| Taxi Driver Online http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| DfT publish their latest 'justifications. http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2642 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Alex [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 2:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | DfT publish their latest 'justifications. |
Still not as up-to-date as JD's list, or as accurate, but it's a start. http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/d ... 41411.hcsp Alex |
|
| Author: | JD [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: DfT publish their latest 'justifications. |
Alex wrote: Still not as up-to-date as JD's list, or as accurate, but it's a start.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/d ... 41411.hcsp Alex The actual figure is 61 have voted to retain restrictions and 44 have yet to decide on policy and 45 have voted to remove restrictions. I notice they say they wrote to 151 councils while I have 150 listed, i'll ask them who is the odd man out? Regards JD |
|
| Author: | JD [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 4:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: DfT publish their latest 'justifications. |
Alex wrote: Still not as up-to-date as JD's list, or as accurate, but it's a start.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/d ... 41411.hcsp Alex The actual figures are 61 have so far voted to retain quantity control 44 have yet to decide on policy and 45 have voted to remove restrictions. I notice the DfT say they wrote to 151 councils while I have 150 listed, i'll ask them who is the odd man out to determine their status? They may have written to an authority that was already unrestricted but we shall see? I might add, that at least two authorities on the list are just waiting for the full council to rubber stamp the committee decision to retain quantity controls. When that happens the number of restricted authorities will rise to 63. The latest state of play can be downloaded here. http://taxi-driver.co.uk/quotalas.pdf Regards JD |
|
| Author: | JD [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 5:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The missing authority is south somerset but why did they write to them? The DfT stats of March 2004 have them down as being unrestricted. If you notice it is added on with the six authorities that re introduced limits. The DfT has added the six plus South Somerset at the end of the list after York. South Somerset must have re introduced numbers after the DFT stats were compiled in 2004 and then decided to delimit again in the space of a few months. I think this needs looking into. It makes no difference to the overal number of 238 councils that retain numbers but it would be interesting to see what South Somerset has to say? Regards JD |
|
| Author: | William Maitland [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 5:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
A timely publication. |
|
| Author: | JD [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 6:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
William Maitland wrote: A timely publication.
Which is a timely publication? Regards JD |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 6:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
William Maitland wrote: A timely publication.
The DfT are just saying what councils have sent them. I'm very much looking forward to seeing what the DfT's say about these so-called justifications. As well as, of course, what the new top man at OFT says. 
|
|
| Author: | JD [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 6:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sussex wrote: William Maitland wrote: A timely publication. The DfT are just saying what councils have sent them. I'm very much looking forward to seeing what the DfT's say about these so-called justifications. As well as, of course, what the new top man at OFT says. We have a few classic responses from councils of our don't we? The thing about the DfT is that they don't ask the right questions. Regards JD |
|
| Author: | 187ums [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 6:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
what you mean is they dont ask the questions that would suit your purpose! |
|
| Author: | JD [ Tue Oct 04, 2005 7:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
187ums wrote: what you mean is they dont ask the questions that would suit your purpose!
What questions would they be? |
|
| Author: | JD [ Wed Oct 05, 2005 3:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Alex wrote: Still not as up-to-date as JD's list, or as accurate, but it's a start.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/d ... 41411.hcsp Alex I got to the bottom of South Somerset. It appears the DfT didn't even know they existed until 2003. It all stems from the Yeovil connection. Yeovil is restricted but the funny part is that South Somerset inherited 7 zones when the boundaries changed and they didn't know they had taken them over, which meant they didn't adopt the correct legislation. It's an amazing story. They don't have taxi meters down there either, I wonder if they are the only authority in the country that doesn't have them? Anyway the Zones have been sorted out and they are being removed hopefully within the next few days. Both Durham and Wolverhampton are as I stated so the DfT have got it wrong yet again. It really [edited by admin] me off when they don't get it right. Regards JD |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
JD wrote: I got to the bottom of South Somerset. It appears the DfT didn't even know they existed until 2003.
|
|
| Author: | TDO [ Wed Oct 05, 2005 7:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
JD wrote: They don't have taxi meters down there either, I wonder if they are the only authority in the country that doesn't have them?
I don't think Andy7 in deepest Essex has them either. |
|
| Author: | JD [ Wed Oct 05, 2005 7:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
TDO wrote: JD wrote: They don't have taxi meters down there either, I wonder if they are the only authority in the country that doesn't have them? I don't think Andy7 in deepest Essex has them either. Thats interesting anyone else? Regards |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Wed Oct 05, 2005 7:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
JD wrote: Regards
Wealden have never had them, and never will. Lewes didn't have them up until about 5 years ago. I also think that two or three of the Norfolk/Suffolk yokel areas don't have them. 
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|