Taxi Driver Online

It must be months since they said a decision was imminent, but not a dickie bird.

Do the PCO think that everyone will forget about it and carry on as before?

_________________
IDFIMH

I hope so, I'm awaiting delivery of my new E7.

If they don't make a decision soon, I'll have to find a town that allows them.



Budge over Sussex, thats my space on the Eastbourne Station rank.

Maybe you two could do a swap, seeing as sussex is so concerned abot the Smoke

You could always start touting with it in the smoke. I'm sure you'd get on like a house on fire with the lads

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Why don't Cab direct build a vehicle that meets the PCO COF? Then they would not be a problem. Oops I forgot. They convert vans into "purpose built", don't they?

They don't build them because you would have to be a c*** to build them, and a bigger one to insist on them.

How does the rest of the world manage with the turning circle?

Why does no other country sell LTI vehicles, apart from the odd few that sell them for their novelty value?

_________________
IDFIMH

I never was much good at crosswords, so i'm not sure what a c***, is. I tried cart, cosh, crop and cool, but they did not seem quite right.

I think it highly likely the PCO wishes this one would go away.

The PCO many years ago, laid down a specification for the minimum requirement for a vehicle that any vehicle manufacturer could build, to be deemed fit for the purpose, for use as a Hackney Carriage (TAXI). The presently available cabs that fit the Conditions of Fitness, are, the LTI TX11, and the Metrocab. Both manufacturers built a cab to the required specification and therefore passed the COF. Now along comes a supplier of "Purpose Built" Converted Vans, that do not meet the specification that other suppliers can, and demands that the COF be changed to a standard that they can achieve. I mean, I could beat Linford Christie over a hundred metres, but the officials won't let me use a motorbike. Or, if the Royal Navy laid down a specification for a new submarine, and a shipyard produced a design that was quite good, but should not be used in salty water, it would not meet the laid down criteria.
The PCO's quandary is, as I see it, is that if they change the COF so that bread vans fit, LTI would cry foul and sue, (no choice really, it would drive them out of business) and if they refuse to lower the standard, the breadvan converters will sue. could cost squillions, could take years.

Just a view from the sideline. discuss.

I think if the PCO keep the turning circle, then a big court case will follow.

Not so sure LTI would do likewise if the turning circle is done away with.

More likely they will do their own bread van.

_________________
IDFIMH

They would surely have done one by now if they were going to...

I would say if they offered a bread van pre de-turncircle, then they would sell even fewer TXs than they do at present.

Maybe they are just waiting to see if the PCO will bottle it, but if the PCO don't, then for them to stay in business a bread van they must offer.

_________________
IDFIMH

On what grounds would they sue?

JD

Maybe to re-coup slush funds.

But we all know that's not true.

_________________
IDFIMH

It will be most interesting to read Jimbos grounds for LTI suing TFL?

Regards

JD

On the grounds that they invested millions, (well a few bob then), designing and developing a vehicle that meets the required COF, only to be usurped by a company that has the goalposts shifted, that is the COF changed to fit the vehicle.
Any change in the COF would be the likely end of LTI. They would have no choice but to sue TfL if they changed the rules to fit.

I think it a reasoned argument that a vehicle is produced to fit the existing COF, and not for the COF to be changed to fit a produced vehicle.

But, as ever, time will tell.

I am, as ever, stating a personal opinion, I hardly own any shares at all in RTZ.