Taxi Driver Online

Councillor would ‘knock sense’ into Fife taxi operators who fail safety tests

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/52 ... ety-tests/

SNP councillor David McDiarmid made the comment after test results revealed several safety concerns, including worn tyres and damaged seatbelts.

North east Fife taxi operators should “have their heads knocked together” after inspections found a shocking number of safety issues.

That’s the view of one councillor after almost a quarter of taxis in the area failed the annual Fife Council safety tests.

The authority’s regulation and licensing committee is now considering what action they can take against operators who fail to keep their vehicles up to standard.

Inspectors discovered one car had a tyre with four nails in it.

Punctures, deep cuts in tyres, damaged seatbelts and oil and coolant leaks were among other problems found.

And one taxi was fitted with illegal number plates.

Meanwhile, in another, the meter was going up too fast meaning customers were potentially being overcharged.

SNP councillor David McDiarmid said: “If it was up to me, I would bring them all in, knock their heads together and knock some sense into them.

“Why have they not got it into their skulls these are the standards we set?”

‘Worst set of figures in 18 years’

Of the 206 vehicles tested in east Fife, the majority passed first time but 45 – or 22% – failed.

Following repairs, 43 passed a retest and two retests were outstanding at the time Tuesday’s committee report was written.

The figures compared to a 92% first time pass rate in Levenmouth and 94% in west Fife.

All those who passed first time were congratulated for maintaining their vehicles to a high standard.

However, former convener Carol Lindsay said it was the worst set of figures she had seen in her 18 years on the committee.

“We have thrown every possible solution at this,” she said.

“There’s one operator I can pick out who, when I was convener, we had in front of us at least five times and she’s back again.”

Possible action against persistent offenders

Three committee members, including the convener and vice convener, have now agreed to a meeting with the fleet service to discuss options for dealing with persistent offenders.

Convener Tom Adams said: “It’s an atrocious set of figures. We in Fife are not going to accept it any longer.

“We’ll report back on what we come up with at the next meeting.”

Somehow even our premier trade journal's rehash has managed to make it all sound a lot worse than even the Courier's and council's sensationalism

I mean, you'd think these people would know that in actual fact a 22% fail rate is unremarkable

And, for example, the nails in the tyre weren't even a failure - as discussed on here before, for MoTs nails in tyres normally just an advisory, and I know for a fact that the ones below were marked advisory rather than actual failure items, but you wouldn't know that from the reports


FIFE TAXI SAFETY SCANDAL QUARTER OF NORTH EAST FLEET DEEMED UNSAFE

Shocking safety failures have been uncovered in North East Fife's taxi fleet, with a damning report revealing that almost a quarter of vehicles tested were deemed unsafe.

Issues ranging from tyres riddled with nails to damaged seatbelts and even illegal number plates have prompted urgent action from Fife Council.

Out of 206 taxis inspected, a staggering 45 – or 22% – failed their initial safety assessments. The catalogue of faults included punctures, deep tyre cuts, defective seatbelts, and fluid leaks. In one alarming case, a taxi meter was found to be running too fast, potentially overcharging passengers.

The dire state of some vehicles has ignited fury among councillors. SNP councillor David McDiarmid expressed his outrage, stating: "If it was up to me, I would bring them all in, knock their heads together and knock some sense into them. Why have they not got it into their skulls these are the standards we set?"

While the majority of taxis (78%) passed their initial tests, the 22% failure rate in North East Fife stands in stark contrast to the significantly higher first-time pass rates in Levenmouth (92%) and West Fife (94%).

Former committee convener Carol Lindsay described the figures as "the worst set of figures she had seen in her 18 years on the committee," highlighting the persistent nature of the problem with some operators. "We have thrown every possible solution at this," she added, pointing to repeat offenders.

In response to the alarming findings, three committee members, including Convener Tom Adams, have agreed to an urgent meeting with the fleet service to formulate stricter measures against those repeatedly failing to maintain their vehicles to the required standard.

Convener Tom Adams minced no words, declaring: "It’s an atrocious set of figures. We in Fife are not going to accept it any longer. We’ll report back on what we come up with at the next meeting."

While those operators who maintain high standards were commended, the focus now firmly rests on addressing the significant safety concerns plaguing a substantial portion of North East Fife's taxi fleet, with the council vowing to take decisive action against negligent operators.

Well clearly your enforcement policy is a tad namby pamby.

