Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Thu Jul 04, 2024 7:31 am

Board index » General » Licensing and legal

All times are UTC [ DST ]



Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 2 of 8
  [ 110 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
toots
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 6:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:22 pm
Posts: 14150
Location: Wirral
skippy41 wrote:
toots wrote:
skippy41 wrote:
Quote:
But the council argued its fleet was wheelchair accessible and claimed any problems were caused by driver error.


HTF do you get a square peg into a round hole???/ :wink:


You bend over Skip and I'll show you :shock: :wink:


Now now toots how would you like a ban on being able to buy battery's :lol: :lol: :wink:


Wouldn't bother me I'm a born again :wink: Anyway I'll bring the square peg with me next week and we'll see if it can fit a round hole :D

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 7:07 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 54423
Location: 1066 Country
MR T wrote:
oh well, after reading the Echo's report it would seem it has to go back to committee.. it does not mean the E7 will be passed..... it just means they have to reconsider....

Judicial Review cannot change a licensing policy in itself, just tell a council where they are wrong, and advise on the changes required.

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 7:08 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 54423
Location: 1066 Country
skippy41 wrote:
What Liverpool could defy the high court, and then face prosecution and massive fines :?: :wink: :wink:

They will change their policy, have no doubt about it. :wink:

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
Brummie Cabbie
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 9:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:11 pm
Posts: 8119
Location: A Villa in Aston NO MORE!
Thank you Skippy41 & JDBubbles for the detailed information that you both provided & that the ultra-hard-working Mr T was unable to provide due to the massive work load that he suffers daily.

Mr T; time for a holiday matey!!

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.
Top
 Profile  
 
Brummie Cabbie
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 9:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:11 pm
Posts: 8119
Location: A Villa in Aston NO MORE!
JDBubbles wrote:
Mrs Lunt, of West Derby, said: “After two years of fighting, it finally feels like we are getting somewhere.

“But it will not feel like we have won until the council licenses these vehicles and I see them on the street.

“This is a landmark case under the Disability Discrimination Act and I am very proud to be a part of it."

And so you should be proud of what you have acheived, Mrs Lunt.

Well done, lady!!

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.
Top
 Profile  
 
Darren63
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 9:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:36 am
Posts: 550
Location: Plymouth
skippy41 wrote:
This was a court case that a disability group brought against Liverpool council.
They rightly claimed that wheelchair users could not travel in a comfortable environment due to the lack of space in the LTI cabs and that a full sized WC could not fit.
Liverpool's defence was that the E7 and its equivalents did not meet the COF regarding the out dated turning circle requirement :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :D :D :D
There is a link to the case on here somewhere.

Now that Liverpool have lost this case GBC will be happy he can now get one :D


What makes me laugh is that the TX has the widest door opening, even several inches more than the euros. So although the innards on a euro is more you cant fit the friggin chair through the door hole. :lol: :lol:
Top
 Profile  
 
skippy41
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 4:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:44 pm
Posts: 10591
Location: Scotland
A council spokesman said: “We have just received this decision and will need time to consider its implications in full with our legal team.”
Quote:

Don't take long in trying to work it out you still have the court costs to pay, i would make the idiot who refused the E7 in the first place pay :D :D


Top
 Profile  
 
Nigel
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:05 am 
There's no need for the passenger to travel sideways, there's enough room in a TX for the passenger to be seated the right way and belted in, it sounds to me like the drivers can't be arsed to move them round and secure them in the right way.
Top
  
 
Brummie Cabbie
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:11 pm
Posts: 8119
Location: A Villa in Aston NO MORE!
Nigel wrote:
There's no need for the passenger to travel sideways, there's enough room in a TX for the passenger to be seated the right way and belted in, it sounds to me like the drivers can't be arsed to move them round and secure them in the right way.

IMO, this should be a clause / paragraph in the Hackney Bye-laws.

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.
Top
 Profile  
 
Sussex
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:42 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 54423
Location: 1066 Country
Darren63 wrote:
What makes me laugh is that the TX has the widest door opening, even several inches more than the euros.

Is that the same for the new shape? :?

_________________
IDFIMH
Top
 Profile  
 
MR T
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 11:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8522
Brummie Cabbie wrote:
Thank you Skippy41 & JDBubbles for the detailed information that you both provided & that the ultra-hard-working Mr T was unable to provide due to the massive work load that he suffers daily.

Mr T; time for a holiday matey!!
To be honest the E7 And Liverpool court case has no interest for me .. But I did point you in the right direction... I had every confidence that somebody would put the full story up.
A friend of mine got married this weekend( for the third time) so the drinking started on Friday and finished this afternoon..... priorities.... :wink:

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!
Top
 Profile  
 
MR T
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 11:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8522
Brummie Cabbie wrote:
Nigel wrote:
There's no need for the passenger to travel sideways, there's enough room in a TX for the passenger to be seated the right way and belted in, it sounds to me like the drivers can't be arsed to move them round and secure them in the right way.

IMO, this should be a clause / paragraph in the Hackney Bye-laws.

As your Fully aware the DDA Act is at this moment being revisited by the Department for Transport, meetings have taken place across the country with members of the trade, on the 9th September the DFT will be holding a meeting with the combined members of the group known as the meeting of minds, there are many issues to be discussed... I'm sure this is one of them. :roll:

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!
Top
 Profile  
 
tx_op
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 5:47 pm
Posts: 595
Location: Lower Highlands
Why does the British Taxi Industry always seem to be at loggerheads with LA's and Courts ? Seems to me our fellow European brothers don't take the same flack on such issues :?
Top
 Profile  
 
skippy41
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:44 pm
Posts: 10591
Location: Scotland
Highlander wrote:
Why does the British Taxi Industry always seem to be at loggerheads with LA's and Courts ? Seems to me our fellow European brothers don't take the same flack on such issues :?


Perhaps if we could find out what the rest of Europe's licencing requirements are we may have some ammunition to fight then and get it all the none essential daft rules removed
Top
 Profile  
 
MR T
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8522
Highlander wrote:
Why does the British Taxi Industry always seem to be at loggerheads with LA's and Courts ? Seems to me our fellow European brothers don't take the same flack on such issues :?


In my opinion, it's probably because in the past associations and unions have spent more time fighting each other........ hopefully that has now changed.........

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 2 of 8
  [ 110 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

Board index » General » Licensing and legal

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 40 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group