Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 2:17 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Mar 04, 2021 1:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13810
Assumed this would be a straightforward article about a policy delay due to Covid, but it does go on a bit.


CCTV in taxis to be revisited following protest by 'struggling' drivers

https://www.cravenherald.co.uk/news/191 ... g-drivers/

Image

CCTV cameras fitted in all Craven taxis by next month is to be revisited following calls for their installation to be put on hold.

Keighley and Ilkley MP Robbie Moore has joined more than 100 taxi drivers in appealing to Craven District Council to reconsider making it policy for all vehicles to have safety cameras, which cost around £500, fitted by April.

“I fully understand the need for CCTV cameras in licensed vehicles for both the protection of taxi drivers and passengers alike,” said the Conservative MP.

“This issue has been raised with me by a number of local taxi drivers. I do, however, believe that the council should again consider postponing the introduction of these cameras due to the ongoing effect that coronavirus is having on the industry as a whole.

“A local group of taxi drivers have come up with a reasonable time scale which I would urge Craven District Council to consider.”

There are currently130 hackney carriages and 15 private hire vehicles operating in Craven and the cost of installing cameras for the drivers has been put at between £450 and £600.

In January, the council’s licensing committee agreed to make it policy for all taxis to have CCTV fitted for the safety of both drivers and passengers by April. Members at the time said while trade was affected by the coronavirus pandemic, the economy would ‘bounce back’ and pointed out they had been discussing bringing in the policy for about three years.

Councillor Peter Madeley, said while taxi drivers agreed CCTV needed to be introduced, for both their and the public’s safety, now was not the time.

Cllr Madeley, said many of the drivers were in his Skipton ward, and were struggling financially due to the pandemic.

"People are finding it very hard and we need to help. They agree with CCTV, but it is a matter of timing. They are currently earning £20 to £30 per day and out of that comes the cost of petrol," he said.

At last week's full council meeting Cllr Madeley was told CCTV would be discussed at the next licensing committee on April 6, almost a week after the policy was to start.

Cllr Madeley was also told no taxi driver would be penalised in the meantime.

Cllr Simon Myers, chairman of licensing, told Cllr Madeley that it was unfortunate that representations had not been made earlier and not just more than a month before it was due to be brought in, but the policy would be re-visited.

He explained that taxi drivers and firms had been made aware of the licensing agenda in January, which included the CCTV policy, and requests had been made by the licensing officer for details of earnings, to inform the committee, but had not been forthcoming.

"We have received correspondence from various taxi firms, a petition and by a large number of taxi drivers and we have undertaken to discuss it at the next licensing meeting on April 6," he said.

“We have always entered into dialogue with taxi drivers, and we are always interested in being as fair as we can."

In response to Cllr Madeley's question that no action would be taken against any taxi driver who had failed to have CCTV fitted by the start of April, Cllr Myers said: "I know out there in the public people sometimes think we are unreasonable, believe me we are not going to start forcing people on April 1 knowing that we are having a meeting on April 6. We don’t want to be unduly harsh with anybody, we will look at it again."

He added that it was unfortunate that representations had been left so late, including the petition, signed by more than 100 people and too late to be presented at full council.

“It is unfortunate that four or five weeks before it is due to come in that we get these representations but that will not stop us from considering it," he said.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 04, 2021 1:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13810
Quote:
In January, the council’s licensing committee agreed to make it policy for all taxis to have CCTV fitted for the safety of both drivers and passengers by April. Members at the time said while trade was affected by the coronavirus pandemic, the economy would ‘bounce back’ and pointed out they had been discussing bringing in the policy for about three years.

So in January councillors thought the economy would bounce back sufficiently that drivers would find a spare £600 for a CCTV system before the end of March :roll:

Quote:
“It is unfortunate that four or five weeks before it is due to come in that we get these representations but that will not stop us from considering it," he said.

And much of the rest of the article seems to be blaming the trade for leaving their representations late.

But in view of councillors' opinion in the economic bounceback back in January, I'm not surprised the trade have been body swerving them.

