Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Tue Apr 28, 2026 9:22 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 221 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 15  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 1:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 4:54 am
Posts: 10460
William Maitland wrote:
jasbar wrote:
greenbadgecabby wrote:
London (Supreme cab company) 04 Reg TX2 (No radio) £230 per week on the flat (Exclusive use, no share)

Colts cabs, P Reg fairway, (No radio) on the flat, £190 per week.

Hope that helps as a comparison.


That'll be the London which is de-restricted then, will it?

:wink:


Is that the London so many thousands of minicabs worked illegally in an unrestricted market.

I also wish everyone would stop quoting London, different World down there, maybe they should do what you do and demand Ken Livingstone resign. Tony Blair he should resign as well because there was an incident between two taxi drivers and a guy called Wencker, it's just not fair, I suspect brown envelopes are flying around like confetti, there that will save you saying it.




Are you so down trodden by society's ills that this is the best you can do? I suspect you are one of the 'I am nearing my pension brigade' don't rock the boat everything is really fine. Just let me cash in my plate in a few years and everything will be okay.


Well it's not. You and people like you are the very reason all this started, to busy kissing arse and pretending everything is rosy in the garden as long as it's not happening to you. Well now it is happening to you. How does it feel?

Jesus, are you the end product of years of servitude to the likes of Edinburgh Council? Don't tell me, your a happy cabby just like the rest of the undead. :-|

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 2:04 pm
Posts: 57
I must admit my plates have kept me in the lifestyle I am accustomed to, you see I dont drive myself, I have to rely on others to do that for me, but I make a living and so do they, a good one at that as well.

I have a good while before I retire, and anyhow the plates are a safe bet, something for the children, what is wrong with this.

While I am at the office I often think of those drivers out there, and the fact that my business acumen is allowing them to make their livings ( at my expense sometimes) they should think themselves lucky, if it was not for the likes of me and all the other people who scrimped and saved and went without so we could run our business in a professional manner they would be on the dole.

Now I am not saying that the drivers should not get a plate if they want one, just that they should have to pay the current market value for them, I did , and like any investment you are looking for a return, why do you find this so perplexing?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 2:04 pm
Posts: 57
jasbar wrote:
William Maitland wrote:
ALI T wrote:
William Maitland wrote:
What has some of that got to do with your average cabby who just goes out and does his job to the best of his or hers ability.
absolutly nothing carry on william

It seems to be more about vengeance and spite against the council :roll: it's all to reactionary for me, something bad happened to me so everyone must suffer the consequences, Hell hath no fury like a taxi driver scorned kind of thing.

how will we all suffer

There may be problems in the taxi trade but telling us who should and should not be resigning their positions from the Council aint going to help anyone.


mulligan should resign becouse he just backed a known and convicted criminal,all this when the chief constable objected,and mr mulligan being on the police board,if he shouldnt resign why not ?

Everyone will have the chance to vote them out, if that is their wish, in 18 months time, until then I would learn to except it.

seems you dont need to learn to accept anything william,youre a master in acceptance

Shame really a document with some reasonable stuff ruined by Political bias.



I take it you mean Milligan, as in Eric Milligan the two times Lord Provost of Edinburgh and nearly third, if it is someone called Mulligan I cant say as I do not know anything about them.

Anyway I do not like to comment on these things as I drive a Taxi for a living, I am not on the licensing commitee of CEC nor the Police Board nor do I really care come to think of it, perhaps you should be asking why it matters so much that cabbies should be telling the ex lord provost he should resign :?


How about because he is a disgrace as a politician?

And that there is every likelihood that he pulled strings, abusing his "elected" position the come to the help of a pal?

Or, because he represents the police board and his Chief constable made a particularly strong case for taking away the criminal's licence?

It's disappointing, and worrying, that anyone would try to defend the scurrilous activities of a Councillor like Milligan, unless he was related to him, or a pal. Particularly when perhaps the major problem our trade has is that Edinburgh's council, made up of people of the "quality" of Milligan, have been sticking it right up us for years. Now this can only be because either they have a strong natural desire to do so - exercise autocratic control because they can - or they just don't realise they're doing it, in effect incompetence.

Now, if you can't see this ....

If you make apology for this ....

If you meekly accept this .....

..... then it is YOU who is the real problem. And nothing is going to change until you get your brain in gear and realise what's going on.

