Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Tue Apr 28, 2026 1:55 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 231 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 16  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 7:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
Taxis wrote:
Sussex wrote:
I'm still not sure that these proposals are pointing at the right folks. Surely it should be the operators that need looking at.

If they kept sec 46 1(c) as it is, i.e. only a PH op needs an operator's license, but kept the amendments to sec 46 1(e) which would mean any person with an operator's license can only give work to vehicles licensed in the same area, would that not sort the Berwick situations, but allow hackneys to carry on as they are? :?


Well that makes good logical sense actually !
Any person with an operator's license can only give work to vehicles licensed in the same area,
This would surely get to the root of all these arguments. All I hear is how drivers are sick of "Outside hack plates been allowed to work from PH offices outside there licencing areas" well like you say Sussex would this not be a far more simpler answer.

captain cab wrote:
The one thing that seems to come out of the entire situation is one that was called for at least one year ago, namely for places like Derwentside and Berwick and Eden to have knowledge tests.

This has apparently happened in both your area and Eden, presumably this will cut down, if not completely out, with the donor plate scenario, and it wont affect the legitimate trade in your area at all.


I totally agree with this, it has in-fact already had an impressive impact to aid the reduction of "New Plates" been issued.

I am also in favour for a course to become compulsory for all new applicants coming into the trade, so that they become trained in different aspects of the trade. So when they are awaiting there CRB check to be returned ( approx 12 weeks ) they can attend a course covering Customer service, disability awareness, basic vehicle maintenance, topography, legislation / licensing regulations and most of all get an insight into the job by listening to experienced drivers.
On completion the applicants will then receive a VRQ level 2 award.

Once again only my opinion....
Steve




Taxis,

As you seem to be a rational person, if you don't mind I will answer some of the points that have been raised:

The members of the Associations involved should by now have
seen the proposed discussion document, if their Assocs. are worth their
salt.
You will have to excuse my little game with JD (rather childish I admit, but extremely good fun!)

My intention was not to impress my opinion of the rights or wrongs of the proposal, but simply to allow people the right to form their own impressions of it, to stimulate debate.

The hackney trade in my area would not feel comfortable if hackney vehicles from another area were working on private hire radio companies, especially knowing that they were beyond the control of the licencing department that has power over them.

JD's response was predictable, and I am sure there is more to come. I would guess that he is waiting for answers to numerous e-mails he will have sent.

Hackney trade reps represent their members. I will ask you to use your own common sense; do you think these members would be agreeable with regard to having their mobile phones made illegal? and would you also think that trade reps would be stupid enough to think that their members would consent to this? It is obvious that the wording in certain parts of the document needs to be changed.

One last thing regarding mobile phones. To make it so you could not use your mobile phone as an assistance to create work would be unenforceable. You know it, I know it and they certainly know it. :D

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57343
Location: 1066 Country
GA wrote:
However if a PH operator used only HC from outside his licensing area then there would be NO requirement for an operators licence at all.

But then he wouldn't be a PH operator, just a firm taking bookings for hackneys.

Truth is most of the firms using the 'Berwick' opt-out are PH ops, not 100% taxis firms.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:31 pm
Posts: 1761
Location: Commonsense Country
Sussex wrote:
GA wrote:
However if a PH operator used only HC from outside his licensing area then there would be NO requirement for an operators licence at all.

But then he wouldn't be a PH operator, just a firm taking bookings for hackneys.

Truth is most of the firms using the 'Berwick' opt-out are PH ops, not 100% taxis firms.


I accept that Sussex ................. but with current PH operators already stating that they will re-licence all of their vehicles with other Licensing Authorities because of lower pricing ............. and bearing in mind the fact that they will no longer need to pay for licenses themselves .............. I find it slightly bemusing that certain people are focusing on individual HC drivers and not on all of the people across the country who have been refused PH operator licenses who can now operate as a PH operator without the requirement for licensing providing they only use HC.

In short, stop thinking about how it will effect the existing trade and concern yourself for a moment on the implications of those wishing to enter the industry who have previously been unable to enter because of licensing criteria.

