Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Thu Sep 11, 2025 11:38 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 5:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:58 pm
Posts: 2665
I am grateful to Swannee for the following:

Compliance with Authorised Officer
142
The driver of a taxi shall not obstruct the Authorised Officer in the performance of any of the Authorised Officer’s duties under these conditions.
143
The driver of a taxi shall comply with all the instructions or directions of the Authorised Officer in relation to these conditions and shall give all information reasonably required in the discharge of the duties of the Authorised Officer.


Very interesting. Frank Smith says jump, and the licensing conditions say, "How high"?

Fraid not.

Edinburgh once did have a cab office, with a Cab Inspector, and complaints were dealt with by him.

But then the Cab office got turned over. As I remember cash went missing. The cab office was burned down.

The council took action. It converted the "cab office" into the Taxi Examination Centre,

The Cab Inspector (position remained in name only) effectively became little more than a garage administrator. Although he retained his position as the mouthpiece for the Chief Constable when he decided to Lord it over his supplicants.

So consider Smith's rush of blood to the head and consider whether he is fit and proper for the post he holds?

Complaints about individuals breaching road traffic regulations should be made to the police. This is not initially a licensing matter, though any subsequent conviction may well be.

Complaints about taxi drivers should be made to the council. We know this because each taxi is required to display signs saying this. Frank knows this also, because he is charged with ensuring these signs are in position at taxi inspection.

So, in the Skull's case, when Frank got the complaint what should have been his options?

1. An alleged traffic misemeanour reported, he should have reported it to his colleagues in L& B, who would then have been obliged to investigate the complaint.

2. If a licensing matter, then frank was NOT empowered to deal with it, he should have forwrded it to the licensing section of the council. That's the rules.

Frank did neither.

He did not forward it. He did not investigate it as a traffic offence. He rushd straight to judgement and only four hours after the alleged incident attempted to intimidaie the taxi driver, as a licensing matter not a traffic violation.

But wait, licensing complaints go to the council, not the cab inspector, so what was Frank doing?

He was overstepping his mark.

Now Frank would aspire to be a Police Inspector. Not just the pretendy Cab Inspector type of Police Inspector, but a real Police Inspector.

You know the type, the Inspector Javaert type.

But, how can he possibly find himself in a real Inspector position when he can't even understand the simple complaints procedure in place here? Which directs complaints to the council, but not to a garage foreman administrator?

Frank is going nowhere. If the Chief Constable puts him in a position of authority, considering his performance here, then the clear signal is that our Police force is managed by incompetents. Frank is now tainted.

He got emotional. He lost it. He saw Skull's name and it got personal for him. Political. This was a guy he wanted to dig out. His status would rise if it was HE who dug Skull out.

Except he hasn't. He;s just opened the biggest can of worms and entered the battlegroung on the softest footing possible.

But worse for him, he's now in a public glare that will show his masters that he is not a safe hand on the establishment tiller.

Bye Bye Frank. And remember, these being Human Rights matters, the sting in the tail is the lawsuit to establish blame and the punitive damages which will result.


:wink:

BTW Swannee, did you get this :lol: Smith was not even an authorised officer in this instance. :lol:

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 9:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 4:54 am
Posts: 10460
Has anyone considered how our illustrious Cab Inspector, Frank Smith or our idiot councillors determine who is innocent or guilty when faced with what amounts to vexatious allegations? Do they toss a coin, play, spin the bottle, or consult the spirit world via an Ouijaboard?

Alternatively, perhaps they believe whoever and whatever. They want to believe. That way, the inconvenience of evidential fact, truth or justice doesn't even enter their thinking.

Then again, this is about the blind obedience of the bewildered herd. It has nothing to do with right or wrong, truth or justice. It's just another convenient ruse to beat down the dissenters.
:-|

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 11:59 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37364
Location: Wayneistan
The system allows everyone their day in court.

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 12:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:12 am
Posts: 233
Surely as the complaint was made by joe bloggs

And not a passenger of skulls, the council has no authority

If its a criminal matter then insp. Smith should investigate it as so

And not threaten the kangaroo court,

No passenger of skulls has made a complaint

Skull must assume its a criminal case and as is his right did not answear

What the fu*k has this got to do with the council


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 1:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:58 pm
Posts: 2665
captain cab wrote:
The system allows everyone their day in court.