And despite the councillor's usual stuff about consultation and dialogue, someone in the comments is claiming no one actually knew about the CCTV proposal that was decided in January. Sounds about right :roll:

Good photo of the rank, though :-s


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 08, 2021 12:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13810
Whatever the pros and cons of the various arguments, the craven process in Craven demonstrates why these things should be decided nationally :roll:


CCTV in Craven taxis on hold for now but 're-visited' in six months

https://www.cravenherald.co.uk/news/192 ... ix-months/

TAXI drivers have been given a reprieve over the compulsory fitting of CCTV cameras.

Private hire vehicles and taxis in Craven were expected to pay around £500 to have safety cameras fitted by April, for the protection of both drivers and passengers.

But, councillors have now decided to shelve the plans until September when they will revisit the new policy and make a fresh decision based on whether the economy is starting to recover.

At Tuesday’s meeting of Craven District Council’s Licensing Committee, John Pickering of the Craven Taxi Association said drivers had been hit hard by the coronavirus pandemic and asked for the compulsory fitting of CCTV to be delayed for two years.

But councillors, who first agreed to the policy in 2018, said that was too long with one questioning the whole point if it kept being put off.

Mr Pickering told councillors nighttime economy in Craven was non existent and day time trade was a fraction of what it was before the start of the pandemic in March last year.

Taxis relied on tourism and the hospitality industry and there had been a massive drop in both, he said. There were also ‘whispers’ of a possible further lockdown in the summer.

Mr Pickering said he was in support of CCTV but called on the committee to shelve the plans for two years, saying passengers were currently having to wear face masks anyway, which meant identification if an issue arose would be impossible, and adding that drivers did not want the added stress of it being reviewed every six months.

“We cannot afford this outlay right now we are struggling to make ends meet. 24 months will allow taxi drivers to fully financially recover,” he said.

Fellow taxi driver Gordon Thomson, based in the Dales, said business had been ‘pretty much wiped out’ over the last year or two, agreed that CCTV was a great idea but also wanted to see it postponed.

The committee, which had received a petition from drivers, heard from Cllr Andy Solloway, who has been volunteering at the Covid vaccination centre in Skipton, that taxi drivers had been doing a good job, bringing people to be vaccinated, and on occasions, helping people to jump start cars that had been left idle for months, and changing tyres.

Cllr David Ireton, who voted against a delay, said if CCTV kept being put off, it raised the question whether it was needed at all. The policy had been put in place to protect drivers when they were accused of ‘all sorts of things’, he said.

Cllr Robert Heseltine said if everything went to plan, there would be a 'return to normal' on June 21, but there could be further lock-downs. CCTV needed to be in place for the safety of both drivers and passengers, he said, but proposed delaying implementation for a further six months and revisiting the situation then.

Committee chairman, Simon Myers said it was unfortunate that taxi drivers had not attended the meeting in January when it had been decided to implement the scheme in April, and that the committee always welcomed input. He added that when the April date had been agreed, it was on the basis that the economy had been expected to be in recovery, but that had not happened.

But, he agreed with a six month delay after which the implementation date of cameras would be reviewed.

“September will be a good time to revisit this, and if we have had more lock-downs, we will look at it again,” he said.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 05, 2021 5:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13810
It's the craven councillors in Craven again, and another great photo of the rank :-s


Councillors to agree date for mandatory CCTV cameras in taxis

https://www.cravenherald.co.uk/news/196 ... ras-taxis/

Image
Image: Craven Herald

TAXI drivers in Craven will have to install CCTV cameras in their cars and undergo tougher criminal record checks under new rules set to be approved next week.

Craven District Council said the proposed rules for both taxis and private hire cabs would improve passenger safety and cut complaints against drivers including “dangerous driving” and “verbal and threatening behaviour”.

The CCTV rules were set to be introduced from 1 January, however, this was delayed after a petition from taxi drivers who raised concerns over the costs and financial impacts of Covid.

The council’s licensing committee will be now be asked to agree a new implementation date at a meeting this evening (Tuesday).

Once the rules come into force, the council will become the first in North Yorkshire to mandate CCTV cameras in taxis.

