Alpha taxi going places

Chris the Fish · **Posted:** Mon Jul 30, 2012 8:46 pm

"Well Bowled" Toots! =D>

toots · **Posted:** Mon Jul 30, 2012 8:50 pm

Can't get the stupid link to work now :lol:

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j& ... t_fFa0G1Kw

Jolly good got it to work now. Anyway this makes for interesting reading

I like this bit tho

Quote:

[15] Finally, Mr Carter placed emphasis on Nottingham City Council v Woodings [1994] RTR 72. The holding of the court (Rose LJ and Waller J) was partly described in the headnote as follows:

' ... whether a vehicle was itself plying for hire was not determinative of whether or not the driver was 'plying for hire with any carriage' for the purposes of the offence under section 45 of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 ... '

London Uncensored · **Joined:** Sun Jul 01, 2012 7:52 pm **Posts:** 107

Sussex wrote:

But I glad you have confirmed, yet again, that members of the London taxi trade have no f***ing idea about taxi law.

Lord Justice Pill quoted the case of White V Cubitt where a vehicle parked in a private yard was plying for hire, as it could be seen from the street. He went on to say applying the principle in White V Cubbit since a vehicle parked in the station forecourt was likely to attract custom from members of the public using the adjoining street, the defendants were plying for hire. Again we have the situation of being on view to the public.

Gilbert V McKay.
McKay had an office in Rupert St. with a sign over the shop window showing that cars were for hire. Several cars belonging to McKay were standing in the street outside of the office.
Several people were seen to enter the office for the purpose of paying for the hire of anyone of the cars, in which they were driven away. McKay was charged with being the owner of unlicensed hackney carriages. He was convicted and fined by the Magistrates court and lodged an appeal, the appeal was dismissed. The Lord Chief Justice Lord Goddard had the following to say. In my opinion even if the cars had been standing in a private yard and could not be seen by the public, there could still have been a plying for hire if they had been appropriated for immediate hiring. The important thing here is the reference to a private yard and not on view to the public at the time of hiring. Even more important is his reference to an immediate hiring. This is what was happening in Leicester Sq. As you can see the essence of plying for hire is being on view to the public. Is this the position of the PHV or not?

You won't and can't argue the case law and revert to the lowest form of wit. You have turned another good thread into a d*ck measuring competition.

So there you have it folks Sussex is a higher authority than Lord Chief Justice Lord Goddard and Lord Justice Pill.

The barrack room lawyer is never wrong. FFS, I really am having trouble spotting any kind of braincell posting on this thread !

toots · **Posted:** Mon Jul 30, 2012 9:07 pm

It's clearly obvious that there is no specific description for plying and we could go all night playing tit for tat but it won't prove anything :wink:

London Uncensored · **Joined:** Sun Jul 01, 2012 7:52 pm **Posts:** 107

Quote:

toots wrote:
London Uncensored wrote:
Calm down now, calm down, eh, eh

I am calm because the whole affair is of no consequence to me whatsoever, I get the impression you think I'm a scouser

Believe me, I'm not the slightest interested in what you are !

captain cab · **Posted:** Mon Jul 30, 2012 9:16 pm

Toots is right;

In the Woodings case the following was stated;

In my judgment, when the defendant parked the marked car in the street, for the purpose of going into the toilet, he was not plying for hire, and when he came out of the toilet, he was not plying for hire. But when, having sat in the driver's seat, he told the prospective passengers that he was free to carry them, at that stage he was, bearing in mind where the car was and what the car looked like, plying for hire.

It may be that, in approaching this matter, the Crown Court to some extent confused the question of whether the car was standing in the street with the question of whether the defendant was plying for hire with the carriage. No doubt, as I have said, when he parked the marked vehicle so that it was merely standing in the street, he was not committing an offence. But it seems to me that plying for hire sufficient to constitute the offence took place when, sitting in the car, he answered the question in the way which I have indicated.

