Taxi Driver Online

I really am fed up bandying words with you.
When I posted the same story on another forum people were happy in their postings that something had been achieved. They didn't nit-pick

_________________
Our safety is Paramount

Are you deliberately being obtuse? I already said that the council have nothing to do with my returns or working conditions. All that would change in my enlightened version of the taxi trade is a new set of laws would set out new parameters for the council to administer.
We could then earn a reasonable (not excessive) return without suffering from an oversupply of cabs.

_________________
Our safety is Paramount

Actually that may be the most practical answer. Abolish PH and have an increase in HC numbers everywhere, and then limit it.
There could be automatic unmet demand surveys in a new form to include phone bookings, carried out every 2 years and a graduated increase only if warranted. What do you think?

_________________
Our safety is Paramount

JD,
as you have asked me to answer your question directly ref councils above in this thread, and I have done so, would you please extend me the same courtesy and answer a question which I have already put twice to you without answer:-

ARE YOU A TAXI OR PRIVATE HIRE DRIVER AND IF NOT WHAT DO YOU DO FOR A LIVING?

Please note that I recognise that I have not put the question in precisely these terms previously, but this is surely relevant to this forum to determine if you are indeed a cab driver or not and of course our views of your opinions would be influenced by your experience of our trade.

_________________
Our safety is Paramount

Well I asked you twice to answer a question in relation to the fact that you inferred the council owed you a living but as you have miserably failed to do that I cannot see any point in asking you again.

You will have to forgive me for seeking a little clarity in your quest for the imposition of quantity controls in Crawley but in your own words “you hadn’t thought it through and you were making it up as you type”. It is therefore no surprise that you blindly stumbled through a catalogue of inconsistencies which resulted in your constant failure to address straightforward questions relating to the many inconsistent comments you made.

You went from restricting vehicle numbers to restricting driver numbers and back again. You said there is an oversupply of hackney carriage and private hire vehicles presumably in Crawley and you inferred that because of this the council owed you a living. When I presented you with the fact that no one twisted your arm to become a cab driver you came out with the prize comment, “That is no excuse for poor returns or working conditions”. You still won’t answer the question in respect of that comment simply because in your mind the people responsible for your “poor returns and working conditions” are the people who officiate licensing policy namely the local council. The sad part for you is that you can’t blame the local council because they have no obligation to provide you with working conditions, whatever it is you mean by working conditions? They also have nothing whatsoever to do with your economic viability resulting in your poor returns. The whole argument you put forward has been inconsistent, ill thought out and could have been summed up in two words “Quantity Controls.”

We’ve been there time and time again and the only argument people like you can put forward is oversupply and the remedy for that is don’t let anyone else have a license.

Your argument is oversupply and your solution is to stop issuing licenses. From my point of view and because we’ve been here countless times before that’s all you really needed to say in order to get your point across. Many people have a view on numbers control but most of them have a considered view and don’t make it up as they go along. Some of the proposals you came up with were so far removed from reality that they bordered on the absurd. Your acknowledged failure in highlighting your inconsistencies is testament to the jigsaw puzzle you put forward as an argument for capping numbers. Perhaps you should concentrate on the fact that instead of there being too many licensed vehicles plying for hire, there are too many licensed drivers and the reason for this is that driver entry in the majority of licensing areas is too simple a process.

In respect of questioning advice given by me or anyone else on TDO I should point out that it is up to every individual to consider any such advice in relation to their own opinions.

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.

Where in square2004's post did he say P/H had fallen? Your just assuming they had.

_________________
Life? Don't talk to me about life!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjm2eslm6hI

If PH hasn't fallen then that's something the council can't do anything about other than having higher entry criteria.

If it is the case that taxis have grown then surely they have only grown with fully licensed cab drivers owning them. How do you want some of them to lose their living? Via a ballot?

It would be interesting to see how many extra licensed drivers there are, as 200 drivers sharing 100 cabs is much the same as 200 drivers sharing 200 cabs.

_________________
IDFIMH

There is no decline in the number of PH [more in fact],the greater % of the new HC licences are being taken up by the asian community all with first time Hackney driver licence,this is another issue altogether there are some alarming stories coming from the punters I always tell them that when they have a problem note the licence No and report to the Licence office at the council.
Sussex has the hit the nail on the head in his comment..
" Higher the entery criteria" have heard of one case where some one took an interpreter with when he went for his "licence test" same thing has happened at the NVQ which we having to do in Chelmsford.

So what's your opinion on the collective view of all the Taxi Trade representatives, "that councillors know best?"

Do you or the organisation you subscribe to, support that theory?

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.

allo allo


Now I did say you were going to get at least both barrels didnt I

CC

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

I accept that I am not perfect. I know I dashed off my suggestions quickly, and as I said at the top of the thread my intention was to start a debate, which it has certainly done. However I never inferred the council owe me a living. For the third time, I state that a council can only work within the laws of the land, is this clear?
I simply want new laws somewhere between the two extremes typified by you on one hand and the "leave it all alone" boys on the other.

You said:-
"When I presented you with the fact that no one twisted your arm to become a cab driver you came out with the prize comment, “That is no excuse for poor returns or working conditions”."
Answer:-
I do not accept that simply because I was not forced to become a cabbie that that should be a reason for poor returns and working conditions!


Speaking of third times, I said:-

"JD,
as you have asked me to answer your question directly ref councils above in this thread, and I have done so, would you please extend me the same courtesy and answer a question which I have already put twice to you without answer:-

ARE YOU A TAXI OR PRIVATE HIRE DRIVER AND IF NOT WHAT DO YOU DO FOR A LIVING?

Please note that I recognise that I have not put the question in precisely these terms previously, but this is surely relevant to this forum to determine if you are indeed a cab driver or not and of course our views of your opinions would be influenced by your experience of our trade."

I note that you failed to answer a simple question. Oh dear.

_________________
Our safety is Paramount

Yes indeed CC but I wonder who from and what he does?

Do you think this whole forum is run by the OFT or National Consumer Council to back up their "laissez faire" attitude to the Taxi trade?

I better stop or I'll get banned for disagreeing.

Best wishes

_________________
Our safety is Paramount

Re my last post JD, I thought I had already covered the topic of my attitude to councils, so I checked back a little and I quote myself here:-

Are you deliberately being obtuse? I already said that the council have nothing to do with my returns or working conditions. All that would change in my enlightened version of the taxi trade is a new set of laws would set out new parameters for the council to administer.
We could then earn a reasonable (not excessive) return without suffering from an oversupply of cabs.

I trust we'll hear no more nonsense about councils owing me a living.

_________________
Our safety is Paramount

I tend to disagree, the LA have an awful amount to do with your working conditions.

The vehicle you drive is your working environment, if they tell you to drive a certain vehicle.

Where you ply your trade (i.e. a rank) is another affect on your working condition.

If there is oversupply of vehicles then the LA are affecting your working conditions.

CC

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

Don't forget the fact they limit the amount you can charge.

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.