Last century, those fighting for their rights had to deal with the same forelock tugging muppets, some of whom we have now in our trade now. Only, our job is much harder, because the very organisation which was established then to fight for justice - The labour party - is the very one which we have to campaign against now. In short, it too has become part of the problem.

And, whether we like it or not, the whole system is controlled by a clique. Eric Milligan is part of that clique. As is Phil Attridge. As is Donald Anderson, the council leader who doesn't, who allows council officials to run rampant with every crap idea they want to inflict on our city - irrespective of both cost and consequences - as they administer their "empire".

The magazine also points out how the rest of the swamp, the councillors who beaver away in their ward, allow the clique to run riot because they never hold them to account, dragging the whole process down and inflicting real damage on us in financial and personal worth terms.

If William Maitland truly is a real person, then take a real look at yourself. Either your thinking is fundamentally flawed or you're morally bankrupt. Which is it?

eusasmiles.zip




Well your not a fan of Ecky then, why the dislike, he was a damned good Lord Provost, and a fine ambassador for Edinburgh, I see he has another role now as well , something to do with tourism such was his success in this field.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 2:04 pm
Posts: 57
"Well it's not. You and people like you are the very reason all this started, to busy kissing arse and pretending everything is rosy in the garden as long as it's not happening to you. Well now it is happening to you. How does it feel?"

How is it "you and people like you" are the very reason all this started, all what started?

I dont kiss arse, and everything in the garden is indeed rosy, as long as what is not happening to me? and what is now happening to me ? :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:51 pm
Posts: 11
jasbar wrote:
William Maitland wrote:
ALI T wrote:
William Maitland wrote:
What has some of that got to do with your average cabby who just goes out and does his job to the best of his or hers ability.
absolutly nothing carry on william

It seems to be more about vengeance and spite against the council :roll: it's all to reactionary for me, something bad happened to me so everyone must suffer the consequences, Hell hath no fury like a taxi driver scorned kind of thing.

how will we all suffer

There may be problems in the taxi trade but telling us who should and should not be resigning their positions from the Council aint going to help anyone.


mulligan should resign becouse he just backed a known and convicted criminal,all this when the chief constable objected,and mr mulligan being on the police board,if he shouldnt resign why not ?

Everyone will have the chance to vote them out, if that is their wish, in 18 months time, until then I would learn to except it.

seems you dont need to learn to accept anything william,youre a master in acceptance

Shame really a document with some reasonable stuff ruined by Political bias.



I take it you mean Milligan, as in Eric Milligan the two times Lord Provost of Edinburgh and nearly third, if it is someone called Mulligan I cant say as I do not know anything about them.

Anyway I do not like to comment on these things as I drive a Taxi for a living, I am not on the licensing commitee of CEC nor the Police Board nor do I really care come to think of it, perhaps you should be asking why it matters so much that cabbies should be telling the ex lord provost he should resign :?


How about because he is a disgrace as a politician?

And that there is every likelihood that he pulled strings, abusing his "elected" position the come to the help of a pal?

Or, because he represents the police board and his Chief constable made a particularly strong case for taking away the criminal's licence?

It's disappointing, and worrying, that anyone would try to defend the scurrilous activities of a Councillor like Milligan, unless he was related to him, or a pal. Particularly when perhaps the major problem our trade has is that Edinburgh's council, made up of people of the "quality" of Milligan, have been sticking it right up us for years. Now this can only be because either they have a strong natural desire to do so - exercise autocratic control because they can - or they just don't realise they're doing it, in effect incompetence.

Now, if you can't see this ....

If you make apology for this ....

If you meekly accept this .....

..... then it is YOU who is the real problem. And nothing is going to change until you get your brain in gear and realise what's going on.

Last century, those fighting for their rights had to deal with the same forelock tugging muppets, some of whom we have now in our trade now. Only, our job is much harder, because the very organisation which was established then to fight for justice - The labour party - is the very one which we have to campaign against now. In short, it too has become part of the problem.

And, whether we like it or not, the whole system is controlled by a clique. Eric Milligan is part of that clique. As is Phil Attridge. As is Donald Anderson, the council leader who doesn't, who allows council officials to run rampant with every crap idea they want to inflict on our city - irrespective of both cost and consequences - as they administer their "empire".

The magazine also points out how the rest of the swamp, the councillors who beaver away in their ward, allow the clique to run riot because they never hold them to account, dragging the whole process down and inflicting real damage on us in financial and personal worth terms.

