Taxi Driver Online :: View topic - Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011

Doom wrote:

Limited hackney carriage numbers

Over 25% of local authorities limit the number of hackney carriages that they will licence, based on the "no significant unmet demand" test (s15 Transport Act 1985 applied to s37 Town Police Clauses Act 1847). This leads to a market in licences (with licences commanding premiums of over £50,000 in some cases), and prevents entry to the market for those without significant capital. The process of limitation also involves enormous amounts of local authority time (both members and officers) and increases costs to the hackney carriage trade, without any demonstrable benefit to the travelling public..

So the legal profession is one of an open door then, anyone can become a solicitor if they want to, maybe we should start asking the monopoly commission to look into how they justify prices like there's then, after all, if we're going to get examined and tampered with, why not the legal eagles, £50 for a letter etc, £10k to say a man can have 20% and his ex wife 80%, yes lets make our mission one to bring legal costs down to a sensible level.

The legal profession was examined and opened up years ago that's why you have all those claim companies suddenly come out of the woodwork :wink:

Incidentally anybody can become a solicitor, if you're prepared to go to college/uni and then 5 years of articles or you could become the 'private hire' of the legal trade and work your way up to legal executive

toots wrote:

Doom wrote:

The legal profession was examined and opened up years ago that's why you have all those claim companies suddenly come out of the woodwork :wink:

Didn't really mean that side of it, I mean the outrageous charges they hit everyone with.

Well when you've spent several years at univeristy earning not a lot at all and then 5 years doing articles earning not a lot I guess they think they've earned all that lovely money. They do save people a lot of money sometimes and even allow people to keep their freedom and god only knows how much that is worth. If you think it's so simple to do go take yourself off to uni but be warned it's not like the piece of p*ss they call NVQ

toots wrote:

If that is true, how come they choose to have perms?

CC

captain cab wrote:

toots wrote:

If that is true, how come they choose to have perms?

CC

It might be a natural mop and not a perm :wink:

from the amount of people against him...... that is now documented.... only a fool that wished to commit political suicide would take him seriously

MR T wrote:

from the amount of people against him...... that is now documented.... only a fool that wished to commit political suicide would take him seriously

Other than the LTDA, TDO has more members than any other so-called representative group at that meeting.

So the fact that they all seemed to be anti one-tier doesn't indicate it wont happen just because of that.

I don't think a one-tier system could happen, unless they exclude London from the new act.

Why dont we cherrypick the good bits of law from all acts and come up with two distinct codes?

captain cab wrote:

Why dont we cherrypick the good bits of law from all acts and come up with two distinct codes?

Why not cherrypick best practice from thoughout the UK and see what comes up rather than pandering to the vested interests who simply want a modified version of the status quo because its suits their vested interests?

Dusty Bin wrote:

captain cab wrote:

Why dont we cherrypick the good bits of law from all acts and come up with two distinct codes?

Cos if you do that they come up with restriction and regular surveys

Author:	Doom [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:20 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
toots wrote: Doom wrote: Limited hackney carriage numbers Over 25% of local authorities limit the number of hackney carriages that they will licence, based on the "no significant unmet demand" test (s15 Transport Act 1985 applied to s37 Town Police Clauses Act 1847). This leads to a market in licences (with licences commanding premiums of over £50,000 in some cases), and prevents entry to the market for those without significant capital. The process of limitation also involves enormous amounts of local authority time (both members and officers) and increases costs to the hackney carriage trade, without any demonstrable benefit to the travelling public.. So the legal profession is one of an open door then, anyone can become a solicitor if they want to, maybe we should start asking the monopoly commission to look into how they justify prices like there's then, after all, if we're going to get examined and tampered with, why not the legal eagles, £50 for a letter etc, £10k to say a man can have 20% and his ex wife 80%, yes lets make our mission one to bring legal costs down to a sensible level. The legal profession was examined and opened up years ago that's why you have all those claim companies suddenly come out of the woodwork Incidentally anybody can become a solicitor, if you're prepared to go to college/uni and then 5 years of articles or you could become the 'private hire' of the legal trade and work your way up to legal executive Didn't really mean that side of it, I mean the outrageous charges they hit everyone with.

Author:	captain cab [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:21 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
Doom wrote: toots wrote: Doom wrote: Limited hackney carriage numbers Over 25% of local authorities limit the number of hackney carriages that they will licence, based on the "no significant unmet demand" test (s15 Transport Act 1985 applied to s37 Town Police Clauses Act 1847). This leads to a market in licences (with licences commanding premiums of over £50,000 in some cases), and prevents entry to the market for those without significant capital. The process of limitation also involves enormous amounts of local authority time (both members and officers) and increases costs to the hackney carriage trade, without any demonstrable benefit to the travelling public.. So the legal profession is one of an open door then, anyone can become a solicitor if they want to, maybe we should start asking the monopoly commission to look into how they justify prices like there's then, after all, if we're going to get examined and tampered with, why not the legal eagles, £50 for a letter etc, £10k to say a man can have 20% and his ex wife 80%, yes lets make our mission one to bring legal costs down to a sensible level. The legal profession was examined and opened up years ago that's why you have all those claim companies suddenly come out of the woodwork Incidentally anybody can become a solicitor, if you're prepared to go to college/uni and then 5 years of articles or you could become the 'private hire' of the legal trade and work your way up to legal executive Didn't really mean that side of it, I mean the outrageous charges they hit everyone with. a bit like cherrypicking

