Taxi Driver Online :: View topic - How do these act within the 1976 act?

I've often wondered how these firms get around the cross-border issues of the 1976 act.

http://www.frasereaglemanagementservice ... ?tabid=213

http://www.taxibankuk.com/index.htm

Now if they only passed on work to taxis then that's ok, but they pass on work to whoever is the cheapest or a member of their gang, and more times than not they are PH. :shock:

So how do they do it one has to ask? :roll:

One further issue is the umpteen different Limo websites who act as booking agents for Limos throughout the country.

So how will these folks be legal come next month? :wink:

The 'loophole' is the fact that they are acting as a 'booking agent' for the company requesting travel.

They are not the ones allocating work to the vehicle/driver.

You claim the same 'loophole' for companies like mine who have a web booking system. The booking software for web bookings is run by Cordic and their software sends the booking into my system.

So all you need to do is take on Preece and Green (?) in the courts.

That means we will need 100K plus in legal fees and promises to pay their's if you lost.

Fraser Eagle are registered in the Burnley area so they are acting as an operator in Burnley in the course of business of making provision for the acceptance of bookings for private hire vehicles. If they have an operators license and are using their own vehicles and drivers licensed in the same area then they are not infringing any laws but that is not the case. The cases of Rendal and Bromsgrove immediately spring to mind, which if interpreted to the letter of the law would make the activity of Fraser Eagle illegal.

The Chairman of NALEO John Thompson likes to beat the drum for the eradication of cross border hiring but he's not so hot on confronting a blatant breach of the law in respect of Fraser Eagle. Why hasn't NALEO acted in Burnley in the shape of the local Licensing Officer, your guess is as good as mine?

Regards

JD

They also hold an International PSV Operator's Licence and a travel agency so I would presume that is what entitles them to book "travel" for third parties.

So all you need to do is take on Preece and Green (?) in the courts.

That means we will need 100K plus in legal fees and promises to pay their's if you lost.

In response to JD......I understand the booking comes from Malta.

Author:	Sussex [ Sun Dec 30, 2007 7:15 pm ]
Post subject:	How do these act within the 1976 act?
I've often wondered how these firms get around the cross-border issues of the 1976 act. http://www.frasereaglemanagementservice ... ?tabid=213 http://www.taxibankuk.com/index.htm Now if they only passed on work to taxis then that's ok, but they pass on work to whoever is the cheapest or a member of their gang, and more times than not they are PH. So how do they do it one has to ask?

Author:	Sussex [ Sun Dec 30, 2007 7:17 pm ]
Post subject:
One further issue is the umpteen different Limo websites who act as booking agents for Limos throughout the country. So how will these folks be legal come next month?

Author:	Darren63 [ Sun Dec 30, 2007 7:45 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: How do these act within the 1976 act?
Sussex wrote: I've often wondered how these firms get around the cross-border issues of the 1976 act. http://www.frasereaglemanagementservice ... ?tabid=213 http://www.taxibankuk.com/index.htm Now if they only passed on work to taxis then that's ok, but they pass on work to whoever is the cheapest or a member of their gang, and more times than not they are PH. So how do they do it one has to ask? Considering taxibank is John Preeces operation the work going to PH is a cert.

Author:	grandad [ Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:09 pm ]
Post subject:
Sussex wrote: One further issue is the umpteen different Limo websites who act as booking agents for Limos throughout the country. So how will these folks be legal come next month? Umpteen? How many can you name?

Author:	Tom Thumb [ Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:06 pm ]
Post subject:
The 'loophole' is the fact that they are acting as a 'booking agent' for the company requesting travel. They are not the ones allocating work to the vehicle/driver. Now the Executive car company in Sussex who take bookings from a major company near me (130 miles away) and then send 3 or 4 local unlicensed vehicles is clearly breaking the law..... but they are cheaper. Several of my major customers book journeys with my company through an agent (normally the travel agent who books flights and hotels for them). You claim the same 'loophole' for companies like mine who have a web booking system. The booking software for web bookings is run by Cordic and their software sends the booking into my system.

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

How do these act within the 1976 act? http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7613	Page 1 of 5

Author:	Sussex [ Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:19 pm ]
Post subject:
Tom Thumb wrote: The 'loophole' is the fact that they are acting as a 'booking agent' for the company requesting travel. They are not the ones allocating work to the vehicle/driver. But they are, as the 1976 act defines, operating, "operate" means in the course of business to make provision for the invitation or acceptance of bookings for a private hire vehicle; And if they are doing that for private hire vehicles, which the act defines as, "private hire vehicle" means a motor vehicle constructed or adapted to seat [fewer than nine passengers], other than a hackney carriage or public service vehicle [or a London cab] [or tramcar], which is provided for hire with the services of a driver for the purpose of carrying passengers; Then IMO they needs ops licenses for every area they send work to.

