Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Wed Apr 29, 2026 6:54 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2012 6:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:20 pm
Posts: 3272
taxeman wrote:
Asking one sector to subsidize another (is anti competitive, the same as restricting plate numbers), This is made worse when license fees are supposed to reflex council costs, not drivers!


Not sure that because something is anti-competitive it's thus illegal, or that would cover lots of regulation.

You compare it to plate restrictions, which is clearly anti-competitive, but equally clearly it's not automatically illegal as a consequence.

As for license fees, since any proposal in the current process presupposes changing existing law then your point about fees reflecting council costs is irrelevant?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2012 9:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Dusty Bin wrote:

As for license fees, since any proposal in the current process presupposes changing existing law then your point about fees reflecting council costs is irrelevant?


I dont think thats right......if a honeypot area is going to have to police PH Operators using vehicles from other areas.....then certainly there will be additional costs in respect of enforcement to the honeypot area.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2012 9:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:20 pm
Posts: 3272
captain cab wrote:
Dusty Bin wrote:

As for license fees, since any proposal in the current process presupposes changing existing law then your point about fees reflecting council costs is irrelevant?


I dont think thats right......if a honeypot area is going to have to police PH Operators using vehicles from other areas.....then certainly there will be additional costs in respect of enforcement to the honeypot area.


My point was that the consultation is all about changing the law, thus the law on fees could be changed as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2012 9:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Dusty Bin wrote:

My point was that the consultation is all about changing the law, thus the law on fees could be changed as well.



Yes, I gathered that the consultation was about that, many thanks for pointing it out :wink:

I dont disagree, but the document goes on numerous times about permitting cross border, it goes on about licensing officers being able to stop vehicles from other areas, there are reams of it.

Yet, there are only 3 paragraphs which seemingly allude to fees.....and they dont really say anything, surely they should have some idea in their heads about who is going to pay for the enforcement and how?

The Guliford ombudsman case is mentioned once in the document, so there is a genuine questionmark about enforcement and who should pay for it.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2012 9:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:20 pm
Posts: 3272
Well I haven't got to the fees bit yet, but your point has naff all to do with the point I was making to taxeman earlier [-(


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2012 9:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Dusty Bin wrote:
Well I haven't got to the fees bit yet, but your point has naff all to do with the point I was making to taxeman earlier [-(



Yeah, TDO is a bit like that. :lol:

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2012 7:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
Dusty Bin wrote:
but your point has naff all to do with the point I was making to taxeman earlier [-(

:D

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 2:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:23 pm
Posts: 203
Dusty Bin wrote:
taxeman wrote:
Asking one sector to subsidize another (is anti competitive, the same as restricting plate numbers), This is made worse when license fees are supposed to reflex council costs, not drivers!


Not sure that because something is anti-competitive it's thus illegal, or that would cover lots of regulation.

You compare it to plate restrictions, which is clearly anti-competitive, but equally clearly it's not automatically illegal as a consequence.

As for license fees, since any proposal in the current process presupposes changing existing law then your point about fees reflecting council costs is irrelevant?


Have not the LC already stated that rescriction are illegal under EU law? Because they are seeking to make changes they can't leave it as is.
Would be the same will subsidisies.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 5:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
taxeman wrote:
Have not the LC already stated that rescriction are illegal under EU law? Because they are seeking to make changes they can't leave it as is.

Not sure they have, but maybe they will. :wink:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 8:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
taxeman wrote:
Dusty Bin wrote:
taxeman wrote:
Asking one sector to subsidize another (is anti competitive, the same as restricting plate numbers), This is made worse when license fees are supposed to reflex council costs, not drivers!


Not sure that because something is anti-competitive it's thus illegal, or that would cover lots of regulation.

You compare it to plate restrictions, which is clearly anti-competitive, but equally clearly it's not automatically illegal as a consequence.

As for license fees, since any proposal in the current process presupposes changing existing law then your point about fees reflecting council costs is irrelevant?


Have not the LC already stated that rescriction are illegal under EU law? Because they are seeking to make changes they can't leave it as is.
Would be the same will subsidisies.

When I listen to Mr Richard Perceval... when he was explaining that a monetary argument would not be acceptable in respect of councils being able to restrict the number of vehicles in there area alone.... I think he actually explained it badly.......... I think what he should have said is.... we know nothing at all about how taxis work... and you need to educate us about how they work day-to-day..... about what happens if there are too many.. about the problems you have over ranking... would association's still be working with the council to provide a service to the public.... or would it simply be a free-for-all creating chaos for all the traffic uses..... But seeing as he wouldn't know to ask these questions in the first place, he said it the way he did.

I think we should take each suggestion the Law Commission has proposed and Debate it explaining to them the realities of Our lives in the taxi trade..

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 8:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
CHAPTER 13 - OVERVIEW OF PROVISIONAL REFORM PROPOSALS
Provisional proposal 1
Regulation should continue to distinguish between taxis, which can accept pre-booked fares, be hailed on the street and wait at ranks, and private hire vehicles, which can only accept pre-booked fares. (Page 160

should they or should they not... and more importantly why.

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 8:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 10:37 pm
Posts: 2406
Why is it that some councils restrict and some also re-restrict,could it be that it works and they actually dont want more vehicles fighting for rank space ? I dont see the logic in flooding the allready oversupplied streets with more taxis.I know my council dont want it,wether its forced on them or us remains to be seen,but not without a fight !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 8:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
blackpool wrote:
Why is it that some councils restrict and some also re-restrict,

Some councillors are brave and forward thinking, others are gutless bas****s.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 8:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 10:37 pm
Posts: 2406
Your talking about your own i presume ? Whats gutless try and explain


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LC 100% taxi WAVs
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2012 11:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
blackpool wrote:
Why is it that some councils restrict and some also re-restrict,could it be that it works and they actually dont want more vehicles fighting for rank space ? I dont see the logic in flooding the allready oversupplied streets with more taxis.I know my council dont want it,wether its forced on them or us remains to be seen,but not without a fight !

I am with you Blackpool.. and so it would seem are the Councillors in Brighton and Hove........ and Sussex will just have to remain a pimple on the backside of society....

_________________
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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 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