Taxi Driver Online

Out of the 250,000 odd, and yes many are odd, licensed taxi/PH drivers in the country, how many do you think have the Berwick/Newcastle/Gladen issue at the forefront of their concerns?

Whereas to both NALEO and the NPHA it is.

Why not have new section, just like the one in Scotland, where drivers are guaranteed a fare review every so often.

And why not have a section, again similar to the one in Scotland, where taxi drivers are also allowed to drive PH vehicles, without the extra cost of an extra license?

And why not have a section that states that councils must allow any reasonable safety system, CCTV, screens, etc unless the council has a good reason not to. i.e. change the onus away from those that don't know best.

_________________
IDFIMH

Well it certainly hasn't elevated fares in Manchester but I really don't see what publishing a national tariff one, and tariff two chart, has to do with representing the interests of hackney carriage drivers?



I can't vouch for every council in the country using it as a guide but I know for a fact that some councils have refused a fare rise based on this very chart and you can find them on TDO.

I can imagine why he started a chart and I would has at a guess that it was more for the purpose of increasing magazine sales than for the benefit of hackney carriage drivers.

The chart scenario is meaningless because it doesn't paint the full picture because many councils have three or four tariffs as we have already discussed on TDO.



I don't think the question has to be asked at all. A council cannot refuse a fare increase if such a fare increase is reasonable. There are a few councils who have found that out the hard way. If those asking for a fare increase need the assistance of a chart to determine their running costs then they are in a bad way. In many ways the chart only serves to restrict fare increases as at least one court case will tell you.



So what right does that give him?



Because the cab trade don't need a league table to work out the cost effectiveness of their product? If a cab driver can't calculate the total annual cost of running his cab including wages at 50% occupancy then they need to go back to school.



Ashamed for not producing a national table of tariff one's and two's? Are you really serious? lol



Well I find it strange that a guy who was prepared to stand as an expert witness in a Manchester court of law and tell a judge why three thousand private hire vehicles should be running around Manchester with illuminated roof signs has now turned somersault and is getting his knickers in a twist about 150 Berwick hackney cabs running around Newcastle with unlit roof signs and acting as private hire.

I don't think you will get a get a hackney cab driver in Manchester standing up in a court of law advocating illuminated roof signs on three thousand private hire vehicles, do you?



So lets get this straight you are quite willing to join an organisation that has no democratic structure for electing or removing officials? I find that strange coming from someone who gives me the impression that they obviously have a brain of some quality.

Perhaps you know more than me in this respect which to be honest i know very little, however if you could fill in the blanks regarding this organisation then I might be a little wiser?

What is the Committee structure of this organisation?

Who elects the committee members?

How many committee members are allowed?

What is the function of the committee?

What is the maximum term committee members can serve?

What's the process for removing committee members?

What's the process for proposing committee members?

Who is given the task of taking and keeping committee minutes?

Who is given the task of ensuring proper financial records are maintained?

What facility is made for members to inspect financial records?

Who elects the Chairman?

Who elects the secretary?

Who elects the treasurer?

What is the voting criteria?

What are the rules for calling a special general meeting?

Does it have an AGM?

What are the rules?

What is the procedure for amending the rules?

What is the procedure for winding up the association

I could go on and on but I won't, no doubt you can enlighten me as to the questions I raised above?



First I am of the opinion that the licensing structure is outdated and it should be taken out of the hands of councillors, therefore under new legislation I would hope that councils and their licensing officers would no longer be a part of the taxi licensing equation.

For the time being John Thompson is a relevance only to his own cause but not to me or hackney carriage drivers.

For the purpose of this meeting of minds business the hackney carriage trade do not need the input of John Thompson, or any other licensing officer for that matter, providing the hackney carriage trade gets its act together?

The power in this equation is held by the hackney carriage trade, Thompson is a complete irrelevance but the fact remains that the taxi trade as a whole including both private hire and hackney carriage cannot agree on the fundamentals of equality, simply because they are infinitely different when it comes down to the basics of equality in the method of hire.



We already have enforceable legislation but its the likes of NALEO members and the police that refuse or are incapable of enforcing it.

So what new legislation are you talking about?

