Taxi Driver Online

That is very good news. I wonder how long it will be before any prosecutions are going to be made against some of the ones doing school transport?

_________________
Grandad,

Not before time, but it'll just shift them from using 9 to 16 seaters and make them buy and use 8 passenger seaters instead even though theyll need to find another poor schmuck of a volunteer driver to drive the second vehicle for nowt, unless of course they force them to be PH plated and that'll not happen.

I don't think you have got this right. If money changes hands then the driver, regardless of whether he receives a payment or not, will require a DCPC and adhere to drivers hours etc.

_________________
Grandad,

There's at least 2 issues that have been "clouded" by the authorities over the years on the matter of "hire and reward".

One is whether the driver is being paid for driving. That is immaterial in the case of "hire and reward"

The second is whether the passenger, either directly or indirectly, is paying to travel. If the answer to this is yes, then the driver needs a PSV licence, DCPC, the vehicle needs a COIF, the operator needs a PSV O licence. It's always been the law. If the vehicle has under 9 passenger seats, then of course private hire or taxi regulations apply.

Case law: hire & reward, Rout-v-Swallow Hotel; EC case law Glocker Ambulanz. Tacho case law: Sweden-v-Lindblom (I think). there's a host of other case law that Martin Allen can quote.

I remember trawling through law books years ago when I got done for driving a bus down a buses only lane in 1974. "Tips", voluntarily given to a driver of a psv or taxi, are NOT fares. A "compulsory" tip IS a fare. A group of students travelling in a bus hired by their college are not deemed to have paid separate fares even though they may have paid the same amount to the organiser providing they all go from the same place to the same place. It gets rather involved, but ANY form of payment is, for the purpose of we are talking about here, for "commercial activity", regardless of whether or not it is "not-for-profit" and regardless of the status of the operator, whether it's cash or payment in kind via any channel.

Not if he's driving a Normal type car or MPV with upto 8 passenger seats on a normal car drivers licences and without any Driver hour limitations...the drivers then would be no different to any other 45pence per mile Volunteer grunt...though the Charity Wheel vehicle owners Charge each and every passenger it would need to be addressed under Private Hire rules rather than PCV for reward laws.

I think that what this ruling means is that even if the driver is a volunteer, if the journey is a "commercial activity" the they will need to be licensed under Hackney or Private Hire rules.

_________________
Grandad,

I Hope your right, It'll stop the unfair competition that these guys cause, they'll either need to do it for nowt or there wont be enough in if for them to cream off if they have to do it professionally like the rest of us ...it was a license for their directors to print money before.

It wouldn't matter if the driver is doing it for nowt. If the contract has any commercial activity they will need to be licensed.

_________________
Grandad,

All that will happen is that ALL the costs Associated with the licenses will be paid for out of license fees income by councils which will be another reason to jack our fees up higher and everything will still continue assuming they can find enough volunteers willing to go through the licensing process

Too many councillors up and down the country see these schemes as their jewel in the crown of providing affordable transport for a little obstacle like this to get in the way

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

In that case we won't have a single Volunteer driver taking old aunty Aggie to the Corn Club, Or Uncle Bert for his annual flu jab.

Good news, but would be easier for us all if the DfT gave out some proper guidance.

Crazy thing is soon we might not be under EU laws.

_________________
IDFIMH

Are you deliberately misunderstanding the ruling?

_________________
Grandad,

"The law" and "the ruling" have been there for many years, it's just that the UK government have in my view deliberately chosen to allow widespread abuse of the law over the years to get transport on the cheap. Thanks again to Martin Allen of MC Cars, Mansfield and Ian Ashman, a coach operator in the north east who have had the guts and determination to see this matter through.

"The law" will stay as it is even if we vote to leave the EU s it will take the government many years to do away with those laws made by the nasty people of Brussels. In fact what the EU has done is to adopt a large part of the Town Police Clauses Act of 1860-whatever and the PSV Regulations of about 1929 into THEIR law. As the TPCA has been there since 1863 there has been no rush to repeal that.

If TAXI(hackney carriage)proprietors and everyone else took the time to read the 1847 TAPC Act,everyone would realise that all road traffic acts are based off the 1847 Act,speeding,wanton driving,drink driving just to name a few.