Taxi Driver Online

Have you considered a complaint to the ombudsman?

From what you have said it would appear the council have taken a 'we are always right' approach to this issue.

If the vehicle maker says that fitting something new compromises the vehicle's safety, then how can a council say otherwise?

_________________
IDFIMH

Hello,
You are right, I did go to the ombudsman and they advised me to go to the local Trading Standards office in my area, which I did and you won't believe this the Trading Standard Officer is the Hackney Carriage officer, As mentioned before I went before a Democratic Appeal Panel, and the Hackney Officer Baffled them, do you think that 60/70year old Council Leaders know anything about the mechanism of a vehicle, so how can they disagree with a statment for the manafacturers
EL

Att of Mr Leeks, read section 10 in the link below, re swivel seats.
http://www.dover.gov.uk/citizenspanel/H ... report.pdf

see swivel seats
http://www.hastings.gov.uk/taxis/taxi_n ... aspx#a0008

This is interesting from Dover and might help Mr Leeks. Well done Pete.

10. Provision of Swivel Seats

It is clear from the consultation with the public that improved accessibility to taxis and private hire vehicles is desirable and would be welcomed by most of our respondents. A proposal was put forward that all taxis and private hires should be fitted with a swivel seat to assist the elderly in and out of vehicles. The public generally welcomed this although not entirely supported by the trade respondents. In consequence of this trade response, an e-mail message was sent out to all Local Authorities asking them for their experience of swivel seats.

The response was generally negative, as it had been found in practice that the swivel seats were not robust enough in practice to stand up to the rigours of constant use in a private hire or taxi vehicle. In addition they were not popular with customers as the raised height of the seat meant restricted headroom for taller passengers and the operating controls were near the passengers feet, which caused difficulties for the drivers in operating the swivel mechanism.

Other problems arose as many modern car seats are electronically linked to the computer management system of the vehicle and removing the seat and replacing it with a swivel seat can, in some cases, affect the operation of the car. Airbag equipped seats have to be removed and the swivel seats do not contain air bags. Scarborough Borough Council decided to remove the requirements for swivel seats for these reasons having previously required them in hackney carriages.

For these reasons, the recommendation previously submitted in respect of swivel seats is withdrawn on the basis that any advantage to be gained is outweighed by their practical disadvantages.

Regards
JD

Well I would have gone back to the ombudsman and mention the conflict of interests.

Think it's the first common law isn't it, mustn't be judged by your accuser.

_________________
IDFIMH

So it is quite simple, no air bag, they have to modify the rest of the airbags with a resister to fool the rest of the airbags, how will anyone know if that works in a smash, not vehicle manufacture fitted, thats modifying the Vehicle Construction and Use of the vehicle and or even could give hidden errors in the computer management system,

more than likely for the driver to be left wide open to a claim in the event of an accident by the passenger in the swivel seat without airbag fitted

front seats are linked to a computer management system in a lot of vehicles nowadays

But hey the t0$$ers down the council think they know best

A Ford Granada?

Jeez, whats the spare car? a cortina mk3?

Captain Cab

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

oops,

please accept my apologies, I think I was suffering a sandpiper moment

Captain Cab

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

I think JD has answered this post quite well

I have one or two questions, presumably the refusal to license deserved more than the stated 14 days.

Why was a vehicle purchased that did not suit the criteria?

Captain Cab

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

What am getting to is the way This Council treats the working class man, please nobody else take it the wrong way, I am just putting over to every one how harshley you can be treated by certain people with a bit of authority, am not against WAV's or swivel seat its the disable we have to look after and so be it, am just stating that principles were not used in my case

Would it be imprudent to ask on what specific grounds you intend to challenge the council's decision? Obviously you are aware that you can only challenge the decision on certain grounds some of which I have listed below.

Illegality, irrationality, procedural impropriety, Human Rights Act section 6, and breach of EC law.

Lets expand further on the five options?

Illegality

Under the heading of "illegality" are encompassed the following grounds of review:

* a public body does something for which it has no positive legal authority

* a statute places a duty on a public authority and that duty has not been carried out

* a statute confers a power on an authority and that power is used for a purpose other than that intended by the statute

* in exercising a public power an authority takes into account an irrelevant consideration or fails to take into account a relevant consideration

* a statute confers a power on public body 'X' but it was taken by public body 'Y' ("unlawful delegation")

* a statute confers discretion on a public authority and that authority adopts an overly rigid policy as to how that discretion will be exercised ("fettering discretion")

* a public authority makes a factual error in arriving at its decision.
..................................................................

Irrationality

Under the heading of "irrationality" are encompassed the following grounds of review:

* the decision is obviously perverse or absurd
* the decision is illogical
* the decision is disproportionate

Irrationality is also known as Wednesbury unreasonableness after the land mark case of Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v. Wednesbury Corporation, which stated that a decision would be unreasonable if it "is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could ever have come to it".

http://www.justis.com/titles/iclr_s4821028.html
..........................................................................

Procedural impropriety

"Procedural impropriety" encompasses the following grounds of review:

* the decision-maker was biased
* the decision-maker failed to provide a fair hearing
* the decision-maker failed to provide reasons for the decision after it was taken
...............................................................................

Human Rights Act 1998 s.6

Section 6(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998 provides that "it is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right". The Convention referred to is the European Convention on Human Rights. An applicant may only bring a review on this ground if "he is (or would be) a victim of the unlawful act" - s.7(1)(b).
...............................................................................

Breach of EU law

Since the Factortame case EU law has been recognised as directly effective in the UK, and it is possible to bring a review based on a breach of EU law.

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cg ... 7/755.html
...............................................................................

You may be fortunate enough to have your predicament highlighted in one of the online or distributed trade magazines, who knows? Whatever happens, can we or can we not expect this to go all the way to judicial review?

Regards

JD

If you do decide to go down the Judicial review route you should be aware of the legal time frame attached to these type of applications and that out of time applications such as yours are only likely to succeed if there are special mitigating circumstances especially if the case is in the public interest?

You should also be aware that if a case has merit a person on income support would automatically get legal aid. A person on a low income would be eligible for legal aid but possibly subject to a monthly contribution, usually spread over the period of the case, and set on a sliding scale. Income and savings being taken into account, but not house value, or personal living expenses, thus it is the value of the disposal income and savings that is important. You should remember this.

Regards

JD

I have come to the conclusion that the Manager of Hackney was not fair, as giving one car a licence to drive without a swivel seat and not granting the other, that is Discrimination, your views would be greatly appreciated, or has anything like this happened to anyone and anywhere. I would let me know
EL