Author:	Doom [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:23 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
[/quote] a bit like cherrypicking [/quote]

Author:	toots [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:52 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
Well when you've spent several years at univeristy earning not a lot at all and then 5 years doing articles earning not a lot I guess they think they've earned all that lovely money. They do save people a lot of money sometimes and even allow people to keep their freedom and god only knows how much that is worth. If you think it's so simple to do go take yourself off to uni but be warned it's not like the piece of p*ss they call NVQ

Author:	captain cab [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:53 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
toots wrote: Well when you've spent several years at univeristy earning not a lot at all and then 5 years doing articles earning not a lot I guess they think they've earned all that lovely money. They do save people a lot of money sometimes and even allow people to keep their freedom and god only knows how much that is worth. If you think it's so simple to do go take yourself off to uni but be warned it's not like the piece of p*ss they call NVQ If that is true, how come they choose to have perms? CC

Taxi Driver Online https://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011 https://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=17878	Page 10 of 11

Author:	toots [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:56 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
captain cab wrote: toots wrote: Well when you've spent several years at univeristy earning not a lot at all and then 5 years doing articles earning not a lot I guess they think they've earned all that lovely money. They do save people a lot of money sometimes and even allow people to keep their freedom and god only knows how much that is worth. If you think it's so simple to do go take yourself off to uni but be warned it's not like the piece of p*ss they call NVQ If that is true, how come they choose to have perms? CC It might be a natural mop and not a perm

Author:	captain cab [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:57 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
toots wrote: captain cab wrote: toots wrote: Well when you've spent several years at univeristy earning not a lot at all and then 5 years doing articles earning not a lot I guess they think they've earned all that lovely money. They do save people a lot of money sometimes and even allow people to keep their freedom and god only knows how much that is worth. If you think it's so simple to do go take yourself off to uni but be warned it's not like the piece of p*ss they call NVQ If that is true, how come they choose to have perms? CC It might be a natural mop and not a perm

Author:	wee eddie [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 4:42 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
No decent Solicitor does "No win ~ No Fee" Work. They leave that to the half-wits and the Barrow Boys and get on with the Commercial Stuff that makes real money

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:00 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
MR T wrote: from the amount of people against him...... that is now documented.... only a fool that wished to commit political suicide would take him seriously Other than the LTDA, TDO has more members than any other so-called representative group at that meeting. So the fact that they all seemed to be anti one-tier doesn't indicate it wont happen just because of that. I don't think a one-tier system could happen, unless they exclude London from the new act.

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:01 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
Doom wrote: Relative of yours? He is Dusty and my triplet brother.

Author:	toots [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:53 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
Sussex wrote: MR T wrote: from the amount of people against him...... that is now documented.... only a fool that wished to commit political suicide would take him seriously Other than the LTDA, TDO has more members than any other so-called representative group at that meeting. So the fact that they all seemed to be anti one-tier doesn't indicate it wont happen just because of that. I don't think a one-tier system could happen, unless they exclude London from the new act. Why exclude London

Author:	captain cab [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:58 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
toots wrote: Why exclude London Coz London is special More seriously....hows about this for some much needed common sense. All the London Cab acts do not encompass PH. The London PH Act does not encompass taxis. Why dont we get the taxi bits thrown out of the 1976 act......or better still adopt the London PH act nationally? Why dont we cherrypick the good bits of law from all acts and come up with two distinct codes? CC

Author:	Dusty Bin [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:25 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
captain cab wrote: Why dont we cherrypick the good bits of law from all acts and come up with two distinct codes? Why not cherrypick best practice from thoughout the UK and see what comes up rather than pandering to the vested interests who simply want a modified version of the status quo because its suits their vested interests?

Author:	toots [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:41 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
Dusty Bin wrote: captain cab wrote: Why dont we cherrypick the good bits of law from all acts and come up with two distinct codes? Why not cherrypick best practice from thoughout the UK and see what comes up rather than pandering to the vested interests who simply want a modified version of the status quo because its suits their vested interests? Cos if you do that they come up with restriction and regular surveys

Page 10 of 11	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Doom [ Fri Nov 25, 2011 3:35 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Law Commission Advisory Meeting 22nd November 2011
toots wrote: Dusty Bin wrote: captain cab wrote: Why dont we cherrypick the good bits of law from all acts and come up with two distinct codes? Why not cherrypick best practice from thoughout the UK and see what comes up rather than pandering to the vested interests who simply want a modified version of the status quo because its suits their vested interests? Cos if you do that they come up with restriction and regular surveys aka the sensible choice.