Taxi Driver Online

I wasn't aware that particular passage was directed at you? I could have sworn it was in reply to a post from the captain?



I'm glad we cleared up the ambiguity about your statement in respect of "working alongside other cabs" and we have established the fact that you didn't mean standing and plying for hire with other cabs?



Good, now we are getting somewhere.



Its not a case of me agreeing anything, its a case of whether the law allows such a thing to happen? In my opinion at this moment in time the law does allow it to happen and whatsmore the practice is becoming widespread. I think a hackney carriage driver in Gateshead would be rather foolish to work for a radio system in Eastbourne don't you?

If by any chance Captain cab was right and I am wrong and the law dosen't allow it? Then all a hackney carriage driver need do to work in Eastbourne under a private hire booking system would be to obtain an Eastbourne private hire license for himself and his vehicle.

If he wanted to work P/H in all 343 authorities all he need do is obtain a private hire license in each of those authorities and have 343 license plates attached to the front and back of the cab and a multitude of roof signs attached to the top of his vehicle? lol

Rather simple don't you think? I suppose you will say thats unethical too?

So thats the answer to your question.

JD

But the law allowed exemptions under section 75, and the repeal of that section of the Act met with your approval.

I agree that a HC driver working in Eastbourne would be foolish, but would you not agree that if the law allowed it, it would be equally foolish.

What isn't so foolish is the simple fact that people can exploit this law to avoid higher standards in one area by becoming licensed in another area which has lower and therefore more easily attainable standards.

What you do need to consider is that we in Gateshead are seeking to improve our standards of service, implimentation of reviewed standards is iminent and we will have more and more "out of town" HC working in our PH offices to avoid the higher standards.

As you point out, this practice is becoming more widespread ............. and I believe that it is something which is so detrimental to the trade that the whole trade should support a clarification of the law which stops its practice.

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.

My statement was quite clear and was only confused by your inclusion to my statements of the words "other HC" in the first instance and more recently the words "other cabs".

Every post I have made within this thread mentioned the fact "under a PH contract" which would signify that when I mentioned the words "working alongside" I was refering to our PH colleagues.

In order to establish the facts it would be easier to actually read what is written and not believe that there is somehow hidden meaning to the questions raised.

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.

Repealing Section 75 just brought unlicensed private hire vehicles and drivers into the private hire licensing system, it did nothing more. It has not hindered or altered the way they do business.



The law already allows it. All it means is another private hire vehicle on a radio system? You have no control over the number of private hire vehicles that may be licensed or in this case a hackney carriage operating as a PH vehicle, so whats your problem?



I'm afraid there is nothing you can do about that, you have nailed your colours to the mast by stating you don't want national legislation defining standards. You're one of those people who wan't to see councillors retain control of licensing because you think councillors know best. You can hardly complain about differing standards because thats what your supporting by advocating retention of the status quo.

Before you criticise councils about their low standards perhaps you should name them first? I would suspect in many cases vehicles from other authorities would be a distinct improvement on some authorites that I could mention, such as Blackpool? However, you can always write to those councils who you think need improving and advise them that their vehicles are not up to scratch?



I was under the impression you wanted a closed shop for hackney carriages but your going to have to explain what improvements in standards you wan't for private hire vehicles because a hackney carriage from another authority would not be a hackney carriage in Gateshead for the purpose of standing and plying for hire.

You harp on about standards and stopping vehicles from other authorities taking private bookings from inside Gateshead, yet any private hire operator from outside Gateshead can take bookings from within Gateshead, Does that not make your argument redundant?



Is it your belief that hackney carriages from other areas are going to infiltrate Gateshead en mass and join private hire radio circuits? lol



The practice is becoming more widespread by virtue of the fact that "central" radio circuits are becoming more and more popular but if it were left to you every private hire operator in the land would be limited to obtaining bookings from within their own licensing area. What you're advocating has already been tried and tested in the courts and found wanting. You appear to me to want to set us back 200 years with your protectionism and ideology.