Under new legislation there hopefully wont be a NALEO and we just might get clear and precise legislation that doesn't require a determination in the courts every ten minutes?



Personally I think it has been well established on this site that this meeting of minds bunch are the ones who have not only failed to learn but are guilty of failing to understanding the frailties of their actions.

Perhaps you can tell me why hackney carriage drivers need these proposed changes and the benefits they will derive from these changes and what they will lose once these changes become law?



Me too but I can think of some that don't.



I'm afraid it wouldn't be that easy because there is no reason why the law should not allow for a contributory offence of disqualified persons being excluded from owning or having an interest in any licensing activity relating to taxi licensing. Apart from the statutory declaration of license which makes it an offence to give false information there should also be a clear cut offence for anyone who willingly participates or facilitates in the execution of the offence. Therefore a deterrent of sorts is in place.

If you want to talk about hackney carriage driver representation and the qualities required for such representation then I will be only too willing to oblige you on that score, however I don't consider any member of the National association of licensing enforcement officers have the best interest of Taxi drivers at heart especially when their members are suspending cab drivers left right and centre for nothing more than allegedly making a nuisance phone call to their ex spouse.

Why don't you sift through the quality of those attending the meeting of minds and tell me which one of them is fit to represent hackney cab drivers?

That is my opinion and I am entitled to it whether anyone shares that opinion is entirely up to them?

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

Well I'm really glad you realise that because it would appear you weren't concentrating when you read it.

I shouldn't really have to spoon feed you line by line like some I can mention because you are an intelligent chappie but i suggest you feast your eyes on this.

I notice you never brought up the subject of **sanctions** against private hire operators........... whose ***drivers*** are caught plying for hire?

We all make mistakes but just in case you didn't get it, I proposed sanctions against private hire operators who allowed their drivers to illegally ply for hire. That means legislation against operators who can't control the people they operate. To me anyone who cant control the people they operate shouldn't hold an operators license.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

Wise suggestions like those you present are too achievable and don't fit in with the object of this meeting of minds bunch. Having said that no one really knows what their objectives are except for perhaps the NTA and the Liverpool crew?

Why they need to enlist representatives from London for a Newcastle enforcement issue is completely beyond me? London have their own problems but the hackney carriage trade in London are not going to sit back and accept legislative changes to their detriment, from this motley crew.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

OK why not?

As far as I can see, you are the only one that is saying these things won't happen, nothing has happened in the past... and nothing will happen in the future... doing it your and JD's way...Oh you will do a lot of moaning that's for sure.....
Ps.. if anybody has any questions regarding the minutes please direct them to BB. he has volunteered to answer any questions

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

Utter tosh

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Hang on....no good idea.....cant we add a part about decapitation or something too....perhaps a short stay in that village in the film 'hostel' for anyone allowing vehicles under their control to illegally ply for hire?

I think a few LO's will be resigning

ffs

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Wasn't he part of the meeting?

Admittedly his contribution was small compared to some but his preoccupied contribution concerned comments attributed to the issue of Berwick only.

Trevor Jones: said, anyone can open a hackney carriage firm and get licensed in Berwick with no control from the licensing office in Sefton.

Perhaps Mr Jones hasn't realised that anyone can open a hackney carriage firm as he calls it, in Sefton and not be under Sefton Licensing control.

However drivers and vehicles are.

Trevor Jones: keeping records equals being professional. Radio companies: properly organised private hire circuits do their job professionally.

He quoted the incident of a driver involved in accident -because there were no records kept by this hackney company, they couldn't pass [the responsibility] onto the driver who was involved, the company got taken to court and had to pay £12,000 out. It's all down to professionalism

I wonder if all those drivers who rent vehicles off Mr Jones write down every job they do? No doubt he will be insisting from now on that they have to record every job they do including those received via a mobile telephone.

I don't know one radio circuit that doesn't write down every booking they receive and I bet he doesn't either.



I don't know of any Tom or Dick who has bought a telephone number and set up a radio circuit do you?

Why should a person who sets up a radio circuit be responsible for licensed hackney carriage drivers?

