Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Sorry Guys bit late doing the update on the law commission. Been a very busy time for Phoenix Taxis with new and exciting times for drivers and customers!!!!!!!! The Law Commission’s long awaited report on the taxi trade has finally been published but don’t forget at present they are only recommendations that may or may not see the light of day, and in any case certainly not before the next election. http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/docs/lc347_taxi-and-private-hire-services.pdf There are 84 separate recommendations and obviously we aren’t going to go through them one-byone, and a lot of the recommendations are as-you-were. We’ll list them into ‘Like’, ‘Not like’ and ‘Jury’s out’ Retention of the two-tier system, which means that taxis retain the sole right to ply for hire and rank up. The definition of plying for hire be replaced with ‘there and then’ hire-Not sure how this will work, because just like illegally plying for hire, what constitutes ‘there and then’? ‘Hackney Carriage’ to be replaced by the term taxi and ONLY taxis should be able to use the word ‘taxi’ to advertise their servicesAbout time too ‘Private Hire bookings (whether taxi or Private Hire) will have a duty to provide a price or an estimate of the fare, will mean that every booking will have to be quoted- Sounds unworkable especially at peak loading times A new power that will allow licensing officers the power to move a PH if they believe that the vehicle is plying for hire, also the power to seize (and presumably crush) a PH caught plying for hire-If put into practice a great idea, but other recommendations will make it harder to establish if the vehicle is plying for hire. The legal requirement for a taxi driver to undertake a fare unless they have ‘reasonable cause’ to be augmented with a requirement to stop when hailed-Impossible to police but drivers could end up in trouble if they are reported for driving past a fare. Councils compelled to consult on ranks and they must have full consultation before removal or moving a rank-good provision, but they should have gone further a based rank space of number of taxis in the area The term operator to be replaced by dispatcher-We do not like this at all, currently anyone accepting a booking for a PH falls under ‘operator’ and it is an offence to accept a booking without a licence. This has kept the touts on their toes, now it seems that ‘representatives’ of a PH firm will be able to stand on the street and accept a booking. Stretched limos and novelty vehicles to be licensed as PH but wedding and funeral cars will still be exempt-Good idea . PH vehicles be allowed to be driven by non-badged drivers when not working-without the requirement to remove all signage, a truly nutty idea and we see trouble ahead. National standards to be applied to drivers and vehicles-good proposal; as it stands the standards vary from authority to authority, and it will prevent councils from insisting on silly condition i.e. bonnets or boots being yellow or all vehicles must be white etc. PH firms to be allowed to sub-contract work to other PH firms and the requirement for a PH firm to have the three licences (operator, vehicle & badge) from the same authority will be removed-This is a serious threat to the licensed taxi trade and must be resisted at all costs. There is a move to introduce it before the LC report is approved, which illustrates how desperate the big PH companies are to see it happen and if it does happen it will go the same way as bus deregulation with a handful of PH firms (with serious money behind them, for instance the multinational PH firm Uber is financed by Goldman Sachs and Google) The proposal makes nonsense of a tougher enforcement regime, as PH vehicles from anywhere undertake bookings where they land. Recipe or chaos; a five star thumbs down Licensing revenues to be pooled nationally as opposed to collected locally and used for local enforcement –a truly nutty idea and it shows that the LC are grasping at straws; if we take Rossendale as an example which is a small town with a large PH fleet that work almost exclusively in Manchester, with the control and supervision falling on Manchester licensing officers who are funded by the licensed trade in Manchester. So not only are Manchester taxi and PH seeing out of town PH pinching their work, they’re paying for the privilege. Apart from that the proposal in unworkable and would create a bureaucratic nightmare –an example of putting the ideology first and common sense a distant second. Another five star thumbs down Council to have the right to remove or create taxi zones within the borough-A common sense proposal; over the years there has been a number of authorities that have merged to create a now authority. Sometimes this is been at the expense of taxi cover in the less vibrant areas. Can you imagine if a Greater Liverpool (already being mooted) was created, that incorporated Knowsley, Wirral & Sefton into the city, there would be no prizes for guessing where the cabs would end up. This is a solution to prevent this happening. Councils to retain the power to limit the amount of taxis in the area-At last recognition that the market isn’t always right and that deregulations can end up being seriously over-subscribed. As the law stands a council can only refuse the issue of a plate if it takes the view that there is no unmet demand for taxis in the area-and they’ve got to provide proof (in the way of a costly survey). The LC have proposed that a ‘public interest’ criteria be introduce to .cover aspects such as rank space and traffic management problems etc.-Excellent suggestion by the LC Disability training to be compulsory for both taxi & PH drivers-Well meaning proposal but without putting any meat on the bones how relevant or intensive the training will be remains to be seen. All licensing officer to be trained and accredited and should have the authority to stop any licensed vehicle irrespective of where the vehicle is licensed- As stated earlier unless they scrap cross border hiring this will be totally meaningless because officers from the honey pot areas will be overwhelmed The offence of touting to be retained, but will allow a council to setup designated areas to allow soliciting-What DOES this mean, are they going to allow a PH firm to put a representative on the streets at peak loading, or at special events (e.g. concerts, football matches, festivals etc) and tout for work? They may as well give them the right to ply for hire at certain times. Appeals to be simplified and all appeals to be heard in the Magistrates’ Court and the unsuccessful applicant given the right to appeal straight to the Magistrates’ court in they chose-Good proposal; the refusal to issue an applicant with a taxi plate starts in the Crown Court, and is therefore quite costly. The right of an applicant to bypass a local licensing panel hearing and elect to go to the Magistrates’ Court is long overdue Judicial Reviews against a council policy to be heard in the County Court as opposed to the High Court-Great idea, judicial reviews in the High Court are costly and dissuades individuals from challenging a council’s policy. Conclusion This is like looking at the Titanic without mentioning the iceberg. A lot of the proposals make sense and streamline laws that have been with us for more than 150 years. But the proposals to allow cross border hiring and PH touting in designated areas smacks of undue influence by a few major PH companies that obviously want to control the PH (and by default the taxi market) For example in Merseyside both taxi and private hire rates are tied to a large Sefton PH company. In addition if it is true that large PH operators are buying laws through Parliament, as appears to be the case with the current deregulation Bill, where will it end? Every taxi driver should take up the fight against the Deregulation Bill while there’s still a taxi trade to fight for. Judicial Reviews against a council policy to be heard in the County Court as opposed to the High Court-Great idea, judicial reviews in the High Court are costly and dissuades individuals from challenging a council’s policy.