Taxi Driver Online

Never seen a more stupid fare table than the Melton Borough Councils.

According to the table the driver can only ask for fares for the 1st 1/3 mile(flag fall) then for every completed mile thereafter,so if the job is for 1 mile the driver only can demand payment for the 1st 1/3 mile the other 2/3 mile is free of charge.

Indeed, but perhaps in reality the meter cranks up in smaller increments, and thus the fare card effectively just shows the rate for the running mile rather than the actual increments shown on the meter?

Note that the fare card doesn't actually say 'every *completed* mile thereafter', it just says that for 'every mile thereafter'.

Our card in Fife is actually a bit vague on that as well, because on Rate 2 it simply says that the fares are 25% higher than on Rate 1.

Don't know if it happens regularly or was just a one off, but a few years ago I'm sure some of the meters were cranking up at 25p increments, whereas the rest were using the same 20p increments as on Rate 1, but with the yardage reduced commensurately.

Thus it was just two different ways of achieving the same result 25% on the 20p is obviously 25p, while (roughly) the same result can be achieved by reducing the yardage.

Of course, on some fares there would be a 5p difference between the different meters, but in the grand scheme of things not particularly significant.

On the other hand, if the Melton fares are cranking up in 20p increments (say) then the fare card isn't exactly an accurate portrayal of what's actually happening, thus a lot more misleading than the Fife scenario.

But I'm sure grandad will confirm whether or not that's the case

The meter increases in 10 pence increments on rate one and 2. Rate 3 and 4 are in 20 pence increments. That is for meters calibrated by Pitts. For meters calibrated by Nottingham radio communications the rate goes up in 10 pence and 15 pence increments.
The meeting today will have some officers and some Councillors. Not sure how many of each.
The Committee chair had a long conversation with my son yesterday and he seemed very annoyed that he has got more information from speaking to drivers than he has got from officers. In fact he said that the licensing officer who wrote the report could not even answer basic questions about how fares were calculated. They probably looked at the fare table in the same way as Sussex has stated.

_________________
Grandad,
To support my charity text MAYORWALK to 70085 to donate £5

Ah, that sounds a bit like the Fife scenario then - I think it was different meter suppliers who provided different calibration information to their agents, thus the different increments and yardages.

Which I suppose is inevitable if the meter manufacturers are provided with vague information on the fare card which can be interpreted in various ways, as exemplified by the Melton fare card simply showing the running mile charge.

So presumably the meter people have taken their own view on how precisely to implement the running mile in terms of increments and yardages. Of course, as Heathcote rightly pointed out, it would have been a bit ridiculous to simply have had the meter clicking up once every mile

On the other hand, if it was down to me the minimum increment would be 20p, and certainly nothing with a 5p on the end

Same taxis in an area charging different prices for the same jobs.

Madness.

_________________
IDFIMH

Difference between meters will never be huge though, unless the increments used by the meter suppliers are huge - say that one was using 10p increments, while others were cranking up at 50p, so a potential difference of 40p for the same run.

Of course, unlikely that the increments used would ever be that far apart, thus the differences will never be too great, and thus manageable, so probably like the current scenario in Melton.

In fact, not unlike the differences between meters due to calibration differences. Eg One cab will just click up that extra 20p for a trip just on the margin, while another won't click.

Which of course is a good argument for smaller increments - smaller discrepancies between fares due to calibration differences.

At the other extreme, imagine if the meter suppliers did take the Melton card literally and the meters clicked up only once a mile. Then the same trip could easily vary by a couple of pounds if the meters were calibrated slightly different, and the trip ended at around the clickover.

And of course, in the Melton scenario if some meters used 10p increments yet others only clicked up once a mile, then there would be huge differences in fares for the same trip.

But surely it's not beyond the wit of man to set a universal tariff?

Have the same start, have the same drops and away you go.

_________________
IDFIMH

Indeed, but if there's a fare card as vague as Melton's then either they take it literally and the meter cranks up once a mile, or all the meter suppliers have their own way of implementing it, so hardly a surprise that some divide the mile into 10 pences, while others divide them into 20 pences, or even 15 pences or 25 pences

And the slight differences in calibration will always be there - if the flagfall ends at 1,600 yards, say, then some meters will always click up a yard or two early, or a yard or two late.

In fact I'm not sure what our meter tolerances are in Fife, exactly, and no doubt it varies between LAs, like everything else. But oddly enough I can't recall ever seeing it discussed anywhere, although I'm sure some official council documents will mention it, no doubt.

There is also the difference due to tyre wear. new tyres are larger than tyres worn close to the limit.

_________________
Grandad,
To support my charity text MAYORWALK to 70085 to donate £5

I believe most accepted tolerance to be plus or minus 5 yards.

And, of course, the tyre pressures can make a difference if they're not the same as when the meter was calibrated in the first place.

Can't remember if it was the council tester or Mr Digitax Agent, but last time round one of them told me that pressures wouldn't make that much difference, but tyre wear was more significant.

And, of course, the real biggie would be using different sized tyres/wheels

anyway, back to the original post "what happens next".
Well the officers have now sated that at the committee meeting held on March 11th that the committee did not approve the table of fares. They approved the start of the consultation period. Even though I have spoken with one of the committee members from that meeting who has confirmed that they did approve the table of fares and that if no objections were received then the new fares would be from May 1st.

_________________
Grandad,
To support my charity text MAYORWALK to 70085 to donate £5

I think you should propose that all Council meetings are recorded especially quasi judicial meetings,as it would appear that officers are telling untruths and calling an elected member a liar.

I think that is a very good idea.

_________________
Grandad,
To support my charity text MAYORWALK to 70085 to donate £5

I had a meeting with senior management and legal on Wednesday and drivers had a similar meeting on Thursday.
Basically the Council held their hands up and said that the whole process had been a shambles from their side and with all the errors that had been in all the reports they had no choice but to stop the whole process because if it had been passed it could have been challenged in court.
One or two other things came to light during my meeting regarding what I can and can't get involved in at the Council. It seems that the last Chief Executive and monitoring officer were wrong to say that I could not talk about taxi licensing at the Council. My input is now welcome and indeed, expected, I just can't be involved in the decision making process, ie I can't attend the committee meeting when they are deciding stuff.
I expect that there may be some radical changes being put forward soon.

_________________
Grandad,
To support my charity text MAYORWALK to 70085 to donate £5