Message from the Law Commission - interim statement

RPLawCommission · **Joined:** Tue May 15, 2012 4:35 pm **Posts:** 11

I'm in the uncomfortable position of agreeing with several things Capt Cab has said tonight. On which note, goodnight from me.

captain cab · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:25 pm

Sussex wrote:

And all the above doesn't take account of the fares downward spiral that will happen.

And drivers may leave if they don't earn enough.

Sussex · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:27 pm

Chris the Fish wrote:

I would love to see the responses - buggered if I am going to read all of them, but I would love to know who made a response. I can't find them on the LC website, anyone know how to get hold of them?

http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/are ... s-docs.htm

toots · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:28 pm

captain cab wrote:

Sussex wrote:

And all the above doesn't take account of the fares downward spiral that will happen.

And drivers may leave if they don't earn enough.

More likely to work more hours though :sad:

Sussex · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:28 pm

captain cab wrote:

And drivers may leave if they don't earn enough.

But they don't, they just work longer and longer hours.

Chris the Fish · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:29 pm

Thanks Sussex.

captain cab · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:33 pm

toots wrote:

I'm inclined to agree with you with regard to firm, however I don't believe the situation will be good for the customer at all.

Its the operator that should be responsible for standards - at the moment all of their true responsibility is sub contracted to the Local Authority - the other week I posted an article regarding some PH driver racing to get through a level crossing - the gut response of the operator was to portion blame, point out self employed status and responsibility to the council.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=21250&hilit=cambridge

Paul Clare, operations manager at Panther “Taxis”, with whom Ahmed was working, said: “Mr Ahmed is self-employed and was suspended from the Panther radio network pending his appearance in court and we fully support the penalty imposed on him.”

Of course the driver may be a nutcase - but he may have been late for a booking due to company incompetence - we'll never actually know - although if he'd died it may have came out in an inquest.

Sussex · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:35 pm

blackpool wrote:

Both youve upset him.

I wouldn't dream of it. :roll:

However from memory the LC got a load of grief whilst doing their original consultation, and that was totally unacceptable. So I just wanted to make it clear I'm not like that bunch of ruffians.

Even though, IMO, the LC have got it really wrong. [-X

Sussex · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:42 pm

captain cab wrote:

Its the operator that should be responsible for standards

The PH operator is liable for everything that happens throughout the booking, via contract law.

Should a PH operator be liable for any council condition that's being breached by a driver or vehicle attached to his firm? IMO no.

At present they must keep insurance and personal details, I think that's as much as can be expected.

captain cab · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:45 pm

Sussex wrote:

But in tourist areas many times you never see the punters again.

And because they aren't locals, they won't know when they are being turned over. :sad:

So they aren't getting turned over now?

In actual fact a driver has to know an area to turn over a passenger :lol:

captain cab · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:53 pm

RPLawCommission wrote:

I'm in the uncomfortable position of agreeing with several things Capt Cab has said tonight. On which note, goodnight from me.

There you go......eh? eh?

O:)

Splendid fellows

captain cab · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:56 pm

Sussex wrote:

The PH operator is liable for everything that happens throughout the booking, via contract law.

Should a PH operator be liable for any council condition that's being breached by a driver or vehicle attached to his firm? IMO no.

At present they must keep insurance and personal details, I think that's as much as can be expected.

So why should a council add more which is already the responsibility of the operator.

In any respect if the customer pricing in advance is actually followed through - it maybe doesn't matter which scenic route the minicab driver takes? :wink:

toots · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:57 pm

captain cab wrote:

RPLawCommission wrote:

I'm in the uncomfortable position of agreeing with several things Capt Cab has said tonight. On which note, goodnight from me.

There you go......eh? eh?

O:)

Splendid fellows

As if you needed it said for your head to get any bigger ffs :lol:

toots · **Posted:** Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:00 pm

captain cab wrote:

Sussex wrote:

The PH operator is liable for everything that happens throughout the booking, via contract law.

Should a PH operator be liable for any council condition that's being breached by a driver or vehicle attached to his firm? IMO no.

At present they must keep insurance and personal details, I think that's as much as can be expected.

So why should a council add more which is already the responsibility of the operator.

In any respect if the customer pricing in advance is actually followed through - it maybe doesn't matter which scenic route the minicab driver takes? :wink:

Customer pricing is already done, it costs £3.20 to get in the vehicle and then it costs £1.40 for each mile thereof and 30p for every minute you make me wait for you. Customers don't always go straight from A to B so accurate pricing prior to trip is not always available

blackpool · **Joined:** Wed Sep 30, 2009 10:37 pm **Posts:** 2406

captain cab wrote:

RPLawCommission wrote:

I'm in the uncomfortable position of agreeing with several things Capt Cab has said tonight. On which note, goodnight from me.

There you go......eh? eh?

O:)

Splendid fellows

As wrote by his misses

Taxi Driver Online

Message from the Law Commission - interim statement

Who is online