B. Lucky :D

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Aberdeen
Wouldn't it be easier just to licence anyone taking bookings for more than 1 HC or PH?

Or is that too easy a solution for those who like the sound of their own voices?

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57343
Location: 1066 Country
I think the problem is quite the reverse.

In my view the Berwick opt-out, be it there or anywhere else, concerns less than 100/200 cars. Maybe up to a 1000 throughout the country.

If the proposed amendments went through (chances IMO 0%) then they would effect 100,000+ cars. :?

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57343
Location: 1066 Country
gusmac wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier just to licence anyone taking bookings for more than 1 HC or PH?

Well I suppose it could be written into a driver's license that he is also a licensed operator. Should cost nothing.

Then he will be able to take bookings, but only in his area of license.

Maybe then we should have a national operators license (for bookings) just for hackneys.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
gusmac wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier just to licence anyone taking bookings for more than 1 HC or PH?

Or is that too easy a solution for those who like the sound of their own voices?
=D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:31 pm
Posts: 1761
Location: Commonsense Country
Sussex wrote:
I think the problem is quite the reverse.

In my view the Berwick opt-out, be it there or anywhere else, concerns less than 100/200 cars. Maybe up to a 1000 throughout the country.

If the proposed amendments went through (chances IMO 0%) then they would effect 100,000+ cars. :?


But Mr Sussex .................... were you yourself not aggravated by the fact that you had to compete with other operations from other areas for certain contracts on the basis that you had to meet certain criteria which the people you were competing with didn't.

B. Lucky :D

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57343
Location: 1066 Country
GA wrote:
But Mr Sussex .................... were you yourself not aggravated by the fact that you had to compete with other operations from other areas for certain contracts on the basis that you had to meet certain criteria which the people you were competing with didn't.

Oh yes, but thankfully we have the laws at present to sort it, if some people can get their fingers out. :roll:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:20 pm
Posts: 124
Location: commonsense country
MR T wrote:
Hackney trade reps represent their members. I will ask you to use your own common sense; do you think these members would be agreeable with regard to having their mobile phones made illegal? and would you also think that trade reps would be stupid enough to think that their members would consent to this? It is obvious that the wording in certain parts of the document needs to be changed.

One last thing regarding mobile phones. To make it so you could not use your mobile phone as an assistance to create work would be unenforceable. You know it, I know it and they certainly know it. :D


Hi, I thank you for the reply.
So I can cancel plans to move house over the county boundary now so I can answer my phone... :lol:
I honestly did not know the situation I apologise for running off at the mouth.

Quote:
You will have to excuse my little game with JD (rather childish I admit, but extremely good fun!)

My intention was not to impress my opinion of the rights or wrongs of the proposal, but simply to allow people the right to form their own impressions of it, to stimulate debate.

Well Mr T it definitely simulated debate :lol:

Deep down I thought it was ludicrous to stop the use of mobile phones and you mentioned hard to enforce....it would be a nightmare to enforce.
Unless pure entrapment was used as a method of enforcement.
eg: waiting in a street or at a airport and ringing the number on a taxi top sign to see if they accept a booking knowing you were outside your area of licencing.....You bugger...you had my a*se going like a cat flap in the wind.
So I will sleep this weekend knowing that impending doom is on the horizon but all is not what meets the eye.

Anyways on a lighter note...GA tells me you are into field sports these days ?
Regards Steve

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:31 pm
Posts: 1761
Location: Commonsense Country
Sussex wrote:
GA wrote:
But Mr Sussex .................... were you yourself not aggravated by the fact that you had to compete with other operations from other areas for certain contracts on the basis that you had to meet certain criteria which the people you were competing with didn't.

Oh yes, but thankfully we have the laws at present to sort it, if some people can get their fingers out. :roll:


But Sussex, the people who attend the "meeting of minds" are getting their fingers out ON THIS ISSUE ............... and the initial suggestions must be debated and then taken to the membership of each representative present ...................... there I'm sure there will be amended proposals and then through further debate a clear proposal for implementation ........................ a proposal which will be discussed with members of the groups concerned.

To use a phrase Comrade Wolfie Smith (aka Terry Flanagan) often used ................. DECISIONS ARE MADE BY THOSE THAT TURN UP.

