Taxi Driver Online

I pointed out to her that all councils have different rules and licence prices and she agreed with me that things need to change and fast
I said that there should be 1 set of rules that everyone can understand and 1 set of licence fees, pointing out that it only costs £53 to licence a bus
Any news for me by the way???

But the cost of licenses needs to be reflective upon the regime.

There are surprisingly few rules, its just that they are interpreted differently.

For example, in Blackpool drivers must provide an enhanced CRB annually, other areas require them every three years.

The question is, do you expect Blackpool, who may have had problems with driver convictions, to change their system to one that would suit you, or do you change yours to suit them?

Manchester has a purpose built taxi policy, do you expect to change your policy to suit them, or do they change to suit you?

We have three tests per year here, do you expect our City Council to reduce that number to arguably meet those lower standards elsewhere?

We may have had problems with drivers manually changing tarrifs.....if we need calendar control meters, do you need them too?

There are many areas of taxi licensing that need visited and revisited, but the issues are more around those of policy and not cost.

There are around 250 licensed vehicles here, combined they will pay our LA approx £40 to £50 K per year.....By the time you pay the licensing officers, the remaining money doesnt amount to much.

CC

But the cost of licenses needs to be reflective upon the regime.

There are many areas of taxi licensing that need visited and revisited, but the issues are more around those of policy and not cost.

Only a thought - what about centralising " A Head Office" to give us some fairness and uniformity throughout the country/trade - leaving the "Clerks" to do the checking on licenses.

I do not see why they must have countless offices around the country all doing the same job,which we are paying for. Now the councils are always on about ways of saving money, but because it is not costing them a bean and it is creating jobs for them, I suppose that it is just not going to happen.

Your missing the point cap. The point is why do we need 343 administration bodies all charging different prices for the same comodity of issuing licenses when a handful will do?

Why do we need 343 enforcement branches when regionalised enforcement could do the same job at a lower price and at more intensity?

Why do we need 343 administrative clerical bodies when a handful would suffice and at far less cost?

Why do we need councillors?

It's about time the Taxi trade came into the 21st century.

Regards

JD

JD, I had the Scottish traffic commissioners, private secretary in my cab last Fri night, and we where discussing the trade and I told her to tell the commissioner to have a look at TDO and gave her the web Addy.
I pointed out to her that all councils have different rules and licence prices and she agreed with me that things need to change and fast
I said that there should be 1 set of rules that everyone can understand and 1 set of licence fees, pointing out that it only costs £53 to licence a bus
Any news for me by the way???

You keep making a wonderful case for change Trevor?

We operate under laws that are 160 years old, which were designed for the horse and cart. It is no wonder they are interpreted differently when you consider the advancement in technology and the introduction of modern legislation, which in many instances conflicts with dated legislation.

You also have to consider the power given to licensing authorities by way of making bylaws and setting conditions, it is no wonder unlawful bylaws and conditions are continuously be challenged and remedied by the courts.

And who is it that makes these unlawful bylaws and conditions? Why no one else but "Councillors".

Take licensing away from councillors and they won't be able to set any conditions. That function will be exercised by the Secretary of state for Transport. You mention litigation but litigation will be vastly reduced once councillors are taken out of the equation. Councillors implementing conditions that aggrieve members of the Taxi trade in one way or another mainly cause litigation. Under new legislation all the rules and regulations will be set out as they are in other Transport bodies so there would be none of this unmet demand business and challenging surveys or erroneous conditions. Going cap in hand to a council for a fare rise would be a thing of the past because under new legislation you set the ground rules for fare increases. Regulation of Fares can either be removed or agreed annually, under negotiation by Trade representatives, which could even be done on a regional basis if not nationally? The OFT want competition in fares but if regulation was removed there would be nothing to stop drivers joining a regional organisation which could in turn recommend a highest ceiling and a lower ceiling but there would be nothing to stop everyone charging the same Tariff at the higher level. This would be far better than having a council set fares.

In respect of CCTV the only persons you need to consult are the DPA. They will tell you what you can and cannot do. I can't believe that your council officer whoever he was didn't think of that before he told you it was illegal?

Regards

JD

Take licensing away from councillors and they won't be able to set any conditions. That function will be exercised by the Secretary of state for Transport. You mention litigation but litigation will be vastly reduced once councillors are taken out of the equation. Councillors implementing conditions that aggrieve members of the Taxi trade in one way or another mainly cause litigation. Under new legislation all the rules and regulations will be set out as they are in other Transport bodies so there would be none of this unmet demand business and challenging surveys or erroneous conditions. Going cap in hand to a council for a fare rise would be a thing of the past because under new legislation you set the ground rules for fare increases. Regulation of Fares can either be removed or agreed annually, under negotiation by Trade representatives, which could even be done on a regional basis if not nationally? The OFT want competition in fares but if regulation was removed there would be nothing to stop drivers joining a regional organisation which could in turn recommend a highest ceiling and a lower ceiling but there would be nothing to stop everyone charging the same Tariff at the higher level. This would be far better than having a council set fares.

In respect of CCTV the only persons you need to consult are the DPA. They will tell you what you can and cannot do. I can't believe that your council officer whoever he was didn't think of that before he told you it was illegal?

Regards

JD

With regard the the statement highlighted in italic - Any condition imposed would have to be concurrent with the law as it now stands as it is under this law that my (as well as thousands of others) licenses have been granted.

With regard the statement highlighted in bold - In Gateshead we do not go cap in hand to councillors for a fare rise.

With regard the statement highlighted in blue - So I could, under your system be charging the same fares as my colleagues in London or Brighton. JD my members want a fair fare and although we could all do with more money we tend not to want to isolate the punters we have that need us the most.

Still need more info before I would even consider that a local council is not best placed to decide local issues which provide best service to the public within their area.

I have said previously I have no intention of being drawn on my ambitions for the future of the Taxi trade until I am ready but you can rest assured that my ambitions relate to the well being of Taxi drivers and by that I mean the people who drive Taxis including owner/drivers. Considerations of Multiple owners do not fit into my blue print for the future of the Taxi trade.

Regards

JD

Lucky for me I will be well gone by then, but I think JD will need to buy a suit of armour and the castle, there are certain people out there that just might take exception.

The real problem here is that NO government either local or national or any agency which is set up to imliment or enforce any aspect of the law forms working policies to benefit the public, no-one else.

This is I believe the fatal error in your plan and the reason you do not want to put forward your ambitions.

You don't like councils because their duty of care is to the public and not to pander to the needs of people who think their well-being is more important than public safety.