A report to the licensing committee said: “The view is that taxi cameras can provide an additional deterrence to prevent risks to passengers and drivers and can add investigative value when required.

“The Department for Transport guidance does not state that taxi cameras should be mandated. The matter remains for the licensing authority to determine based on local circumstances.”

The council said the cameras cost between £450 and £630, and that this “has always been an important consideration”.

Drivers who cannot afford the equipment would be to apply to the council for an exception to the rules if they can show they are suffering from financial hardship.

A total of 12 taxis in the district have so far installed the cameras.

The new rules on criminal record checks are being imposed on all councils by the Department for Transport which published its new Statutory Taxi and Private Hire Vehicle Standards earlier this year.

Currently, councils are “encouraged” to check criminal records, but the new proposals go further saying the enhanced criminal checks “should” be carried out on drivers applying for licences.

Those with specific previous convictions will also face tougher bans.

Announcing the new standards earlier this year, former transport minister Nusrat Ghani said: “While the vast majority of drivers are safe and act responsibly, we have seen too many cases where taxi and minicab drivers have used their job to prey on vulnerable people, women and children.

“These rules would make sure that drivers are fit to carry passengers, keeping people safe while stopping those with bad intentions from getting behind the wheel of a taxi or minicab.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 05, 2021 5:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13810
Quote:
Drivers who cannot afford the equipment would be to apply to the council for an exception to the rules if they can show they are suffering from financial hardship.

So individuals in the trade are to be effectively means-tested to see if they can afford to comply with the conditions of fitness?

Whatever next - imagine if they did things like that for vehicle age or inspections.

If they think now is an appropriate time to introduce CCTV then maybe better for the whole trade to comply. If they think there are affordability issues then abandon it, or at least postpone it for a year or so [-(


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2021 10:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13810
It gets worse ](*,)


CCTV cameras in taxis to be made mandatory from January 1

https://www.darlingtonandstocktontimes. ... january-1/

CRAVEN will become the first area in North Yorkshire to mandate CCTV cameras in taxis when the new rules come into force on 1 January.

The start date was agreed by members of Craven District Council’s licensing committee last night after a petition from taxi drivers who asked for a delay due to the financial impacts of Covid and costs of installing cameras.

Drivers also asked if the council could set up a hardship fund for those unable to afford the equipment which costs around £500, but this was refused.

Instead, drivers will be offered a temporary exception to the rules if they can show they are suffering from “financial hardship”.

Councillor Simon Myers, deputy leader of the council and chairman of the licensing committee, told a meeting last night that the authority “didn’t want to delay this any further” as he also urged drivers to apply for government grants if they can not afford the cameras.

He said: “Every taxi driver in Craven is eligible for a bounce back loan. That is at far cheaper rates than this council could do and is hugely affordable.

“I have told the taxi trade that and I will say it again.

“These grants are a much better avenue than asking the council to set up something it has never done before – some loan scheme – and charge interest rates.”

The CCTV rules were first made a policy by the council in 2018, but there has since been delays in bringing this forward.

The aim is to improve passenger safety and cut complaints against drivers which have recently included “dangerous driving” and “verbal and threatening behaviour”, a council report said.

Speaking at last night’s meeting, councillor David Ireton said safety on the roads and inside taxis was a more important issue than the costs of cameras.

He said: “It is alright to keep kicking this policy down the road and say we will do it when the taxi drivers can afford it, but I don’t think that is the answer.

“We are here to protect the public and drivers – and CCTV cameras are a vital tool in the tool box to do this.”

Also at last night’s meeting, new rules on enhanced criminal record checks for taxi drivers were agreed by councillors.

These rules are being imposed on all councils by the Department for Transport which earlier this year published its new Statutory Taxi and Private Hire Vehicle Standards.

Currently, councils are “encouraged” to check criminal records, but the new proposals go further saying the enhanced criminal checks “should” be carried out on drivers applying for licences.

Those with specific previous convictions will also face tougher bans.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2021 10:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13810
Councillor Simon Myers, deputy leader of the council and chairman of the licensing committee wrote:
“Every taxi driver in Craven is eligible for a bounce back loan. That is at far cheaper rates than this council could do and is hugely affordable."