Sussex · **Posted:** Mon Jul 30, 2012 9:33 pm

captain cab wrote:

Toots is right;

In the Woodings case the following was stated;

In my judgment, when the defendant parked the marked car in the street, for the purpose of going into the toilet, he was not plying for hire, and when he came out of the toilet, he was not plying for hire. But when, having sat in the driver's seat, he told the prospective passengers that he was free to carry them, at that stage he was, bearing in mind where the car was and what the car looked like, plying for hire.

It may be that, in approaching this matter, the Crown Court to some extent confused the question of whether the car was standing in the street with the question of whether the defendant was plying for hire with the carriage. No doubt, as I have said, when he parked the marked vehicle so that it was merely standing in the street, he was not committing an offence. But it seems to me that plying for hire sufficient to constitute the offence took place when, sitting in the car, he answered the question in the way which I have indicated.

Thank you Captain for, once again, saving me from pointing out these things.

London Uncensored · **Joined:** Sun Jul 01, 2012 7:52 pm **Posts:** 107

Sussex wrote:

captain cab wrote:

Toots is right;

In the Woodings case the following was stated;

In my judgment, when the defendant parked the marked car in the street, for the purpose of going into the toilet, he was not plying for hire, and when he came out of the toilet, he was not plying for hire. But when, having sat in the driver's seat, he told the prospective passengers that he was free to carry them, at that stage he was, bearing in mind where the car was and what the car looked like, plying for hire.

It may be that, in approaching this matter, the Crown Court to some extent confused the question of whether the car was standing in the street with the question of whether the defendant was plying for hire with the carriage. No doubt, as I have said, when he parked the marked vehicle so that it was merely standing in the street, he was not committing an offence. But it seems to me that plying for hire sufficient to constitute the offence took place when, sitting in the car, he answered the question in the way which I have indicated.

Thank you Captain for, once again, saving me from pointing out these things.

What a cop out by Sussex !

Answer this:

If a PH driver is hailed from the street can he stop and pick up the fare; if not why ?

Can a PH hire driver go onto a station car park or Hackney Carriage rank and pick up. If not why ?

If there is a line of PH vehicles parked on a public highway, drivers in or outside waiting to be hired. Is this a rank or not ?

If a PH driver is sitting on a public highway and a member of the general public approaches the driver and asks if he is available and he asks where are they going. Has he committed an offence ?

If he does accept the fare after asking the person where they are going. What laws has he breached if any ?
And if consequently there is an accident and the passenger, himself and his car is damaged what could happen ?

ANY TAKERS ? :roll:

toots · **Posted:** Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:13 pm

London Uncensored wrote:

Sussex wrote:

captain cab wrote:

Toots is right;

In the Woodings case the following was stated;

In my judgment, when the defendant parked the marked car in the street, for the purpose of going into the toilet, he was not plying for hire, and when he came out of the toilet, he was not plying for hire. But when, having sat in the driver's seat, he told the prospective passengers that he was free to carry them, at that stage he was, bearing in mind where the car was and what the car looked like, plying for hire.

It may be that, in approaching this matter, the Crown Court to some extent confused the question of whether the car was standing in the street with the question of whether the defendant was plying for hire with the carriage. No doubt, as I have said, when he parked the marked vehicle so that it was merely standing in the street, he was not committing an offence. But it seems to me that plying for hire sufficient to constitute the offence took place when, sitting in the car, he answered the question in the way which I have indicated.

Thank you Captain for, once again, saving me from pointing out these things.

What a cop out by Sussex !

Answer this:

If a PH driver is hailed from the street can he stop and pick up the fare; if not why ?

Can a PH hire driver go onto a station car park or Hackney Carriage rank and pick up. If not why ?

If there is a line of PH vehicles parked on a public highway, drivers in or outside waiting to be hired. Is this a rank or not ?

If a PH driver is sitting on a public highway and a member of the general public approaches the driver and asks if he is available and he asks where are they going. Has he committed an offence ?

If he does accept the fare after asking the person where they are going. What laws has he breached if any ?
And if consequently there is an accident and the passenger, himself and his car is damaged what could happen ?

