Why is it that we are not geting our act together we all know what is happering are we going to just let it happen.
| Taxi Driver Online https://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| why is https://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=18614 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | charles007 [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | why is |
Why is it that we are not geting our act together we all know what is happering are we going to just let it happen.
|
|
| Author: | toots [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
charles007 wrote: Why is it that we are not geting our act together we all know what is happering are we going to just let it happen. What's happening, do you know or are you, like everybody else, speculating? |
|
| Author: | andycable [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
When in april are they telling us what they want to do ? What do you think they are going to tell us ? What would you like them to tell us ? I have quite a few thoughts but I dont like going first at much 
|
|
| Author: | toots [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
You gotta come first at something it might as well be on here 
|
|
| Author: | Brummie Cabbie [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
andycable wrote: I have quite a few thoughts but I dont like going first at much Thoughts are continuosly being collected by email at; Email; hannah.gray@lawcommission.gsi.gov.uk |
|
| Author: | captain cab [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
Brummie Cabbie wrote: andycable wrote: I have quite a few thoughts but I dont like going first at much Thoughts are continuosly being collected by email at; Email; hannah.gray@lawcommission.gsi.gov.uk the thought police.......Orwell wasn't wrong. CC |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
charles007 wrote: Why is it that we are not geting our act together we all know what is happering are we going to just let it happen. Because many don't know what act to get, some are content with what act might come, and some are those that always leave it to late. |
|
| Author: | andycable [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
Brummie Cabbie wrote: andycable wrote: I have quite a few thoughts but I dont like going first at much Thoughts are continuosly being collected by email at; Email; hannah.gray@lawcommission.gsi.gov.uk Well lets discuss it like grown ups and send them the link. I will get the ball rolling then, one plate one person (conditions within). |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
andycable wrote: I will get the ball rolling then, one plate one person (conditions within). I will add, but don't expect an avalanche of support, i) very high national standards of driver (in accordance with the London cab trade) and vehicle ii) no restrictions on taxi numbers iii) locally licensed PH operators using locally licensed PH drivers and vehicles iv) 100% of taxi/PH licensing fees spent on the taxi/PH licensing function v) licensing officers allowed to enforce all vehicles in their area, be they locally licensed or not vi) fares being set via a fair and reasonable formula, reviewed annually vii) council set fares to be the maximum allowed no matter where the job ends viii) fixed penalties for minor offences that currently see drivers being suspended ix) statutory taxi PH code of conduct that will stop the trade's current decline into civil war x) ban Unite from having anything to do with our trade |
|
| Author: | gusmac [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
Sussex wrote: andycable wrote: I will get the ball rolling then, one plate one person (conditions within). I will add, but don't expect an avalanche of support, i) very high national standards of driver (in accordance with the London cab trade) and vehicle ii) no restrictions on taxi numbers iii) locally licensed PH operators using locally licensed PH drivers and vehicles iv) 100% of taxi/PH licensing fees spent on the taxi/PH licensing function v) licensing officers allowed to enforce all vehicles in their area, be they locally licensed or not vi) fares being set via a fair and reasonable formula, reviewed annually vii) council set fares to be the maximum allowed no matter where the job ends viii) fixed penalties for minor offences that currently see drivers being suspended ix) statutory taxi PH code of conduct that will stop the trade's current decline into civil war x) ban Unite from having anything to do with our trade 
|
|
| Author: | Brummie Cabbie [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
Sussex wrote: andycable wrote: I will get the ball rolling then, one plate one person (conditions within). I will add, but don't expect an avalanche of support, i) very high national standards of driver (in accordance with the London cab trade) and vehicle ii) no restrictions on taxi numbers iii) locally licensed PH operators using locally licensed PH drivers and vehicles iv) 100% of taxi/PH licensing fees spent on the taxi/PH licensing function v) licensing officers allowed to enforce all vehicles in their area, be they locally licensed or not vi) fares being set via a fair and reasonable formula, reviewed annually vii) council set fares to be the maximum allowed no matter where the job ends viii) fixed penalties for minor offences that currently see drivers being suspended ix) statutory taxi PH code of conduct that will stop the trade's current decline into civil war x) ban Unite from having anything to do with our trade Generally in agreement even on ii) provided that i) is nationally mandatory. No mention of the most important issue though; enforcement. xi) The right of enforcement officers to impound contravening vehicles for illegal plying for hire pending a confiscation order from the courts. Strongly agree with vi) but only if fares in all LA are initially thoroughly reviewed and set at the correct level to start with. Don't agree with vii) and neither do DfT as per their written submission to the HoC Select Committee. x) would be undemocratic, but who gives a flying fukc. |
|
| Author: | captain cab [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
1, ban Unite from having anything to do with our trade 2, adoption of London PH act across England & Wales 3, ban Unite from having anything to do with our trade 4, All 'taxi' radio circuits to be licensed. 5, ban Unite from having anything to do with our trade 6, All local authorities must have a local based topographical knowledge test for all taxi drivers. 7, ban Unite from having anything to do with our trade 8, Adoption of a second tier of private hire licensing specifically to cover limousines, specialist hire and executive hire vehicles 9, ban Unite from having anything to do with our trade 10, A completely seperate Taxi and Private Hire function in all local authorities 11, Ban unite 12, All newly licensed taxis must be wheelchair accessible 13, Ban Unite 14, Surveys of demand to be part of the function of local transport plans 15, Ban unite 16, Greater harmony between licensing, planning and highways departments, irrespective of their authority (local council or country council) 17, Ban Unite 18, Section 52 of the road safety act to be abolished or clear guidance issued. 19, Ban unite 20, free and unfettered access to all rail and transport intercharges 21, ban unite CC |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
Brummie Cabbie wrote: xi) The right of enforcement officers to impound contravening vehicles for illegal plying for hire pending a confiscation order from the courts. I don't think that's a proportionate act for simply plying. Repeatedly picking up un booked, possibly, but not just for plying. As vii) I merely suggest the Law Commission ignore the ramblings of the DfT and listen to those amongst us that realise how much damage is being done to our trade by greedy cherry pickers. |
|
| Author: | captain cab [ Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
Sussex wrote: I don't think that's a proportionate act for simply plying. Repeatedly picking up un booked, possibly, but not just for plying. As vii) I merely suggest the Law Commission ignore the ramblings of the DfT and listen to those amongst us that realise how much damage is being done to our trade by greedy cherry pickers. Is this the same DfT that done absolutely zero to stop the Berwick scenario with vehicles working miles away from their actual place of license? Of course the law should be changed to ban extortionate off the meter quotes......only a complete ar*e would say it shouldnt.....or a cherry picker. CC |
|
| Author: | MR T [ Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: why is |
charles007 wrote: Why is it that we are not geting our act together we all know what is happering are we going to just let it happen. Charlie you need to be patient... a great many people who certainly have their own agendas have been pounding away at the Law Commission, the Law Commission at present has been gently feeling its way around the taxi and private hire trades. there is nothing that can be done at present,,, the next stage will be a consultation with all interested parties... and then they will present their recommendations.... until then how will we know whether we agree or disagree.... |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|