope that answers your questions