Taxi Driver Online

Ah, so in fact it looks like Wolves DID take part in the GMP operation (and this lends support to the supposition that it all happened on the one night), and they've quote tweeted the GMP Traffic tweet, adding this:


And Taxi Point has done a separate piece on it

Which is very similar in style to the Manchester-only piece, in terms of padding and stating the obvious for the average reader of Taxi Point, most obviously:

- the bit about possible action with regard to the suspensions etc, and now the display of badges, but mere speculation about what that possible action might be is repeated in both pieces;

- the stuff about it all being part of 'wider efforts' to ensure passenger safety and compliance, blah, blah;

- padding out the stuff about wearing badges being a 'legal requirement';

- this about the cross-border stuff for the three millionth time: "The findings again places out-of-area working under scrutiny..."

- and, of course, for a bit of balance a brief summary of the official Wolverhampton Council PR/boilerplate at the end.

Wolverhampton-licensed private hire drivers face action after more than a THIRD found not wearing their badges during cross-border checks

City of Wolverhampton Council has confirmed enforcement action will follow after dozens of Wolverhampton-licensed private hire drivers were found non-compliant during a late-night taxi operation.

Council compliance officers took part in a joint operation alongside police and partner agencies, during which 83 Wolverhampton Council licensed private hire vehicles operating away from their home authority were checked. The operation identified 33 drivers who were not wearing or correctly displaying their driver badges.

WV Public Protection said badge display is a legal requirement when working as a licensed private hire driver. Officers confirmed that further action will follow against those found in breach, although the council has not yet detailed whether this will involve warnings, penalty points, suspensions or licence reviews.

The findings again places out-of-area working under scrutiny, particularly given the volume of its licensed drivers operating across the West Midlands and in major city centres such as Manchester. Wolverhampton is one of the largest private hire licensing authorities in the country by driver numbers, where only a fraction on licensees actually work the region they are licensed.

Council officers checked 83 Wolverhampton-licensed PHVs during a joint enforcement operation, with 33 drivers found in breach of badge display rules.

The findings where part of a wider Greater Manchester Police enforcement operation in Manchester city centre, stopping and checking more than 174 licensed vehicles in a single evening.

In total the operation resulted in one arrest, 24 licensing suspensions, five vehicle defect notices and two immediate prohibitions.

Failure to display a driver badge is often cited by regulators as a passenger safety concern, as badges are intended to aid identification and allow members of the public and enforcement officers to quickly verify licensing status.

The council said the checks formed part of wider efforts to ensure passenger safety and compliance with licence conditions, particularly during night-time economy hours when demand for private hire vehicles is highest.

Wolverhampton Council has previously defended its licensing standards, arguing that enforcement action is taken where breaches are identified, including against drivers operating outside the authority’s boundary under cross-border rules.

So, again, it's all harmless and informative enough, but it's largely just doing the Wolverhampton PR stuff for them - the tweets put out on the official council feed gain very little traction, and I'd guess the Taxi Point stuff gets far more readers, and to that extent helps feed the official Wolverhampton PR narrative.

Why not question, for example, why the Wolverhampton Council tweets almost NEVER mention any suspensions, and only mention that kind of stuff when it's a clean bill of health - 'all our vehicles found compliant', or similar

I mean, GMP Traffic said 174 taxis in checked, "resulting in 1 arrest, 24 licensing suspensions, 5 vehicle defects and 2 prohibitions."

So if almost half the cars checked were Wolves-plated, surely some of them must have been taken off the road, or were one of the defective cars, or maybe even the arrest?

And another odd thing is that when Wolves do post and official tweet about ops, they seem to now regularly mention drivers not wearing badges, which they didn't mention at all until relatively recently.

Which all seems a bit odd, both in terms of zero mention of vehicle issues, but apparently lots of naughty drivers not wearing badges. Which doesn't ring true, somehow, both in terms of the lack of likelihood of all vehicles being compliant while drivers not, and also in terms of why the council highlights one but not the other

To be fair, I put the Taxi Point article through yet another AI detector tool, and it came up just '20% AI detected', and the site also provides an analysis narrative


That word 'polish' towards the end there is maybe why there's a bit of a sniff about Taxi Point's output, at least from my perspective - it's all a bit overly-polished, and a bit too neat and tidy.

And there are certain structures, rhythms and repetitions about it all that suggests to me that there's a bit too much AI input, or similar.

Of course, grammar checkers and the like are nothing new, so there might just be a bit of that, or whatever

Those are the two grammar/spelling errors found by the AI detector tool. Which can't say I noticed, but I only quickly skimmed the whole piece.

But that's another thing that looks a bit too polished on Taxi Point - I never really notice any spelling/grammatical errors at all, while it's often easy enough to find several in even a shortish mainstream media piece on the trade

The fact that so many drivers weren't wearing their badges is evidence that they think, when working away from their licensing area, they can get away with not having to worry about their licensing requirements.

And they are usually right in 99% of cases.

_________________
IDFIMH

locally 90% of locally licensed drivers don't wear their badges (they are in the vehicle somewhere) so Sussex are you saying down Brighton way they are all goody two shoes ?

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Most certainly not, but officials monitor licensing requirements on a daily basis, not via the once-in-a-blue-moon checks that most Wolverhampton drivers receive.

_________________
IDFIMH

The Fife spotchecks just over a year ago in the Glenrothes zone revealed that 9 out of 13 drivers checked didn't have their badge on display (they don't even have to wear it).

You know, that's the Fife zone where apparently the annual vehice inspections demonstrate that the vehicles are almost beyond reproach

Echoes of Wolverhampton in that - slapdash drivers worth highlighting, particularly when it comes to the small beer stuff like badges. But vehicles barely worth even mentioning

Not limited to wolverhampton; in fact based on what we read on here I would say wolverhampton are probably in top 10 proactive licensing districts.

I would say Brighton is exceptional if badge checking goes on

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector