Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Thu Apr 30, 2026 8:02 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
JD wrote:
captain cab wrote:
JD wrote:
I thought hearsay was admissable (McCool vs. Rushcliffe BC) :wink:

regards

CC


Only for councillors administering licenses and not in this court of law? lol

Regards

JD


We're now a court of law? I suppose that is a kind of improvement on councils :wink:

regards

CC

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Until that provision took effect a licensing authority had a discretion which was largely unfettered as to the number of licences it granted or refused, subject only to the normal administrative law principles. Section 16 clearly limited that discretion. The judge in the court below summarised the legal position thus produced in a way which seems to me to be accurate when he said at paragraph 6 of the judgment:

"(a) before a local authority can refuse an application for a vehicle licence in order to limit the number of licensed taxis, they must be satisfied that there is no significant demand for the services of taxis, within the area to which the licence would apply, which is unmet;

(b) if the local authority are thus satisfied, a discretion, as opposed to an obligation, arises to refuse the grant of a licence; but

(c) if the local authority are not so satisfied, they cannot refuse to grant a licence for the purpose of limiting the number of licensed taxis and are thus obliged to grant it."

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
captain cab wrote:
We're now a court of law? I suppose that is a kind of improvement on councils :wink:


Yes and your on trial for withholding information and spreading rumours incompatible with your status.

The jury is out but when it returns I'm sure Sussex will find you guilty and GMB will be given the task of passing sentence, so that should be very interesting? lol

Regards


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
captain cab wrote:
Until that provision took effect a licensing authority had a discretion which was largely unfettered as to the number of licences it granted or refused, subject only to the normal administrative law principles. Section 16 clearly limited that discretion. The judge in the court below summarised the legal position thus produced in a way which seems to me to be accurate when he said at paragraph 6 of the judgment:


What pray is the purpose of this?

Regards

JD


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
JD wrote:
captain cab wrote:
We're now a court of law? I suppose that is a kind of improvement on councils :wink:


Yes and your on trial for withholding information and spreading rumours incompatible with your status.

The jury is out but when it returns I'm sure Sussex will find you guilty and GMB will be given the task of passing sentence, so that should be very interesting? lol

Regards


It's good to see an old fashioned kangeroo court in full working order (please dont confuse the kangeroo with kangoo, you know the NTA feelings on rear loaders).

The word 'interesting' is of course extremely well chosen. :lol:

I will make a couple of phone calls over the weekend to clarify all the differing areas operating PH in Manchester.

regards

CC

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
captain cab wrote:
I will make a couple of phone calls over the weekend to clarify all the differing areas operating PH in Manchester.


We are already aware of the activities of private hire in Manchester because in Manchester we have no enforcement at night or any other time of the day, come to think of it?

The only time we get enforcement is when they decide to do spot checks but the spot checks are not about curbing the illegal activities of some private hire elements they are about making sure vehicles and drivers are above-board. While all this goes on the rest of the city is swarming with private hire cars from all over the place blatantly plying for hire. So that's the picture in Manchester and it always has been and I must say its getting increasingly worse.

The fact remains that its not evidence of private hire working the streets of Manchester that we need, its your evidence that P/H radio circuits are employing Trafford Hackney cabs?

Regards

JD


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57349
Location: 1066 Country
The long-standing argument began in 2003 when a survey found that public demand for black cabs far outstripped supply, leading councillors to increase the number of licences from 34 to 52.

So the councillors decided a while back to go from 34 to 52 but backed down and kept plate levels the same.

I wonder if that's when the T&G got involved. :lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
A survey is to protect a policy of restriction it has no other worthwhile use but you also know that too?


J.D. maybe in your experience you consider this statement as correct, but I would disagree with you, a councils responsibility is to provide and oversee the workings of the hackney and private hire trade, its duty is to provide a public transport system that works, the survey if and I say if it is carried out properly provides useful and even critical information as to whether or not the general public and the disabled are receiving the service, some councils have seen that deregulation does not work and even the removing of zones leaves areas isolated, due to the fact that taxis who were working those areas immediately left tham and header for the busier parts.. now I know that this view does not sit well from a driver's point of view, but let's face it, if ever driver had his own way they would work as little as possible for as much as they can, and sod the public... :wink:

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57349
Location: 1066 Country
I'm just wondering what a court would view as sufficient evidence of no SUD, other than a SUD survey.

