Taxi Driver Online

Well actually I was calling for increased regulation of the HC trade in Gateshead.

But TDO reminded me of that so it doesn't really count.

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.

Thank you .......... that expalins that then.

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.

Perhaps Mr Bolton has a valid point to make? Considering the fact that the majority of Taxi proprietors in restricted areas like to distance themselves from the private hire trade by letting it be known that the two trades are infinitely different? Why then in your opinion should private hire drivers pay to subsidise a council's restrictive policy, which has no benefit to private hire drivers whatsoever but every benefit to hackney carriage proprietors?

Regards

JD

Is this a recent enquiry?


Regards

JD

If you could expand a little, are you saying that the Sefton hackney carriage trade first proposed this two-pound levy? Or did the private hire representatives on behalf of their members magnanimously offer to contribute to the council policy of restricting licenses?

Regards

JD

The chances of that are pretty slim.



And the chances of that are even slimmer.



Now you are reaching out into the world of Fairy Tales.

Since when have you known Private Hire drivers to volunteer to finance a hackney carriage survey?

Keep on dreaming Trevor.

JD

I suppose the fact that its a licensing department.

Are we going down the road of splitting budgets into individual items?

Man hours working on the HC's and man hours working on the PH's?

I thought the cost of licensing were to reflect the cost of the licensing regime.

CC

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

The whole point to my question is whether or not Private hire drivers "should pay a special levy" for a policy that has no bearing on how they operate? How a licensing authority utilises its budget is neither here nor there.

It would appear the facts in this case revolve around a special levy on Private hire drivers, which was proposed and supported by the hackney carriage trade? The DfT has already stated that drivers should not pay for surveys and I've always been of the opinion that it is debatable if such action would ever stand up in a court of law?

My point and this thread, is not about licensing departments paying for surveys, its about a special two pound levy being placed on Private hire drivers, to help pay for a council policy of retaining numbers control. A survey serves only one purpose and that is to stop applicants from obtaining a proprietor license, unmet demand surveys have nothing whatsoever to do with advancing a public service or the administration of licensing functions. If it did then every council in the country would be undertaking surveys.

The legislation says it all because it "presupposes" that a council decision to retain restrictions can only be upheld if they are in possession of evidence that there is no unmet demand. Therefore in ninety nine cases out of a hundred a council has already made a decision to retain a policy of quantity control and the survey is just a means to uphold that policy in the light of legal action. You know that as well as everyone else?

I might ask you this, of the 98 councils who currently restrict numbers how many of them have placed a special levy on private hire drivers in order to pay for a survey?

Can you see the difference?

Regards

JD

The problem with the simplistic analysis employed by the ombudsman is that it treats the trade as one homogenous mass, rather than the competing interests that it in fact consists of.

Of course, that's generally the case with the taxi trade when the views of vehicle proprietors are deemed to represent everyone, but in this case it's the same with the PH side - the operators are deemed to represent the whole trade, while of course their views may be the antithesis of many in the trade, particularly in this case where PH drivers would like a HC plate. But of course like the taxi props, the PH ops have a vested interest in preventing this and keeping drivers in their place.

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

In this particular instance the Ombudsman was probably not the best route to take to resolve this matter.

I'll get the minutes and have a look at exactly what transpired and see if there is a way to reverse this decision.

Regards

JD

I dont think the DfT stated it in that type of context JD, I think they meant more a case of financing and paying for it directly themselves.

Manchester has regular surveys, how do they organise funding?

If anything Sefton seems to be more transparent than a lot of places in relation to fees and where the money goes.

To say private hire dont benefit from surveys is a moot point and I would suggest blinkered.

regards

CC

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

I addressed this point last week and again a couple of hours ago, so why not unblinker yourself and address the points I made rather than ignoring them and repeating a point which might merely suit your own agenda?

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

DfT financing of surveys.

It is not good practice for surveys to be paid for by the local taxi trade (except through general revenues from licence fees). To do so can call in question the impartiality and objectivity of the survey process.



It comes out of the licensing budget but it doesn't levy a special charge on Private hire drivers.



How do they benefit?

If I was a private hire driver I think I would derive more financial benefit from not paying for a survey. What benefit does a private driver derive from paying for a survey?

A council who wants to restrict licenses such as Sefton has no option but to have a survey all they want to do is soften the financial blow by putting part of it on the private hire trade.

Prior to 1976 there were no licensed private hire drivers so there is a strong case for having separate licensing regimes which in effect we have already in restricted authorities.

Regards

JD

and then later in the morning you will stop a volcano from erupting, and stop a schoolbus full of kids from falling over the ledge the bus is balancing on.





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.

It appears to me that Sefton is clear on what funding is used for what purpose.

If they had just increased all fee's by £2 and then not said anything about what that £2 was for we wouldn't be having this debate.

Just an observation.

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.