Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Mon Apr 27, 2026 3:00 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57334
Location: 1066 Country
I have my doubts about the data protection issues over the cameras pointing away from the motor. :sad:

But then your manor is a law unto themselves. :shock:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
TDO wrote:
STF wrote:
I understand that the vast majority of drivers are self employed and as such can claim any cost of fitting a camera against tax - it will therefore cost them nothing in the long run!


That's a fallacy but it also seems to be a view widely held in the trade.

If you spent £1,000 on a system then you would get tax relief on this but that would be at the rate you pay tax on - so if you pay tax at 20% then you would save £200 in tax, thus the system would still cost you £800.

(Another way of looking at this is that it would reduce your profits by £1,000, so your tax bill would be reduced by the tax you would pay on that £1,000, which at 20% is £200)
.

The best way is to lease buy, all payments except for the last one are totally tax-deductible, similar to rent, the last one is when you purchase, very small amount of tax, but be careful of the company that sets up the lease purchase contract for you...


Another point to remember is that the cost of the system would be spread over several year, so you wouldn't get the full tax saving for several years

_________________
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: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
Sussex wrote:
I have my doubts about the data protection issues over the cameras pointing away from the motor. :sad:

But then your manor is a law unto themselves. :shock:


I'm sure you do, you must be very careful if you ever go out for the day and video your family in public

The local police had no problems using the video as evidence when it recorded a armed assault on on off-licence that it was parked in front of, in fact they had nothing but praise.

_________________
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: Tue Apr 03, 2007 10:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57334
Location: 1066 Country
MR T wrote:
I'm sure you do, you must be very careful if you ever go out for the day and video your family in public

The issue isn't videoing people with their consent, it's the many thousands an external video would capture that should be of concern.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 1:58 am
Posts: 106
Location: SHEFFIELD
Sussex wrote:
Andy Christian wrote:
The apparent unequal split between Black cab and Private Hire was determined by: (a) cost - in the 'pilot' it cost over three times as much for black cab ( 2 cameras fitted) than for Private Hire (1 camera fitted); and (b) taking into account the proximity of the fare to the driver.

Very surprising that. :?

I don't think I have ever come across a taxi/PH CCTV with two cameras. You have to wonder if that's really necessary. :?

Apparently if the camera is located at the front then the infra red camera blinds itself by the reflection from the partition so another camera is needed for passenger section, whereas Ph only need the one.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
MR T wrote:
I have cabs that have three cameras not just two, number one records everything that happens in the vehicle, number two is forward-facing and Records everything that the driver sees ( very useful in an accident) No 3 faces through the rear windscreen and records everything from behind, this is worked through a splitter box( it allows you to use four cameras at once) the screen shows four pictures at once( or you can select any one of the cameras) for example you can select your rear camera, which then allows you to use the screen for reversing, plus of course we have sound, simple really when you think about it.


I'm all for camera flexibility and I don't believe drivers should be restricted to any particular type of camera just because the LO and the police think its the right one to have. I know that some licensing authorities are hung up on the application of these cameras and the police should be the only body to have access to them but as long as the driver is happy with the equipment he has then in my opinion that should be enough.

Trevors setup is the type of setup I think we could all live with because it gives the added bonus of front and rear accident accountability.

We should aim for such a system if it is cost effective?

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
Sussex wrote:
MR T wrote:
I'm sure you do, you must be very careful if you ever go out for the day and video your family in public

The issue isn't videoing people with their consent, it's the many thousands an external video would capture that should be of concern.


The points I was making Sussex is that if you are in a public place videoing your family and in the background are the general public, were does it leave you.

_________________
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: Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
JD wrote:
MR T wrote:
I have cabs that have three cameras not just two, number one records everything that happens in the vehicle, number two is forward-facing and Records everything that the driver sees ( very useful in an accident) No 3 faces through the rear windscreen and records everything from behind, this is worked through a splitter box( it allows you to use four cameras at once) the screen shows four pictures at once( or you can select any one of the cameras) for example you can select your rear camera, which then allows you to use the screen for reversing, plus of course we have sound, simple really when you think about it.


I'm all for camera flexibility and I don't believe drivers should be restricted to any particular type of camera just because the LO and the police think its the right one to have. I know that some licensing authorities are hung up on the application of these cameras and the police should be the only body to have access to them but as long as the driver is happy with the equipment he has then in my opinion that should be enough.

Trevors setup is the type of setup I think we could all live with because it gives the added bonus of front and rear accident accountability.

We should aim for such a system if it is cost effective?

Regards

JD


The cost five years ago was £700 per cab I know it was expensive, but the safety of my drivers comes first . and nowadays you can put together a system very very easily and quite inexpensive.

what I found with having the rear camera connected up to the screen was that drivers started to use it as a rear-view mirror, not really a good idea they started to spend more time looking backwards than they did forwards.

_________________
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: Wed Apr 04, 2007 3:08 am 
Personally I've got two autocab cameras in my car; one by the passenger sunvisor and one in the rear. To be honest I only went for them as they are compatible with my data head. If you feel that somethings not right then you just hit a red button and the previous 30 seconds and the following 30 seconds and stored and can be downloaded on a laptop to pictures that the Police can use. Cost about £250.

Also I do have signs on the windows and dashboard of the car that state "THIS CAB IS FITTED WITH CCTV - IMAGES MAY BE RECORDED" Not had to try it yet but apparently this covers the privacy grey area should the pictures be used in Court.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 3:08 am 
Personally I've got two autocab cameras in my car; one by the passenger sunvisor and one in the rear. To be honest I only went for them as they are compatible with my data head. If you feel that somethings not right then you just hit a red button and the previous 30 seconds and the following 30 seconds and stored and can be downloaded on a laptop to pictures that the Police can use. Cost about £250.

Also I do have signs on the windows and dashboard of the car that state "THIS CAB IS FITTED WITH CCTV - IMAGES MAY BE RECORDED" Not had to try it yet but apparently this covers the privacy grey area should the pictures be used in Court.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 11:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
Ideally you would want a small unit that could store data on a memory flash card, has the ability to connect several cameras at once either by way of an add on, or peripheral built-in interface and has adequate software. The device should also have the option of being fixed or portable for the reason of theft.

I'm sure there is equipment out there that fit these specifications but the overriding factor is size? The smaller the apparatus the better.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
http://www.y3k.com/acatalog/v247.html :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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 193 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