Taxi Driver Online

Road Traffic Regulation orders covering areas like St Johns Lane in Liverpool city centre specifically state that buses, hackney carriage vehicles, private hire vehicles and bicycles are permitted access. I am lead to believe these rights extend to Liverpool bus lanes (as is the case with neighbouring areas Sefton and the Wirral). Due to some 'confusion' with officers on the ground Liverpool's traffic services recently wrote to Liverpool neighbourhood Inspector Colin Dyson clarifying the situation in order for him to pass the policy down the line.

I'm surprised the Meeting of Minds tried to reach an agreement on this issue when all they had to do was read the road traffic regulation orders. These were drawn up to reflect Merseytravel's 2006-2011 Local Transport Plan, which provides recognition for both HC and PH operations as forming part of a fully integrated public transport network.

_________________
Don't knock it, 'til you try it....

I'm not surprised one little jot, bit TBH disappointed that some hackney carriage reps couldn't leave their prejudices against PH at the door.

_________________
IDFIMH

Exactly the point Mr Sussex, until both sides of the trade work together, for the mutal benifit of all members of the trade, the conflict will continue.

Regards
BB

_________________
Mick Hildreth (07814 032002)
GMB PDB P39 Southern Region Branch Secretary
mick.hildreth@gmbtaxis.org.uk
www.gmbpdb.org.uk

Should they have to work together on such issues? Surely the HC reps should lobby for HC inclusion in bus lanes. PH reps should lobby for PH inclusion in bus lanes. If HC reps exerted more energy on improving their own industry instead of sabotaging the PH industry then maybe they wouldn't be in such a mess.

Central Government has a duty of care to discourage private motorists from using their own vehicle. This has lead to the promotion of public transport. If the local transport plan says both HC and PH are public transport then what on earth possesses anyone to suggest that one type of taxi (theirs) should be allowed but another type of taxi (their competitors) shouldnt?

Liverpool's licensing committee might be completely controlled by HC trade union reps but fortunately Merseytravel and Liverpool's traffic services appear to look at transport provision as a whole.

_________________
Don't knock it, 'til you try it....

Now your area might be different, but down here every firm I know of has a mixed taxi/PH fleet.

So it sticks in my throat when one side of the trade has a pop at the other, simply for being the other side.

_________________
IDFIMH

There's about 8,000 vehicles licensed by Merseyside (Sefton, Liverpool, Knowsley, Wirral, St Helens) of which 72% are PH. Liverpool's HC vehicles are so high profile and politically virile, decision makers often forget the unsung PH heroes who quietly and efficiently provide nearly three quarters of the local taxi provision.

_________________
Don't knock it, 'til you try it....

Now if I was someone else then I would say those 72% need someone or some union to speak to councillors and the like, and sort it out.

Cos excluding 72% of the licensed trade is bang out of order.

_________________
IDFIMH

Deltastaff,

Are the PH part of any union association in your neck of the woods?

_________________
Mick Hildreth (07814 032002)
GMB PDB P39 Southern Region Branch Secretary
mick.hildreth@gmbtaxis.org.uk
www.gmbpdb.org.uk

The Sefton Hackney Trade fully supported the inclusion of the Sefton private hire trade regarding being included to use bus lanes, and that was quite a number of years ago.

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

Let's look at the dynamics...
If a Delta passenger suspects they may have been overcharged, their first port of call is to ring the company who provided the service, i.e. Delta. If Delta do not provide a satisfactory solution then their next port of call is to contact the local licensing authority. Now Delta are keen to root out any overchargers for obvious reasons. If their driver is judged to have charged the correct fare then a full explanation is provided over the phone to the customer there and then. If the driver is judged to have overcharged then Delta ensure that the driver immediately refund the FULL fare, not just the amount overcharged. The result is that very few complaints filter past Delta's complaints procedure to Sefton's licensing wing.

Compare this with the service provided for our drivers. When falling foul of bus lane regulations, displaying a phone number on their door, taking a so-called cross-border hiring or having a Christmas tree decoration illuminated in their windscreen, their first port of call is their operator. If operators like Delta can satisfy drivers that their actions or wrong and should be changed (such as illegal lights in their windscreen) or agree that drivers are correct and secure on their behalf changes in legislation (such as permitting door advertisements or access to local bus lanes) then drivers seem less inclined to seek recourse through a union.

The PH vehicles I refer to as forming 72% of Merseyside's combined taxi fleet are by no means a united force. First of all they are divided by 5 local authorities. Secondly each authority is divided into dozens of competing operators. Thirdly each operator is divided up into many drivers with differing opinions. Common ground is hard to come by, but there is representation of sorts.

On the Wirral there are PH driver unions, I think represented by the T&G, who I believe secured access to Bus Lanes through political means. Liverpool is 100% focused on Hackney Carriages so it doesn't matter who represents PH, it's wasted breath. Sefton is 50/50 towards HC and PH so business has found a commercial balance of 85/15 in favour of PH in keeping with the demand. Interestingly you can divide Sefton itself into 2 portions. North Sefton's political PH creatures are the driver associations but South Sefton's political PH creatures are the operators. In 1993 these South Sefton operators secured in a Liverpool stated case the right for PH vehicles to pick up pre-bookings beyond their local authority boundary provided driver, car and operator were licensed by the same authority. OK the operators benefited from an increased customer base but so did their drivers.

So in answer to both of your questions there is no unified representation for the many thousands of PH drivers but the various parties who do represent have precipitated what is to all intents and purposes a very taxi focused environment.

_________________
Don't knock it, 'til you try it....

HEAR HEAR! In Sefton the HC trade reps supported PH in bus lanes and PH access was granted. In the Wirral the Police objected, HC reps stayed neutral and PH access was granted. In Liverpool the HC reps objected but traffic services refused to be drawn into the age old HC/PH fisticuffs. They sought guidance from the Local Transport Plan and PH access was granted. I am astonished that despite Greater Manchester's inclusion of PH in the local transport plan their ten authorities prohibit access to over 10,000 PH vehicles yet permit access to their 1,750 ish HC vehicles. The question is, who's not representing their 10,000 PH drivers?

_________________
Don't knock it, 'til you try it....

It would appear no-one with any balls or brains.

_________________
IDFIMH