Taxi Driver Online

No difference.


The IPL came about after the council agreed with the trade mandarins that this list would be used to meet any “significant demand”. The trade mandarins being those with vested interests to protect like John T.

In the past the council has invited those on the IPL to apply for a licence when a “significant demand” is recognised, but the fact is, you don’t need an invite. The IPL has no provision in law and cannot be used as an excuse to deny a live application.

BTW, every time someone buys a licence they leapfrog the IPL to do it.

John T writes:



This is absolute shi**, the council can only deny a licence on the grounds of “no significant unmet demand” and to do that they have to prove it. Having a list of people who are interested is no proof of “no significant unmet demand”



This is sh*te also; the only thing the council can act upon is a live application, and the only way they can deny it is by having proof of "no significant unmet demand". They cannot deny a licence because someone was interested 15 years ago and might still be interested. The C.E.C would be denying a licence on the bases of who was applying and not whether or not demand was significant at the time.



Crap again; the council had a waiting list which was then turned into a list Interested Parties List. The waiting list was a list of live applications waiting to be granted. This meant that any licence applied for and not decided upon within 6 months would have to be granted on default - the council having gone over the statutory time period in which to decide the licence.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

If you apply before the SUD is completed and a “significant demand” is recognised the council would have to grant your licence.

If you applied before someone on the list the council would have to grant your licence first. This would mean the C.E.C granting more licences than the “significant demand” figure recognised, to get to those on the IPL.

All licences would then have to be granted as the council would be granting more licences than the SUD came up with.

In short; the council cannot go to the IPL in isolation, nor can the deny a licence for any other reason than “no significant unmet demand”


A foot full of lead springs to mind.

"Oversubscriptions, deliberations" John you are a monkey

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

This thread was started at Tuesday lunchtime and I would take a bet that a lot of those viewing are from Edinburgh.

Whether you like it or not John T. a lot of drivers will be saving up their pennies to have take a punt on the next SUD coming-up with a figure of 99 licences to be granted.

We are at this moment making certain the council will not be issuing off the IPL in isolation. We even have it rubberstamped that we can stop them if they intend to do so.

This being the case drivers will have lots of time to put their money down and jump those on the IPL.

The reason the C.E.C increased the licence fee to £1205 was an attempt to discourage applications. They know they are very weak on the issue of the IPL.

Nae luck son

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

"We are at this moment making certain the council will not be issuing off the IPL in isolation. We even have it rubberstamped that we can stop them if they intend to do so." Yet another laughable claim. It is well established and I think most people know that any such list cannot be used in isolation, so why make out that you are ensuring it? Rubberstamped? I won't ask what the rubber is, (you fanny, to coin your own phrase)

"If a survey indicates that 20 additional licences would meet an unmet demand, and there are 40 applicants for licences. Do they all get a licence or how is it decided who gets and who doesn't?"
Now that's a question you still haven't answered, so try offering an answer without going down your usual road.

Answered:

If you apply before the SUD is completed and a “significant demand” is recognised the council would have to grant your licence.

If you applied before someone on the list the council would have to grant your licence first. This would mean the C.E.C granting more licences than the “significant demand” figure recognised, to get to those on the IPL.

All licences would then have to be granted as the council would be granting more licences than the SUD came up with.

In short; the council cannot go to the IPL in isolation, nor can the deny a licence for any other reason than “no significant unmet demand”


A foot full of lead springs to mind.

"Oversubscriptions, deliberations" John you are a monkey

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

John T Writes:



You need to check with a lawyer John, as I advised at the start of this thread. There is nothing laughable about it - just certainty.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

I know you have a reading problem so I'll explain that if you read my comment in its entirety, you will see that the laughable part is that you and the royal "we" find it necessary to make such a claim when legal precedent on this has already been established without your input.

John, I have refuted every question you’ve asked, maybe not the way you would have liked, by leaving certain key factors out, but answers none the less. You in turn obfuscate, “oversubscription”, “merits”, “deliberations”, none of which has any bearing on the granting or denying of a licence.



This is absolute shi**, the council can only deny a licence on the grounds of “no significant unmet demand” and to do that they have to prove it. Having a list of people who are interested is no proof of “no significant unmet demand”



This is sh*te also; the only thing the council can act upon is a live application, and the only way they can deny it is by having proof of "no significant unmet demand". They cannot deny a licence because someone was interested 15 years ago and might still be interested. The C.E.C would be denying a licence on the bases of who was applying and not whether or not demand was significant at the time.


Crap again; the council had a waiting list which was then turned into a list Interested Parties List. The waiting list was a list of live applications waiting to be granted. This meant that any licence applied for and not decided upon within 6 months would have to be granted on default - the council having gone over the statutory time period in which to decide the licence.