The whole concept of hackney carriages is that they and their drivers are licensed and have a plate on the front and back of the vehicle and in most cases inside the vehicle. The driver also has a badge and if a passenger has a complaint all they need do is read the plate number inside or outside the vehicle or take the drivers badge number.

In case you hadn't realised that's the same format as what happens when the general public hire a hackney carriage from the street. There is no difference is there apart from the fact that the hackney carriage hired over the radio might be licensed in a different area, however the aggrieved person can phone the company she hired the vehicle from and enquire as to the details of vehicle plate number 123? I don't suppose you are suggesting the operator would refuse to give the complainant the details?

Therefore as long as the hackney carriage and driver are licensed it doesn't make any difference where they are from?

But it suits your purpose to cloud the issue just so you can make a case against the Gladen ruling.

I'll say it again, hackney carriages and their drivers are both licensed and accountable and it doesn't make any difference where they are accountable. If you had a hundred London cabs working Newcastle you would still say they weren't accountable. The fact is they are all accountable but not to Newcastle and that's how it has been for 160 years.



Well it would appear this meeting of minds bunch want individual hackney carriage drivers to have operator licenses because they are perplexed in how to deliver what they want without affecting hackney cab drivers?

The bottom line is that they haven't got a clue how to do it it so its a case of asking everyone to accept the proposals as they stand and hope that the DfT can sort it out for them and if not then who gives a chit? Well I'm afraid that's a kack handed way of doing things and the urgency with which you are trying to get this agreed smacks of desperation.

I don't know of one hack radio circuit that doesn't keep records of bookings but maybe you do and perhaps you can enlighten us on that score, who knows, but if you can't, then your argument doesn't hold water.

By the way I phoned Blue line the other day and they informed me they keep records of every booking they take, does that surprise you?

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

Well obviously it wouldn't suit operators and with you being an operator I can understand the way you feel but there are people out there, especially in London, who would be only too pleased to have such legislation.

You want to get rid of illegal plying for hire don't you? Then why not make operators accountable for the actions of those they operate?

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

This meeting of minds little get together is about enforcement and nothing else so why don't you guys just hold your hands up and say so because its all documented in black and white.

The fact that licensing officers in Newcastle and Liverpool can't control illegal plying for hire is of no concern to hackney carriages drivers anywhere else and the reason why is because we are all aware of the lack of enforcement in our own areas and no matter what restrictions you place on hackney carriage drivers it will not solve the problem one little bit.

Ask those in London.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

Are the really? even if licensed in another area?



He might well do that....then again he might not, perhaps you should ask?


Good...I'm quite certain when changes to the act occur it wont be an issue then will it



Perhaps I do?

And perhaps they havent got a license and perhaps they've never owned or driven a cab aswell.

Ones things for certain...they will be licensed when the law changes




You seem to believe there should be a loophole that basically says anyone can accept a booking for a HC?

Has the person who accepts the booking any responsibility at all?



So if I operate an office with purely HC's working from it and I am not a licensed HC driver or proprietor....you dont think I should be licensed?

I get the idea.

Potentially Mr Glitter could purchase a company...and effectively operate a radio circuit of purely HC's without recourse to anyone?



That doesn't surprise me in the least about blueline, they are in my view a very professional outfit.

I'm not urgent in the slightest...if I was I would be at meetings wouldnt I?

I think I have an idea of how to ensure that individual drivers are not affected by any change....but I'll keep that to myself, same as those circuits that dont keep records

Best regards

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Thats absolutely correct JD....but hey...I dont come from Newcastle or Liverpool And we dont have illegal plying for hire

Whose wanting to restrict Hackney Carriage drivers?

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

It was meant to read "drivers and vehicles licensed in Sefton are under the control of Sefton licensing" but perhaps it didn't read that way?

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

Yeah it didnt.... but now I'm confused

regards

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Mr T said said, "anyone can open a hackney carriage firm and get licensed in Berwick with no control from the licensing office in Sefton."

the point I was making is that anyone can open a hackney carriage radio circuit in Sefton and not come under sefton licensing because they don't need to be licensed.

However if the vehicles and drivers were licensed in Sefton then they would indeed come under sefton licensing.

The point being that a license is not required to set up a hack radio radio circuit.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.