More on the LC and the political dimension

toots · **Posted:** Sun May 27, 2012 11:55 am

captain cab wrote:

toots wrote:

Yeah I do recognise all the differing vehicles used by ph, but, I also know you know that when I talk of a single tier it is a single tier that offer taxi services. Since this was posted it has come to light that there maybe differing tiers, within the single tier, if it ever came about.

Many, many phds like working on a circuit. They have no desire to purchase a purpose built vehicle or sit on a rank, but, they would like to be able to pick up passengers who flag them down. It would seem that the 'single tier' with differing tiers would suit a lot of those drivers

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18891&hilit=anarchy

Does this sound familiar?

Primarily the ‘Taxis Act’ it is a single tier system, all vehicles are ‘taxis’ and allowed to ‘ply for hire’, however the only ones permitted to ‘rank’ are those that are ‘wheelchair accessible’, unfortunately, in all the excitement they seemingly forgot to exclude wedding and funeral cars, they subsequently spent a year or so discussing this, much to the annoyance of wedding companies and funeral directors, who presumably don’t want taxi roof-signs and identification plates – although I would envisage the number of people hailing hearses may be limited.

Does this one ring a bell regarding the LC thoughts on street hails;

The normal forces of competition cannot apply to the street hail market – the customer hails a cab and merely hopes the fare charged by the driver is the correct one.

Did you note the exclusion of this but from the LC documents where they quote Biggar at will?

Darryl Biggar wrote;

“Larger cab networks have more available vehicles and are likely to be able to offer short waiting times on average. At the same time, since customers are attracted to calling a network that offers the shorter waiting times, the larger networks are likely to have more customers, thereby attracting more taxis to join their network.”

Of course it rings bells it's been pointed out on numerous occasions. That said nobody is suggesting that wedding and funeral cars will be part of the taxi market although they will for the ph market. Also I agree with the danger that maybe taxi circuit monopolies will be the result of LC intentions. There is never going to be a single tier for all vehicles but I think when people talk of a single tier it is that of the 'hail/ring up and book' taxi market and as I said even that 'single tier' would apparently have differing tiers within it

blackpool · **Joined:** Wed Sep 30, 2009 10:37 pm **Posts:** 2406

The more i read the more the mind boggles ! Its basically a free for all with only the survival of the fittest,or should that be the cheapest ? Lets all work for companies like Ad lee.You think this all simplifies things and makes it better for the average driver,think again...

Chris the Fish · **Posted:** Sun May 27, 2012 12:45 pm

So then Toots, you are saying one tier, with lots of tiers within it.

Two Tier:
Primary Tier, Hackney Carriage (or Taxi if HC gets removed) able to do what HC's have always done. Vehicles at the standard required for PH and then raised by LA's, with drivers who must do a "Knowledge" set by the LA.

Secondary Tier, PH who can only work pre-booked, are not Taxis, require only the National Standard for vehicles, whose drivers need not do the knowledge and who may set their own rates. I accept that the drivers may have knowledge of the local vicinity, but also accept they may not. They may exceed the vehicle standard, but they may not.

I see no reason for Wedding and Funeral Cars to be licensed if they are only used for those purposes stated (other reasons for similar in other religions should be treated in the same way).

Any vehicle not classed as a Taxi, yet transporting fare paying passengers is then a PH. (Unless large enough capacity ie. 9 or more passengers in which case it is a Bus or Coach or on rails, a train.)

Personally I have nothing against Operators having to be Licensed, including Taxi Operators. I would suggest that Operators running fleets of 10 or more cars (of either Taxi or PH) should be required to have WAV availability, and if they operate 24 hours a day (and believe me some do not) then WAV provision should also be 24 hours at all times when 10 or more cars are working. The WAV driver, with higher running costs would in most cases then, be something that the Operator needed and the Radio Rent would be far less, less to the extent that it may be that the Operator has to pay the WAV driver to be on the circuit. If the driver of a WAV found he/she was not getting a fair crack of the whip, he would move to another operator and, through necessity some of the Saloon drivers would have to go with him/her. Also there would be nothing to stop a Taxi being on a PH circuit, nor anything to prevent a PH from being on a primarily Taxi circuit.

So - for me, TWO TIERS please. Further I don't want multiple tiers in either of the Two Tiers. The more simple it is, the easier to enforce.

toots · **Posted:** Sun May 27, 2012 1:09 pm

Chris the fish wrote:

So then Toots, you are saying one tier, with lots of tiers within it.

No I'm not but I think you will find that is Mr Buttons idea

Blackpool wrote:

The more i read the more the mind boggles ! Its basically a free for all with only the survival of the fittest,or should that be the cheapest ? Lets all work for companies like Ad lee.You think this all simplifies things and makes it better for the average driver,think again...

Yeah that's about right and it seems this is what the LC wants. As CC has pointed out on numerous occasions the LC have quoted Darryl Biggar but only selected quotes that suit their argument. Imo if the LC go either way the trade is fu*ked. Before anybody fills in the consultation I think they should make sure they fully understand the consequences of the loaded questions. Things will not stay the same imo, but, one has to decide on which principals one is able to reach a compromise.

For the record I have no strong opinion so far as I have yet to digest the full complexity of the consultation and all the possible consequences.