The only reason you advocate high standards now is because you have finally realised that they are the only options available to you. If you had started down that road years ago instead of trying to fight deregulation of numbers perhaps Gateshead wouldn't be in the situation it is today. There are standards and there are standards? You can set them as high as you like but if you want to do a Dublin or a Liverpool, then all you have to do is sit back and do nothing at all. Those who hinder progress rather than assist it should carry a health warning, your proposals would lead to cheap central booking systems being outlawed, which in turn would have the effect of increasing costs for many drivers.

For the purpose of private bookings no matter where they were taken your actions would bring hackney carriage drivers under the same regime as private hire drivers. Region two's tin pot resolution would achieve nothing except more expense and further regulation for hackney carriage drivers.

The amendment could easily be circumvented by anyone who desired to work in a particular area. All they need do is license their hackney carriage as a private hire vehicle in the chosen area, or alternately saturate the area with advertising using a phone number that terminates in another authority. A prime example of that is Delta infiltrating Liverpool.

Region two's proposal is redundant before it even gets off the ground.

If you or the Captain want hackney carriage radio circuits in Carlisle or Gateshead to keep records of bookings, all you have to do is get your individual councils to pass a bylaw. You do not have a mandate from the Hackney carriage trade to try and alter legislation that might adversely affects the rest of us.

JD

As you clearly advocate that councils should not control HC & PH licensing no-one should find it surprising that you would take this stance.

On reflection, and with my HC head on, I think its great that people who do not meet the criteria are forced into HC in other areas in order for them to work as a PH in Gateshead.

It will mean that our association will be able to more easily identify through the press who these vehicles are, why they are working in Gateshead with licenses from other areas and which PH operators are exploiting the licensing system to take on more drivers so they make more profit.

Whereas the HC licensed in Gateshead will be of the higest standard driven by people who are working to higher standards of service and are therefore more worthy of the trust of the people of Gateshead.

I know of Gateshead PH operators who will only give their systems to people licensed in the borough and I'm sure they will join us in our condemnation of the actions of the PH operators who will take someone onto their system EVEN though they were unable to attain the local authorities standards.

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.

I think the reason Section 75 was repealed was to alter the way those who were operating without licenses conducted their businesses.

You obviously don't so perhaps you could furnish us with the reasons you think Section 75 was repealed if it wasn't mean't to change the way they "do business".

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.

Is there are connection in the way one actually conducts a hire and reward business and having a license or not having a license? Does a license alter the way business is conducted? I think 99% of people would draw the conclusion that a license would just make the business practice legitimate? And in theory that's what licensing is about.

If you were to infer that a license could put a premium on the eligibility of a person to carry on a business then in many fields, that is a distinct possibility. I doubt you would want a doctor to treat you if he wasn't qualified? In that respect what you're talking about is qualification and accountability. Perhaps qualification and accountability is not too much to ask, is it?

If you prefer us all to be uncountable then I'm sure many would appreciate not having to pay their inflated license fees, especially those in Edinburgh?

Regards

JD

I don't disagree at all with that JD.

I think that qualifications are an integral part of a businesses accountability, and is probably why the organisation I chair has been pushing our own council to insist on proper training.

The fact remains that the more our local council does to improve the quality of our services, the more likely it becomes that those who are incapable of attaining, what could be considered minimal standards, will seek a HC licence from an area where standards are lower, and therefore more attainable to a particular applicant.

I find it abhorrent therefore that a person incapable of attaining a certain standard can still work within an area in which they were unable to acquire a licence.

The public who use our services should expect the best service possible and through high standards they should have confidence in our services. If this is allowed to continue then our public perception will remain at the level of service of our worst colleague, which is aggravating when our worst colleague may not even be licensed by the same authority.

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.

_________________
"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.

In the words of Mike Dickins, "its all a load of Sh*t really isnt it??"

CC

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