If William Maitland truly is a real person, then take a real look at yourself. Either your thinking is fundamentally flawed or you're morally bankrupt. Which is it?

eusasmiles.zip




Now thats why I chose the name I have, what has half of this got to do with us, stick to the issues, or stand for a position on the Council, but stop mixing the two.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 4:54 am
Posts: 10460
William Maitland wrote:
I must admit my plates have kept me in the lifestyle I am accustomed to, you see I dont drive myself, I have to rely on others to do that for me, but I make a living and so do they, a good one at that as well.

I have a good while before I retire, and anyhow the plates are a safe bet, something for the children, what is wrong with this.

While I am at the office I often think of those drivers out there, and the fact that my business acumen is allowing them to make their livings ( at my expense sometimes) they should think themselves lucky, if it was not for the likes of me and all the other people who scrimped and saved and went without so we could run our business in a professional manner they would be on the dole.

Now I am not saying that the drivers should not get a plate if they want one, just that they should have to pay the current market value for them, I did , and like any investment you are looking for a return, why do you find this so perplexing?





The market is set by the Council (regulatory capture) the plate holders operate as a cartel inflating drivers rentals and plate premiums due to the rationing of both making the market uncompetitive and undemocratic.

As a successful business man you should recognise this.

"The drivers should think themselves lucky" No you should think yourself lucky you have got away with this scam for such a long time. The drivers on the other hand are just about to be re-educated as to what is going on.


The drivers have as much as a right to a public licence as anyone else in the profession they have chosen to qualify for. It should not be down to a group of politicians manipulating legislation or those with vested interests to decide the market. This is what makes it uncompetitive and undemocratic.


Now if you can't understand or don't want to understand the market then that is fine by me, but nobody said you would have the luxury of a privileged existence in a restricted market for ever.


Enjoy it while it lasts! :wink:

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
William Maitland wrote:
Well JD should three unelected individuals claim to be speaking for the majority, same goes for everyone else who claims to be representing each other, I dont subscribe to that, if someone wants to speak or act on my behalf they better make sure they have my permission.

It follows that it would be better if there was some kind of proper Drivers association, where peoples views and wishes were taken into account, what we have at the moment are a couple of opposing groups arguing vociferously with each other , and it would seem with everyone else, there is no representation, so why should anyone simply assume the role of representative.


I was trying to read between the lines in what you said in the post to which I initially responded. I got the impression you were basically asking the question, "who should represent" the Taxi trade in Edinburgh? I personally could not come up with a solution but I wondered if you could shed more light on the points you raised?

Your reply still doesn't answer the pivotal point as to whom you think should do the representing? However, I notice in your most recent reply that you state and I quote,

"It follows that it would be better if there was some kind of proper Drivers association, where peoples views and wishes were taken into account,"

Just one observation about that passage of yours? I would be interested to know when you state, "taken into account" Just who precisely would do the taking into account? Would it be the council for instance and if so, if the drivers organisation in question told the council they wanted to drive their own vehicles and the only way that can be done is through lifting quantity control, how much notice do you think the Council would take of that request?

More to the point, would the organisations representing the Edinburgh Taxi owners welcome such a request? Or would they be totally against such a request being taken into account by those who were required to take views into account?

Perhaps it is not quite as simple as you imply when you state views will be taken into account. Under those circumstances would it be right to suggest that there are certain views that will never be taken into account because the council and those who do the accounting have a policy of non negotiation on certain views.

Therefore you will always have the situation where those in power will pick and choose which views they take into account especially when those views are manifestly incompatible with their own policy.

Regards

JD


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
William Maitland wrote:
I must admit my plates have kept me in the lifestyle I am accustomed to, you see I dont drive myself, I have to rely on others to do that for me, but I make a living and so do they, a good one at that as well.

I have a good while before I retire, and anyhow the plates are a safe bet, something for the children, what is wrong with this.

While I am at the office I often think of those drivers out there, and the fact that my business acumen is allowing them to make their livings ( at my expense sometimes) they should think themselves lucky, if it was not for the likes of me and all the other people who scrimped and saved and went without so we could run our business in a professional manner they would be on the dole.

Now I am not saying that the drivers should not get a plate if they want one, just that they should have to pay the current market value for them, I did , and like any investment you are looking for a return, why do you find this so perplexing?


I was wondering William? I am not questioning your business head but are you aware of what is going on around you? At what point in the future do you say to yourself the way things are going I could be left with several cabs with no one to drive them and no artificial plate value to fall back on?

