Taxi Driver Online

Gateshead Councils Cabinet met on Tuesday 13th July and decided to maintain their policy of restricting the number of HC saloons they licence.

There will be no unmet demand survey to justify their decision as they claim they don't have a restriction of numbers as they allow applications for WAV's.

The trade had called for the council to review its policy in line with government guidelines however it chose to retain its policy without any justification.

Even Local Councellors are dismayed by the cabinets decision and the decision will be called back at the next full council meeting to be held later this month.

The trade will, until that meeting, show the council exactly what it thinks of that decision.

They don't need an un-met demand survey to justify not having quotas, only one to justify having them.

You have them for the saloons, but for how long?

_________________
IDFIMH

What exactly do you want from the council, Angel?

Best wishes

John Davies.

All we want John is a system thats fair to as mant people as possible which allows users the best service possible as well as allowing drivers to get fair pay for a fair amount of hours.

We asked Gateshead Council to suspend the issuance of new HC vehicle licenses pending an unmet demand survey, along with conultation and debate to formulate a licensed vehicle policy which provided the best possible service to the people of the whole borough.

We want Gateshead Council to adopt the same policy (with exeption to fares) as Brighton & Hove which has been described by government as exemplary.

They have indeed chosen to disregard the very policy they claim to have based their decision upon, its very strange indeed, appart from the fact that certain materials supplied to support our application were never forwarded to the councellor's, although other materials against our applications found their way into the councellors hands without problem.

B. Lucky

Why doesn't someone simply apply for a saloon taxi?
If they refuse and someone appeals to the court, the council will have to have demand survey evidence to back up their refusal.
If they don't have any independant evidence, then the council will lose.

The council believe that by allowing WAVs they don't operate a restrictive policy.

Applications have already gone into the council for saloon plates, none of which were accepted.

The council will never deregulate fully as they need to maintain a proportion of WAVs to satisfy the disabled rights lobbyists. Removing the saloon restriction will reduce the number of WAVs, even with the 195 currently licensed disabled people still claim there isn't enough. As I have said many times before a large proportion of our fleet are old vehicles (over 10 years old) alllowing saloon plates would therefore see the ammount of accessible cabs reduced very quickly.

The whole trade needs urgent review of policy, we really need a new National Cab Act, I recon that the intervention of the OFT and subsequent advice from government has only served to confuse laws that were confusing enough.

B. Lucky

Gatesheads last unmet demand survey was 7 years ago. It recomended there was no signifigant unmet demand but advised that extra plates should be issued to the first 12 applicants who would provide a WAV in order to satisfy any demand from disabled users.

This was challenged by a local PH operator who took the council to court and won, the LO who argued the case "left" the council very shortly after the ruling, but is still very much involved in the trade.

B. Lucky

so the licensing officer provided evidence to the solictor defending the council? is it fair to assume then that when the case was lost he went to work for the operator who won?

wee jock poopong mcplop

what happens if the owner of a saloon vehicle wants to change his vehicle, can he put on another saloon or does he have to put on a wav???



If anyone can put on a vehicle that conforms with council requirements then they don't have a restriction on numbers policy do they???

Where the council may come unstuck with the law, is if they allow the excisting owners of Saloon Hackneys to renew their licence with the same type of vehicle, when they change it for new.



Do you mean that the trade wanted the council to have a survey in order to restrict numbers???

On the other side of the coin, If I was a councillor in this situation, I would probably ask myself, "do the public have anything to gain by restricting numbers" secondly, I might ask myself does the council have anything to gain by restricting numbers. If, having satisfied myself with the answer to those two questions as being in the positive, I may come to the conclusion that having an unrestricted policy was not so unreasonable.

what happens if the owner of a saloon vehicle wants to change his vehicle, can he put on another saloon or does he have to put on a wav???



If anyone can put on a vehicle that conforms with council requirements then they don't have a restriction on numbers policy do they???

Where the council may come unstuck with the law, is if they allow the excisting owners of Saloon Hackneys to renew their licence with the same type of vehicle, when they change it for new.



Do you mean that the trade wanted the council to have a survey in order to restrict numbers???

On the other side of the coin, If I was a councillor in this situation, I would probably ask myself, "do the public have anything to gain by restricting numbers" secondly, I might ask myself does the council have anything to gain by restricting numbers. If, having satisfied myself with the answer to those two questions as being in the positive, I may come to the conclusion that having an unrestricted policy was not so unreasonable.

Well they don't really.

It's open to anyone to challenge, although the DfT's list of districts that must be WAV by 2010-2020 would cause any challenge a few difficulties.

As I have said, it's all about standards. Get those sorted and everything will fall into place.

If the gov haven't enough time to amend a soppy loop-hole in the 1998 London Act, then I think the chances of a NCA is slim at best.

_________________
IDFIMH

The holder of a saloon vehicle plate can put on either a saloon or a WAV.
The holder of a WAV plate can only replace with another WAV.




As I've just said existing saloon licence holders can replace with another saloon.


The simple fact of the matter here is that if a driver is given the choice of driving a saloon or a WAV they will choose a saloon every time. Where then do the wheelchair users and other disabled groups stand when it comes to their rights for accessible public transport.

With that in mind councils should look to increase the number of HC's in line with the demands of the public making sure they form policy which encourages WAV purchases instead of a free for all which will benefit no-one other than those who ONLY want a plate.

The ONLY way to have a single tier system therefore is to have every licensed vehicle wheelchair accessible. As I represent a growing number of PH drivers, most of whom are happy driving PH, I could never condone such a policy.

I am interested to see what others think on how to get a single tier system to provide adequate provision for those who live in our community with a disability and rely on public transport to be socially included. Particularly if any vehicle type is approved for use as a HC.

B. Lucky

Everything I have heard or read about disabled groups is that their preference is a mixed fleet of saloon and WAV taxis.

The problem arises when the saloon lads don't change, in enough numbers, to WAVs. As happened recently in Stratford. Because of that, it appears the gov have lost patients, hence the 2010-2020 deadline.

The only glimpse of light is in the Minister's recent statement when he implied that WAV MPVs could solve the problem.

We will see.

_________________
IDFIMH

The difference with the PH trade is that providing a firm has a number of WAVs, then it can accommodate WAV customers.

With the taxi trade hirings are immediate, and WAV customers are discriminated against if there are no WAV available, whilst there are saloons.

Not saying that right or wrong, but that's the way the gov see things.

_________________
IDFIMH

Where did the minister imply that WAV MPVs could solve any problems?

WAV MPVs are not fit for public use as a HC if they are rear loading as in a rear end collison there is no escape route.

Appart from that WAV MPVs cost signifigantly more than standard MPVs or saloons and if drivers have a choice they wil always go for the cheapest option.

The only exeption would be those who can provide regular work for their WAV by doing school runs and the like. The problem lies when a wheelchair user needs a WAV at either 8:45am or at 3:30pm.

I now of WAV drivers who haven't done a single wheelchair job because they bought their WAV to obtain the rights to work outside the nightclubs. A few have been reported to the council for pulling off ranks when a wheelchair user approaches, others have developed a bad back redering them unable to physically push a wheelchair into their vehicle and have recieved an exeption from the council because of it.

In short, in Gateshead, people buy WAVs to get plates so if they had the chance to spend less and get a saloon they would most certainly choose that option.

B. Lucky