Taxi Driver Online

Both of them? lol

Regards

While this thread is active I'm going to ask the question of those who work for a radio company and obtain their work off the radio or by a computerised data system from office to vehicle, if your office ever undertakes work from outside your licensed area and if that work ever finishes outside your area? For instance have you or your company ever taken a job in a neighbouring authority to an Aiport in another neighbouring authority.

Regards

JD

Thousands and thousands of times.

_________________
IDFIMH

Good, I suspect we can assume that every radio circuit in the country operates on the aprehension that it is not illegal to pick up a pre booked job in an area other than your own under the circumstances where the out of area job is allocated to a vehicle who is in the same area?

We all know this type of radio hire is commonplace but if it was challenged, it would no doubt have to be challenged under the remit of Plying for hire? Therefore Considering the normal accepted status of plying for hire is one where a vehicle and its driver have to be stood or standing in a street and act like it is commiting an offence, could the fact that the job in question which was obtained in an area which was not covered in the license of the person undertaking the job be construed as plying for hire?

There is of course a means to an end to this question but I would fist like to clear up the legality of taking a radio job in an authority other than your own while at the same time you yourself had taken the radio job while you were parked or driving through that authority?

Regards

JD

I suspect many radio firms haven't a clue.

I remember well spending a long time talking to a lad from Wigan who's (then) LO insisted that a job could only be dispatched to a driver if the job started or finished in the Wigan area.

_________________
IDFIMH

I think a question could be asked if the driver was parked up in the other area, but IMO that again would depend on vehicle signage and where he was parked up.

If the driver had dropped in the other area and was on his way back, then IMO he is OK.

As for which area the job was obtained from, I suppose it depends on which end of the phone the job is obtained from.

_________________
IDFIMH

In my most professional opinion, as a sports lawyer, it's fully acceptable under the 1976 act.

Just imagine how confusing for punters it would be if it wasn't.

_________________
IDFIMH

lol you're right and just imagine how prohibitive it would be for competition. However, all along I was alluding to the 1996 case of Director of Public Prosecutions v Computer Cab Company Ltd and another.

In this case the DPP failed in a prosecution against London cab drivers who it was alleged had permitted their cabs to be hired in parts of the Metropolitan area in which, by reason of the conditions attached to their licence, they were prohibited from plying for hire. The statutes they were prosecuted under were para 31(1)(ii) of the London Cab Order 1934, sections of the Metropolitan Pubic Carriage Act 1869 and Criminal Justice Act 1967 as amended by the Criminal Justice Act 1982.

The DDP also brought a number of related charges against the agency company based in London Central on the basis that they had aided and abetted the taxi drivers to commit the offences.

Now we all know the difference in the London badge system but this was probably the only case where a prosecution had been brought against a hackney carriage driver for picking up a job in an area other than the one he is licensed for. It was also the only case that brought into question the Validity of a booking agency in one area issuing jobs to drivers in another area.

The charge was plying for hire and the accusation was, that by picking up a pre booked job in an area other than the one these cab drivers were licensed, constituted plying for hire. Furthemore, the AGENCY By issuing the job was aiding and abetting.

The case was dismissed and the subsequent appeal lost but what it did was prove that a hackney carriage driver from one area can legally pick up a pre booked job in another area. It also meant that a "central" issuing agency was not breaking the law or aiding and abetting a driver because the hire in question was lawful.

So therefore the case of a "legal central hackney carriage agency" was established by this very case. And the case for issuing a job from an agency inside the area where the job is booked, to a driver licensed outside that area was also established. It must be remembered that the agency nor the drivers were subject to an private hire legislation at the time. This is because 1. They were hackney carriages and 2. There was no London Private hire legislation in force at that particular time.

However the principal of an inside Agency using outside licensed hackney carriage drivers, was firmly established.

It should be mentioned that other cases have also established the right of cross border hiring but off the top of my head I can't think of a case that has touched on the Central Booking Agency except for the refrence in Glasden to hackney carriages not needing a license to pre book work.

Regards

JD

I think the 'central booking agency' system makes bundles of sense.

Alas for PHs it can't really happen on a multi area basis. Which is a shame in one way, but not in many others.

_________________
IDFIMH

I think so toooooooooo. I've had the idea for quite some time and the way I see it is that you could subscribe to two Agencies. Perhaps a National central booking agency and a regional agency. I'm not a radioman myself but I don't see why anyone in this field who is an entrepreneur could not set up such an agency. The advantage to private hire drivers who currently pay high radio rents would be that the cost of joining such an agency or agencies would be far cheaper than what they are paying now. They would of course have to change from Private hire to hackney but there are 245 areas where they can get licensed.

My Personal opinion, is that there is no longer any need for Private hire vehicles to be licensed under that regime. Thanks to Gladen, as the legislation stands the whole concept of licensing has been turned on its head.

I have written an article that will hopefully make people sit up and think about the need for new Taxi legislation. In the meantime if drivers applied their minds to Gladen private hire legislation would effectively be out of business.

Regards

JD

I have taken the liberty of posting this Extract from Shanks v North Tyneside.

Latham LJ said.

[26] The meaning of 'operator' in s 80 when taken in conjunction with s 75(2) provides for considerable flexibility. The operator can use the vehicles within his organisation for journeys both inside and outside the area of the local authority in which he is licensed and, indeed, can use such vehicles and drivers for journeys which have ultimately no connection with the area in which they are licensed. There is, it seems to me, therefore, no reason to believe that the construction, which I consider to be the right construction of the Act, renders the operation of private hire vehicles in any way so restrictive as to justify the conclusion that the construction that I have reached must be wrong.
..........................................................

The ruling is quite simple ............ there is no need to complicate it.

When a customer phones an operator to book a PH vehicle the vehicle and driver MUST be licensed by the same Council as the operator.

That booking can be to pick the customer up and drop them off wherever they choose.

B. Lucky

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.

Apart from stating the obvious, I think we are all aware of that.

JD

I don't think there's any confusion about private hire being able to operate anywhere in the country as long as the operator/car/driver is all licensed by the same authority, thanks for the case though.

I'm pretty sure I've read a case or in one of the acts that a hackney carriage must either start or finish in his controlled area.

I believe the dft report also mentioned this as being one of the distinguishing features between ph and hc. When I remember where I read it I'll post the reference. I'm sure it was a court ruling.

kevin

Dft view on hc and cross border hirings here:

http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/C309 ... OFT676.pdf

It's tucked away on page 76.

I'll still try and remeber the actual legislation.


Kevin