Taxi Driver Online

Read the story here:

http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/transfers.htm

Post your views below!

So the only thing stopping the half-way house of giving old plates to new drivers, is the dishonesty of the old drivers.

What a surprise.

_________________
IDFIMH

But can we really be so unkind to those who maybe try their hands, without blaming the system that allows them to do it?

Alex

_________________
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ

Simply the best taxi forum in the whole wide world. www.taxi-driver.co.uk

most people now the score.if they dont when they buy, they do after a while. so they can then resale it if they want do.
isnt one of the first thing you are told when buying anything buyer beware.

The problem we are going to have Mr Guest, is not buyer beware, but buyer non-stop be-moaning.

_________________
IDFIMH

Twice the plates. Half the work. Twice the tariff.

Great, I'll be able to read Lord of the Rings on the rank. That's if I can get on one in the first place.

But the shortage of rank space, doesn't justify keeping the numbers restrictions.

It just means that there is a shortage of rank space, and someone needs to do something about it. Be it drivers unions/associations or the council.

Perhaps it might be good, if it was both.

_________________
IDFIMH

I doubt it, somehow.

Plates could well double in places like Luton, where taxis are only around 10% of the combined fleet and numbers are obviously hugely distorted.

So jockeys run there own cab or some PH switch to taxis.

What's the big deal?

It won't mean half the work for the same reasons - as per the OFT report, in the de-restricted areas the combined fleet hardly changed in size.

Luton is similar in population to Aberdeen, which has 900 taxis compared to less than 100 in Luton.

Apparently Aberdeen has a very good fleet of (saloon) vehicles - perhaps someone from north of the border could confirm this. And a low tariff.

I can't really see any need for tariff changes.

Dusty

no need for tariff changes? now you are taking the [edited by admin], with an order to go all WAV, and a report wanting better service massive tarriff increases are in the pipeline.

Dusty your assertion of no need is the biggest lie of all.

Well I was talking about de-restriction obviously, so WTF's the rest got to do with things?

Anyway, considering the 'excess profits' being earned in some areas the Govt might take the view that de-restriction could mean WAVs replacing saloon cars without any need for change.

If you compare areas then you'll probably find that with the country's fare lottery then tariffs in some PB areas aren't dissimilar to those in saloon areas.

You don't need tariff increases for WAVs - but what would probably happen is that if you have saloons and they don't rise then you'll end up with a bigger PH sector than you would have otherwise.

There's no economic logic in current fare structures, so to that extent you point lacks logic.

Dusty

Twice the taxis. Half the work. No tariff increase.

Standards fall. Public safety compromised.

Oh, and if you don't believe that doubling the number of taxis will halve the amount of work, just ask anyone who got their own taxi for the first time. New found enthusiasm. Bills to pay - Radio dues to pay (got to have one don't you?) Insurance, expensive for first time owners - Repairs, could be a shock for the first time owner - all of which continue to accrue when off work through holidays, sickness or whatever.

Remember, in due course the increase in taxis won't just be taken up by those leaving other taxis. Half the work might just be an understatement?

Added to which, there's now nothing to stop criminal elements taking out plates and, overtime, taking over the whole trade. Licences can be issued willy nilly. So, who knows, we might all be working for big garages backed by laundered cash?

I can't wait for these dubious concerns bleeding me dry. After all, I'm used to the council doing it. Repairers doing it. Taxi retailers doing it. Insurance companies doing it. Should make a nice change!!!

Jasbar

Yes Jasbar that could well happen.

But he would have had the choice to do so, without having to pay tens of thousands to someone, for something that person got for nothing.

In fact he would be better off struggling under a de-limited system, because he wouldn't have the black-market premium around his neck.

_________________
IDFIMH

If there are any problems in this regard then regulation is the problem, it has nothing to do with restricted numbers.

Apparenty the London taxi trade has an excellent safety record, and have never operated restricted numbers, and are reputed to offer a high standard of service in general terms.

Contrast New York and London - the former infamous for crap service, the latter lauded internationally.

In NY plates are worth £200,000 plus, in London they are worthless.

Restricted numbers are an irrelevance as regards all the issues that are generally cited in their defence - it's down to other issuse, primarily lack of regulation in most cases.

And numerical restrictionsit don't help earnings of journeymen - the trade takes on journeymen until wages are such that they can't get any lower, but of course the trade is not satisfied with this and always wants more journeymen and thus lower wages - New York, Brighton, Edinburgh, it's the same everywhere.

By the way, OFT report did provide stats saying that there was no difference in accident rates between restricted and unrestricted authorities.

Dusty

Yes, that sounds like the kind of argument you often hear from owners who don't want jockies to do what they seem to be doing themselves - running a vehicle - and thus always has to be taken with a pinch of salt. Are you saying no one should run vehicles? Well, obviously not, but it shouldn't be for you or councillors to play god and tell people what they should and shouldn't do in this regard. Obviously some drivers may prefer to jockey but that should be their decision - if they can't make up their own mind and need their hand held then they shouldn't be driving a taxi in any case.

As regards the amount of work after de-restriction, how it will pan out exactly depends on local circumstances.

For example, in Brighton PH and HC are effectively one and the same, so if de-limitation took place them most PH would go HC, but since they most work fot the same offices then overall the amount of work won't change, but what will is that some won't have a monopoly on the street work that they had before, and why should they have had a monopoly in the first place?

In a place like Luton numbers could well rise considerably, say taxis increased from a tenth to a quarter of the local combined fleet - that's an increase in taxis of 150%.

But is a taxi fleet comprising 25% of the local combined trades such a disaster?

What about Edinburgh, for example, where taxis comprise a TWO THIRDS of the combined fleet.

By your reckoning, things would be a disaster, but plates in Edinburgh are still worth £25k.

The bottom line is that some markets are so distorted by quotas that numbers could rise substnatially, but this has knock on effects elsewhere, such as increasing rank and hail work in previously unserviced areas, and taxis doing more pre-booked work - Edinburgh and Aberdeen are clearly demonstrative of this.

And as the T&G have usefully pointed out, even with taxi numbers increasing by 50% in Sheffield rank waiting times didn't increase that much, implying that de-restriction was hardly a disaster job-wise.

Dusty

PS The Brighton example is hypothetical only, since it seems improbable that a de-limit wouldn't be on the basis of WAVs, thus perpetuating a PH sector.

So what's to stop that happening now?

Probably someone to do with the 'fit and proper' person requirements.

How would this change with de-restriction?

Dusty