Author:	Sussex [ Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:21 pm ]
Post subject:
Tom Thumb wrote: You claim the same 'loophole' for companies like mine who have a web booking system. The booking software for web bookings is run by Cordic and their software sends the booking into my system. The difference is you are a licensed operator, who only gives work to vehicles licensed by the same council as you. So you are a good guy.

Author:	Tom Thumb [ Sun Dec 30, 2007 11:03 pm ]
Post subject:
So all you need to do is take on Preece and Green (?) in the courts. That means we will need 100K plus in legal fees and promises to pay their's if you lost.

Author:	Sussex [ Mon Dec 31, 2007 7:20 am ]
Post subject:
Tom Thumb wrote: So all you need to do is take on Preece and Green (?) in the courts. That means we will need 100K plus in legal fees and promises to pay their's if you lost. I wouldn't dream of it, but the law is the law. The fact that in this instance the law is a joke is neither here nor there. I would say the answer would be a national operator's license, but I'm not sure that's something I want.

Author:	JD [ Mon Dec 31, 2007 10:35 am ]
Post subject:
Steve Almond or Dave Craddock are the two gentlemen that can give us the answer to the question of how they get around the law in relation to acting as an agent for Private hire companies. Regards JD

Author:	JD [ Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:49 am ]
Post subject:
Fraser Eagle are registered in the Burnley area so they are acting as an operator in Burnley in the course of business of making provision for the acceptance of bookings for private hire vehicles. If they have an operators license and are using their own vehicles and drivers licensed in the same area then they are not infringing any laws but that is not the case. The cases of Rendal and Bromsgrove immediately spring to mind, which if interpreted to the letter of the law would make the activity of Fraser Eagle illegal. The Chairman of NALEO John Thompson likes to beat the drum for the eradication of cross border hiring but he's not so hot on confronting a blatant breach of the law in respect of Fraser Eagle. Why hasn't NALEO acted in Burnley in the shape of the local Licensing Officer, your guess is as good as mine? Regards JD

Author:	Tulsablue [ Tue Jan 01, 2008 1:09 pm ]
Post subject:
JD wrote: Fraser Eagle are registered in the Burnley area so they are acting as an operator in Burnley in the course of business of making provision for the acceptance of bookings for private hire vehicles. If they have an operators license and are using their own vehicles and drivers licensed in the same area then they are not infringing any laws but that is not the case. The cases of Rendal and Bromsgrove immediately spring to mind, which if interpreted to the letter of the law would make the activity of Fraser Eagle illegal. The Chairman of NALEO John Thompson likes to beat the drum for the eradication of cross border hiring but he's not so hot on confronting a blatant breach of the law in respect of Fraser Eagle. Why hasn't NALEO acted in Burnley in the shape of the local Licensing Officer, your guess is as good as mine? Regards JD They also hold an International PSV Operator's Licence and a travel agency so I would presume that is what entitles them to book "travel" for third parties.

Author:	Sussex [ Tue Jan 01, 2008 6:37 pm ]
Post subject:
Tulsablue wrote: They also hold an International PSV Operator's Licence and a travel agency so I would presume that is what entitles them to book "travel" for third parties. The only thing/being that's able to give/pass work to a PH driver and vehicle is a licensed PH operator licensed in the same district as the vehicle it gives/passes the work to. No exceptions are allowed.

Author:	captain cab [ Fri Jan 02, 2009 9:47 pm ]
Post subject:
In response to JD......I understand the booking comes from Malta. regards CC

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

Author:	toots [ Fri Jan 02, 2009 10:13 pm ]
Post subject:
Tom Thumb wrote: So all you need to do is take on Preece and Green (?) in the courts. That means we will need 100K plus in legal fees and promises to pay their's if you lost. It shouldn't be for anybody other than our very own legal system that should be taking these people on. If they are breaking the law then the LA's should be either closing them down and let them fight in court to be re-opened or take them to court using tax payers money and send the proper message to anybody else who is considering running this type of unlicensed business. Quote: In response to JD......I understand the booking comes from Malta. What implications does that have?