Taxi Driver Online

Sussex :
Arrow Cars office is lit up like Blackpool tower...passengers cannot miss it and the signage is misleading to say the least....a lot of passengers have paid at the desk believing they are paying for a Taxi as in a hackney...walked to the hackney to find out that they have paid for a private hire. They also have a policy of NO REFUNDS...so the passenger has no choice after paying but to travel with them.

Captain Cab :..If you are aware of any case law that Pat is not aware of ...point it out to him...he will be pleased to have it as any ammunition is surely welcome.

As for ''fit and proper'' person, how can the licensing dept be satisfied of this if no one is aware of the identity of the person/s holding 98% of the shares in the business ?...why the secrecy ??

http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/vie ... hp?t=10045

not exactly ammunition.....but should keep the old chap aware.

CC

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

I think the assertion with St Albans is a bit of a red herring, although I can see the point.

The blackpool case even went to the possible extreme of the pilot pre-booking PHV's before he landed!

CC

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

But surely the office will still be lit up even if the cab trade win, it will just be Private Hire rather than Taxi. As for the refund policy I'm not sure that unusual in the travel industry. In fact it's the norm.

As for the ownership of the company, what does that matter? Someone must have signed the operator license application, they are the ones responsible for the license.

_________________
IDFIMH

I think it does matter who owns the company especially if they are known criminals, not that this is necessarily the case here

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

Yes Toots, you alone see the point here. A Council are forbidden from giving a Licence to anybody, without that Council KNOWING they are fit and proper. It is obvious that organised criminals would use a "clean skin" to front any licence application, Pub, Casino, Bookies and now PH offices. Is Mr Richmond a "clean skin", or is he just a front for his father Geoffrey. A search on Geoffery will show he is a bankrupt (to the tune of 3.3 million). The Customs and Excise have not recovered that money.

Is it any coincidence that, if you ring Arrow cars office in Leeds and ask for their VAT number, they will inform you they are not registered for VAT. Try do this please if you do not believe me.

I would suggest that a company which ran services at 3 airports and had a major City office must have a turnover in excess of £73k. The companies in our 10 authorities pay their VAT and are quite rightly aggrieved. I understand that a complaint to the Custom's and Excise fraud division is under way.

The Private Hire trade here in Manchester have tried to get Arrow Cars VAT number unsuccessfully.

The private hire Trade are supportive of the Cab committee's court application, WHY?.

Their are ten Authorities which OWN Manchester airport. Each of these Authorities have their own EXCELLENT private hire companies and drivers. None of these companies were asked to tender and/or compete with Arrow cars for this contract. To make matter's worse Arrow cars have now, naturally poached some of their best drivers.

The decision to bring in Arrow cars in, without normal procurement procedures, raises the possibility of an offence under the 2010 Bribery Act. I have asked for details of the Airport group arrangement with Arrow Cars via a freedom of information request. This has been refused. I am sure they will not refuse the high court. We will see.

If the Airport group had put this out to tender and a Greater Manchester firm (all members of TfGMA, the umbrella group, Transport for Greater Manchester Authorities) had won the contract, there would have been no complaints and, by de facto, no case to answer.

I will as always update when able.

I disagree.

There is no provision to keep an eye on private hire firm owners, just private hire operator licensees.

I think it cost Plymouth Council about £250,000 to find that out.

_________________
IDFIMH

But the owners don't need a license, only the person who does the operating.

In the same way a person could own a pub but have no license to run one.

_________________
IDFIMH

I never suggested there was provision to keep an eye on ph firm owners, I just think it matters so perhaps there should be provision

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

I agree there should be, but the Manchester cab trade are taking the council to court for not enforcing a provision that doesn't exist.

_________________
IDFIMH

So, 98% of a company is an ''unknown'' person who can dismiss the directors at a moments notice and who in reality has the controling interest in the business yet remains anonymous ?
How can you form an opinion on whether this person/s are fit and proper to have an operators licence if you dont know who they are ?
For arguments sake it could be a director of the airport or his wife or relative or even someone working in the licensing dept who owns 98% of the business yet remains unknown to anyone.
As for ranking up, a previous operator, Checker cars ranked up on their first day at the airport and were immediately removed by the then head of Licensing John Pullan. So, why is it different now ?
Since the ''fares'' are charged at the booking office and no money is given to the driver they are required to be VAT registered and they are not. Why not ?

I believe that at east midlands airport it is the other way around and the money is collected by the driver.

_________________
Grandad,

So Tesco want to sell alcohol in Lancaster High Street but hardened criminal Joe Bloggs who lives in Exeter has a couple of shares in Tesco. So Tesco shouldn't be granted a liquor licence?

So Mad Reg the local drug dealer is laundering money through a PH firm.....but isnt down as the operator?

CC

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

I just wanted to bump up a thread from 7 years ago, which has a similar theme to the Manchester Cab trade issue.

viewtopic.php?p=14397

Plymouth council believed the named operator was being a front for someone else, who they viewed as not being 'fit and proper'. The judge decided there was no evidence that records weren't being kept in accordance of the act (albeit a different act), and found in favour of the operator.

Now that cost the council £120,000 in fees for the other side, and maybe more in their own costs.

Have the Manchester cab trade put aside £250,000?

_________________
IDFIMH