Taxi Driver Online

But I doubt if his analysis was a deciding factor.

I can't remember his name mentioned in any official capacity, but ISTR his analysis was published in PHTM?

In the end it was all about politics.

Can't recall Mr Grisdale taking apart any of the SUD surveys, so he was obviously partisan as well

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Gerald actually posted on here about a year ago as "The Old Man of York".

He posted about ten messages then threw his toys out of the pram and hasn't been heard of since.

http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/vie ... &start=100

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Gerald travelled to london at his own expense and put questions to the select transport committee that they could not answer satisfactorily, parts of his report were mentioned by the government, in the final summing up and whilst he cannot claim full credit for the outcome I feel sure that his tearing apart of the methodology used went a long way towards the decision, a lot of people in the taxi trade owe a great deal to this man who is now happily retired in Scarborough.

Gerald came up with the revelation that in restricted areas private hire vehicles outnumbered hackney carriages.

Rather an elementary observation I would have thought even for a ten year old. He then suggested that if you combine the restricted hackney carriage trade with the unrestricted private hire trade then the Taxi using public were served by more vehicles.

He failed to grasp the point that except in a minority of restricted areas if you remove the private hire element the taxi using public have fewer public service vehicles than those in unrestricted areas. He also failed to grasp the fact that the OFT report was primarily about Hackney carriages serving the public and their restriction of numbers based on quantity controls and not about unrestricted private hire licenses.

In the end when his arguments and figures were pulled apart brick by brick and when he realised he had lost the argument he did as dusty said, "He through his toys out of the pram and took a powder".

We never did get to see his figures but from what he said on here his arguments didn't hold water. He was also a fervent advocate of the double shift theory whereby the public in restricted areas are best served by having fewer hackney carriage vehicles than those in unrestricted authorities. The problem Gerald had was the fact that he couldn't provide any evidence to support his reasoning in respect of double shifted cabs in restricted areas, which is not surprising considering no one else has been able to provide such evidence.

I suppose we only have to look at the situation in Crawley and Mr Allo Allo's observation that derestriction has meant an oversupply of vehicles to see which system provides more cabs. It's elementary that more cabs equals greater availability to the public and that’s why Mr Allo Allo wants to restrict the influx of vehicles.

Regardless of the merits of each system you can't get away from the facts and the actuality was that Gerald tried to substitute those facts with fiction. When he came on TDO he tried to justify his position of less equals more but sadly his argument floundered to the extent that in the end he became completely demoralised and left.

I'm afraid whatever Gerald achieved in York he miserably failed to prove his point on TDO. His departure was sad in a way because he seemed a decent guy.

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.

You make it sound like the TransComm was in favour of derestriction and the Govt was not, whereas it was in fact the other way round.

I can't remember the Govt mentioning his report; could you be more specific?

And I thought the TransComm questioned people, not the other way round?

I think Gerald has been pulling your chain, mr thinker.

As I said, the final result was all about politics and vested interests, and I doubt if Gerald's input had much to do with it, indeed his rather superficial analysis was not unlike that proferred by several other stakeholders such as the T&G.

And don't forget that the Govt's conclusion was to "strongly encourage" councils to delimit, so his analysis clearly didn't cut much ice with them.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Taxi twaddle
By Reader's letter

HAVING seen the leading article in The Press (Cabs to go black, June 2), I have come to the conclusion that the only way for an idea like this to be spawned is for City of York Council to have a Daft Ideas Department.

There is nothing wrong with the taxis as they are. To heap the expense of spraying the York Hackney Carriages black, and then insisting that other private hire taxis are to be sprayed any colour except black, has got to be one of the most idiotic ideas in years.

All it will do is put up the price of taxi hire to the public.

Perhaps it is a sneaky way to get more passengers on to some of the empty buses that at times clog up the streets. Good advice on this issue is "if it isn't broke, don't fix it". If the best that City of York Council can do is to entertain and pursue ideas like this, we are in for an expensive four years.

Steve Helsdon, York Traffic Action Group,

its strange when people can fork out £60 grand for a "free" plate but cant afford a £1000 respray or for that matter a nice black £16000 peugeot 407 lol

_________________
now a licensed hackney driver

Readers' letters

Taxi-ing issues
By Reader's letter
Comment

ARE there no more serious issues for the bureaucrats of City of York Council to concern themselves with than the colour of taxis (City black cab plan is passed, The Press, June 9)?

They do not operate the cars or own the cars, nor do they pay the drivers, so how can they legitimately dictate that the cars must be black? Private hire vehicles must be pre-booked and cannot pick up on the street, and the alternative is a registered taxi rank as at York Station, so there is no difficulty whatsoever in recognising an official taxi.

Personally, as long as I get from A to B safely and on time, I couldn't care less if the car is sky-blue pink with yellow spots on, and I am sure the vast majority of people feel the same.


This is simply another example of bureaucratic nonsense which serves no useful purpose. (A bit like the council itself).

P Witlea, De Grey Place, Bishopthorpe, York.


* I READ with interest that the council has decided to implement a policy of making black compulsory as the colour of all hackney carriages, and not allowing private hire vehicles to be this colour.

This procedure would have to be enacted under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provision) Act 1976, Section 47 Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence Conditions. This states that: "Any person aggrieved by any conditions attached to such a licence may appeal to a magistrates court."

If the present York taxi trade is unhappy with the council's intention, ie that it does not serve any useful purpose, involves needless expense, and since taxis are privately-owned and not owned by a corporation they therefore do not require a corporate image, they only have to put their case before the magistrates to prove the policy unreasonable.

I appealed some years ago on a number of unreasonable conditions, including the buying and selling of hackney carriages, how far from the centre of York a driver could live, whether he could have a part-time job, and the advertising on taxis.

My appeal was upheld, and that perhaps raises a moot point regarding advertising. Since the bench ruled in my favour back then, this causes a precedent, as the council did not appeal the then decision.

Peter Wheatley, York Road, Haxby, York