Taxi Driver Online

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/d ... 13742.hcsp

But May 2007 does sound shed loads better than November 2007.

_________________
IDFIMH

I have to say that the stance of this site and its moderators (TDO)has been one of equality.

Allowing people equal opportunities, opposing any thought of restriction and fighting hard to allow people the right to do whatever they want.

Why then would a site like TDO wish to see the transportation of passengers for hire and reward restricted to those who are licensed by the local authority.

Are TDO claiming that these people have been operating illegally.

Or are TDO claiming that they are supporting a restriction which includes them and excludes others.

Does that sound strange to anyone else?

People like Sussex will claim that it is not the same, they will give reasons why these companies should be licensed, all of which are true, but they will not admit that it amounts to a restriction, and they will not admit that they support that restriction.

Hypocritical, some people.

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.

_________________
IDFIMH

GA , I must admit I can see your point.

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

Well stop acting like one and offer a response.

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.

Its that lateral thinking thing MrT

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.

Sussex, the very title of this thread in my opinion goes to show just what a self centred man you really are, surely everyone has the right to make a living, these people to whom this affects are trying to make an honest living and if they were using this then it was clearly better than not using some form of licence. Maybe a lot of these people tried licencing and found they were hitting their heads against a brick wall and found this to be the only alternative. So Mr sussex just because you have a comfy pair of slippers and are licenced give the ones that are at least trying a break and let them have a little leigh way!!! Afterall if the shoe was on the other foot i think you would be calling for the same gratification

_________________
Legal and proud

Loads a love from BERTIE !!

Sorry but I seem to have the old fashioned view that un-licensed drivers and vehicles just aint right.

Maybe we should allow muggers and robbers a year to get their act into order.

_________________
IDFIMH

Dont talk tosh Sussex, it barely compares and as you well know those that are using the 7 day contract are operating legally, all be it using a loophole, however most of these people have tried to licence and have been hit by a wall. Alas this is changing rapidly thankfully. This is why i ask that you give these people a bit more consideration. I personally was licenced from the start so aint bothered but i know many a good op that just could not due to councils unwillingness and you know what a pain they can be surely!!!!!

_________________
Legal and proud

Loads a love from BERTIE !!

Illegal no, immorally YES dangerously YES Children driven by [edited by admin] YES Clapped out dangerous vehicles YES What an advert for the industry and on here its defended CRAZY INSANE RIDICULOUS as Sussex says dont be a [edited by admin]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

_________________
The views expressed by this contributor do not neccesarily reflect the policys of The GMB Nationally or of the GMB London Region.

GMB who the F**K pulled your chain, myself and sussex are clearly haveing a sensible debate, now go and pick your own strawberries!!

And as for driven by [edited by admin] i would be very careful if i were you , i cant find 1 paper clipping about a limo being involved in any rape cases or driven by [edited by admin], but i can give you loads of Taxi/ cab ones. Now whos the [edited by admin]

_________________
Legal and proud

Loads a love from BERTIE !!

What do you mean it doesn't compare?

A car full of kids, women, fellas, running around the town in an un-licensed un-checked motor being driven by an un-licensed un-checked driver.

The Limo trade just happen to be the luckiest b******ds around that a major accident has never happened in one, else the law would have changed many years ago.

Crazy thing is all the good ones seem to be supporting all the bad ones. TBH you deserve one another.

_________________
IDFIMH

If I can have my ten penneth, these people need licensed and there never should have been a loophole.

They buy franchises, they buy vehicles, they buy uniforms, they promote the fact that the legitimate licensed trade isn't safe because it isn't 'wimmin' only for 'wimmin' and by 'wimmin'.

PH licensing isn't particularly onerous, I would suggest it is a damn side easier to be legitimate than operate illegally. Yet inspite of all of this, they chose their own path.

Just like those airport transfer companies that operated on exemptions.

And whilst a firm can claim it CRB's all of its staff, I'd prefer an independent body to verify that.

CC

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

Thats your opinion Sussex and i respect that, We have a difference of opinion here. As for Illegal like i say they were hardly Illegal just exploiting, now what would you of done given the same circumstances fella?

_________________
Legal and proud

Loads a love from BERTIE !!

I agree totally but its a fact of life that people will exploit loopholes

_________________
Legal and proud

Loads a love from BERTIE !!