RealCabforce Wrote:
Most Taxi drivers in Edinburgh and several legal opinions agree that Edinburgh council has adhered to the law.
Absolute rubbish, no information was produced in court that CEC had monitored demand other than a few stance surveys a bout 3 years ago.
They claimed that the Taxi Monitors report showed that there was no demand for taxis because no one had applied bearing in mind they operated a policy to turn people away.These current applicants seem to think that the current buzzphrase of "proving no significant unmet demand" is the all of everything. The vast majority do realise that demand has been monitored continuously by the appointed taxi monitor. Although skull and his sidekicks belittle those reports, they are nonetheless valid assessments of demand on a monthly basis.
No valid assessments of any kind were carried out from one month to the next. Nothing produced in Court.What some may not know is that Skull has a long history of troublemaking. He has publicly stated that he is not a violent person, but privately he boasts of a violent past.
15 Years as a Taxi driver and not one customer complaint, speaks for itself.We are expected to believe that his correspondence with the HSE about the safety of the TX1's wheelchair facilities is the first time that it has been raised yet similar ramps etc have been in use since around 1986/7 with the advent of the Metrocab and Fairway. He consistently refused to accept any wheelchair bound passengers on the grounds of a non-existent health & safety assessment. And shouted long & loud about unfair treatment.
CEC and the HSE have my risk assessment carried out as per HSE instructions. Similarly he demands a plate for no other reason than to sell it, failing to realise that if the council grants these licences, there will be a clamour from the 110 applicants waiting for over 10 years. Common sense dictates that, as the council do not eat, sleep & drink taxis, they will simply remove the nuisance and de-restrict numbers, thus wiping out any plate value at a stroke.
More s**t. What I have maintained all along is that I will do what ever the situation dictates.At first, that may appear alright, but if you have 3,000 drivers on 3,000 taxis you will not have the 24 hour coverage nor the modern vehicles that we have at present. I can run a new taxi, change it every 3 years and the overheads of HP,Insurance, licensing & maintenance amount to c£280 per week (this excludes any radio dues, if an owner should joins a circuit.)
Does any one else want to answer this clown?Now either add on a radio fee of at least £80 per week or take off the rental income from a driver and everyone ends up paying more or driving around in older, less-well maintained taxis. These figures do not include any repayments on loans to buy plates.
Diatribe!There is a strong case for restricting phc licences, given the conduct of a large number in Edinburgh who blatantly break laws and licensing conditions with impunity.
So we actually recognise that the PHC exist, you might want to tell Jim Muldoon Chairman of the Scottish Taxi Federation he says they don’t.
Tighter regulation would benefit all of us - phc included. As would ridding out trade of parasites!!
Give me the plates and I'm gone! ![Bad Grin :badgrin:](./images/smilies/badgrin.gif)