Taxi Driver Online

it does not matter what the 'public wants' the vehicle needs to be safe, comply with british road & vehicle regs and meet CURRENT licencing laws.

it is not up to the council to licence it, it is up to the operator to prove the vehicle meets the requirements to obtain a licence, as laid down by their local licencing authority or to challenge the licencing requirements in the courts if it does not.

that is one of the biggest problems in this trade. many councils are just too slow to keep up with what is happening in the real world.

you need to push the rules a little now and again to get things changed. many people do it, many are successful some are not. if people did not challenge the council rules we'd all still be going around with bales of hay in the boot

Perhaps, but then why do you take us to task for complaining about it?

See that's the problem, who is to judge what is a pukka un-licensed vehicle, over that of a non-pucker un-licensed vehicle?

_________________
IDFIMH

Tulsa,
There were a couple of items I forgot to mention. They are both causing feelings of foulplay;
The lack of Crb checks,
The lack of Airport permits,
In both cases if they are a requirement for us then they should be for them.
Ged.
Ps my original invite still is on the table, when you are down here just ask for me. The same for anybody else, find the feeder park and I will be there.

_________________
taxi driver @manchester airport

The Airportcarz situation revolves around the allegation that they are breaking the terms of their license, by acting outside the boundary of that license. No one has suggested they are unlicensed but if they are acting outside their license terms? Then they would indeed be unlicensed.



It has always been like that and there are no signs of the parking restrictions being relaxed, in fact in todays current climate I think it may even get worse.



I was under the impression that all vehicles for hire and reward are licensed. I don't think the word "should" is apropriate. If a vehicle is not licensed then it is not a hire and reward vehicle. Limos are hire and reward vehicles but the police in most parts of the country turn a blind eye to the fact that some are not licensed. In the main, police haven't a clue about hire and reward licensing laws and it certainly isn't one of their main priorities.

Best wishes

JD

I would love to meeet and have chat over coffee, next time I'm down there and get a delay. (probaly next MYT flight pick up).

Not sure what it is you guys are actually after, What type of traveller do you get or try to target for your work ?.
Do you prefer the business type short trip to city centre or are longer distance jobs more profitable/better.

I get a lot of phone calls from abroad asking about transfers and I always tell them it would be easier and probaly cheaper to use the Taxi rank just outside the terminal doors for journeys to city centre or Stockport, or journeys upto about 10 miles. I could not recommend a black cab type vehicle for four passengers with luggage to travel on a 100 mile 2hr+ journey.
If Airportcarz have to get licenced as ph ( I presume they could not get HC plates) what difference would it make apart from not being able to use the word Taxi and or bus. (btw this is a genuine question as to what operational difference there would be to the guys on the rank).

I hope I don't come over as anti Taxi, my own background is some 35 years in PSV, but My family history is quite deep into HC and PH operation, both my brother and father in law where operators and drivers (good old days of black morris oxford with red leather seats) I cut my teeth driving cabs during the winter months.

I do have some knowledge of the way the airport management think (or dont think at times) as I was an active member of CPT and attende some meetings down, I have to say I was quite disgusted with the managenents attitude to airport staff and in particular at the time to the airport fire service.
I think the real "fight" should be against them but sorry I dont have a clue where to start.

Have a great New Year everyone and If I could ask all of you at some point during the festivities to spare just a moment to think of all the poor souls and their families who have been affected by the recent events around the Indian Ocean, God Bless them all.

Aiportcarz have private hire vehicles in other areas of the country including Stanstead Airport but they won't licence P/H up here because they have to comply with the regulations as laid down by the city Council.

Some time ago when they enquired with the City council about private hire status they wanted the council to make a special dispensation on their behalf, the dispensation was to allow their vehicles to dispence with the council logo. After an appeal which took place on the 30 June 2003 the council told them to [edited by admin] off.

Excellent Connections know that they couldn't run the same operation as they do now if their vehicles were private hire. One word sums it up, "Watford". Just let them try parking a fleet of Private hire vehicles at the airport in public view, see what happens.

Best wishes.

JD
Best wishes

JD

For many years AirportCarz ran there operation at Stanstead by going through the PCV loophole.

If my memory is correct, and the rumours were right they only licenced when the local council literally bent over backwards and ammended their local byelaws to something that suited Richard Matthews.

Andy 7 will know more than the rest of us on the Stanstead story.

_________________
A member of the Hire or Reward Industry

happy new year, mr thumb.

I had a conversation today with a leading light down their in Chelmsford and he said the same as you with regard to the council previously bending over backwards to accommodate Mr. Matthew's.

In fairness to Dawn French who is now head of licensing, the person who I spoke to said that she had only been in the job a relatively short period of time, I think he said two years but it seems her background is not related to the Taxi trade.

If your licensing officer isn't familiar with the laws Governing our trade then what chance do Councillors have of making the right informed decisions?

I think the decision of the council not to defend their policy of restriction and issue Mr. Matthew's with four new licenses, speaks volumes about the situation down there. Either Chelmsford Council decided that they were going to lift numbers in January 2005 in any case and that issuing four licences was neither here nor there or they completely failed to understand current case law.

It is a well-established fact in law that a council can defer an application until such time it has measured demand. When that exercise has taken place it will then be in a position to make a decision on any application placed before it.

Perhaps the council as I have already stated has made a decision to lift numbers and saw no point in going to court over it.

I understand Mr Matthew's has placed an order for 20 plates should Chelmsford decide to lift numbers but I just wonder where he is going to get the H/C drivers to pay him the kind of rent he would obviously need to make a profit.

Best wishes

JD

Just heard that the Commissioner thinks that everything is Kosher at the Airport. She will hold an Open Forum in Lancaster to explain the reasons.
Let you know more when I have read the findings.
Ged

_________________
taxi driver @manchester airport

Spot on Ged, the commisioner found that Airportcarz has no case to answer under current legislation and she will be giving her reasons at 10-30 on the 9th February at Lancaster magistrates court.

Anyone can attend.

Best wishes

JD

It would be very nice if a full transcript could find it's way onto here.

_________________
IDFIMH

I'm sure it will. Certainly if I have anything to do about it.

Best wishes

JD

"The Traffic Commissioner has now conducted her review of the evidence and legislation and as a result has determined that there is no evidence before her to call a Public Inquiry. However as the matter has been dealt with in open forum previously she feels that it is appropriate to give her findings and reasons for the decision in open forum. This will be delivered on Wednesday 9th Feb. 2005 at 1030 am in Lancaster Magistrates Court and all other interested parties are welcome but not required to attend"


So there we have it , 11 months of head scratching, 3 adjournments, hours of written statements being gathered, video evidence of drivers accepting instant hirings, to be told that there is NO evidence. I am on the phone tomorrow for her summary and comments, I cannot accept that there is absolutely nothing wrong in the operation.
If I get it I will put it up on here as soon as possible.
Ged

_________________
taxi driver @manchester airport