Taxi Driver Online

It does indeed.

However you could say that adapting to the needs of customers is why one part of our trade has grown considerably, whilst the other has grown not so considerably.

The days have long gone when customers took their chance trying to get a cab, in the outskirts/suburbs via a rank or a flag-down. Now that just never happens, they ring for one and get it to their door.

So why would you want to have a licence that would allow you to do these things Suspect, when you yourself clearly understand that the major potential for higher earnings is within the P/H sector.

Could I suggest that your only motivation are envy and greed.

B. Lucky

Well you can suggest what you like, however before you start preaching perhaps you can give us your registered charity number.

What I want is for all to be treated the same, and given the same oppourtunities as others. Something both you and your union seem to hate.

I just don't know why you persist with this argument Mick, it just seems to twist what might be regarded as basic thinking that is taken for granted in society.

Let's see, some are afforded blatantly preferential treatement, then those who want equality are called greedy and envious???

I would suggest that the term 'greedy' might be better targetted at the former, not the latter.

Hopefully the OFT will contain my kind of argument in their report, and we'll then see if MPs etc use your kind of argument in response.

Dusty

Yes, part of the problem here is that the number of HCs is so restricted in many areas that they pick and choose where they work so there aren't ranks in many areas that might be served by HCs in unrestricted areas, and there are so few in the streets that people simply don't bother hailing one.

I think this is what's called supressed demand in the consultants' reports, although in those cases I think they are more probably referring to demand evident at the particular ranks surveyed rather than in the local authority area as a whole.

However, that marvellous invention the telephone has certainly tipped the balance towards pre-booked work, notwithstanding the above.

Dusty

I'm not so sure Andy - take Brighton for example, the only thing that's stopping an effective one-tier system there is the license quotas, surely?

Dusty

jesus dusty the telephone as an invention is not that new!

christ they had them when they filled you with ashes!

since tv meal packets went inside you memory has slipped

Wharfie

Well I never claimed that it was that new, just that it has contributed towards more pre-booked work.

For example, I know that in my household we didn't have a phone until I had almost left school, but of course with you aristocratic background no doubt you had one next to your cot

There are still lots of people who don't have a phone, because they haven't got a credit history or can't afford the deposit or whatever.

That's why there's still been plenty of public telephones available until recently.

Of course, more recently the mobile phones explosion has further changed the balance.

Dusty

In the main yes, but I'm still not sure what we do with the exec cars, limos, small minibuses. Do we want stretch limos pulling onto the ranks?

Then what happens if all HCs have to be WAV?

Yes, as we discussed recently on another thread a PH tier would still be necessary, but not for so-called taxis and similar.

Anyway, I doubt if there would be many stretch limos or S-class Mercs willing to rank up at the hack rates

The WAV issue is a good point - a one tier WAV trade would just be unfeasible.

However, as we again discussed in another thread, policies could be put in place to encourage a WAV sector, and not force one.

What is better, both for the public and the disabled, and the trade?

100 HCs, 20 of which are WAVs, and no PH.

Or 25 WAVs HCs and 75 PH?

Dusty

Well the former is my favored option.

However unless subsidies are offered to the WAV owners, it's going to be difficult to decide who pays £30,000, and who pays £10,000 for a new vehicle.

I can only agree Andy that subsididies are the answer. I cannot accept that we are not part of the transport infrastructure of this land. I for one one am sick and tired of the grinning beard (Branson) being on the t.v, and in the papers etc every couple of days telling us about HIS latest investment in new trains in HIS company.He forgets a couple of things,Stagecoach are the major shareholders in the company and more importantly they have just recieved a further subsidy of £238,000.000 from us.
I go back to what I have been saying for years,A one tier system for taxis.With the highest possible entry level, all vehicles to be wheelchair accessible. There should be a range to choose from, and if this government is serious about the disabled we should attract subsidies to buy the vehicles. These vehicles should be purpose built and not conversion jobs. The turning circle to my mind is a red herring to perpetuate the hold on the market by our friends LTI.
Can you imagine the major manufacturers licking their lips if they could get public money to develop such a vehicle and then knowing that their customers were getting further subsidies to buy them?
This would ,I believe, help to get rid of the "us and them" attitude. Everybody buying one type of vehicle (different manufacturers to ensure competition).Everybody acting under one set of laws. Get control from local authorities who have abused their position down the years. It would also at a stroke get rid of the parasites with their O licences cocking a snook at the rest of us abiding by the rules. I would also say that limos and the rest would still need legislation, it matters little to me that whether they get paid on the day or they invoice a month later it is still hire and reward and should be legislated accordingly.
If anybody thinks this is just wishful thinking, try the maths, imagine all the taxis and then all the P.H going into the melting pot and coming out as new hybrid without any grey areas,all spending £20,000 on a new vehicle,thus all charging the same economical running rate. Utopia perhaps but we have to look beyond what we have now.
I need to and lie down now. Ged

And quite deserved it will be.

I can well foresee a high standard of HC vehicle and driver being the norm, possibly including compulsory WAVs.

I hope and pray that some sort of national standard will come in. This will rid us of the cross-border mess, were two adjoining councils have totally different levels of vehicle and driver standard.

I haven't myself got a problem with the conversions, they have saved some of my colleagues tens of thousands. And to be honest I don't like the way LTI operate.

Roll on OFT, then we can debate the facts, not our thoughts.

Yes, whatever happens it should avoid any element of compulsion, which should have been jettisoned in medieval times.

As we discussed a couple of years ago a bit of regulatory tinkering could provide a mixed fleet with an adequate number of WAVs, eg different age rules, fuel duty rebate, different license fees (as in Dublin).

Even 20% WAVs would be better than in some locations at present, even those with 100% WAV HCs.

I disagree with Ged, however, I don't think a one tier WAV only trade is feasible - it would be more expensive, and this would be paid for either by customers in the shape of higher fares and lower availability, or the trade takes the hit.

Then there's people who can't get into a WAV, and people who don't like PBs at all.

So I think with a one tier WAV trade, a smaller tier of saloon cars would be required in one form or other, so it wouldn't be a one tier trade

But a mixed fleet would be better than what we've got now, and with no compulsion involved.

Dusty

no dusty
we had contraptions of 2 metal tins connected with string, actually but had one in every room.

we tried this method on the taxis but the string kept breaking.

Wharfie