Taxi Driver Online

Much the same for limos 7 years ago then. There was no one interested in licensing them at that time. I went to my LA and they were a bit puzzled that I wanted to be licensed but they looked at it and agreed. They were one of only a few that would license at the time.

_________________
Grandad,

We finally extracted from you the fact that the “vehicle operator” informs the hirer where to obtain a driver. You could have said that in the first place and saved us all a lot of time.

The question arises why is the business called “self drive” when there is no self drive element involved whatsoever? Why is it not called “Chauffer drive” or something else? Or perhaps just vehicle and chauffeur hire? Because that’s how a court will see it, even if you don’t? You must have a very low opinion of our judiciary if you think they won't spot a "pretext" when they see one?

In a court of law you will be asked the question “where does the “self drive” element fit into this vehicle hire”? Then what will you say to that? Well Milord, there is no self drive element, the hirer has to hire a chauffeur to do the driving.

Let’s imagine you are asked whether you have any involvement in providing a chauffeur? And when you say no, the court asks how do hirers obtain details of those persons you only allow to drive your vehicles, namely chauffeurs? Your response is likely to be we’ll Milord, we do inform the hirer where to obtain the services of a chauffeur. Then you’re going to be asked why you said a moment ago “that you had no involvement in providing a chauffeur?

No doubt the court will then look down on you with some contempt and ask the question what is the purpose of calling your business self drive hire when over 90% of those holding driving licenses are excluded from driving?

You don’t think that the judiciary isn’t smart enough to realise that a person who carries on a business of hiring out 16 seater “vehicles” and whose only source of income is based on drawing custom from the general public of which over 95% are not even eligible to drive and where a third party driver has to be hired in order for the vehicle to be driven, is not one of carrying on a business for the purpose of “hire or reward”?

Like I said, you have demonstrated on here that you know very little about the concept of hire or reward let alone employment law, which for some misguided reason you associate employment with purchasing a one off service from a self employed Chauffeur.

The triangle of association now reads as follows.

A = member of the public, “the hirer”.

B = Operator, minibus owner

C = Agency or driver

The hirer phones Mr S6 who is the operator and asks can they hire his unlicensed limousine minibus for three hours, he says yes but you need a PCV license to drive it. Mr S6 informs the hirer that if they don’t have a PCV license he can give them details of where to obtain a qualified driver. Mr S6 imparts those details and the hirer makes contact with the agency or driver. The driver or agency then liaises with the vehicle operator to sort out the contract details of hiring the vehicle or vice versa?

Still "Illegal" simple as that.

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 realy are flogging a dead horse here JD. It doesn't matter how many times S6 tells you how it is done to comply with the law as it stands, you will keep changing some of the details to suit your interpretation.

You keep refering to vehicle operator instead of vehicle owner.
you keep refering to unlicensed limousine where self drive hire does not require a license.
You sugest that the vehicle owner deals with both contracts when in fact the agency deals with the driver contract and the owner deals with the vehicle contract.

This is how I understand it from what has been put on here.

_________________
Grandad,

I will also add that JD has pointed out how the name could be flawed basicly this is what your post really suggests, this is not illegal, he could call it bobs fann-ies aunt self drive scheme for all anyone cared, no law against this, so i see some parts of your recent post as a total sham milord, come on JD get with it, the scheme itself would be on trial not the name of it, and this scheme is perfectly legal, wether you like it or not

QUOTE by JD

The question arises why is the business called “self drive” when there is no self drive element involved whatsoever? Why is it not called “Chauffer drive” or something else? Or perhaps just vehicle and chauffeur hire? Because that’s how a court will see it, even if you don’t? You must have a very low opinion of our judiciary if you think they won't spot a "pretext" when they see one?

_________________
Legal and proud

Loads a love from BERTIE !!

He has told us how it is done and that he informs the person paying for the hire of the vehicle where to obtain a driver. You do agree with that don't you?



I think you will find that in this respect I have categorised owner and operator as the same on countless occasions, I don' think I need keep saying it as most people will be aware of what I mean? Anyone who operates a self drive hire business is entitled to be called operator.



Yes I do, for the simple reason they are unlicensed vehicles carrying passengers for hire or reward.

You may not agree but you have your opinion and I have mine, I don't see any case law coming form you that backs up your opinion, do you?



Are you suggesting the driver of the vehicle does not have to sign the insurance contract and there is no contract between owner and driver whatsoever?



