Taxi Driver Online

Back to the proposals.

If a cab driver receives a phone call from a customer outside of his licensing area, would that driver have to ask that customer to ring back in 20 minutes when he back in his manor?

And if that customer was outside of his area, but not far from where he was, would he then have to drive 20 minutes back into his area, answer the phone, and then spend another 20 minutes going back to where he was in the first place?

_________________
IDFIMH

Can I ask a question here ?

I have read the Suggested amendments to the LGMPA 1976.
Lets just say a lay person like myself does not agree with some of the Suggested amendments what do I do to oppose the proposal ?
I am not in any way saying all the proposals are not in the best interest for the trade but I do think amendments like this could effect individuals dramatically so it would be nice to have the opportunity to comment on them and give reasons why we oppose such amendments.

Why I ask this is !

I have stated before on TDO I live / reside a few hundred yards across the border of my licencing council. So what would I have to do in the case I was at home resting or having lunch and a customer rang to arrange a "booking for a future occasion" ?
I would have then to say "hang on a moment until I run down the street so that I can legally talk to you or I will be committing an offence."
The same thing would surely apply if a hackney driver was dropping off outside his licensing area and his mobile rang with someone requesting an advanced booking.

_________________
The greatest pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do.

Sorry Sussex...just you said it better
I was posting at the same time as you I think....

_________________
The greatest pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do.

I think the only way out of the crazy situations we have just listed is for mobile phone bookings to be exempt from any new amendments.

But the new sets of dataheads coming out, or already in place in many areas, are mobile phones in all but name.

So if they exempted mobile phones, then they might as well not bother changing anything.

_________________
IDFIMH

Taxis,

The ideas mooted in the discussion document would not be proposed if any stakeholder found the mooted ideas contentious.

The route of change was specifically for non contentious matters.

There are obvious problems, if a cab is at an airport about to go back to its base and a call came in....would that cab have to be sent 100 miles plus back and another sent?

But you should consider that at the moment a person running an entirely HC radio circuit doesnt apparently need licensed, is that right?

CC

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

I suppose your going to give the exclusion of Carlisle's busiest Taxi rank as an example?

Well done, something you voiciferously supported which was illegal and which discriminated against the majority of the Taxi Trade.

Your moto should read "working together with the council to exclude the majority of the Taxi trade". Any more accolades you want to mention?

These amendments could be another one of your warped sense of priorities, couldn't they? "Working together with NALEO to screw hackney carriage drivers".

I asked you did you drive a cab or just own them? You never replied.

I take it you don't drive a cab even though you may have retained your license. You also say you no longer represent the association to which you belong, so this issue doesn't affect you does it? Or does it?

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.

The people who thought of these proposals obviously are trying to stop hackney drivers been licenced with one council then taking bookings outside there licencing area. As we all know that you can legally do ( at the moment ).....I can see that some hackney drivers never return to there licencing area to work they simply take advanced bookings by mobile phones or land line numbers .
But to stop this and exclude the use of mobile phones to accept bookings outside your licencing area would create more problems for hackney drivers as a whole nationally.
I think this particular proposal needs more thought, there is many hackney drivers throughout the country that do "return to there licencing area" and should not be put in a position where they are committing an offence if they accept a booking on there mobile for been outside there licencing area at the time of the booking.

_________________
The greatest pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do.

Why should we consider that? The owner of a radio system doesn't drive the cab that carries the punter do they? Is that why you support these amendments? I don't think so, you support these amendments because you want to see the freedom of hackney carriage drivers to take bookings anywhere in the country removed.

Do punters phone your office for a cab and ask the operator has Wayne Casey had a CRB check? When you book a self drive hire car do you ask the agent if they have had a crb check? When you book a flight on a plane do you ask if the airline owner has had a crb check?

I'm refraining from stating the obvious.

I suppose your next suggestion will be for all phone staff and radio operators to have crb checks. It might have escaped your attention but in this game you only need a crb check if you drive passengers and their is a reason for that, if you don't already know?

