Taxi Driver Online

they aint operating in another area.

CC

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

“operate” means in the course of business to make provision for the invitation or acceptance of bookings for a private hire vehicle;

CC

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

OK, you're using the same nitpicking but irrelevant argument that you used last night.

I was clearly talking about vehicles and drivers, thus using the term 'opertate' loosely rather than in the strict legal sense.

I shall try to avoid using that word in future, but I'm sure most people understood what I was getting at

Primarily ph already work in the area they are licensed and occasionally they pick up outside their area. There's just so many Delta they appear to be all over the place, but, I reckon they are getting calls to these areas because they are cheap

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

We still go back to the difference issue.

I think that the law allows councils to put in provisos ensuring hackneys work predominately in their licensing area, in the same way it ensure PH operators must.

However I'm not convinced there is a law which dictates that a license PH must work predominately in it's licensing area, only that it must work for a licensed operator based in that licensing area.

_________________
IDFIMH

I'm not nitpicking.

CC

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

Well again I'm not arguing about generally accepted current law, I'm asking why the principles enunciated in the Berwick HC case shouldn't apply to PH.

Anyway, we're clearly going to have to disagree on this.

Further up the thread we accepted that calls were being taken in Sefton, my point was about vehicles doing what they do in a 'remote' area, to use the judge's terminology from Berwick.

Yet you use the term operate all the time.....are you UNITE liverpool?

CC

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

I'm generally agreeing with you, it's just I can see why they can be separated.

_________________
IDFIMH

The responses in this post(nit picking)is a classic example how you educated taxi men cant agree to agree on rules and regulations..........hence mr Richard Percival and the law commisions involvement.

I think you'll find (as a newbie on here), that we tend to argue an awful lot.....this is one of the better arguments.

CC

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

I don't believe this is the reason why Mr Percival and the Law Commission are involved at all, if I was honest about it I'd say it has something to do with private hire having an agenda, but, not really sure what it is

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

OK, I've used the term 'operate' a few times in this thread, but I underlined (I think) that it was vehicles and drivers that I was talking about, thus the legal definition of 'operate' that you proffer - "in the course of business to make provision for the invitation or acceptance of bookings for a private hire vehicle" - clearly couldn't apply to the actions of a vehicle.

Having said that, I accept that it's not the best word to use in this particular context, so I apologise and will try not to use it in future.

But while we're at perhaps you could stop your ten-year (at least) habit of using the misleading term "deregulation" when you actually mean delimitation or desrestriction of numbers, and which a few of us got fed up pointing out after the first five years or so?

Oh, and while we're at it couldn't you stop signing off your posts 'CC'? That's what the bit to the left of the message is for - it means we know who's written it without the author having to sign it every time. And indeed if you want to see your (pseudo)name twice in the same post you can always use the signature function.

The point is that when I'm quoting your posts and have the time to be neat and tidy it's annoying to have to get rid of your 'CC' signature all the time.

Mind you, in view of some of the other posts I often wonder why I take the time trying to be neat and tidy at all

Well I think you're both right to an extent, but it's not just private hire who have an agenda, as the numerous competing interests on display at the recent meeting demonstrate.

After all, the DfT have long acknowledged that the legislation is in need of a 'rewrite', a major issue in the regard being the length of time it's taken to get even to this stage.