Taxi Driver Online :: View topic - John Preece wins court battle against Plymouth council

@ sussex, jd and steveo.

I think you need to re-read my post, I'm certainly not anti de-restriction, I personally welcome it but I'm a minority of 1.

Ultimately I think John Preece is after these plates out of principle and out of greed. Good on him for persuing this so far, but if the survey was done properly, I am confident the judge would have rightly thrown this case out.

"The Taxifast requirement of these Hackney plates is in direct response to consumer demand."

Ha! Demand for PH maybe, but demand for hackney? Everyone in driver in Plymouth would know that is a load of tripe.

It's pretty clear now that the survey on which the council relied was done by monkeys and its now going to cost them.

However, I can't help but feel that if another survey was conducted (properly) it would still show no SUD.

Ultimately I think John Preece is after these plates out of principle and out of greed. Good on him for persuing this so far, but if the survey was done properly, I am confident the judge would have rightly thrown this case out.

Plymouth does not need any more hackneys. Customers would not benefit from delimitation.

Drives.

Drives wrote:

mr preece sounds like a greedy man

Ultimately I think John Preece is after these plates out of principle and out of greed.

Ha! Demand for PH maybe, but demand for hackney? Everyone in driver in Plymouth would know that is a load of tripe.

If the council is protected from costs, who is going to take them on? That's a fight we will no doubt have in the High Court."

http://makeashorterlink.com/?K5A1231EC

COUNCIL BRAKES ON TAXI APPEAL

12:00 - 29 March 2006
Plymouth City Council will not launch an appeal against a court decision to award city firm Taxifast a hackney carriage licence.

But the authority stressed it was still considering the 'policy implications' of Mr Recorder Jonathan Fuller QC's decision on March 7.

The judge upheld Taxifast's appeal against the council's refusal to grant the licence in 2003, and it is now unclear whether the ruling means the council will have to scrap its 359-cab limit on Hackney carriages.

If it does, it will have serious implications on existing black cab owners, and bus companies.

Taxifast boss John Preece yesterday launched his own appeal - by way of case stated in the High Court - to obtain a further 29 hackney licences.

The March 7 decision ordered that Taxifast should be awarded just the one licence plate for one Hackney cab that it had presented to the council.

It ruled the firm's demands for another 29 plates were not made as formal applications.

Mr Preece has also applied to the council for a further 50 hackney plates and offered to give a presentation of his plans to run 'taxibuses'.

He told the Herald he has yet to hear from the council and said: "We will be challenging them if they decide to retain the limit."

Mr Preece feels his taxibus idea fits with the authority's transport plan and said: "If they do not permit us to do that we will have to push things forward."

The transport mogul is also planning a further appeal - this time on the issue of costs.

On Friday, March 24, the Recorder allowed a council appeal against his original award of costs reducing the amount the authority had to pay from 60 per cent to 20 per cent of Taxifast's bill.

Mr Preece said he was concerned that taxi operators elsewhere in the country would be dissuaded from making an appeal against a local authority decision if they thought the costs were prohibitive. He said: "That is a serious injustice. If the council is protected from costs, who is going to take them on? That's a fight we will no doubt have in the High Court."

During the hearing Mr Preece announced his intention to run a fleet of 30 'taxibuses', which must have a hackney licence.

He is appealing to the High Court to obtain a further 29 hackney licences, denied him at the Plymouth hearing.

And he has applied to the council for a further 50 hackney plates and offered to give a presentation of his plans to run taxibuses.

Author:	Darren63 [ Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:26 pm ]
Post subject:
@ sussex, jd and steveo. I think you need to re-read my post, I'm certainly not anti de-restriction, I personally welcome it but I'm a minority of 1.

Author:	JD [ Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:33 pm ]
Post subject:
Darren63 wrote: @ sussex, jd and steveo. I think you need to re-read my post, I'm certainly not anti de-restriction, I personally welcome it but I'm a minority of 1. Re read it and accept your point. Regards JD

Author:	Sussex [ Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:42 pm ]
Post subject:
Darren63 wrote: @ sussex, jd and steveo. I think you need to re-read my post, I'm certainly not anti de-restriction, I personally welcome it but I'm a minority of 1. It may seem you are a minority of one, but I very much doubt you are. It's that most people just go with the flo and/or can't be bothered to argue with the big mouths. There was time when I just thought it was me, out of 250,000 licensed taxi/PH drivers, that thought quotas were wrong. But thanks to this site and it's members we are not alone.

Author:	Drives [ Thu Mar 09, 2006 10:14 am ]
Post subject:
"The Taxifast requirement of these Hackney plates is in direct response to consumer demand." Ha! Demand for PH maybe, but demand for hackney? Everyone in driver in Plymouth would know that is a load of tripe. It's pretty clear now that the survey on which the council relied was done by monkeys and its now going to cost them. However, I can't help but feel that if another survey was conducted (properly) it would still show no SUD. Ultimately I think John Preece is after these plates out of principle and out of greed. Good on him for persuing this so far, but if the survey was done properly, I am confident the judge would have rightly thrown this case out. Plymouth does not need any more hackneys. Customers would not benefit from delimitation. Drives.

