Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Tue May 05, 2026 3:48 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 12:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 8:58 pm
Posts: 3568
Location: Plymouth
Plymouth council staff offer to lend their own vehicles in desperate bid to get children to school
Posted: January 02, 2016
COUNCIL staff have offered to lend their own vehicles amid fears a school transport shake-up would leave children without a lift.

There were fears some children would not have transport to get them to school when the new terms starts after a shake-up in the way taxi contracts are handed out.

The Herald has learned that up to 50 children may be affected by a lack of cover after Plymouth City Council scrapped its arrangements with two taxi firms.

In June, The Herald reported how the council was overhauling its Home to School transport system for children with “complex and unique needs”.

In a bid to save tax-payers £350,000 a year, the council activated an early release contract with TAXIFIRST and Crownhill Taxis.

The firms were contracted to provide services until August 2016, but the change meant these arrangements now ended on December 31, 2015.

The council tendered for the services, but The Herald understands TAXIFIRST, which covered about 70 per cent of the runs, that’s nearly 130 a day, decided not to re-enter the bidding.
However, it is understood the firm encouraged individual drivers to apply to take on the routes from January 4, 2016.

Industry sources told The Herald that drivers then “cherry picked” the most profitable routes, leaving up to 50 of the least attractive vacant.

There are now fears these children will have no taxi transport when the term begins.

It is understood TAXIFAST has agreed to cover some services after direct approaches from head teachers in order not to leave those children “high and dry”.

David Trace, TAXIFAST owner, would only say: “We wish Plymouth City Council and all the new contractors well for the new year, and especially the children. These children are very important.”

A council spokesman said: “Plymouth City Council’s passenger services are provided for anyone who qualifies for free transport across the city.

“There are currently 700 young people covering 200 routes, largely made up of vulnerable children with special educational needs or disabilities.
“Following a comparison with similar sized councils, it was decided to re-tender home to school taxi routes to generate better value for money whilst improving the high standards of quality and safeguarding.

“Previously the service used two operators for taxis and two operators for mini buses. Those operators then sub-contracted many routes to smaller suppliers to cover the variety of routes.
“Through this exercise the council has been able to open up the market for other small operators in the city and this will mean better value for money, while improving the high standards of quality, safeguarding and service.

“Unfortunately, at a late stage in the retendering process some of the operators are now not able to deliver all the routes that they have been awarded.

“Of the 700 young people who require the service, approximately 85 have been affected and alternative arrangements are being put in place.
“The council has decided to use some of its own suitable and approved pool and fleet vehicles, along with some employees’ vehicles that are already used for council business.”

Read more: http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Plymout ... z3w5Ob8qOY

_________________
Chris The Fish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdlyi5mc ... re=related


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 1:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
Chris the Fish wrote:
it was decided to re-tender home to school taxi routes to generate better value for money whilst improving the high standards of quality and safeguarding.


So they thought they could get more for less. Excellent thinking.

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 1:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 8:58 pm
Posts: 3568
Location: Plymouth
Let me assure everyone, I will not be tendering. :roll:

_________________
Chris The Fish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdlyi5mc ... re=related


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 2:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 8:15 pm
Posts: 9170
Something don't add up, It affects 50 kids yet 70% equals 130 daily runs for one company, that would make 200 runs per day (100%)...that's 4 Journey's per day per child.

Methinks the council have got their knickers in a twist and can no longer wriggle out of them. #-o


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 2:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
If I had been the owner of Taxifast I would have tendered a new price that was something like 20% above the old price rather than not tender at all.

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 2:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
bloodnock wrote:
Something don't add up, It affects 50 kids yet 70% equals 130 daily runs for one company, that would make 200 runs per day (100%)...that's 4 Journey's per day per child.

Methinks the council have got their knickers in a twist and can no longer wriggle out of them. #-o

Some of the 130 runs will have been let to individual drivers leaving 50 that have not been covered. :wink:

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 6:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2015 7:04 am
Posts: 2555
yet most of these parents who worry about there kids so much, will have cars on the drive but like a lie in , if you are so concerned take them yourself , fooking scum


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 7:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:45 am
Posts: 9966
Location: Braintree, Essex.
ven2112 wrote:
yet most of these parents who worry about there kids so much, will have cars on the drive but like a lie in , fooking scum

=D> =D> =D> =D> =D>


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 7:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:47 pm
Posts: 20863
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
when it comes to school contracts economics goes out of the window which is probably why taxifast told their drivers to bid individually at least then they have only themselves to blame if they get the maths wrong and bid too cheap. One reason why I stopped bidding for school runs years ago. Normal punters going to work pay proper prices and it's noticeable when the schools are off our drivers have work while the others sit around :wink:

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 7:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57359
Location: 1066 Country
Chris the Fish wrote:
Industry sources told The Herald that drivers then “cherry picked” the most profitable routes, leaving up to 50 of the least attractive vacant.

The council cancelled the contract.

