Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Wed May 06, 2026 3:51 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 10:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57364
Location: 1066 Country
wannabeeahack wrote:
tom2907 wrote:
PH roof signs are Illegal.
not in sandwell....

I've had one on top of my 'cab' for the last 22 years. \:D/

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 6:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
Sussex wrote:
wannabeeahack wrote:
tom2907 wrote:
PH roof signs are Illegal.
not in sandwell....

I've had one on top of my 'cab' for the last 22 years. \:D/


Time you got a new cab then! :mrgreen:

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 7:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:44 pm
Posts: 10591
Location: Scotland
Time he became a proper taxi driver instead of PH :mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 9:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24392
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
skippy41 wrote:
Time he became a proper taxi driver instead of PH :mrgreen:



he doesnt want to be mistaken for a dodgy taxi driver

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 10:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:11 pm
Posts: 8119
Location: A Villa in Aston NO MORE!
grandad wrote:
tom2907 wrote:
Transport Act 1980

Section 64.

Roof-signs on vehicle other than taxis.

(1)There shall not, in any part of England and Wales outside the metropolitan police district and the City of London, be displayed on or above the roof of any vehicle which is used for carrying passengers for hire or reward but which is not a taxi—(a)any sign which consists of or includes the word “taxi” or “cab”, whether in the singular or plural, or “hire”, or any word of similar meaning or appearance to any of those words, whether alone or as part of another word; or (b) any sign, notice, mark, illumination or other feature which may suggest that the vehicle is a taxi.

(2)Any person who knowingly—(a)drives a vehicle in respect of which subsection (1) is contravened; or(b)causes or permits that subsection to be contravened in respect of any vehicle,shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding [F1level 3 on the standard scale].(3)In this section “taxi” means a vehicle licensed under section 37 of the M1Town Police Clauses Act 1847, section 6 of the M2Metropolitan Carriage Act 1869, [F2section 10 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982] or any similar local enactment.

That just says that any top sign used on a private hire vehicle can't use certain words. It doesn't say that you can't have a sign.

Which part of the phrase, 'any sign, notice, mark, illumination or other feature which may suggest that the vehicle is a taxi', is difficult for you to understand?

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 10:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:11 pm
Posts: 8119
Location: A Villa in Aston NO MORE!
tom2907 wrote:
Transport Act 1980

Section 64.

Roof-signs on vehicle other than taxis.

(1)There shall not, in any part of England and Wales outside the metropolitan police district and the City of London, be displayed on or above the roof of any vehicle which is used for carrying passengers for hire or reward but which is not a taxi—(a)any sign which consists of or includes the word “taxi” or “cab”, whether in the singular or plural, or “hire”, or any word of similar meaning or appearance to any of those words, whether alone or as part of another word; or (b) any sign, notice, mark, illumination or other feature which may suggest that the vehicle is a taxi.

(2)Any person who knowingly—(a)drives a vehicle in respect of which subsection (1) is contravened; or(b)causes or permits that subsection to be contravened in respect of any vehicle,shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding [F1level 3 on the standard scale].(3)In this section “taxi” means a vehicle licensed under section 37 of the M1Town Police Clauses Act 1847, section 6 of the M2Metropolitan Carriage Act 1869, [F2section 10 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982] or any similar local enactment.


Image Image Image Image Image

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:11 pm
Posts: 8119
Location: A Villa in Aston NO MORE!
If there is ONE ISSUE that a National Association for Hackney Carriage proprietors and drivers should have taken through the Courts to the ultimate end since the Transport Act 1980 was enacted it is this one!!

The legislation is clear, councils are flagrantly abusing this legislation, it has not been legally challenged, so who can blame the councils?

It's the easy option!!

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
Brummie Cabbie wrote:
If there is ONE ISSUE that a National Association for Hackney Carriage proprietors and drivers should have taken through the Courts to the ultimate end since the Transport Act 1980 was enacted it is this one!!

The legislation is clear, councils are flagrantly abusing this legislation, it has not been legally challenged, so who can blame the councils?

It's the easy option!!


Yes, the legislation is clear. You can have a roof sign as long as certain words are not used.

