Taxi Driver Online

As we ex[ected CEC have refuse my licence.

Cllr Wigglesworth intimated that the Jacobs' interim survey is incomplete, flawed because it is only relevant to the stances observed in it. This was a clearly orchestrated manouevre. He tried to get the RC to agree that a number of licence s should be added. I believe the figure of 100 was mentioned. No need to guess why this figure was arrived at. Expedient or not.. A recommendation along these lines is expected to made to the Council Executive who are responsible for setting policy. That very policy used to deny here.

Councillor Walker tripped over himself to say that Jacobs' interim survey was flawed. Seems like Inch is working him from the back too.

Susan Clark advised the Committee that it was perfectly reaonable for the Council, when an application is lodged, to seek the information needed to consider that application. In short, according the Council's position, interim or monthly surveys are no longer required. Just wait and when an application is made, trot out and get the negative results needed to deny.

Does anyone want to venture what a Sheriff will make of this ruse. They were advised about Coyle. The denied despite it.

We got what we want. We await the Councils recommendation to the executive with interest. We await confirmation of the refusal and the grounds on which it ius made.

Our straetgy is working.
meanwhile, the forelock tuggers gave another amazing display of servitude. Brown tongues in evidence. I truly hope that they believe they were handed a victory today. It would demonstrate how far out of this particular loop they are.



PS Many thanks to JD for his sterling efforts. Between us, we can look forward eagerly to the appeal. Thanks again.

congratulations on getting your objective it is about time they were brought to book.

Yeah, we now have a pattern.

Twice the council has trotted in surveys, twice they've had a negative, twice councillors have stated the survey was flawed, twice they've still used those flawed survey to deny licences.

So, how did they exercise their discretion reasonably by basing their decision on unsound material fact? And, haven't they erred in Law by doing so thereby acting contrary to natural justice?

WOW!!! 4 grounds of appeal in one act, and we haven't ever begun yet.

good, get moving with the appeal and i maybe get a plate before i retire.

Perhaps the councillors decided that it would be best to stall things until after the elections in May, which is the effect of yesterday's refusal.

Better perhaps to store things up rather than risk a stink before polling day, particularly since some of the councillors presumably won't be returned or won't be back on the licensing committee or are perhaps retiring with their five figure 'redundancy' payment.

Yea and ill have a baked tattie shop on the moon before you ever get a free plate ha ha

90 minutes litigating for something you then say is "objective acheived"
that dont make sense does it ?

from what i saw, the performance resembled a blustering old ejit eventually resorting to personal insults was closer to the mark

Your a bit quieter these days Taylor, all those court costs for what? ..

always "another day" "next month", "after the elections"...

your wife must be delighted with your expensive hobby

baked tattie anyone ?

What a tit you are holm390

Haven't you noticed the only place we get to see you guys is on a taxi forum. So much for fighting for your precious trade...christ there is no one out there giving us opposition.

You lot live in a fantasy World holm390

"from what i saw" Muppet

Where were was all the opposition

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

In light of the appeal courts reaction to the way Edinburgh council conducts its business I wouldn't be so hasty to mock the events of last week.

It has already been established that the law thinks and acts on a vastly different plane to that of Edinburgh council. The council recently found out to their cost that in the end there is only one winner, therefore I suppose Edinburgh Council won't be feeling too comfortable going to court armed only with an extremely limited Taxi rank observation? Especially when the court realises it is the only observation made in a period of two years.

The added addition of a very limited questionnaire of which at least three of the 13 respondents have a vested interest in retaining the status quo won't do them much good.

I'm afraid the writing is on the wall for Edinburgh council and I don't have to paint you a picture of what will immediately happen once they have lost.

So if I were you, I would be very concerned indeed if Jim Taylor Goes ahead with his appeal.

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.