Taxi Driver Online

instead of picking on PH drivers, ring and book a few "self drive" limos and actually get in the vehicle, or would the expense prove too much?

p.s. dont follow me too closely, i brake hard...

Sussex

Many thanks for the constructive comments, good wishes and the helpful legislation info: very useful & will be used soonest.


Bloodnock said:

I say again, we are simply gathering information we are NOT enforcing the law, just bringing wrongdoing to the attention of the proper legal authorities for them to analyse and act appropriately - we may be proven wrong in court, and we are certainly not acting as judge, jury and executioner.

A nerve was certainly touched when the term "Vigilante" was used, as this would seem to infer some kind of malicious intent on our part. We are just reacting to the on-going problems of PHV and others plying for hire illegally, in the face of a council doing squat, despite many pleas from beleaguered Hackney drivers.

If I misread your comment I apologise.

Never apologise if you believe your in the right...only apologise if you believe your wrong....if theyre wrongdooers they deserve caught, just a Pity your LA didnt contribute more to the cause though..

I would strongly advise caution, a number of years ago a group of drivers in Sefton followed the same path, they were advised not to, the people they placed in court took civil proceedings against them, it all became very messy,

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

MR T said:


I respect your heads up - thanks for that.

Do you happen to know why civil proceedings were brought against them?

I thought that we would be ok, if we were seen to be fair and above board with our actions?

If you are going down the independent route I would advise you video as much as you can, without a) getting in the way of any illegal activities, and b) getting a right hander from those being videoed.

Then send those videos, via youtube if need be, to every councillors in your area. Copied of course to the press and your LOs.

_________________
IDFIMH

Actually I don't remember.. I just remember advising them not to take that road , if you take them to court and lose the case... then what.... you have accused them of something they have been proven not to have done. blacken their name and put them to some considerable expense. the lawyer's fees will probably bankrupt you and then there's the compensation. remember the old rule, measure twice ..Cut once.

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

Sussex raises a good point.

To date, I presume you've attempted to get the LO to enforce the law. That individual is in the employ of the council and following policy.

Have you contacted all the councillors? They are the one's who will kick ar$e for you if you can get them on side. See some of the posts on here for a superb example of how to motivate politicians and media:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=36436

Also, if it's not too sensitive, how many 'test purchases' have been made and provided evidence of wrong doing? If you have a substantial number, you may have a cause of action against the council for misfeasance (or is it malfeasance?).

Good luck in your endeavours.

Cabbyman Said:


Absolutely - and our objective (believe it or not) is not to necessarily punish the "wrongdoers" in court, it is to embarrass the council sufficiently for them to realise the situation is serious, and also to get them both inform people that they are doing wrong (see my previous posts on private land activities) and enforce - which is what we pay our fees for.

Irrespective of the impact this kind of illegal activity has on our incomes, the public remains at risk.

Sussex asked earlier if the ombudsman was an option, well it is, but our intention is too prove a point with the council, that things are rotten in the borough, and we still fervently hope we can get the council see sense, before we call them in.

I believe the numbers and evidence we have proves that the situation is more than sufficient to demonstrate a very strong case against the council if we chose to, but we still hope they can see reason before the ombudsman is used, or ultimately a judicial review - with all the cost implications that would mean to all sides.

You're presuming the council are interested and will be interested in your findings and prosecutions. However, all you are likely to create is a short term embarrassment.

I personally dont believe you will achieve what you want and in due course the council will take its own 'pay back' upon the trade.

CC

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

The payback has already started.

Should we just sit back and continue to be shafted then?

As hinted in my previous post, I believe garnering interest from both the media and councillors (who are not the same as 'the council' and will have their votes in mind) will be the way to go with 'legal' options to be kept in reserve for use later, if necessary.

No matter what happens you will never eradicate illegal plying for hire. The only thing you will ever acheive is proving a point to the council. That is providing you go about it the right way and employ a solicitor. legal costs can be recovered in court if you win.

The solicitor will even get the names and addresses so you won't have to go chasing your tail trying to find out who's who.

Do it right and you can't fail to get a result. Hopefully!

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.