CC


Really? And at what cost?

Irespective of the quality of legal agent you can afford, the damage has already been done, it can't be undone.

If suspended you've already lost a vast amount of earnings. You've probably lost your drive because the owner's had to move on and find a replacement. It's already cost you big time.

And any decision to reinstate a licence, even if a Sheriff would be prepared to buck the establishment system and do so, is not accompanied by an automatic right of redress.

So the system can shaft you because it will "get it right" in the end?

This is precisely why we don't have capital punishment in this country. The system invariably gets it wrong.

The bewildered herd knows all this, which is why they keep their heads below the parapet. The system is designed to ensure servility. We're all living in abject fear of coming into conflict with the system.

Which is why our trade is divided and weak.

Don't you think the council, cops and courts understand this?

So, why don't we?

:roll:

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2011 1:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:58 pm
Posts: 2665
Jasbar wrote:
I am grateful to Swannee for the following:

Compliance with Authorised Officer
142
The driver of a taxi shall not obstruct the Authorised Officer in the performance of any of the Authorised Officer’s duties under these conditions.
143
The driver of a taxi shall comply with all the instructions or directions of the Authorised Officer in relation to these conditions and shall give all information reasonably required in the discharge of the duties of the Authorised Officer.


Very interesting. Frank Smith says jump, and the licensing conditions say, "How high"?

Fraid not.

Edinburgh once did have a cab office, with a Cab Inspector, and complaints were dealt with by him.

But then the Cab office got turned over. As I remember cash went missing. The cab office was burned down.

The council took action. It converted the "cab office" into the Taxi Examination Centre,

The Cab Inspector (position remained in name only) effectively became little more than a garage administrator. Although he retained his position as the mouthpiece for the Chief Constable when he decided to Lord it over his supplicants.

So consider Smith's rush of blood to the head and consider whether he is fit and proper for the post he holds?

Complaints about individuals breaching road traffic regulations should be made to the police. This is not initially a licensing matter, though any subsequent conviction may well be.

Complaints about taxi drivers should be made to the council. We know this because each taxi is required to display signs saying this. Frank knows this also, because he is charged with ensuring these signs are in position at taxi inspection.

So, in the Skull's case, when Frank got the complaint what should have been his options?

1. An alleged traffic misemeanour reported, he should have reported it to his colleagues in L& B, who would then have been obliged to investigate the complaint.

2. If a licensing matter, then frank was NOT empowered to deal with it, he should have forwrded it to the licensing section of the council. That's the rules.

Frank did neither.

He did not forward it. He did not investigate it as a traffic offence. He rushd straight to judgement and only four hours after the alleged incident attempted to intimidaie the taxi driver, as a licensing matter not a traffic violation.

But wait, licensing complaints go to the council, not the cab inspector, so what was Frank doing?

He was overstepping his mark.

Now Frank would aspire to be a Police Inspector. Not just the pretendy Cab Inspector type of Police Inspector, but a real Police Inspector.

You know the type, the Inspector Javaert type.

But, how can he possibly find himself in a real Inspector position when he can't even understand the simple complaints procedure in place here? Which directs complaints to the council, but not to a garage foreman administrator?

Frank is going nowhere. If the Chief Constable puts him in a position of authority, considering his performance here, then the clear signal is that our Police force is managed by incompetents. Frank is now tainted.

He got emotional. He lost it. He saw Skull's name and it got personal for him. Political. This was a guy he wanted to dig out. His status would rise if it was HE who dug Skull out.

Except he hasn't. He;s just opened the biggest can of worms and entered the battlegroung on the softest footing possible.

But worse for him, he's now in a public glare that will show his masters that he is not a safe hand on the establishment tiller.

Bye Bye Frank. And remember, these being Human Rights matters, the sting in the tail is the lawsuit to establish blame and the punitive damages which will result.


:wink:

BTW Swannee, did you get this :lol: Smith was not even an authorised officer in this instance. :lol:


150 criminal cabbies told they can stay on the road

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/edinb ... jp#5902010


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 126 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