Author:	JD [ Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:37 pm ]
Post subject:
Drives wrote: Ultimately I think John Preece is after these plates out of principle and out of greed. Good on him for persuing this so far, but if the survey was done properly, I am confident the judge would have rightly thrown this case out. And if Plymouth had given Mr Preece an answer to his application back in 2003 he wouldn't have had to spend 350 grand getting a license. Councillors think they can do what they want, it happened in Edinburgh, it happened in Plymouth and its happening all over the country. If he had got a refusal like he should have done back in 2003 then he would have got his plates and lots of them. Councillors have 20 days left to appeal, my money is on Plymouth removing quantity controls. It just proves how precarious the system really is? Regards JD

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

John Preece wins court battle against Plymouth council https://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3341	Page 3 of 7

Author:	Scott AKA TMTLTH [ Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:39 pm ]
Post subject:
Drives wrote: "The Taxifast requirement of these Hackney plates is in direct response to consumer demand." Ha! Demand for PH maybe, but demand for hackney? Everyone in driver in Plymouth would know that is a load of tripe. It's pretty clear now that the survey on which the council relied was done by monkeys and its now going to cost them. However, I can't help but feel that if another survey was conducted (properly) it would still show no SUD. Ultimately I think John Preece is after these plates out of principle and out of greed. Good on him for persuing this so far, but if the survey was done properly, I am confident the judge would have rightly thrown this case out. Plymouth does not need any more hackneys. Customers would not benefit from delimitation. Drives. mr preece sounds like a greedy man

Author:	Skull [ Thu Mar 09, 2006 3:00 pm ]
Post subject:
Scott AKA TMTLTH wrote: Drives wrote: "The Taxifast requirement of these Hackney plates is in direct response to consumer demand." Ha! Demand for PH maybe, but demand for hackney? Everyone in driver in Plymouth would know that is a load of tripe. It's pretty clear now that the survey on which the council relied was done by monkeys and its now going to cost them. However, I can't help but feel that if another survey was conducted (properly) it would still show no SUD. Ultimately I think John Preece is after these plates out of principle and out of greed. Good on him for persuing this so far, but if the survey was done properly, I am confident the judge would have rightly thrown this case out. Plymouth does not need any more hackneys. Customers would not benefit from delimitation. Drives. mr preece sounds like a greedy man Or is that a business Man? Mr. Preece is what all taxi drivers claim to be the minute they get a License Plate only this guy is not kidding himself on.

Author:	Sussex [ Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:13 pm ]
Post subject:
Drives wrote: Ultimately I think John Preece is after these plates out of principle and out of greed. Who knows, but if memory serves me right Mr Preece wanted to get the rights to Plymouth Station, and First Great Western said no because he has no hackneys who can ply for hire. Thus he might be very keen to get 30 (maybe 80) hackney plates to cover the station work.

Author:	Sussex [ Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:22 pm ]
Post subject:
Drives wrote: Ha! Demand for PH maybe, but demand for hackney? Everyone in driver in Plymouth would know that is a load of tripe. But was that PH demand once taxi demand?

Author:	steveo [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:07 pm ]
Post subject:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?K5A1231EC COUNCIL BRAKES ON TAXI APPEAL 12:00 - 29 March 2006 Plymouth City Council will not launch an appeal against a court decision to award city firm Taxifast a hackney carriage licence. But the authority stressed it was still considering the 'policy implications' of Mr Recorder Jonathan Fuller QC's decision on March 7. The judge upheld Taxifast's appeal against the council's refusal to grant the licence in 2003, and it is now unclear whether the ruling means the council will have to scrap its 359-cab limit on Hackney carriages. If it does, it will have serious implications on existing black cab owners, and bus companies. Taxifast boss John Preece yesterday launched his own appeal - by way of case stated in the High Court - to obtain a further 29 hackney licences. The March 7 decision ordered that Taxifast should be awarded just the one licence plate for one Hackney cab that it had presented to the council. It ruled the firm's demands for another 29 plates were not made as formal applications. Mr Preece has also applied to the council for a further 50 hackney plates and offered to give a presentation of his plans to run 'taxibuses'. He told the Herald he has yet to hear from the council and said: "We will be challenging them if they decide to retain the limit." Mr Preece feels his taxibus idea fits with the authority's transport plan and said: "If they do not permit us to do that we will have to push things forward." The transport mogul is also planning a further appeal - this time on the issue of costs. On Friday, March 24, the Recorder allowed a council appeal against his original award of costs reducing the amount the authority had to pay from 60 per cent to 20 per cent of Taxifast's bill. Mr Preece said he was concerned that taxi operators elsewhere in the country would be dissuaded from making an appeal against a local authority decision if they thought the costs were prohibitive. He said: "That is a serious injustice. If the council is protected from costs, who is going to take them on? That's a fight we will no doubt have in the High Court."