ANY TAKERS ? :roll:

Oh ffs what is the point of all this. A ph operator is opening a base in Liverpool, end off

London Uncensored · **Joined:** Sun Jul 01, 2012 7:52 pm **Posts:** 107

Quote:

Toots wrote: Oh ffs what is the point of all this. A ph operator is opening a base in Liverpool, end off

It's what's called a debate... That's what forums are for. This particular forum is called Taxi Driver Online. UK cab trade debate and advise.

Let me guess Toots... You are a mini-cab driver. Correct ?

toots · **Posted:** Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:47 pm

London Uncensored wrote:

Quote:

Toots wrote: Oh ffs what is the point of all this. A ph operator is opening a base in Liverpool, end off

It's what's called a debate... That's what forums are for. This particular forum is called Taxi Driver Online. UK cab trade debate and advise.

Let me guess Toots... You are a mini-cab driver. Correct ?

Your point?

MR T · **Joined:** Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm **Posts:** 8529

Quote:

Answer this:

If a PH driver is hailed from the street can he stop and pick up the fare; if not why ?

Can a PH hire driver go onto a station car park or Hackney Carriage rank and pick up. If not why ?

If there is a line of PH vehicles parked on a public highway, drivers in or outside waiting to be hired. Is this a rank or not ?

If a PH driver is sitting on a public highway and a member of the general public approaches the driver and asks if he is available and he asks where are they going. Has he committed an offence ?

If he does accept the fare after asking the person where they are going. What laws has he breached if any ?
And if consequently there is an accident and the passenger, himself and his car is damaged what could happen ?

ANY TAKERS ?

Why are you asking such childish questions..... define what you mean by street .

and then answer this question... if the Law Commission have their way and private hire companys are allowed to use private hire vehicles from other areas.... do you not think that A..L... company might double overnight by using vehicles from outside of London..

Sussex · **Posted:** Mon Jul 30, 2012 11:07 pm

London Uncensored wrote:

What a cop out by Sussex !

Answer this:

If a PH driver is hailed from the street can he stop and pick up the fare; if not why ?

No, because his licensing conditions don't allow this. Has f*** all to do with illegal plying.

London Uncensored wrote:

Can a PH hire driver go onto a station car park or Hackney Carriage rank and pick up. If not why ?

No, because his licensing conditions don't allow this. Has f*** all to do with illegal plying.

London Uncensored wrote:

If there is a line of PH vehicles parked on a public highway, drivers in or outside waiting to be hired. Is this a rank or not ?

It is not a rank, it is a line of PH parked up. If however a customer approached the line and asked if they were immediately available and a driver took the fare un-booked, then clearly an offence has taken place. But that's a long way from a chap sitting in his PH on a main road minding his own business.

London Uncensored wrote:

If a PH driver is sitting on a public highway and a member of the general public approaches the driver and asks if he is available and he asks where are they going. Has he committed an offence ?

No.

London Uncensored wrote:

If he does accept the fare after asking the person where they are going. What laws has he breached if any ?

Touting/plying/breach of his licensing conditions.

London Uncensored wrote:

And if consequently there is an accident and the passenger, himself and his car is damaged what could happen ?

The passenger is covered, the driver might be.

London Uncensored · **Joined:** Sun Jul 01, 2012 7:52 pm **Posts:** 107

toots wrote:

London Uncensored wrote:

Quote:

Toots wrote: Oh ffs what is the point of all this. A ph operator is opening a base in Liverpool, end off

It's what's called a debate... That's what forums are for. This particular forum is called Taxi Driver Online. UK cab trade debate and advise.

Let me guess Toots... You are a mini-cab driver. Correct ?

Your point?

Another unanswered question and yet again another question answered with a question.

If you don't want to take part in the debate; depart from the debate !

toots · **Posted:** Mon Jul 30, 2012 11:20 pm

Yes I currently drive a private hire vehicle and your point is?

Taxi Driver Online

Alpha taxi going places

Who is online