Taxi Driver Online
http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

section 65 mp act 1976.
http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=15964		 Page 1 of 5
Author:  jimbo [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 5:48 pm ]
Post subject:  section 65 mp act 1976.
Section 65 Fixing of fares for Hackney Carriages, states that, " (1) A district council may fix the rates or fares within the district.."

with the operative word being "FIXED" where does this leave discretion for a driver to discount?

I can't find any mention in the act of the metered fare being the MAXIMUM that can be demanded.
Author:  captain cab [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: section 65 mp act 1976.
jimbo wrote:
Section 65 Fixing of fares for Hackney Carriages, states that, " (1) A district council may fix the rates or fares within the district.."

with the operative word being "FIXED" where does this leave discretion for a driver to discount?

I can't find any mention in the act of the metered fare being the MAXIMUM that can be demanded.


It's a decent point and one that even Mr Button doesnt seem to answer properly in his book.

There seems to be many things to counter a driver charging more than the metered fare in the various acts, but very little suggesting he cannot charge less.....save for your point regarding section 65.

section 54 of the 1847 act concerns agreements as to fares, however, bearing in mind these usually concern fares across district borders where the fare is open to negotiation either upwards or downwards, that doesn't seem to help too much.

Good point for debate!

CC
Author:  Brummie Cabbie [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: section 65 mp act 1976.
jimbo wrote:
Section 65 Fixing of fares for Hackney Carriages, states that, " (1) A district council may fix the rates or fares within the district.."

with the operative word being "FIXED" where does this leave discretion for a driver to discount?

I can't find any mention in the act of the metered fare being the MAXIMUM that can be demanded.

The idea that the Table of Fares is a maximum is an OFT barmyism!!

Some time ago in the 1950's or 1960's there was a case stated, known as the Newark-on-Trent case, where a driver was prosecuted & also lost on appeal for charging less than the metered fare.

That, to my knowledge has never been overturned!!

I would love to get my hands on the written judgment again, but alas I have searched, but have not found!!
Author:  captain cab [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:54 pm ]
Post subject: 
From the NALEO Book;

FIXED TARIFF

In the case of SPARKS v NEWARK & SHERWOOD DC (QBD Feb 1986), it was held that the tariff set by the district, under section 65, was fixed and where this is not qualified by such words as 'a maximum' was therefore a fixed fare and it was not proper to charge less than the tariff, however it is suggested that a discrict may set a tariff which is 'a maximum table of fares' when it would be left to drivers to charge less than the tariff.

CC
Author:  Brummie Cabbie [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:10 pm ]
Post subject: 
captain cab wrote:
From the NALEO Book;

FIXED TARIFF

In the case of SPARKS v NEWARK & SHERWOOD DC (QBD Feb 1986), it was held that the tariff set by the district, under section 65, was fixed and where this is not qualified by such words as 'a maximum' was therefore a fixed fare and it was not proper to charge less than the tariff, however it is suggested that a discrict may set a tariff which is 'a maximum table of fares' when it would be left to drivers to charge less than the tariff.

CC

That's the one!!

I remember now!

But I thought it was much older than that!!

Sparks; what a name!!

Anyone have the FULL judgment?
Author:  captain cab [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:13 pm ]
Post subject: 
Brummie Cabbie wrote:
captain cab wrote:
From the NALEO Book;

FIXED TARIFF

In the case of SPARKS v NEWARK & SHERWOOD DC (QBD Feb 1986), it was held that the tariff set by the district, under section 65, was fixed and where this is not qualified by such words as 'a maximum' was therefore a fixed fare and it was not proper to charge less than the tariff, however it is suggested that a discrict may set a tariff which is 'a maximum table of fares' when it would be left to drivers to charge less than the tariff.

CC

That's the one!!

I remember now!

But I thought it was much older than that!!

Sparks; what a name!!

Anyone have the FULL judgment?


1986.......I think I have some old NFTA executive minutes, but I'm not certain they'd mention this court case, and I doubt I'd have a transcript.

I could ask the NTA solicitor, he's bound to have court yearbooks if they do such a thing?

Although, I'd be surprised if Bryan didnt have a copy.

CC
Author:  Brummie Cabbie [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:21 pm ]
Post subject: 
captain cab wrote:
Brummie Cabbie wrote:
captain cab wrote:
From the NALEO Book;

FIXED TARIFF

In the case of SPARKS v NEWARK & SHERWOOD DC (QBD Feb 1986), it was held that the tariff set by the district, under section 65, was fixed and where this is not qualified by such words as 'a maximum' was therefore a fixed fare and it was not proper to charge less than the tariff, however it is suggested that a discrict may set a tariff which is 'a maximum table of fares' when it would be left to drivers to charge less than the tariff.