Author:	Sussex [ Thu Mar 30, 2006 7:47 am ]
Post subject:
So Plymouth are starting to see a tad of sense. But methinks it wont finsih here, unless of course the council de-limit and pay him his costs.

Author:	Sussex [ Thu Mar 30, 2006 7:48 am ]
Post subject:
steveo wrote: If the council is protected from costs, who is going to take them on? That's a fight we will no doubt have in the High Court." Quite.

Author:	jimbo [ Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:33 pm ]
Post subject:
steveo wrote: http://makeashorterlink.com/?K5A1231EC COUNCIL BRAKES ON TAXI APPEAL 12:00 - 29 March 2006 Plymouth City Council will not launch an appeal against a court decision to award city firm Taxifast a hackney carriage licence. But the authority stressed it was still considering the 'policy implications' of Mr Recorder Jonathan Fuller QC's decision on March 7. The judge upheld Taxifast's appeal against the council's refusal to grant the licence in 2003, and it is now unclear whether the ruling means the council will have to scrap its 359-cab limit on Hackney carriages. If it does, it will have serious implications on existing black cab owners, and bus companies. Taxifast boss John Preece yesterday launched his own appeal - by way of case stated in the High Court - to obtain a further 29 hackney licences. The March 7 decision ordered that Taxifast should be awarded just the one licence plate for one Hackney cab that it had presented to the council. It ruled the firm's demands for another 29 plates were not made as formal applications. Mr Preece has also applied to the council for a further 50 hackney plates and offered to give a presentation of his plans to run 'taxibuses'. He told the Herald he has yet to hear from the council and said: "We will be challenging them if they decide to retain the limit." Mr Preece feels his taxibus idea fits with the authority's transport plan and said: "If they do not permit us to do that we will have to push things forward." The transport mogul is also planning a further appeal - this time on the issue of costs. On Friday, March 24, the Recorder allowed a council appeal against his original award of costs reducing the amount the authority had to pay from 60 per cent to 20 per cent of Taxifast's bill. Mr Preece said he was concerned that taxi operators elsewhere in the country would be dissuaded from making an appeal against a local authority decision if they thought the costs were prohibitive. He said: "That is a serious injustice. If the council is protected from costs, who is going to take them on? That's a fight we will no doubt have in the High Court." Not going that well for Mr Preece, is it?

Author:	steveo [ Fri Apr 07, 2006 9:50 pm ]
Post subject:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?J58F24CEC QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE Be the first reader to comment on this story 12:00 - 07 April 2006 The saga of Plymouth's black cab limit has taken a new twist - with questions being asked in the House of Commons. South West Devon's Tory MP Gary Streeter probed the Secretary of State for Transport, Dr Stephen Ladyman, about steps taken to promote use of taxibuses. It has emerged the question was prompted by Taxifast boss John Preece, who is still awaiting a city council decison on the future of its ceiling on city hackney carriage licences. Last month, the private hire magnate won a court appeal against a council decision to refuse him a black cab licence back in 2003. The ruling left the council, and everyone else, pondering what it meant for the authority's 359-cab limit. It is understood the council is taking legal advice and will not comment any further. During the hearing Mr Preece announced his intention to run a fleet of 30 'taxibuses', which must have a hackney licence. He is appealing to the High Court to obtain a further 29 hackney licences, denied him at the Plymouth hearing. And he has applied to the council for a further 50 hackney plates and offered to give a presentation of his plans to run taxibuses. He said his intention was to set up an affordable service, running to a timetable but picking people up from their own homes. Now he has turned his attention to Parliament to find out what he has to do to be allowed to run a taxibus service. Responding to Mr Streeter's question, Dr Ladyman explained the Transport Act 1985 allowed a taxi owner who has black cab licences to apply to the Traffic Commissioner for a bus operator's licence. He said: "The taxi owner can then register a route with the Traffic Commissioner and provide a local bus service, interspersed with periods of conventional taxi operation." The Department for Transport had published a guide called Flexible Transport Services, he said, 'which sets out the benefits of taxibus services and other flexible services'. The minister said: "It includes advice on setting up a taxibus service." Mr Preece said the city council had left Taxifast 'scratching its head' and that Mr Streeter's question was designed to show 'whether the Secretary of State can throw some light on the issue'. "We want the Transport Commissioner to show some encouragement or give some guidance to the council," he said. Mr Preece said he saw taxibuses as being 'the future of transport in Plymouth', but added: "We can't do it without hackney licences. "We want to participate in the public transport system in Plymouth and it's obvious the people of the city are behind us." .........................

Page 3 of 7	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Apr 07, 2006 10:08 pm ]
Post subject:
steveo wrote: During the hearing Mr Preece announced his intention to run a fleet of 30 'taxibuses', which must have a hackney licence. He is appealing to the High Court to obtain a further 29 hackney licences, denied him at the Plymouth hearing. And he has applied to the council for a further 50 hackney plates and offered to give a presentation of his plans to run taxibuses. But what about poor old Plymouth Council's buses?