Council officials can't be viewed as independant if they are defending their existing policy.

The existing trade would be viewed as having a vested interest or two, so WTF does it then? :-k

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 10:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
Sussex wrote:
I'm just wondering what a court would view as sufficient evidence of no SUD, other than a SUD survey.

Council officials can't be viewed as independant if they are defending their existing policy.

The existing trade would be viewed as having a vested interest or two, so WTF does it then? :-k



That is something I have been working on for quite some time, the key to it is that everyone must agree to it.. :wink:

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
Sussex wrote:
The long-standing argument began in 2003 when a survey found that public demand for black cabs far outstripped supply, leading councillors to increase the number of licences from 34 to 52.

So the councillors decided a while back to go from 34 to 52 but backed down and kept plate levels the same.

I wonder if that's when the T&G got involved. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Sussex my dear friend, we have the information onboard TDO but before I upload the latest changes heres what the quota list says at the moment.

16. Burnley. Currently reviewing its policy after originally deciding to issue 6 licenses immediately then 3 licenses per year for 4 years. As of 11/10/06

I think you will find that adds up to an extra 18 licenses making 52.

By the way I'm ammending my foreceast downwards for restricted councils, it would appear a slippery sloap is gathering momentum?

Regards

JD


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
MR T wrote:
J.D. maybe in your experience you consider this statement as correct, but I would disagree with you, a councils responsibility is to provide and oversee the workings of the hackney and private hire trade, its duty is to provide a public transport system that works, the survey if and I say if it is carried out properly provides useful and even critical information as to whether or not the general public and the disabled are receiving the service, some councils have seen that deregulation does not work.


Trevor it doesn't matter how much you try and justifify or indeed try and convince me and everyone else that a survey is for the benefit of the public the DfT are already well aware what a survey is for and so are we?

If you have any doubts you may wish to read what the DFT said about councils conducting surveys, in June 2005.

We have received some interim responses from local authorities who say that they cannot deal with the request within the given timescale because they were undertaking a survey of unmet demand. ""However, the fact that a local licensing authority is undertaking a survey of unmet demand presupposes that a policy decision has been taken to maintain quantity controls; an assessment of unmet demand is not required if a decision has been taken to deregulate"". So, if you are currently undertaking a survey of unmet demand, perhaps you could at least respond to us explaining "why the local authority has taken the policy decision to maintain quantity controls rather than to remove them".

JD


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
Trevor it doesn't matter how much you try and justifify or indeed try and convince me and everyone else that a survey is for the benefit of the public the DfT are already well aware what a survey is for and so are we?


I am well aware of a number of things , Tory policy was?, Tony Blair's wish- list and the OFT supposedly impartial review, and as for the paragraph your referring to, it is just spin to justify a massive cock-up. :wink:

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 1:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Quote:
We have received some interim responses from local authorities who say that they cannot deal with the request within the given timescale because they were undertaking a survey of unmet demand. ""However, the fact that a local licensing authority is undertaking a survey of unmet demand presupposes that a policy decision has been taken to maintain quantity controls; an assessment of unmet demand is not required if a decision has been taken to deregulate"". So, if you are currently undertaking a survey of unmet demand, perhaps you could at least respond to us explaining "why the local authority has taken the policy decision to maintain quantity controls rather than to remove them".


Then doesnt that expose the situation in Burnely?

CC

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 2:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
The sage continues......

Cabbies call off festive strike plans

By Telegraph newsdesk

CABBIES in Burnley have renewed their threat to take the council to court after it announced plans to stop limiting the number of licences it hands out.

But they have backed down from a threat to strike over Christmas and New Year.

Drivers claim there is not enough custom in the town to support the plans.

They have employed a solicitor to and are threatening to take the council to court.

The council has been warned it would face having to pay out at least £130,000 if it loses any court action because it would have ignored expert advice which said there was no unmet demand.

Mohammed Ibrar, chair of the town's Hackney Carriage Drivers Association, said: "We are not going to go on strike because that would alienate people and we have a lot of support among the public.

"But we are asking for this decision to be called in by the Government and, if that doesn't work, we will consider legal action."

Burnley Council, which approved the move earlier this month, has said granting more Hackney carriage licences will open up trade, allow for more cabs with disabled access, keep fares down and lead to safer taxis.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 60 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group