That time will certainly come William as certain as it came to Dundee and the 238 councils who do not restrict numbers in England and Wales. So at the moment the garden might be rosy for persons who need quantity control to survive but you need to consider what you will be left with when quantity control is no longer your saviour?

Regards

JD


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 2:04 pm
Posts: 57
JD, when the Government issued it's response to the OFT report it mentioned that there would be a letter sent out to Councils (in England and Wales only I think) that would give guidlines on quantity restrictions, it goes on to mention that

A./ There should be effective surveys to measure demand, including Latent demand for Taxi services.

B./ Consultation with:

1./ ALL THOSE WORKING IN THE MARKET.

Well nobody has asked me, how hard can it be for three thousand people to fill in a questionnaire expressing their wishes, like the one Wigan have on their website.

http://www.wiganmbc.gov.uk/pub/ehcp/lic ... nnaire.pdf

So the Question is not really about who represents who for me, rather about why there is no representitive organisation in Edinburgh for all those involved in the Taxi trade in Edinburgh, the thing is, changing anything about peoples business or job without consultation under the we know whats best for you might not be as risk free as they think!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 2:04 pm
Posts: 57
Also it does list other reasons why a council could keep a limit on numbers, Environment and the like, LTP's?


It does not need to be one way or the other, theres always a middle ground.

JD, do you think the OFT were right to give the advice they did at the time , that they should consider removing quantity controls right away, they never consulted with "all those working in the market for taxis" did they?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 2:04 pm
Posts: 57
Indeed for those who want to dabble in the risky business of bringing about change to other peoples lives, I would urge you to think carefully about getting involved in things without consulting the people involved, it is a legal right, and I for one wont hesitate to use it if I need to, April the 6th was a good day!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 8:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
William Maitland wrote:
JD, when the Government issued it's response to the OFT report it mentioned that there would be a letter sent out to Councils (in England and Wales only I think) that would give guidlines on quantity restrictions, it goes on to mention that

A./ There should be effective surveys to measure demand, including Latent demand for Taxi services.

B./ Consultation with:

1./ ALL THOSE WORKING IN THE MARKET.


The advice to which the Government referred is the best practice advice which is currently being considered.

In respect of the text from the Rupert Cope letter letter which you quoted as follows.

Quote:
There should be effective surveys to measure demand, including Latent demand for Taxi services.


What the letter from Rupert Cope actually said at para 13 was this,

13. In those areas that need to undertake a new unmet demand survey, the Action Plan makes clear that for the survey to be effective, latent demand should be taken into account.

The letter does not state "There should be effective surveys to measure demand" The reference was made in respect of those councils who wanted to retain quantity controls and you can see exactly what it says from the section I have posted.

In respect of consultation this comes under useful questions when assesing quantity control and it takes the form of the following advice.

Questions relating to consultation and other public transport service provision

· When consulting, have you included etc
- all those working in the market;
- consumer and passenger (including disabled) groups;
- groups which represent those passengers with special needs;
- local interest groups, eg hospitals or visitor attractions;
- the police;
- a wide range of transport stakeholders eg rail/bus/coach providers and traffic managers?

· Do you receive representations about taxi availability?
· What is the level of service currently available to consumers (including other public transport modes)?



Can you tell me if you are in the Scottish Taxi trade?

I have posted the letter in question so there can be no future missunderstanding as to its contents.

Rupert Cope
Head of Taxi/PHV Branch

Government request to all councils restricting the number of taxi licences in England and Wales outside London to review Quantity Control policies

1. I am writing to ask you, following the announcement of a Government Action Plan for taxis (and private hire vehicles), to review your local policy to restrict the number of taxi licences that you grant and to publish the outcome by 31st March 2005.

Background to this letter

2. As you will know, the Office of Fair Trading published a market study into the regulation of taxis and private hire vehicles in the UK in November 2003. The Government responded in respect of England and Wales on 18th March by means of a Written Statement in the House of Commons.

3. The Written Statement included an Action Plan for Taxis and Private Hire Vehicles that I attach as annex A (Gov Statement 18/03/04) to this letter. Paragraphs 1 to 11 of the Action Plan, in particular paragraphs 4 to 8, cover restrictions on the number of taxi licences issued by licensing authorities.