Well considering there has been practically no information put on here that can be substantiated I'm surprised you have enough details to understand anything? Perhaps if these 16 seater limo owners and these driver agencies were more open as to the way they operate we might glean some worth while information where we can say yes thats perfectly legitimate? However when their sole aim in life is to carry passengers for hire or reward under any circumstances then its not surprising that they don't like disclosing the way they operate?

They could put their contracts online but that would mean exposing how they work and that is something most of them desire to keep secret.

Isn't this chap who owns the elongated Ferrari one of your upstanding 16 seater limo operators?

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 are missing the point here.
It has taken a while, but we now have most of the relevant facts.

S6 maintains that this "scheme" is completely lawful and doesn't constitute "hire and reward".
JD contends that it is an artificial arrangement intended only to get around the current law.

Both of them have a valid point of view.
Provided that every part of the "scheme" is done exactly right then S6 is correct.There is however, no room for error. The slightest arrangement between owner (or operator, I don't believe there is much difference) and the driver (or his agency) could be seen by a court as enough to make it a "hire and reward" contract for carrying passengers. This would make JD correct.
There are so many people using this "scheme" that it is inevitable that some are making mistakes.
Others are barely bothering to stick to the letter of the "scheme" and are clearly illegal.
I stress the word "could" as this is what the court would effectively have to decide about this scheme, if it were brought before them.
Something as small as passing on a phone number to the hirer might be enough.
They could even decide that the whole thing is a sham anyway, also making JD correct
We will not know until a court rules on it and that won't happen until somebody operating this "scheme" is prosecuted.
I hope this happens soon because IMO the faster this whole thing is settled, the better for everyone.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

I welcome this post Kermit because a court will undoubtedly tell Mr S6 what type of business he runs, according to the way it is operated. I have said this until I am blue in the face so there is no need to remind me what I am already on record as saying. You mistakingly associate the name self drive hire with the category of business sef drive represents. It is Mr S6 who says his category of business is self drive hire and the name which may be in any form has nothing whatsoever to do with the category of business. If I advertise as jack the butcher the word jack has nothing whatsoever to do with the category of business but the word butcher does.

Mr S6 will go to court and say the nature of his business self drive hire, as I have already stated the prosecution will invite Mr S6 to define which part of his business is self drive? Perhaps we should ask him ourselves which part of his business is self drive because excluding the hirer from driving the vehicle in my opinion is anything but self drive.

Thank you for giving us a help in hand.

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.

I take it you think a court of law would fully understand someone letting their 100,000+ limo be driven by anyone.

I know of one court that wouldn't.

_________________
IDFIMH

TBH I don't give a monkeys about words, it's actions that matter. And all I see is sections of the limo trade spending their life abusing, or attempting to abuse, the licensing system.

What % of limo companies do you think run legit?

_________________
IDFIMH

To answer your question honestly sussex it would take a fair bit of research and a darn good survey, clearly im not the man to do that however what i will say is of about 30 limo companies i know personally and mix with around 25 of those are either licensed via VOSA or PH via their councils, nearly every limo company in Plymouth are licensed all bar deffo 1 and maybe 2 so if these odds are anything to go by i suspect the odds are far more in favour of licensed limo ops than against, but hey like i say unles we have a survey we will never know the true figures

_________________
Legal and proud

Loads a love from BERTIE !!

Oh dear oh dear, again you have changed everything to suit your own view.
How many times has it been said during this thread that mr S6 doesn't have any vehicles. Lets get this straight, he runs a garage that repairs limos, does S6 conversions and sells limos.. He doesn't hire out any vehicles at all.

_________________
Grandad,

You missed out vehicle Engineering and Compliance specialist , (the only one in the country known to VOSA)

I'm well aware he doesn't have any vehicles, he has said on more than one occasion he doesn't have any vehicles, the reference to him is purely hypothetical, I use him as an example only because he is the one at the centre of the pro legal self hire debate.

If your intention was to score a point then I'm afraid it was a self inflicted wound.

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.

No my point is that you can't post anything on this debate without changing the context of replies or making hypothetical statements.

_________________
Grandad,

Cannot agree with you on that score, we answer the phone for a couple of local companies (the use the call divert) when they are out on the road (or in bed if working daft hours). We just simply answer the phone. It does happen quite often that we would give a quote on one phone and within seconds the other phone will ring with the same customer. It oes work better that just leaving the answer phone on which a lot of people do not like. This is based on results of jobs booked.

_________________
you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.