BTW I still haven't read a good argument for a 2 tier system within the taxi trade as we know and understand it

Dusty Bin · **Joined:** Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:20 pm **Posts:** 3272

captain cab wrote:

Did you note the exclusion of this bit from the LC documents where they quote Biggar at will?

In fact in nearly 300 pages they quote one of his paragraphs and he's referenced a handful of other times in the footnotes.

And that one paragraph is from his 40-odd page document.

So maybe you're overegging the pudding a bit?

Quote:

Darryl Biggar wrote;

“Larger cab networks have more available vehicles and are likely to be able to offer short waiting times on average. At the same time, since customers are attracted to calling a network that offers the shorter waiting times, the larger networks are likely to have more customers, thereby attracting more taxis to join their network.”

Perhaps the reason they didn't quote that bit - not to mention his other couple of hundred paragraphs - is that it hardly says anything of earth-shattering importance. He's just saying that larger networks are more efficient.

toots · **Posted:** Sun May 27, 2012 3:18 pm

Dusty Bin wrote:

He's just saying that larger networks are more efficient.

I wish they were but they aren't at least not here. What I find frustrating is the drivers say they can't earn enough money and they're sat around too long and the operators that work for the companies giving the work out say they haven't got enough drivers to cover the work. The customers say they can't get a car for love nor money on a weekend. What is going wrong?

Sussex · **Posted:** Sun May 27, 2012 5:37 pm

Dusty Bin wrote:

I mean, unrestricted WAV HC London, single-tier? :-"

If London is included in the Act then there will have to be two-tiers, but I'm not convinced London will be included.

If London is left out then there is a chance of a one-tier happening, providing councils are allowed to set their own conditions.

Sussex · **Posted:** Sun May 27, 2012 5:39 pm

toots wrote:

What controls over ph are you referring to, because if I understand the LC correctly they intend to have down graded national standards for ph and LAs unable to change them

Keep the riff-raff out controls.

Sussex · **Posted:** Sun May 27, 2012 5:40 pm

blackpool wrote:

Its basically a free for all with only the survival of the fittest,

Welcome to the PH trade.

Sussex · **Posted:** Sun May 27, 2012 5:43 pm

Chris the Fish wrote:

So then Toots, you are saying one tier, with lots of tiers within it.

The LC are proposing a two-tier with some vehicles being licensed as one offs.

Can't see that being much different than a one-tier with one offs.

Dusty Bin · **Joined:** Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:20 pm **Posts:** 3272

toots wrote:

Dusty Bin wrote:

He's just saying that larger networks are more efficient.

I wish they were but they aren't at least not here. What I find frustrating is the drivers say they can't earn enough money and they're sat around too long and the operators that work for the companies giving the work out say they haven't got enough drivers to cover the work. The customers say they can't get a car for love nor money on a weekend. What is going wrong?

Simple answer is the usual one I suppose - busy sometimes, quiet most of the time.

Dusty Bin · **Joined:** Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:20 pm **Posts:** 3272

Sussex wrote:

Dusty Bin wrote:

I mean, unrestricted WAV HC London, single-tier? :-"

If London is included in the Act then there will have to be two-tiers, but I'm not convinced London will be included.

If London is left out then there is a chance of a one-tier happening, providing councils are allowed to set their own conditions.

So effectively things carry on as now quality control-wise, both inside and outside London?

Thus as I said I can't see how you equate that with a single-tier.

Maybe B&H because its driver-base is single-tier at the moment, and derestriction would mean perhaps shift the vehicle base more towards single-tier.

But I would imagine that the driver-base in most LAs is defo two-tier at the moment thus derestriction would only have a limited influence on the two-tier structure.

And, as I said, with many LAs moving towards WAVs for new licences in recent years then that consolidates the two tiers rather than undermines them.

Of course, it all depends on the Equality Act to a degree as well, but I'm more than sceptical about your analysis.

London is an extreme example, obviously, but I can't see derestriction on its own doing much to undermine the two-tier structure in the majority of provincial LAs.

And if the LC does force more LAs to derestrict then many more saloon areas may end up with a mixed fleet, so to that extent those areas will be triple-tier-ish

toots · **Posted:** Mon May 28, 2012 1:59 am

Sussex wrote:

toots wrote:

What controls over ph are you referring to, because if I understand the LC correctly they intend to have down graded national standards for ph and LAs unable to change them

Keep the riff-raff out controls.

How do you propose they do that if they down grade standards

Dusty Bin · **Joined:** Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:20 pm **Posts:** 3272

toots wrote:

How do you propose they do that if they down grade standards

Rewind:

Sussex wrote:

I'm not convinced what the LC are proposing is a million miles from a one-tier system.

The only thing going against that is the down grading of PH standards.

However if councils keep controls over PH, and I think that could be where we end up, then in many many areas a near as dam it one-tier is what we will end up with.

toots · **Posted:** Mon May 28, 2012 2:08 am

Dusty Bin wrote:

toots wrote:

How do you propose they do that if they down grade standards

Rewind:

Sussex wrote:

I'm not convinced what the LC are proposing is a million miles from a one-tier system.

The only thing going against that is the down grading of PH standards.

However if councils keep controls over PH, and I think that could be where we end up, then in many many areas a near as dam it one-tier is what we will end up with.

If councils keep control over PH then nothing would change here, which suits me just fine. I still don't see how the council will be able to keep the riff raff out in the future any more than they can already

Taxi Driver Online

More on the LC and the political dimension

Who is online