_________________
IDFIMH

But, I mean, where to start with all this, now that I've had time to calm down a bit?

But a very basic one - remember the new fire extinguisher sticker thing, which was in the small print of a new testing manual sent to us a few weeks before the annual tests? (Ours are all done at the same time over March/April).

Well, predictably enough, this was listed as a failure item at least half a dozen times

And if you're thinking the trade should be reading the small print for stuff like this, the small print also says the extinguisher can be either foam or powder.

Yet one of the failure items is that the extinguisher in the car was foam when it should have been powder

So the people passing the rules, and then enforcing them in a state of high dudgeon, clearly haven't read the small print either

(It's on page 14 below - the item above the stuff about CCTV stickers. And there's also the 'expiry date' thing for the fire extinguisher - I've yet to work out what that means after 20 years or so when I was almost failed on an expiry date. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's no expiry date on a fire extinguisher - the date is normally the manufacturing date

https://www.fife.gov.uk/__data/assets/p ... l-2025.pdf )

So, I mean, was having a search around last night for stuff, and this is what came up on Google's AI thingy when searching for 'Glasgow first time pass rate taxi inspections', or something similar. I only mentioned Glasgow in the search, and nowhere else

So combine Fife Council's ludicrously over-the-top reaction to a 78% pass rate, the Courier's and PHTM's portrayal of it all, and the crudeness of the AI stuff, and you come up with that above

And, in particular, check out what it specifically says about Glasgow at the top, and also in the summary at the bottom. All that says is that the majority of Glasgow taxis pass first time, as compared to those dangerous menaces in NE Fife

But all that tells us in terms of simple numbers is that the Glasgow pass rate could be as low as 51%, which is a majority

So maybe in actual fact the pass rate in Glasgow is lower than the 78% in NE Fife, but the way it's been portrayed in the press and portrayed via Google results in the nonsense above

So Stuart what do you consider a high enough pass rate bearing in mind the requirement on the trade to prioritise safety ?

75 %, 80% or even 90% which i consider to be a good target to aim at ?

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

I think equally as important as the pass rate are the reasons the vehicles failed.

Bald tyres and iffy brakes are a whole world apart from a dirty car and blown bulbs.

Or even a sticker on the window.

_________________
IDFIMH

Edders, not sure it's possible to specify a figure, precisely, particularly when I don't think the stats can be directly compared even in Fife, never mind over all UK authorities. Because I don't think it's comparing like-with-like, even in Fife.

And, most obviously, my only real recollection of when all this kicked off here was when (off the top of my head) the pass rate in our zone was around 93%, yet the council was still portraying us a danger to the public

Trouble was, you see, that in other zones the pass rates were regularly 99/100% or so

Which even people employed by the council I've spoken do don't believe. Off the record, of course. But it's been pretty much the same ever since then, although we've improved here in some years, while the other four zones have dropped a bit, but I can't recall reading of any of the other zones falling below the mid-90s% or so.

But I'd guess that our recent 78% was the first time any of the five zones have dropped below 80% in the last twenty years or so, thus out of maybe 100 different testing rounds and reported stats.

But, put it another way, which other of the UK's 300 licensing authorities are kicking up such a stink about a pass rate of around 80%?

I'll wait

I suspect many councils have a 100% pass rate, as vehicles that fail the first time pass when the faults are sorted.

In other words, no records are kept for failures.

_________________
IDFIMH

ultimately faults have to be rectified for the vehicle to continue being licensed but as has often been debated in the past is that whilst some drivers will get their vehicles inspected and serviced before testing others do seem to test and then sort out the faults.

I suspect the latter "strategy" is what bothers councillors as it demonstartes a poor attitude to safety.

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Not necessarily. What that demonstrates is a superficial attitude to safety - it's more about image and optics than substantive safety.

I mean, many of those passing the tests with flying colours may have had a string of faults simply rectified before the test.

So it looks good on paper, but the car in fact may have been less safe than a car failing the test on a couple of minor faults, or even just a missing sticker, or whatever

Of course, there's no definitive answer to it all, but the problem here is that they're obsessively comparing different zones probably using different approaches, and making a mountain out of a molehill with it all.

Maybe, as Sussex alluded earlier, they should concentrate on individual operators rather than comparing individual zones with each other, so effectively they're demonising someone with a bulb out because they're in the wrong zone, but the odd car with a string of faults gets off lightly because they're in the right zone.