If you apply before the SUD is completed and a “significant demand” is recognised the council would have to grant your licence.

If you applied before someone on the list the council would have to grant your licence first. This would mean the C.E.C granting more licences than the “significant demand” figure recognised, to get to those on the IPL.

All licences would then have to be granted as the council would be granting more licences than the SUD came up with.

In short; the council cannot go to the IPL in isolation, nor can the deny a licence for any other reason than “no significant unmet demand”


A foot full of lead springs to mind.

"Oversubscriptions, deliberations" John you are a monkey

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

Did you miss this one John?





This simple fact translates into hike rentals (often against market conditions, as is the case at this point in time) and increased plate premiums. The only people not competing are the owners, who, for the most part, depend on increasing driver numbers to fuel their employment status.

The only way this can be achieved is by restricting the choice of employment opportunities for drivers’ i.e. limiting the number of available shifts by artificially capping the number of vehicles.

This is why I don’t believe you are a driver John, as only a servile idiot would advocate paying more for fewer choices, while working more hours for less money.

Now take into consideration the other transport groups expanding on the back of a burgeoning Edinburgh economy. The only group not expanding is the taxi trade.

In the next few years the Ph will expand to take most of the work, and as long as idiots like you are prepared to pay 50K + for licence, you will refuse to even notice

This is what's happening now John or don't you understand?

John T: driver, owner, or servile idiot, you decide?

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

Skull wrote

So you think that if the council commission a survey and you apply before it reports back that you will get a plate before someone on the IPL who is invited to apply once the survey is complete.
Remember that timing is the crucial element here. The SUD is not established until the report is complete. If, then, as you claim, 99 people on the IPL were invited to apply for a licence within a specific time or be removed from the IPL, would the council complete their consideration of your application before those of the IPL? I doubt it. All applications would be considered at the same meeting and due consideration, and probably preference, would be given to those who had "expressed their interest" well before your evil ploy was dreamt of.

As I said you misled others before and cost them money. Your revenge should be paid for out of your own pocket not the pockets of others. The only reason for licences being issued was council negligence. Salteri has already "sold" the plate that you and others here campaigned for. A somewhat hollow victory for those claiming to fight for truth and justice. The reality is that this is all about lining pockets with a fast buck to the detriment of those who are trying to work long term in the trade and earn their living by providing a good service.

I didn't miss it, I ignored it for the pathetic bullshit that it is.

I find the words "only a servile idiot would advocate paying more for fewer choices, while working more hours for less money" interesting, as that is the reality of what you are advocating!!

John T writes:




No John, this is what the status quo has brought us.

The trade no longer operates in a restricted market John. Yes, the council can cap numbers but the customer transport market is about taking people from a – to – b. By failing to compete, while expecting drivers’ rentals to prop – up a dwindling customer base, it is inevitable the hack feet will lose its numerical presence in the market. This simply means other transport groups expanding to soak – up any new demand, while eating away at the existing demand as is happening now.

This shouldn’t be that hard for you to understand John, evidence of what I am pointing out is all around you. You might not want to look at it but it’s happening never the less.

The drivers are not here to fuel your little illusion John and what’s more they are becoming better informed every day.

Thanks to guys like you….


BTW John, the council state there has been a 300% increase of Ph in the last few years. Now add that to night buses, taxi -buses, rickshaws and the Ph and Taxis from Edinburgh’s surrounding areas.

And you want drivers not to have the opportunity to compete but pay ridiculous rentals and plate premiums just to keep your little illusion going.

Not a chance!

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

I said they are seen as people who want to destroy the trade!!!
So you have no problem with someone who applies for a plate as long as garry and jim have nothing to do with it?

I think John would rather you bought a licence for 50k

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

John writes:


The council have no choice John; I and others will have live applications up and running before anyone in the IPL applies and even if they do attempt to go to the list we will stop them.


Yes, but the report is conducted over a specific time period giving us plenty opportunity to apply.



They would have no choice but to grant the licences on up-to-date information. This information would be produce by the SUD; they can’t then say that although a “significant demand” existed it doesn’t apply to you but to those on the IPL who applied after you-silly boy.



No preference John, just demand and whether that demand is significant or not. Preference of what they might want to do, and what they have to do by law is two different things. And expressing an interest stands for nothing against a live application.



Never happened, I advised everyone correctly and had they stuck by their applications they would have got their licences on the back of Salteri et al.



No John, Salteri et al got there licences through the process of law. Had the C.E.C applied the law as they should have they wouldn’t have lost.

Taylor is now taking them to task and will do the same again but this time their whole house of cards is shaking all around them. It could be the end of the road for the C.E.C before the IPL even becomes an issue….

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"