How does he know "every taxi driver in Craven is eligible for a bounce back loan"? Has he assessed them all in terms of eligibility, and is he qualified to make such an assessment? :evil:

Councillor Simon Myers, deputy leader of the council and chairman of the licensing committee wrote:
“I have told the taxi trade that and I will say it again.

“These grants are a much better avenue than asking the council to set up something it has never done before – some loan scheme – and charge interest rates.”

A loan is not a grant :evil:

And didn't the bounce back loan scheme close to new applicants around six months ago anyway? :evil:

Quote:
Instead, drivers will be offered a temporary exception to the rules if they can show they are suffering from “financial hardship”.

And this councillor is in charge of assessing this as chairman of the licensing committee? :evil:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2021 11:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13810
Article above was on the Darlington & Stockton Times website. This is on the more local Craven Herald site. They're both part of the Newsquest publishing group, so I assumed this would be the same article, as they often repeat them over two or more local titles. But it's actually a completely different piece, and interesting enough to include this alternative version here :?


CRAVEN taxi drivers will have to have CCTV cameras fitted in their vehicles by the start of next year.

https://www.cravenherald.co.uk/news/196 ... as-fitted/

CRAVEN taxi drivers will have to have CCTV cameras fitted in their vehicles by the start of next year.

After deferring implementation of the policy for two years, Craven District Council’s licensing committee agreed it was needed for the safety of both passengers and drivers and should be brought in without further delay.

There will also be a hardship policy where drivers not able to afford the £450 to £630 cost of instalment will be able to apply for a longer period of time to get a camera fitted.

Drivers will also be contacted with details of available government loans after two councillors suggested it should be down to the council to loan hard pressed taxi owners the money to have the cameras fitted.

Councillor Peter Madeley, himself the owner of a taxi, said drivers welcomed the policy, but many needed help in buying the equipment, which the meeting heard had increased in cost over the last two years.

One taxi driver, who spoke at the meeting, added drivers were struggling even after the lifting of coronavirus restrictions because of the rise of internet shopping.

Cllr Madeley said no one wanted to see the policy being ‘kicked down the road’ again, but suggested it was better to loan struggling drivers the money rather than give them more time to get the cameras fitted.

A report to the committee summarised complaints made by both drivers and passengers since October last year. They included drivers making prohibited turns, blocking disabled bays, not complying with Covid regulations and swearing.

There were also claims of drivers refusing to pick up a passenger with a guide dog, of using a mobile phone and using ‘rude hand gestures’.

Committee chairman Simon Myers said it was ‘completely ridiculous’ to suggest the licensing committee bind the council to offering loans and that they were not ‘masters of finance’.

There were government loans available for businesses at much lower interest rates than the council could offer, he said.

Cllr Robert Heseltine, who moved adoption of the policy from January 1 next year, said it would give drivers almost three months to get cameras fitted.

Cllr Chris Moorby said he believed prevention was better than the cure, and that cameras were needed to protect both driver and passenger.

“We have been very fair during the situation with Covid, but now is the time to move forward. There is CCTV on buses and trains and we need to have it in taxis.”

Drivers who apply for hardship exemption will be assessed by the licensing manager, the chairman and deputy chairman of the licensing committee and the council solicitor.

New taxi vehicles have been required to have cameras installed since the start of 2021 and so far, 15 have had them fitted.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2021 11:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13810
Quote:
Committee chairman Simon Myers said it was ‘completely ridiculous’ to suggest the licensing committee bind the council to offering loans and that they were not ‘masters of finance’.

You're telling me :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2021 8:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 53921
Location: 1066 Country
Quote:
as he also urged drivers to apply for government grants if they can not afford the cameras.

Good luck with that one. #-o

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2021 8:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 53921
Location: 1066 Country
Quote:
He said: “Every taxi driver in Craven is eligible for a bounce back loan. That is at far cheaper rates than this council could do and is hugely affordable.

“I have told the taxi trade that and I will say it again.

