Taxi Driver Online

That sounds like a bit of spin again Cap.

Presumably by undersupply they mean unmet demand, in which case the LA is legally obliged to issue new licenses, so the NTA's concern isn't really relevant and portraying this as the NTA doing the public a favour doesn't really wash.

It sounds a bit like the T&G's managed growth spiel, which again normally only meant an LA issuing the smallest number of plates that it could get away with, and which the T&G couldn't influence anyway.

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

On what basis are councils making decisions locally, they are avoiding making decisions and forming policies by allowing a free for all.

I agree with everything contained within the statement.

B. Lucky

So they should be, I was talking to one of our drivers yesterday who told me his earnings up to 31/12/04 were £12,145 not bad is it £233 per week for 65 hours work. The year before he took £19,500, it's plain to see Dreg is killing the trade.

So would you say the public are being better served Nigel? Less earnings in this instance equals a 62% drop in earnings. Would that suggest the public is better served by at least the same percentage?

If they are better served by that same percentage would it be right to say that your local council got it right as far as a better public service goes?

If the public does not get a better service, then how is that the Cabbies in Mansfield are waiting longer for jobs now than they were before de restriction?

One final point, I have always acknowledged the possible financial difficulties surrounding de restriction but the hours you say this driver worked and the money he earned equates to £3.58 per hour. I was wondering if he would not be better served doing something else, or as one well known member of this forum once said "does he think the council owes him a living".

Best wishes

JD

Percentage should be 37.7% not 62%

Best wishes

JD

No on that one

Because we have 45 more vehicles on the rank fighting for work.

No one owes him a living but they owe him a decent standard of living, £3.58 per hour is not a decent standard of living in my eyes.

We the drivers are on about the loss of trade since the price increase not how the public are served, the public are well served in our area, we have nearly 90 HC and 200 PH plus around 30 HC that work in Mansfield but are licensed in other districts, thats a total of 1 car per 320 persons in our area thats taking in all the HC and PH.

So do you think the loss of earnings is more down to the increae in fares, or a combination of both fares and de-restriction?

Best wishes

JD

T&G said;
Neglect of core (private hire) customer previously served by P.H. drivers.

T&G said;
In the longer term, "independent" drivers move onto company circuits or go out of business.

_________________
IDFIMH

Exactly, if you can't earn out of this trade, then WTF is anyone doing in it.

_________________
IDFIMH

Funny enough Sussex, that well known member said it to you.

lol how ironic.

Best wishes

JD

3 things John

1. The Increase in fares

2. De limitation

3. Lack of customers

I think the third reason is a bye-product of numbers one and two. So in effect you are saying the first two elements equate to the third element.

I know you weren't happy about the recent fare increase but sometime before that you mentioned your takings were down considerably because of de restriction and at the time I said I sympathised with your predicament.

So you have a situation in Mansfield where the incumbent Taxi drivers are obviously feeling the financial effects of de restriction and their plight is further compounded by the recent fare increase and in turn it is these two elements which have alienated customers from riding in cabs?

Would that be about right?

So if the public aren't riding in cabs what are they riding in?

Best wishes

JD

You are right on that score.

TDO

The government issued guidance to Local Authorities, this is the guidance to which is referred.

I think we can agree to disagree.


With regards to your concerns regarding a contradiction

I reaffirm my initial response, there is no contradiction, the first sentence is a statement, the NTAs concern, and the NTAs view. This isnt the same as stating what you stated.

You dont seem to see the main jist of the NTA statement. The NTA are concerned by the wave of delimitation and restriction without the proper consultation with stakeholders and groups. I think its a fair enough statement, covering both the LAs that choose to limit without evidence and delimit without evidence.

I am agreeing with Mr Angel on this one.

regards

Captain Cab

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

Well there's a surprise

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