Besides if it ever became a requirement it could easily be achieved by the same legislative method used for Taxi drivers which didn't include altering taxi legislation. Obviously your mind isn't capable of digesting that fact?

Any more preposterous reasons why we need these amendments.

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

Very sensible post, now why didn't the clowns who want to see these proposals implemented think of that. I think you would be a fair exchange for the likes of Mr T who doesn't drive a cab but wants to tell us hackney drivers how we should work.

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.

It seems quite reasonable to suggest you dont fully understand this JD

CC

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

The silence is deafening from these people who support these amendments and want to see cab drivers deprived of the basic rights they currently enjoy, in respect of taking private bookings?

These people have been given the floor and yet not surprisingly they have said sweet FA about why we should lose the rights that allow us to operate with some degree of flexibility? I suspect these people had plenty to say when this document was being discussed at the so called "meeting of minds" gathering.

We had one suggestion from Mr Wayne Casey an avid supporter of these changes as to why we need to relinquish our current right to take private hire bookings without the need of a private hire operators license and his reasoning is this.

The vulnerable public need protection from prospective owners of hackney carriage radio circuits.

To put it another way, Mr Casey thinks that vulnerable people and children under 18 are at risk from radio circuit operators when they are riding in the back of a hackney carriage. That doesn't say a lot for us licensed hackney carriage drivers now, does it?

We all know those arguments are preposterous but clouding the issue is nothing new to Mr Casey. However the radio operator crb check is the only reason put forward so far from Mr Casey as to why we all need to have our current right to take private bookings anywhere in the country removed?

I wonder if Mr Casey realises that every hackney carriage driver in the country has been vetted by their local council in the form of a CRB check before they are given a license?

Perhaps Mr Casey's next crusade will be to ask for all telephone staff to be CRB checked and licensed? Perhaps Mr Casey believes that if your granny answers the phone at home to take a taxi booking while you are out, that she too should require a CRB check?

CRB checks are for the specific purpose of protecting the vulnerable and in this game the only person who has contact with the vulnerable is the Taxi driver. Need I say more?

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 therefore apologise to Mr Casey and the NTA for obliquely suggesting that they probably were involved".




You must really like humble pie JD / Graham

CC

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

Here are some of the effects these proposals will have on hackney carriage drivers if they are implemented?
__________________________

The proposed amendments will mean

1. It will be an offence for any hackney carriage driver in England and Wales to take mobile phone bookings either inside or outside their licenses area.

2. In order to take a private booking at home every individual hackney carriage driver living in England and Wales will require a private hire operator’s license.

3. All Hackney carriage drivers in the UK will no longer be allowed to work for a private hire radio circuit outside their own licensed area.

4. It will be an offence for London and Scottish hackney carriage drivers to accept mobile phone bookings in any area of England and Wales outside London and Scotland.

5. Every private hire booking will have to be recorded and archived for a specified period.

6. Those hackney carriage drivers working under a system such as Taxicall, which operates a system of call diversion, will commit an offence if they take a booking without first obtaining a private hire operators license.

7. The amendment could even make it an offence for companies such as Taxicall who operate private hire call diversion?

8. It will be an offence in England and Wales to accept a direct booking via a mobile phone in any place other than where the operator license is registered.
_______________________

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

As I said before, you really dont understand it and your now completely out of your depth.

Has anyone a pair of armbands for JD / Graham?

CC

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

lol I wouldn't call it humble pie Mr Casey, I would wait for the coup de grâce before you jump to any conclusions. I haven't finished with you just yet so I hope you stick around? In the meantime why don't you answer a few of the questions relating to this document you support or does your involvement in the secret NTA society preclude you from answering? lol

I was asked in a private message if you drove a cab, I wasn't sure what to say so I told the enquirer that Mr Casey might find it hard running a radio circuit and driving a cab at the same time?

Perhaps you can give the enquirer a reply straight from the horses mouth? Do you drive cab?

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.