Quote:
Plying 4 hire, how many of you know what it means? Answers on a postcard please.
Regards
JD
According to JB it would have to be a rather big postcard, as ever it is a question that some would wish to be more confusing than it actually is.
Blaming the 1847 act as one person does, because it was passed at a time when engines didn’t exist is a stupid argument to offer, as it is the activity of the driver and situation of the vehicle, as opposed to the legislation which is the real debate.
Only a hackney carriage can ply for hire.
If you consider that only a hackney can ply for hire, then you must surmise that other vehicles cannot.
Each 'plying for hire' case seems to differ except in one way, the vehicle plying for hire must be displayed or exhibited to the public.
This leads to a situation where some people would argue that a PHV if found on any street could be considered as 'plying for hire'.
In my view that assumption is incorrect, and that assumption is nothing more than an attempt to undermine legislation to further the claim that current laws are unworkable and we need new ones in place.
Again, the basis of opinion that is given as fact enters the debate.
This is obviously flawed logic and presumes that unlicensed vehicles plying for hire wouldn’t exist if new legislation were made.
As previously stated, 'Plying for hire', in my view has more to do with what the driver is doing and where the vehicle is parked, than the unambiguous view of some.
This was made clear in the Milton Keynes case, where a PHV parked next to a taxi rank, and the Ogwr vs. Baker case, where a PHV parked outside a nightclub.
The Nottingham vs. Wooding’s case seems to give the better view, not because the court recognised that PH existed and not because in the opinion of some it conflicts with the above mentioned cases but because it made it reasonably clear that the response from the driver was of equal significance as to where the vehicle is situated.
Regards
CC