If they are worried about 'cherry-picking' then they only have themselves to blame.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2016 10:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 8:15 pm
Posts: 9170
edders23 wrote:
when it comes to school contracts economics goes out of the window which is probably why taxifast told their drivers to bid individually at least then they have only themselves to blame if they get the maths wrong and bid too cheap. One reason why I stopped bidding for school runs years ago. Normal punters going to work pay proper prices and it's noticeable when the schools are off our drivers have work while the others sit around :wink:


Many councils pay extremely decent rates, If an operator gets a poor deals it's because the operator underpriced and underated his true worth...like any other business you have to factor in all costs before tendering a price that will make enough profit to ensure it's worth your while, and if the council won't offer you that price then walk away and focus your efforts on something else.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
bloodnock wrote:
edders23 wrote:
when it comes to school contracts economics goes out of the window which is probably why taxifast told their drivers to bid individually at least then they have only themselves to blame if they get the maths wrong and bid too cheap. One reason why I stopped bidding for school runs years ago. Normal punters going to work pay proper prices and it's noticeable when the schools are off our drivers have work while the others sit around :wink:


Many councils pay extremely decent rates, If an operator gets a poor deals it's because the operator underpriced and underated his true worth...like any other business you have to factor in all costs before tendering a price that will make enough profit to ensure it's worth your while, and if the council won't offer you that price then walk away and focus your efforts on something else.

When we filled in the framework form we were asked to give a price for a certain journey. This was not going to form the basis of any tenders. I just put the rate that would be on our meter. When ever I tender for a school contract I just quote what it would be on the meter, taking into account potential waiting time. I think that is a fair way for both the Council and the driver. I win some and I lose some but if i won every tender I would know that my price was to cheap.

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:45 am
Posts: 9966
Location: Braintree, Essex.
Can't grumble at our School Contracts round here, with the exception of a few turbomongs who think tendering a cheap price is good for business all is OK.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 12:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 8:58 pm
Posts: 3568
Location: Plymouth
Shake-up of Plymouth school taxis leaves 17 routes uncovered and is no longer expected to cut costs
By ChiaraHerald | Posted: March 23, 2016
By CHIARA GIORDANO Education Reporter @cfgiordano
A CONTROVERSIAL shake-up of school taxis has left 17 routes without drivers – and is no longer expected to cut costs either, the council has admitted.
The council has admitted it no longer expects to save tax payers £350,000 a year through a controversial shake-up to school taxi provision.
And that means the axe may fall on other services, says the man leading the cost-cutting mission.
As previously reported in The Herald, Plymouth City Council overhauled its school transport service for 700 children with special needs at the beginning of the year in a bid to save money and improve provision.
At the time, the council hoped to knock £350,000-a-year off its £3.5million transport running costs by activating an early release clause to call time on its contract with providers Taxifirst and Crownhill Taxis.
The contract was instead opened up to smaller taxi firms and individual drivers, who were able to bid for the work.
But the councillor overseeing the changes has now admitted the new system is no longer expected to achieve the predicted savings after Taxifirst, which previously covered 70 per cent of the runs, opted not to get on board.
"We aren't identifying all of the savings we thought which is disappointing," admitted Councillor Jon Taylor.
"The savings target for the new tender over two years was £350,000 but that is unlikely to be realised as a result of what's happened.
"You would've thought if you were putting out an attractive business proposition that they [Taxifirst] would bid for the work.
"It was a risk that was identified but not seen as significant but these things do happen sometimes."
The Budshead councillor said it was "difficult to tell" whether the new system is in fact saving the council any money at all and that they "just don't know".
He says the council now plans to look at cutting costs in other areas through the Growth Assets and Municipal Enterprise Programme (GAME).
"This project is part of a much bigger programme," said Cllr Taylor.
"What normally happens when we've got hundreds of projects is if one doesn't deliver then we will find alternative savings so I think in this case they are looking for alternative savings around commercialisation.
"If you look at a £65million programme, there's always going to be a risk with a project you are looking at – but if you don't take any risks you aren't ever going to see any of the numbers you want to deliver.
"If you look at the changes that we've made to our fleet of vehicles in relation to rubbish collection, that project has delivered big savings so if you look at it in a wider context you offset the savings from one project to another."
In January, The Herald learned that up to 50 children were at risk of being affected by a lack of cover after the council scrapped its arrangements with the two taxi firms.
But Cllr Taylor says the council is making strides in this area and that just 17 routes now remain uncovered by taxi drivers.
"What's happening is those routes are still being covered as they were previously by parents, schools and Plymouth City Council so significant progress has been made," he said.

Read more: http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Shake-P ... z43lqLjq46

_________________
Chris The Fish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdlyi5mc ... re=related


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 12:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 8:58 pm
Posts: 3568
Location: Plymouth
Still not going to go for one - before anyone asks. :roll:

_________________
Chris The Fish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdlyi5mc ... re=related


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 747 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group