CC

That's the one!!

I remember now!

But I thought it was much older than that!!

Sparks; what a name!!

Anyone have the FULL judgment?

1986.......I think I have some old NFTA executive minutes, but I'm not certain they'd mention this court case, and I doubt I'd have a transcript.

I could ask the NTA solicitor, he's bound to have court yearbooks if they do such a thing?

Although, I'd be surprised if Bryan didnt have a copy.

CC

Thanks for that & it's good to see it spelt with a Y!!

:D
Author:  Sussex [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 8:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: section 65 mp act 1976.
jimbo wrote:
Section 65 Fixing of fares for Hackney Carriages, states that, " (1) A district council may fix the rates or fares within the district.."

with the operative word being "FIXED" where does this leave discretion for a driver to discount?

I can't find any mention in the act of the metered fare being the MAXIMUM that can be demanded.

I think it has evolved as common sense.

Not necessary the discounting side, but the side which allows drivers flexibility to take folks who haven't got enough money i.e. £6.00 job and the old girl only has £5.80.

If the driver allowed that then he would be committee an offence.
Author:  captain cab [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 8:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: section 65 mp act 1976.
Sussex wrote:
I think it has evolved as common sense.


I understand the points you make, but I'm also pretty certain if discounting was perfectly lawful Jim Button would have been telling us all about it, instead of referring to some obsure OFT report and whittling on?

CC
Author:  Brummie Cabbie [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: section 65 mp act 1976.
Sussex wrote:
jimbo wrote:
Section 65 Fixing of fares for Hackney Carriages, states that, " (1) A district council may fix the rates or fares within the district.."

with the operative word being "FIXED" where does this leave discretion for a driver to discount?

I can't find any mention in the act of the metered fare being the MAXIMUM that can be demanded.

I think it has evolved as common sense.

Not necessary the discounting side, but the side which allows drivers flexibility to take folks who haven't got enough money i.e. £6.00 job and the old girl only has £5.80.

If the driver allowed that then he would be committee an offence.

If I remember correctly, I think the Sparks case was brought about because the guy was discounting all or most fares & perhaps even advertising the fact.

In the OFT report, their barmyism is that those drivers who want to discount fares should have door sized posters advertising the conditions of discount.
Author:  captain cab [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: section 65 mp act 1976.
Brummie Cabbie wrote:
Sussex wrote:
jimbo wrote:
Section 65 Fixing of fares for Hackney Carriages, states that, " (1) A district council may fix the rates or fares within the district.."

with the operative word being "FIXED" where does this leave discretion for a driver to discount?

I can't find any mention in the act of the metered fare being the MAXIMUM that can be demanded.

I think it has evolved as common sense.

Not necessary the discounting side, but the side which allows drivers flexibility to take folks who haven't got enough money i.e. £6.00 job and the old girl only has £5.80.

If the driver allowed that then he would be committee an offence.

If I remember correctly, I think the Sparks case was brought about because the guy was discounting all or most fares & perhaps even advertising the fact.

In the OFT report their barmyism is that those drivers who want to discount fares should have door sized posters advertising the conditions of discount.


which was rubbished i think.......but some LA's dont set fares.......apparently they dont have to.

I wish I could do that, that would be sweeeeet......I'd charge people by how they look......people with beards and ginger hair would need to be millionaires......you reading this Chris????? :lol:

CC
Author:  Chris the Fish [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
I can shave - and 'er indoors can dye her hair.

Tax all those under Six foot. Double the tax for all those with receding hairlines.
Author:  captain cab [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:30 pm ]
Post subject: 
Chris the Fish wrote:
I can shave - and 'er indoors can dye her hair.

Tax all those under Six foot. Double the tax for all those with receding hairlines.


Its not about tax though, and your being harsh :wink:

CC
Author:  Chris the Fish [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:37 pm ]
Post subject: 
My mistake - I hadn't read the thread.

For "Tax" in my previous post substitute "Extra Tariff" on both instances.

Happy now Mr Short-Baldy?
Author:  captain cab [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:40 pm ]
Post subject: 
Chris the Fish wrote:
My mistake - I hadn't read the thread.

For "Tax" in my previous post substitute "Extra Tariff" on both instances.

Happy now Mr Short-Baldy?


ouch :lol:

But I was on about councils who dont stipulate tariffs......or should I add dyslexic beardies to my imaginary list.......which come to think of it would need some type of written test for passengers before I move an inch and decide how much to charge. :D

CC
Page 1 of 5 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/