Taxi Driver Online

I've always favoured a one-tier system, but I think that's unlikely with the DDA in the offing - you can't have a one-tier system based on accessible vehicles.

It would be possible to have a mixed fleet based with appropriate incentives to run a WAV (eg different age rules for WAVs and saloons), but I suspect the authorities will go for the more straightforward option - ie an all WAV taxi fleet and a saloon PH fleet to maintain consumer choice.

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

For what it's worth, I would have a stiff topo test, a driving test and a test on the relevant rules as a minimum for getting a badge.

For saloons, since it's so easy to get finance these days I would be tempted to specify brand new cars only, and run for four years max, say. A few years ago I thought five years max, but certainly in my areas there are part-time cars that are just a handful of years old, so five years is not much of a detterent these days.

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

You really have not thought this through, as usual.

If all LA's had an arbitrary policy of not licensing any vehicles over seven years old, as you suggest, a license holder who paid £32,000 for a TX11 in 2005, would be paying £170 a week until 2010, at which stage his cab would have a two year life until 2012, when it would become worthless. Even if he decided to trade it in for new, the depreciation would be so dramatic that it would not be viable.
Many years ago, I bought a second hand Metrocab with a GG (Glasgow)registration. It had been worked into the ground over three years and sold on. Had it been properly maintained it would have been worth twice as much as I paid for it. Age limits are meaningless. What is important is good maintainance, and a reasonably strict testing regime.
With age limits, owner/drivers will never get off the finance treadmill, and with a free for all de-limiting would be crazy to get on it.

So. 100 cabs 200 drivers. de-limit, and there are 200 cabs, 200 drivers.

And everyone's takings remain the same?

How so?

If the number of passengers remain static, and their spend remains static, profits must fall, because operator costs have doubled, with twice as many cars in town. where a town was served by 100 cabs costing, say, £10K each, the total would be £1,000,000. double the number of cabs, and the vehicle costs also double. (to £2,000,000) add on the insurance and other ancillary costs, (fuel used would remain the same) and everyone is losing money, are the not?

I'm not an economist, as you may have noticed, but the phrase "diminishing return" springs to mind.

There was I time when I agreed with that, but not no more.

If all drivers took care of their motors then it shouldn't matter, apart from the fumes they give off. But we have too many people in the trade that don't give a dam.

And why should they? The customer getting into the shed is going to pay the same rate as the customer getting into the £32,000 motor.

Now in an ideal world the LOs would conduct regular check ups between taxi tests, but we know that doesn't happen. And because we know, the bad ones also know, and it's them that the blame for age limits should rest with.

_________________
IDFIMH

If that's the case, then only the stupid will buy and run their own vehicles.

But I suspect many of the new plate-holders would have been paying up to £200/250 a week rent. So over a three year period they would be about £10,000 better off.

Of course existing plate-holders will be worse off. But there is nothing stopping them going into partnership with another licensed driver.

_________________
IDFIMH

So what would you do with all the seven year old, perfectly servicable Cabs? That are worthless, because nobody will license them?

I agree it's not ideal, but do we want a better trade or one stuck in the past?

We could also do away with driver's standards.

_________________
IDFIMH

If you want a case in point, where newer does not mean better, look at the buses in London. The 50 year old, but servicable Routemaster scrapped in favour of the new, highly flammable bendybus. QED.

Yes, we noticed Jimbo.

I can't see why takings don't remain the same?

In your orginal post you then mentioned costs, and thus alluded to profit, but that doesn't affect takings, surely?[/b]

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

A reasonable point, but no one's saying that everyone would be running their own taxis, the numbers are just illustrative to demonstrate that the bare number of taxis exaggerates the increase in supply.

But if drivers are less profitable then they'll clearly they may exercise the option of driving for someone else, it's all about choice, which is after all the engine of the market that you allude to - Adam Smith's 'invisible hand'.

But profit isn't everything - some guys might just like to run their own motor, for whatever reason. When I first started on multi-driver vehicle things like changeovers, cleaning the car and fuelling up etc always got on my tits - I was usually the one being made a monkey of.

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

Meet TDO

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

Yeah. But sat nav makes topo last year's control mechanism.

Yes, well at least if the LA allows it.

Again it often seems to come down to the owners versus the rest - the owners like the idea of sat nav because it can be used to justify dumping topo tests, thus more drivers, whereas clearly others like the idea of a topo.

But I hope mr GBC doesn't see your statement above, hope he hasn't got a weak heart

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