4. As a result, this letter is for the attention of those taxi licensing authorities in England and Wales outside London that restrict the number of taxi licences that they issue. I am addressing this letter to the Chief Executives of the councils listed at Annex B (list of quota councils). For ease, I enclose a further copy for the appropriate taxi licensing officer. I am also copying this letter for information to the Chief Executives of County Councils and Passenger Transport Executives who will need to include justification of local policies to restrict taxi licences in their Local Transport Plans .

The power to issue taxi licences

5. Section 37 of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847, as amended by section 16 of the Transport Act 1985, enables district/borough councils or unitary authorities to license taxis within their area and to restrict the number of taxi licences issued only if they are satisfied that there is no significant unmet demand for taxi services in their area.

6. In effect, this means that a council can:

· issue a taxi licence to any applicant meeting the local application criteria

· grant at least such number of taxi licences as it considers necessary to ensure that no significant unmet demand remains

· refuse to grant additional taxi licences provided that it is satisfied that there is no significant unmet demand.

However

· if a council is unsure of the presence or absence of significant unmet demand it is not in a position to refuse to grant a taxi licence provided the application criteria are met.

The Government's position

7. The Action Plan makes clear that the Government believes restrictions should only be retained where there is shown to be a clear benefit for the consumer, and that councils should publicly justify their reasons for the retention of restrictions and how decisions on numbers have been reached. Thus, the Government considers that, unless a specific case can be made, it is not in the interests of consumers for market entry to be refused to those who meet the application criteria.

8. However, the Government also makes clear in the Action Plan that local authorities remain best placed to determine local transport needs and to make the decisions about them in the light of local circumstances. So it is not proposing at this time to take away the power to restrict taxi licences from local authorities.

What we are asking you to do

9. Accordingly, we ask you to review the case for restricting taxi licences for your area and to make that review public.

10. Though this is a new request, we do not consider that this should be burdensome in the light of what you should already be doing for your licensing area in respect of issuing taxi licences.

11. It is of course for you to make the case for your area in the light of your local knowledge of local needs and circumstances. Inevitably, this will mean that you will need to know whether or not there is any unmet demand for taxi services in your area. For example, if your understanding of (unofficial) taxi plate values in your district is that they are high, this would seem to indicate that there is significant unmet demand for taxis in your area.

12. Unless you are confident of the situation in this regard in your area, your consideration may therefore necessitate an unmet demand survey. However, such a survey may not be necessary if a recent survey can be demonstrated to have addressed the issues adequately.

13. In those areas that need to undertake a new unmet demand survey, the Action Plan makes clear that for the survey to be effective, latent demand should be taken into account.

14.To help you formulate and carry out a comprehensive review and reach a satisfactory conclusion, we thought it might be useful to provide some questions that highlight the issues that you will almost certainly need to take into consideration. The checklist of questions is at Annex C. Please note that the checklist is not exhaustive, but is offered in the spirit of aiding local consideration.

15. In reaching your decision, we would also ask you to take into account the advice we issued to all councils about local accessibility policies in September 2002. In particular, if you are lifting restrictions or issuing new taxi licences because you have found unmet demand in your area, we would urge you to consider whether the new licences should be for accessible vehicles.

16. We would encourage you to make all the evidence gathered to support the decision-making process available for public scrutiny.

17. Those councils who have not undertaken an unmet demand survey for some time and now decide to do so, might find it helpful to consult neighbouring, local councils who have recent experience of such surveys.

18. We would ask you to make your conclusions public by 31st March 2005 and would appreciate a copy of them no later than 30th April 2005.

19. It seems to us that the outcome of your review will be either (i) to deregulate and thereby grant a taxi licence to anyone meeting the application criteria, or (ii) to continue restricting the number of taxi licences issued. In that instance, three scenarios would appear to be possible outcomes:

· maintaining the current limit of taxi licences;

· granting a number of new licences to meet the unmet demand that you have identified by means of a new survey;

· granting a specific number of new taxi licences each year.

Future requirements

20. The justification by 31st March 2005 is a one-off requirement for local councils. The Action Plan sets out the following on-going arrangements for councils continuing to restrict taxi licences:

· a three yearly review, with published conclusions

· justification of the local policy for quantity restrictions in the 5 yearly Local Transport Plan process.

21. The Action Plan commits the Government to review the situation regarding quantity controls in three years' time, with a view to further action if necessary.

22. We look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully,

R F Cope

ANNEX C

Useful questions when assessing quantity controls of taxi licences

· Have you taken into account the Government's view that quantity controls should be removed unless a specific case that such controls benefit the consumer can be made?