B. Lucky :D

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:31 pm
Posts: 1761
Location: Commonsense Country
Taxis wrote:
Anyways on a lighter note...GA tells me you are into field sports these days ?
Regards Steve


Providing he doesn't have to walk to far :shock:

B. Lucky :D

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 11:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
Taxis wrote:
MR T wrote:
Hackney trade reps represent their members. I will ask you to use your own common sense; do you think these members would be agreeable with regard to having their mobile phones made illegal? and would you also think that trade reps would be stupid enough to think that their members would consent to this? It is obvious that the wording in certain parts of the document needs to be changed.

One last thing regarding mobile phones. To make it so you could not use your mobile phone as an assistance to create work would be unenforceable. You know it, I know it and they certainly know it. :D


Hi, I thank you for the reply.
So I can cancel plans to move house over the county boundary now so I can answer my phone... :lol:
I honestly did not know the situation I apologise for running off at the mouth.

Quote:
You will have to excuse my little game with JD (rather childish I admit, but extremely good fun!)

My intention was not to impress my opinion of the rights or wrongs of the proposal, but simply to allow people the right to form their own impressions of it, to stimulate debate.

Well Mr T it definitely simulated debate :lol:

Deep down I thought it was ludicrous to stop the use of mobile phones and you mentioned hard to enforce....it would be a nightmare to enforce.
Unless pure entrapment was used as a method of enforcement.
eg: waiting in a street or at a airport and ringing the number on a taxi top sign to see if they accept a booking knowing you were outside your area of licencing.....You bugger...you had my a*se going like a cat flap in the wind.
So I will sleep this weekend knowing that impending doom is on the horizon but all is not what meets the eye.

Anyways on a lighter note...GA tells me you are into field sports these days ?
Regards Steve



Steve

My name is Trevor. I do not accept your apology because you have nothing to apologise for. If I were you I would also question anything that was about to affect my life, and I would demand answers so that I understood the proposals.

Captain Cab has stated that no proposals would go forward unless they were uncontentious....................meaning that every association agrees on the proposals......................if one assoc. disagrees then nothing will go forward. Apologies for repeating myself, but people seem to miss this point.

Please tell me you shoot!! :D

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 11:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
GA wrote:
Taxis wrote:
Anyways on a lighter note...GA tells me you are into field sports these days ?
Regards Steve


Providing he doesn't have to walk to far :shock:

B. Lucky :D


I will have you 8) :wink:

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 12:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:20 pm
Posts: 124
Location: commonsense country
MR T wrote:

Steve

My name is Trevor.

Please tell me you shoot!! :D


Well Trevor Hello...Getting away from Taxi talk for just a post or two..Yes I do mate.
I have various locations where I have rights and owners permission to shoot and of course take care of there vermin problems spread from the Scottish borders to North Yorkshire.
I can just about say I have access to most species on our quarry list.
I did however give up rifle shooting some years ago ( I find it boring as sin )..But I still have a passion for working gundogs and needless to say shooting over them.
Overall from a training point of view I like my Rabbit shooting
And the odd day in a pigeon hide still appeals to me.
I do have some good wildfowl places one in particular still gets me going where vast numbers of Canada geese congregate..
I am big on conservation and never go mad and make a place destitute.
I will actually re-stock Rabbit places if need be so there is always ground game for the dogs.

Before I came into the taxi trade among other things a big part of my daily life was built around the training and trialling of English Springers.
( I have Cocker's now...There More of a challenge )lol

Here is a couple of pics of the dogs and stuff.
Sorry to all I know its a Taxi forum but Mr T did ask...lol

Image

Image

Image
Above is my pups first Raabbit
Image

We also have Ferrets..Well our lass keeps these ( But there good fun for a shooting bolting rabbits day ).
Image
And there they are again
Image
Image

Here are the 2 bitches I had
Image
Image
Image
And finally the pup I have in now...
Image
Anyways its your fault Trevor for this massive post...You asked me !

Regards Steve
Well maybe this thread needs to lighten up a little :D

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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 231 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 16  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 997 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