Taxi Driver Online

This article kind of makes it sound like it's about a council livery, but it's obviously very similar to the Southampton scenario and the multi-operator problem, but looks like they're retaining magnetic signs so drivers can work for multiple apps and offices if they so desire.

But obviously the arguments are very similar to those made in Southampton, with the 'Uber representative' in favour of the magnetic signs, but the traditional big operator saying the opposite. Who'd have expected that?


Portsmouth taxis: 'Terrible' plan to make drivers have permanent city council badge on their cars is thrown out

https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/polit ... ut-3499808

COUNCILLORS have rejected ‘terrible’ proposals requiring taxi drivers in Portsmouth to have permanent city council livery on their vehicles following widespread opposition from the industry.

Members of the council's licensing committee unanimously agreed on Thursday not to push on with a planned consultation on changes to its policy due to concern not all options had been fully considered.

A report said the 2019 relaxation of rules allowing taxi and private hire vehicles to use magnetic livery was being ‘repeatedly misused’ and not correctly displayed, forcing the council to ‘divert resources’ from more important issues.

The change had been made to allow drivers to remove the signs when working for different companies but more than three per cent of drivers have since been recorded without correct displays, the report said.

It said: ‘The use of an approved vehicle livery to promote and to identify a locally-licensed vehicle goes to the heart of promoting public safety and reassurance, particularly to those vulnerable passengers awaiting a pick-up at night.’

But the proposal drew significant opposition from the taxi trade for what they said was ‘a blatant restraint of trade’ amounting to a ‘cartel practice’.

Uber representative Peter Sutherland said the data provided to councillors was ‘limited, and selective at best’.

He said: ‘Yes, there have been offenders. Yes, some of these offenders are repeat offenders, of that there is no question - but there are over 1,000 licensed vehicles in Portsmouth.

‘I have suggested to enforcement officers on more than one occasion that there are different punishments that can be given to offenders, especially repeat offenders, to eradicate the problems swiftly and cover all the concerns.

‘The trade wants to see warnings or short-term suspensions, up to perhaps a longer term suspension or cancellation of a licence and the vehicle licence if the driver is a repeat offender.

‘Punish the offenders and not law-abiding drivers.’

His comments were echoed by five other taxi drivers at Thursday's meeting.

Support within the industry was not unanimous. Aqua Cars general manager Bruce Hall supported the proposal which he said would provide clearer information to the public about the taxi they were using.


Image: The News, Portsmouth

He said standards within the industry were ‘slowly eroding’ and that the reintroduction of permanent livery would make it safer.

However, councillors were unanimously opposed to putting the proposal out for consultation with councillor George Madgwick saying it would have a ‘terrible’ effect.

‘I think it’s really unfair that we’re penalising self-employed drivers because we as a council can't afford to hire more people to enforce this,' he said. 'That's something we have got to sort out internally.

‘The three per cent of drivers who break the rules are going to break the rules even if we make livery permanent.

'We'll lose drivers to another area where they don't impose these rules which completely counteracts the point about having taxis available for people.’

Councillor Charlotte Gerada said the council should consider introducing ‘stronger penalties’ before changing its policy. Her view was backed by councillors Rob New and Daniel Wemyss.

The committee agreed unanimously to ‘reject’ the proposal and requested more evidence and alternative options be brought for consideration when it meets in March.

But does all this mean drivers would have to change signs back and forth several times a day?

If so, then I suspect the abuse of the rules being highlighted by council officers is just the tip of a very large iceberg, and councillors are not fully aware of the extent of the problem.


But I suspect a lot more than the three per cent actually detected are breaking the rules. But of course, the vast majority of the 1,000 vehicles probably won't be working for multi-operators, so to that extent the three per cent detected might indicate that it's a major problem among those that do work for more than one operator.

Struggle to argue with that.

_________________
IDFIMH

I would imagine not.

Say you are driving down the main road and operator B gives you a job, not really sensible to stop the car and put operator A's signs on.

It would make sense all around to have a generic sign for all.

_________________
IDFIMH

There is nothing stopping Mr Hall from having a company rule insisting that every car on his circuit has fixed signage on their vehicles.

_________________
IDFIMH

Having just read the report to councillors, a very glossy brochure that must have cost a f***ing fortune to produce, it appears that only the council's logo door sign is mandatory, and any circuit door sign is optional. So drivers can work, and I see their drivers in B&H, without the circuit door sign.

https://democracy.portsmouth.gov.uk/doc ... -%20v2.pdf

_________________
IDFIMH

I think if we had permanent signage on the vehicles in Sefton it would put off some of the 1500 from outside of Sefton using Sefton to license

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

Rapidly losing the will to live with all this

Earlier articles confusing enough as it is, but this makes it look like they've agreed on permanent signage, in effect banning multi-op drivers. Then it says it's more about the punishments than the actual rules.

Then the article refers to a council logo, but doesn't seem to be about that at all

Then it's stated that the new policy was approved by councillors on Monday. Then it says it's going out to consultation


Portsmouth taxi drivers who do not show the right livery on their cars will be punished

https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/polit ... ed-3782624

TAXI drivers who repeatedly fail to display livery on their vehicle will be the subject of a new punishment system under a new policy being consulted on by Portsmouth City Council.

The chairman of its licensing committee said the new strike-based system would give the council stronger powers to deal with repeat offenders.

‘What we're trying to do is put some teeth on the bones of this,’ Councillor Scott Payter-Harris said. ‘With livery there's never really been any harsh penalties for people who are straying from the policy.

‘Now, after the third time of doing it, they're going to have permanent fixed livery. Fingers crossed, people will actually start playing by the rules.’

Council licensing officers had originally called for a requirement for all taxis to have its livery displayed permanently after data showed three per cent of drivers had not complied with rules allowing a magnetic version to be used. The rules had previously been relaxed in 2019 to allow drivers who work for several companies to have a detachable livery, making it easier to display which firm they were on duty for.

‘The use of an approved vehicle livery to promote and to identify a locally-licensed vehicle goes to the heart of promoting public safety and reassurance, particularly to those vulnerable passengers awaiting a pick-up at night,’ a December report said.

But the proposal prompted a backlash within the industry with councillors instead favouring a new punishment system.

Uber representative Peter Sutherland said: ‘I have suggested to enforcement officers on more than one occasion that there are different punishments that can be given to offenders, especially repeat offenders, to eradicate the problems swiftly and cover all the concerns.’

Drivers had warned that the move would restrict their ability to operate outside Portsmouth.

Under the revised version, which was approved by the licensing committee on Monday, drivers caught without council livery on display will receive two warnings before being required to use a permanent version of the livery on their vehicle.

Any further breach will see their taxi licence suspended with the potential for it to be revoked.

Consultation on the revised taxi policy will begin in the coming weeks.

Talk about dragging it out.

_________________
IDFIMH