Questions relating to the policy of controlling numbers

· Have you recently reviewed the need for your policy of quantity controls?
· What form did the review of your policy of quantity controls take?
· Who was involved in the review?
· What decision was reached about retaining or removing quantity controls?
· Are you satisfied that your policy justifies restricting entry to the trade?
· Are you satisfied that quantity controls do not:
- reduce the availability of taxis;
- increase waiting times for consumers;
- reduce choice and safety for consumers?

· What special circumstances justify retention of quantity controls?
· How does your policy benefit consumers, particularly in remote rural areas?
· How does your policy benefit the trade?
· If you have a local accessibility policy, how does this fit with restricting taxi licences?

Questions relating to setting the number of taxi licences

· When last did you assess unmet demand?
· How is your taxi limit assessed?
· Have you taken into account latent demand, ie potential consumers who would use taxis if more were available, but currently do not?
· Are you satisfied that your limit is set at the correct level?
· How does the need for adequate taxi ranks affect your policy of quantity controls?

Questions relating to consultation and other public transport service provision

· When consulting, have you included etc
- all those working in the market;
- consumer and passenger (including disabled) groups;
- groups which represent those passengers with special needs;
- local interest groups, eg hospitals or visitor attractions;
- the police;
- a wide range of transport stakeholders eg rail/bus/coach providers and traffic managers?

· Do you receive representations about taxi availability?
· What is the level of service currently available to consumers (including other public transport modes)?


Regards

JD


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2005 8:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
William Maitland wrote:
Also it does list other reasons why a council could keep a limit on numbers, Environment and the like, LTP's?


I'm afraid it lists no reasons why a council could keep a limit on numbers, the letter and Government action plan make it quite clear that if a council wishes to retain numbers according to the law it has to be certain there is no unmet demand.

The Government or the letter offer no legal reasons as to how a council can restrict licenses. All the letter does it make it quite clear that what is required under the law for a policy of restriction is that a council must be in possesion of evidence that shows no unmet demand. However only a court of law will determine if that evidence is sufficient.

Quote:
It does not need to be one way or the other, theres always a middle ground.


There is no middle ground. Either a license application is granted or it is refused, its as simple as that.

Quote:
JD, do you think the OFT were right to give the advice they did at the time , that they should consider removing quantity controls right away, they never consulted with "all those working in the market for taxis" did they?


You mean they never consulted with those who have a vested interest in retaining quantity controls?

That was not the excercise of the OFT review, their remit is consumer benefit not those who wish to retain a restrictive practice. The OFT reasoning is based on a level playing field. Something you disagree with no doubt.

Regards

JD


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2005 1:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 12:54 am
Posts: 2372
Location: edinburgh
William Maitland wrote:
I must admit my plates have kept me in the lifestyle I am accustomed to, you see I dont drive myself, I have to rely on others to do that for me, but I make a living and so do they, a good one at that as well.

I have a good while before I retire, and anyhow the plates are a safe bet, something for the children, what is wrong with this.

While I am at the office I often think of those drivers out there, and the fact that my business acumen is allowing them to make their livings ( at my expense sometimes) they should think themselves lucky, if it was not for the likes of me and all the other people who scrimped and saved and went without so we could run our business in a professional manner they would be on the dole.

Now I am not saying that the drivers should not get a plate if they want one, just that they should have to pay the current market value for them, I did , and like any investment you are looking for a return, why do you find this so perplexing?

absolutely abhorent
you are the most digusting excuse for a human being i have ever come across,you make a good case for the slave trade william
as for youre children no chance mate times creeping up fast and the days of the expensive family hierloom(aka plate) will soon be a thing of the past
i think you will find youre investment going up in smoke real soon
couldnt happen to a nicer person :lol: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2005 1:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 12:54 am
Posts: 2372
Location: edinburgh
now realcabforce/forum william maitland has managed to express a view that most decent human beings will find sickening (and this man has offspring, not much hope for the future generations)
now i hope you agree that this kind of attitude is excactly the reason why everyone that wants a plate should have one,and one of the reasons why we applied in the first place, we all know a williem in the taxi trade dont we.
or do you think we should all bow down to this man who i am sure if this were a few hundred years ago would have been branding all his drivers and saying the should think themselves lucky that they can pick my cotton and sugar,
in exchange for a mud hut.
well done willem munchausen youve made a most convincing point ive heard in a long time for derestriction
:-& :-& :-&


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 221 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 15  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 264 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