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 7:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:47 pm
Posts: 20866
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
Sussex wrote:
edders23 wrote:
hmmmm......................... makes it a lot easier for rogue drivers to hide as it makes it much harder to identify them other than through the plate/badge which in 99 cases out of a hundred is NOT noted by people who have a problem

it will also be very difficult for people to identify the vehicle they have booked and make it easier for farejackers to pinch fares

You make a great case for PH roof signs. :wink:



Sorry I am used to all PH having roof lights I forget there are a few areas of the country where they don't

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 8:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57364
Location: 1066 Country
Brummie Cabbie wrote:
The legislation is clear, councils are flagrantly abusing this legislation, it has not been legally challenged, so who can blame the councils?

You may think it's clear, but councils, the courts, and licensing lawyers disagree.

But this act isn't the one needed to outlaw PH roof signs, if councils wish to ban them all they need do is amend their licensing conditions.

As those supporters of restrictions keep repeating, councils know best.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 9:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:57 pm
Posts: 395
Location: South Coast
Quote:
(1)There shall not, in any part of England and Wales outside the metropolitan police district and the City of London, be displayed on or above the roof of any vehicle which is used for carrying passengers for hire or reward but which is not a taxi—(a)any sign which consists of or includes the word “taxi” or “cab”, whether in the singular or plural, or “hire”, or any word of similar meaning or appearance to any of those words, whether alone or as part of another word; or (b) any sign, notice, mark, illumination or other feature which may suggest that the vehicle is a taxi.


As I read this, a roof sign that is lit and says "Private Hire" would be illegal. But equally as I read it, you could emblazon "Private Hire" on the sides, bonnet and boot of the vehicle (as long as the LA Bye Laws don't forbid this) and maybe on a green sunstrip on the windscreen instead of "Kev & Trace". The roof sign could say "Pre Bookable Vehicle Only." By definition, "Pre bookable vehicle only" makes clear it is not a taxi cos you don't have to book a taxi. And it can't be illuminated. On thinking about it, someone ought to show this to 2 of our local take aways, Domino's Pizzas and Indian Knights t/a cos they both have home delivery vehicles that have illuminated roof signs. I suppose Indian Knights could be mistaken for the name of a taxi co?

_________________
Nobody told me to use my initiative. To err is human to arr is pirate.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
Sussex wrote:
Brummie Cabbie wrote:
The legislation is clear, councils are flagrantly abusing this legislation, it has not been legally challenged, so who can blame the councils?

You may think it's clear, but councils, the courts, and licensing lawyers disagree.

But this act isn't the one needed to outlaw PH roof signs, if councils wish to ban them all they need do is amend their licensing conditions.

As those supporters of restrictions keep repeating, councils know best.

And that is not exactly true... about simply amending their licensing conditions..... councils also have to deal with the fact that it has become excepted practice...

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 4:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
2 Jobs wrote:
Quote:
(1)There shall not, in any part of England and Wales outside the metropolitan police district and the City of London, be displayed on or above the roof of any vehicle which is used for carrying passengers for hire or reward but which is not a taxi—(a)any sign which consists of or includes the word “taxi” or “cab”, whether in the singular or plural, or “hire”, or any word of similar meaning or appearance to any of those words, whether alone or as part of another word; or (b) any sign, notice, mark, illumination or other feature which may suggest that the vehicle is a taxi.


someone ought to show this to 2 of our local take aways, Domino's Pizzas and Indian Knights t/a cos they both have home delivery vehicles that have illuminated roof signs. I suppose Indian Knights could be mistaken for the name of a taxi co?


They would be ok because they are not carrying passengers for hire or reward.

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 10:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24392
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
is it any wonder the public are confused when the trade, the councils and the courts have no definitive answer to a simple problem

lets make private hire private, no signs, no rooflight, and ive seen some hack-saloons and private hire with a lot of council stickers up and down the N/S windscreen, some facing out, some facing in, in an accident the police could claim these obstructed the drivers vision.....good thinking councils!

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 11:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57364
Location: 1066 Country
wannabeeahack wrote:
is it any wonder the public are confused when the trade, the councils and the courts have no definitive answer to a simple problem

Which is why we might have a new act in the next few years.

Might not of course, but my feeling is we will. Good or bad thing who knows?

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 840 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