“These grants are a much better avenue than asking the council to set up something it has never done before – some loan scheme – and charge interest rates.”

Another numpty councillor.

The Bounce Back loans were used by many drivers last year to help them eat and keep their homes.

Currently they are paying them back.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2021 2:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13810
Drivers in Skipton have staged a go-slow protest.

No point reading the ITV article here, but there's a regional news report video which is worth a look.

Looks like a reasonable enough turn-out, but no sign of any real congestion, but maybe a town like Skipton won't be affected by a protest like this in the way that a big city would. Or maybe they just weren't going slow enough :badgrin:


Taxi drivers in Skipton protest after being told to install CCTV in cabs and foot the bill

https://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2021- ... tv-cameras

Dozens of taxi drivers staged a go-slow protest in Skipton town centre in North Yorkshire today, to complain about the cost of having to fit CCTV cameras in their cars.

Image
Image: ITV Calendar


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13810
This should maybe be in a new thread, but the link to the CCTV issue is just too obvious, and indeed at least one councillor is using these incidents to bang the CCTV drum:


Police appeal after taxi drivers assaulted in Skipton Bus Station

https://www.cravenherald.co.uk/news/197 ... s-station/

Image

POLICE are appealing for witnesses after two taxi drivers were assaulted on two separate occasions in Skipton.

Both incidents happened at Skipton Bus Station in the early evening, or late at night, and both saw taxi drivers being attacked while they were sitting in their vehicles.

The most recent happened at around 6.10pm on Thursday, November 11, when the town centre would have been busy, and is believed to have been connected to an earlier collision between two cars in nearby Craven Street.

The driver of a silver Ford Tourneo taxi, a local man aged in early 40s, reported to the police that he had been assaulted while inside his vehicle during an argument between two other men in the car park.

A police spokesperson said: “It is believed this altercation, and the subsequent assault on the taxi driver, was connected to a damage-only collision between a silver Audi A3 and a blue VW Passat at the traffic lights outside Tesco on Craven Road at 5pm.

“Police were also called to that incident and the drivers eventually exchanged insurance details. The driver of the Audi, an 18-year-old man from Skipton, was reported for driving without due care and attention and careless driving.” Enquiries are ongoing.

On Saturday, September 11, again in the bus station, police received reports of an assault on a taxi driver at just after 2.30am.

It allegedly involved a group of five boys, all aged around 15 years old, who attempted to get into the taxi.

The taxi driver, who is aged in his late 30s and from Bradford, was hit in the neck and face causing bruising.

Police have so far been unable to trace the youths, but believe they are not from Skipton but possibly from the Colne area .

The chairman of Craven District Council’s Licensing Committee, which earlier this year agreed all taxis will have to be fitted with CCTV cameras by the start of next year, for the safety of both drivers and passengers, said the attacks were unacceptable and that cameras could have acted as a deterrent and provided police with vital information.

Cllr Simon Myers said: “Two assaults on taxi drivers in Skipton in the last two months is two too many and is sickening. Taxi drivers play a very important role in the lives of many elderly and vulnerable people and of course in the night time economy.

“Craven District Council and it’s Licensing Committee will do all we can to protect them and the travelling public."

In connection with the alleged incident with the youths, he added: “The fact that there appear to have been no witnesses and there was no CCTV may mean that the culprits escape without consequences any punishment for a very serious matter.

“One can’t help but think that CCTV might have helped as a deterrent in these cases and could have provided real evidence to assist the police in identifying the perpetrators of these crimes.”

Anyone with any information to either of the assaults is asked to call police on the non-emergency 101 number, select option one and ask to speak to the force control room, or Crime Stoppers anonymously on 0800 555111 or via http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org.

Reference number for the September 11 incident is 12210199575, and for the November 11 incident 12210239834.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13810
On a lighter note, you can always rely on the Craven Herald for the great photos :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 7:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 53921
Location: 1066 Country
CCTV is a deterrent, the councillor is bang on with that.

But the biggest plus for CCTV isn't the deterrent factor, it's the 'save your livelihood factor when scumbags make false claims against you.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 74 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