Of course, to a degree they do do that, and they're not going to suspend a missing sticker offender, say.

And, on the other hand, I don't think they actually suspend any, if at all, because they know if it's appealed it probably won't stand up in court - I think in the past they've suspended or revoked one or two, but it's been successfully appealed.

So to a degree it's more about this 'the process is the punishment' thing in politics right now. So police will come round and search someone's house and even stick them in the cells or whatever, all over a tweet or something they've said online that someone in power doesn't agree with - the authorities know it won't stand up in court, but they do it just to scare the living daylights out of people, and also to deter others from saying similar inconvenient stuff online.

So I think the taxi testing stuff in Fife is similar to a degree - they're trying to demonize and gaslight the trade into thinking they're some sort of danger to the public, but in the grand scheme of things for the vast majority of failures it's really not very much.

On the other hand, I suspect some of these licensing councillors are genuinely so clueless that they think they're being fair and reasonable.

I mean, one licensing councillor tried to get five people into my Octavia recently (three kids and two adults), until I pointed out the obvious. And both the councillor and their spouse referred to being on the 'licensing board', when even I know that's the liquor licensing function, and it's the licensing committee that deals with the taxis.

Of course, they may actually be qualified mechanics, and just didn't know the seating capacity rules

But I'd guess that if they see stuff like "O/S/R Brake light inoperative" or "Oil leak excessive dripping on ground greater than 10mm" then they think the car is in imminent danger of brake failure or spontaneous combustion

Another wee mystery solved - I think

Had always wondered what the illegality there was all about, since although there are plenty 'civilian' cars around with easily visible illegal number plates (misspaced or distorted fonts etc), I hadn't noticed any taxis knocking around with obvious presentational stuff like that. So I thought it was maybe something a bit more sinister than the boy racer/vanity plate sort of stuff

But I found a photo on Facebook of the car that failed the test, and there's a reasonably clear photo of the number plate, and the photo isn't recent.

And there is an obvious illegality, correct me if I'm wrong, and assuming the photo is clear enough, but it's absolutely piffling

So who'd have guessed that this heinous illegality portrayed by the council and press would in fact be something invisible to anyone except at very close quarters, while no one bats an eyelid about obvious illegalities on civilian cars which are obvious at maybe 40 yards approaching at maybe 40mph

This is the photo of the plate here, which I've cropped so as not to show the full number. It's not exactly high-res at that level of detail, but the illegality should be obvious, correct me if I'm wrong. (Of course, it could be something completely different, but we'll see...)

The first time pass rate for buses and coaches is usually just over 90% according to DVSA figures. Most of those get a 'PRS", pass rectified on site for minor things like lighting defects and very often brake adjustment. As for fire extinguishers, again there should be national standards. PSVs cannot carry powder extinguishers as there is a real danger of passengers inhaling the stuff if the bus catches for. fire extinguisher in a taxi or ph is as useful as a chocolate tea pot. when I got a hybrid car licenced I had an interesting conversation with the LO. Did I need an extinguisher for an electrical fire, petrol fire or other flammable materials? there was no answer. There was hardly enough room for passengers with luggage let alone 3 extinguishers rattling around. One year I put a small bus extinguisher in the car. that had been through a PSV test earlier in the week, it was marked to BS5423, psv spec. It was deemed unsuitable for a ph car!!

Noted for future reference.

Anyway, I'm guessing the illegality in the number plate above is the lack of the plate supplier at the bottom, which also needs the postode (the postcode in particular is usually in tiny, tiny lettering).

In even smaller letters in the bottom right corner the manufacturer and BS number is required (not that BS - it's the fire extinguisher spec BS sort of thing, although some would argue that our fire extinguisher spec in Fife is also the other BS )

Full spec in the graphic here, which is bit big for display on here:

https://hillsnumberplates.com/wp-conten ... _guide.jpg

This is mine, shown in a bigger context, demonstrating that you wouldn't be able to see that on a moving car, unlike the many 'civilian' cars knocking around with more obviously illegal plates



But that's Bristol Street Motors via the Taxi Centre...

(Bristol Street Motors is (or was) actually a Skoda dealer in Darlington )

And I took the Taxi Centre badge off

Actually easier than I thought to remove, and get rid of the sticky residue with a dab of WD-40.

Waited for a sunny day, and the sun shining on it for a couple of hours to warm it up and loosen the adhesive. Hair dryer would have done the same trick, but I don't have any hair, therefore...