Taxi Driver Online

No they aren't low but I bet if a private company was running licensing and charging those fees they would be paying a very handsome dividend to their shareholders

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

To be fair to Brum....they do a lot of licensing swoops.......but as we all know, the license fee payer shouldnt be paying for these.

Now enter the law commission......because I fear we will pay....with interest.

CC

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

FFS Captain!!

I wish you wouldn't use that fkucing Yankee dictionary!!

_________________
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.

I think we all make a mistake when we ask our Councils not to put up the charges for their services and then expect them to raise our Fares.

If you put a rise off, when the time eventually comes for that rise, it appears to be so very much larger, mainly because of the amount of time since the last one.

So:

First thought ~ £450 is not an awful lot if you relate it to the annual (or in some cases 3 year) Turnover of a Cab.

Second thought ~ a small annual increase in the Mileage Charge would put much more money in the Cabbies pocket that a £125 rise took out of it.

What to do: Get your Council on your side, they should not be The Opposition, suggesting that their Charges should be reviewed and adjusted, annually, as should your Fare Structure

Final thought: Cabbies that offer discounts during the busy periods are cutting their own throat. The Punter needs a Taxi or he would not have approached you.

_________________
Don't dream it ~ Be it.

So you think £120 for an hour's work and a bit of plastic and paper is justified?

_________________
IDFIMH

It's not just about the cost of the plastic and paper as you put it.

And you well know it.

There are many costs involved in running licensing departments, such as wages, business rates, rent of premises, utilities bills at commercial rates, costs of equipment, up-keep of the equipment, just to name but a few.

Why should tax payers have to subsidise a licensing department?

Those that wish to be licensed should be contributing to the running of licensing departments.

Every licensing department has massive running costs and those have to be covered by the licensees.

That is what I was surprised about.

_________________
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.

Why should taxi drivers?they can only charge what it costs,if other councils can produce it cheaper,then why can't Birmingham?

I'm sorry but I doubt it costs Birmingham £120 a year to process badges in my experience the licencing departments always claim to run at a loss usually demonstarting it with a little creative accountancy e.g. calculating the profit/loss situation whilst leaving out the fee's from other licensing activities

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

Because we subsidise every other council department.
I don't have children but pay for the schools, I've never been in a sports centre, don't use swimming pools, libraries or the parks yet I still pay for them. Nor do I have a need for social services or day centres and neither myself or anyone I know lives in a council house yet a large percentage of my council tax goes towards these.


As should those that use the services mentioned above. Stop using my tax to fund libraries etc. and charge the users each time they access the service.

Why should one department be funded solely from the people that use it and other departments funding be divided between all council tax payers ? Not only do we pay some tax towards licensing we then pay again to use the service, doesn't happen with any other department (except maybe for sports and leisure).

Well actually, in relation to driver's licenses, legally it is.

And I'm surprised you don't know that.

_________________
IDFIMH

You are confusing driver's licenses and vehicle licenses.

For vehicle licenses it was ok to bunch up all the costs you mention, until the Guildford District Auditor explained to the UK it wasn't.

For driver's licenses it isn't legally possible to charge for anything other than the processing cost of the license.

_________________
IDFIMH

Most councils are taking the p*ss when it comes to fee's they claim.

The best example is Manchester. The District Auditor must think so as well, as he is Auditing now at our request.

To get an example of creative accounting, look at these figures, for the year ended 2011 we were charged over 24 grand FINANCE CHARGES ! !. When do we get anything without paying at least a year in advance. ?

https://skydrive.live.com/redir.aspx?ci ... SmkJZbib84

If you and the others above are right, then the district auditor will highlight that in his report.

What you all forget is that Brum had an audit many years ago that resulted in a refund to the licensing department of $368K, because surplus from the licensing department had been transferred to the council's general funds.

If what some say in previous posts was correct, then you expect costs incurred in running HC and PH licensing departments to be legally covered by the council from general funds.

That is just plainly incorrect. If is was correct the district auditor would have said so in the Brum case and he did not.

Now some of you might not like that and may wish to have part of the cost running your licensing department paid for out of your council's general funds, but hey - dream on.

Get back to reality!!

_________________
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.