Taxi Driver Online

Does anyone know the outcome of the rank saga in Carlisle

Yes.

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.

well GA what happened

if you type 3 w's then the word taxi then a - then the word forum then a .co and a . and a uk you will find the answer.

or

3 w's then the then the word cabby and then the word forum (without any gaps) then a .co and a .uk

Its the only place the real truth can be found.

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.

so now saloons can now use it OK

HA HA hA

_________________
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 it wont be long before they do and CCC go before the beak

skippy i,m new to this what does ccc mean

Carlisle Cricket Club.

_________________
IDFIMH

The minutes of the committee meeting won't be out until next wednesday but I can confirm that after a very lenghty committee meeting councillors decided to maintain the present illegal condition. The News and Star are reporting the story so we shall have to wait and see what they say about the matter.

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.

How sad, after all your efforts as well .................... maybe the legality of the condition is not as clear cut as the self professed legal expert has lead us to believe .................. maybe his advise is not as accurate as he would have us believe ................... beware of this man, if it goes tit$ up he cannot be held accountable as he doesn't exist.

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 can assure you that the effort was minimal but the sad part as far as you're concerned, is the fact you can't comprehend the Maud ruling. I'm not surprised by that but I must admit even though most councillors are less than knowledgeable in respect of Taxi licensing, I was somewhat surprised at the decision of these councillors in Carlisle.

Perhaps these councillors think they are above the law, however I fully expect the judiciary to remind them otherwise.

Lets hope they don't have to wait too long.

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.

Oh I can't wait either JD .............. their legal department were obviously aware of your allegations and your references to what you believe to be case law ............................ unfortunately they don't believe that your assumptions are correct and so allowed the condition to remain ..................... they are obviously as confident in defending the councils actions as you are of them being found to be illegal ................... as you say the decision will be made in a court, but only if someone decides to challenge it.

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.

Phil Coleman of the Carlisle News and Star has reported on Carlisle council's recent decision to maintain the illegal taxi rank condition attached to the majority of hackney carriage proprietor licenses.

Councillors were warned of the illegal condition in a report from the licensing department, which under normal circumstances would have been reviewed or written in consultation with the councils legal department.

This decision proves that there are times when councillors think they are above the law, however we shall have to wait and see if the situation is remedied in the near future. It is my opinion that we can't have licensing authorities flouting taxi legislation by imposing illegal conditions on license no matter who they are?

This council, like every other council in the United Kingdom has had the opportunity to cater for the wheelchair bound public and impose conditions of license that are not illegal. Carlisle Council has chosen to make a statutory law fit its illegal condition and that cannot be allowed.

There has been some discussion as to the part played by the National Taxi Association and those involved in its administration? I don't know what you think? It is my view that once an illegal practice by councillors is exposed, it is incumbent on the National body to try and remedy that illegal practice. At least that would be my approach. In this instance it would appear there has been no attempt by the National Taxi Association or indeed any other Taxi organisation to right the wrong of Carlisle councillors.

I haven't seen or read any input from the GMB or the T&GWU on this illegal practice so we can only assume that if they do know about it they haven't got a clue how to remedy it, or they give it tacit approval?

These are the people who put themselves forward as representatives of the Taxi Trade but as you can see, when something of National importance occurs in their own back yard, they turn a blind eye. If such a situation were to occur in any other place in the country, for instance Brighton, then no doubt we would hear a cacophony of sound that would resonate all the way to Westminster.

If this illegal condition is allowed to go unresolved then what other illegal conditions will these so called representatives acquiesce to in the future?
______________________________

City chiefs vote to defy ruling on taxis

Published on 05/04/2007

By Phil Coleman

CITY councillors have voted to defy an Appeal Court ruling by keeping its policy of reserving the Station Rank at Carlisle Railway Station for London style cabs capable of taking people in wheelchairs.

Taxi leaders immediately applauded the decision, saying it would continue to ensure a quality taxi service for wheelchair users.

The decision came after a lively debate among councillors sitting on the council’s Regulatory Panel.

Officials explained that the current policy of reserving the Station Rank – widely regarded as a premiere taxi site – for taxis which are accessible to wheelchairs was introduced in 1994, partly to ensure that sufficient numbers of such taxis continued to be available.

But a case that went to the Appeal Court in 2002 had resulted in a ruling that local authority taxi licences should be applied throughout a local authority district, effectively putting the Carlisle policy in conflict with what is a binding legal decision.

There was a fear that restricting licenses to certain areas could create first and second class ranks.

In an official report on the issue, council officers urged councillors to take immediate action to remedy the situation or face the possibility of a legal challenge to its policy.

But several councillors spoke in favour of retaining the current policy.

Liberal Democrat James Tootle told the meeting: “It doesn’t seem unreasonable to discriminate positively.”

Michael Boaden (Labour) said retaining the decision could be justified under anti-discrimination laws.

Addressing the meeting, Brian McCullough, of Carlisle Taxi Association, said scrapping the current policy, which amounted to positive discrimination, would be a tragedy. Disability groups locally and nationally were appalled at the possibility that the policy could be ditched.

Some taxi drivers had chosen more expensive London style cabs largely because they knew they would be able to exclusively work the busy Station Rank, he said.

The loss of that exclusive right, opening the rank to taxis without wheelchair access, would make it uneconomic and prompt some taxi drivers to switch to normal saloon cars, reducing the service to the disabled.

He argued that current law provided a legal justification for keeping the current policy precisely because it is positive discrimination, ensuring the disabled knew where they could find an suitable cab.
_______________

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

It would appear that the Maud judgement is being challenged in another place and/or doesn't apply in the Carlisle situation.

I beg to differ.

_________________
IDFIMH