Taxi Driver Online

JD.. you have so many questions, and mostly put your own answers to them, so it becomes very confusing, you state that I have just made something an offence.... that is not within my power..... all I have done is read what has been written....

I would suggest that you contact George Sims... or Barry Carter.... or even Pat Connor. they'll have copies

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

I think you should start a national Taxi Association for drivers, if you think it would not be a waste of your time and energy.... and money..

As for being surprised that some drivers do not know about the NTA... well let's face it, quite a few don't even know what time it is, or even the shorter route from A to B. after all it is the nature of that beast.

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

The hire would be hack if thats what your picking them up in.
You don't need a booking office licence in Scotland anyway.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

I am thinking along this scenario, with PH all calls go to a base of some kind, and the base sends out the jobs to the drivers, so having the phone in the hack it could be deemed as doing the above, when I accept a call, as opposed to someone jumping in on the rank or a wave down, the only difference being my office is mobile

A hack is always a hack skippy, even if the job is PH. A hack can do PH work but it is still a licenced hack.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

This whole sorry saga just illustrates that we need new legislation fit for the modern world.
Laws which recognise the existence of mobile phones, internet, sat-nav, computers, phone-forwarding and the whole kit and caboodle of the iPod generation.
Perhaps we should just have ONE type of cab as well, instead of this ridiculous split.
Or maybe hackneys could continue BUT could only accept individuals hiring them personally in the street/on rank, and PHVs should be the only cabs to accept prior bookings.

What do people think?

_________________
Our safety is Paramount

Well Trevor, considering I asked you two simple questions I thought you might have had the decency to answer them. You say you have read the proposals, which is an advantage over the rest of us who haven't. We know that you and Casey work hand in glove on many issues so I have no reason not to believe that you didn't have a hand in this little exercise. The reference to committing an offence is what any proposal to change the legislation will mean. I explained this to Casey 12 months ago and he had no answers then and he won't have any now so if your hands are on this proposal then the comment applies subject to implementation.

I also told Casey that if he continued down this road he would also make it illegal for services such as taxicall to operate.

Casey has a fixation but its certainly not about Berwick, its about what the Gladen decision represents. Oddly enough, apart from one or two lemmings in the North East the rest of the Taxi trade in the UK have never heard of Gladen or if they have they couldn't give a flying fig.

I don't see any Berwick cabs working Sefton private hire do you? I can see several Trafford and Salford Cabs working Manchester private hire but thats not a problem. So why should hackney cabs working private hire be such a big deal in the North East and not in the North West? Both Manchester, Trafford and Salford have cabs as old as Berwick and whats more the licensing enforcement in Manchester is probably ten times worse than Berwick. Apart from the occasional once a month Spot checks conducted by VOSA and the rest of the Government agencies I haven't seen a Manchester enforcement officer on foot patrol for over 20 years. You might get the licensing vehicle out on the occasional Friday or Saturday night but they might as well stay at home for what use they are. When they walk past two private hire cars sat on a taxi rank and say nothing then that tells you the calibre of these people.



Didn't you know, He's on holiday until next Friday? But I'm having a special copy of this document hand delivered to me later today so we shall see what all the fuss is about? I wouldn't mind betting that it contains everything Casey and I discussed over 12 months ago when I pointed out the folly of trying to implement such an amendment. I'll have to look for that thread sooner or later.

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.

When you mentioned these proposals my immediate reaction was they had come from the NTA and in particular instigated by Wayne Casey. After some lengthy time consuming enquiries it appears that the NTTG, the GMBU, and the T&G weren't even consulted on these proposals and nor did they know about them?

It would also appear that when all these organisations met two weeks ago nothing whatsoever was mentioned by the NTA, even though they had ample opportunity to do so. The secret society known as the NTA are that secretive that they didn't even inform the very people who represent those who these proposals will impact on most.

I don't know if the NPHA has anything to do with formulating these proposed amendments but if they did then they are tared with the same brush. I'll tell all private hire drivers now, the changes proposed in this document I received today are in no ones interest least of all your own.

So regardless of your attempts to try and deflect attention away from the NTA I can inform everyone that every other National hackney carriage representative trade group in the country played no part in formulating or even agreeing to these proposals.

Mr T would have you believe otherwise

After I've read these proposals I'll post a report on them within 24 hours. At least the Nationwide Taxi trade will be able to see what these clowns are proposing and how they will affect every Taxi driver in the country and all because one man didn't like the Gladen decision.

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.

JD.. You might like to ask yourself the question why I mentioned the proposals in the first place.... Do you think that I did not know what your response would be?.
I do know from your reply that somebody is telling YOU porkies.

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

Well perhaps you care to elaborate? I have no need to doubt the integrity of those persons I spoke to, so if you question their integrity then by all means explain why you believe I was misled?

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.

You conveniently failed to mention that the proposals were the by-product of the NTA and no one else. I suspect everyone reading this thread assumed by your comments that there were other hackney carriage organisations involved in its formulation, when in fact there wasn't.

We now have something that resembles the truth of the matter but no thanks to you.

So having read it what do you think of these proposals and are there any glaring mistakes in the drafting? lol

That should be an easy question answer.

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.

I think I'll let you dig a bigger hole for yourself.. but don't say I didn't try to warn you... it is much more fun and interesting to see other people's point of view .... have fun...

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

I take it you are not prepared to give an opinion on these proposals, is that because you don't understand them, or the fact you believe they are right for the Taxi trade? I take it you are also of the opinion that the drafting is correct? Having read it you see nothing wrong with? I think it is rather obvious that the person responsible for drafting the document also sees nothing wrong with it. lol

Apart from being a dogs breakfast this document quite clearly shows up the failings of you and those involved in drafting it. If you can't see the mistakes then its hardly a very good advertisement on your or their ability to advise others, is it? I suppose your going to tell us you don't advise others?

When you have found flaws in these proposed changes please let us know because we wouldn't like your credibility to suffer too much of a blow.

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.

I would be interested to fine out how much input these proposals had from NALEO.

When some kind soul puts them up maybe we can find a set of words that might do the trick and sort the so-called bad guys, but wont cause big problems for the good guys.

_________________
IDFIMH

Naleo is certainly one organisation that would want changes but Mr T said it was presented for stakeholder discussion, the only problem with that is that the main stakeholders know nothing about this document. Mr T's bosom buddy John Thomson of Sefton is secretary of Naleo but surely his first loyalty is to the Taxi trade and not any licensing enforcement organisation?

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.