Jump to content
tara_dad

public safety issue it regards unplated taxi & Ph vehi

would you be happy with unplated taxi & Ph  

20 members have voted

  1. 1. would you be happy with unplated taxi & Ph

    • yes
    • no


Recommended Posts

Professor John Wells, who is the professor of phonetics at the Univeristy College of London and who is also the president of the spelling society says ....

 

"People are being held back by the burdon of having to spell and punctuate correctly.... there are more important things in life and the apostrophe is a waste of time and should be scrapped"

English to be ?freed up? so people can spell ?logically?.

 

He even suggests that spelling in txt speak shud be ok.

 

Supoze tho that if u are corrispondin in an ofishial way and tryin to get yer poynt ova grama and speling probobly do help... but then u all undastud that didnt ya :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:shock::wink::D

 

But... it's still not fare to keep on having a go a TD just becasue of his spelling and grammer though as this is an issue that he obviously cares strongly about and who also feels it's still worthy of persuing..... 8)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I beg to differ with the prat of a professor, people are not held back by the burdon of having to spell and punctuate corrrectly, they are held back by their poor English skills .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems dictionary compilers are now deleting "unused" words from their dictionaries - with the addition of "new" slang in regular use - so over time our language could be completly unrecognisable! :roll::wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
now, now, boy`s what have a said about going off on one :lol: pick a new topic to ramble on, and on, and on, and on,

 

Wow TD, I can't believe that you of all people could quote a phrase like that..... now that really is pots and kettles!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

blow the old cobwebs look at the dust in here

 

 

anyway got pointed to this old post which was on a taxi fourm about the pink ladies so letting have a loook its an old post back 2006 and still today as not been sorted out here you go have a look

 

This is the reply recived today form Phil Johnson head of Warrington Borough Council Jun 22, 2006

 

Transport.

It shows their on the ball with the problem.

 

Dear sir

Thanks for your note.

I hope I can provide some of the reassurance you requested.

 

Firstly, we have a egal firm looking at the issues of Pink Ladies who are

seeking to justify running unlicenced vehicles. We are also led to believe

that James Button, the person who publishes the definitive text on Taxi's

has indicated that Pink Ladies have possibly found a loophole insofar as the

way they franchaise their particular operations, however this has yet to be

confirmed.

 

However, with regard to the use of the Pink Ladies company on contracted WBC

services, whether Social Services or Special Education needs, it is a

condition of our contracts that only licenced vehicles can be used. When

this issue arose WBC's taxi licensing officer indicated to me that some of

their vehicle licences were running out.

We (WBC) carried out an internal review of Pink Ladies involvement with the

Council's Passenger Transport Unit, the unit which procures transport

services for both Social Services and Education vulnerable clients. Pink

Ladies then operated a total of 14 contracts with us. We contacted Pink

Ladies and asked for a confirmed list of which licensed vehicles they would

be using on our contracts as we knew they still had four licences still

current. This was provided and because they obviously could not meet the

needs of all contracts, four have been terminated. Contracts operate

throughout the day, hence ten are still operating with licensed vehicles.

 

In order to verify that Pink Ladies were providing licenced vehicles, checks

have been carried out this morning at two locations and The company was

confirmed as complying with Contract conditions

 

Pink Ladies has provided a very reliable, flexible and cost effective

service that will be lost, if the legal loophole is found to be valid, the

Council will not, as you rightly suggest, envisage a removal or reduction of

contract conditions. As this situation develops, the Council will review its

position.

I'm sure I don't need direct confirmation from our Executive Members for

Environment or 'Safer Communities' that they would wish officers to ensure

the safety of vulnerable clients as first priority - and that is what we

will do.

 

I'm sure you know Warrington is not the only authority which is dealing with

this particular problem at the moment, Cumbria, St Helens and Wigan, I

believe are similarly affected, as the Pink Ladies franchise spreads out

from Warrington.

Please feel free to contact me again at any time for any reassurance you

need.

Regards,

 

Phil Johnson

Head of Service (Transportation)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All right matey how thing`s ok yes we could all say that is we did not have all the overheads like fees to pay. if we did not we would have more money and cost would go down and it would be a lot cheaper for a cad but where drivers are paying ?1.000 a year and then pay ?000. You can see but we pay so the public will not be put in danger

 

 

i will huff but you calling me a puff...lol or "you calling my dad a pikey", ""you callng my mum a wineo", I,am I bothered ? yes i am :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmmmm :?

 

I think we can all safely say that this topic should now be drawn to a close once and for all as it's going round in circles and going absolutely nowhere.

 

Is there an extra charge for that :lol::wink::P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dismayed, reading or posting on any thread is optional.

Besides, it's probably the only thread where I can wind TD up. LOL. :lol::P:wink:

Although he did tell me off once, for doing it. :shock::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dismayed it may on here. But let me assure you drivers lively hoods are on the line and public safety is just because many drivers do not post on here, dose not mean behind scenes nothing is happening. Just because the post are not moving on here and because we can not get the council to own up to its mistakes. should stop. I see in other Warrington web forums sites its gaining momentum and that is not me as I will not use them As Gary get the story but I can now see other local sites are jumping in on the act now but it show that we was the first to notes this problem. Information is coming as well from whistle blowers. Should we stop?.

But then remember there is a debate going on here, every one can clearly see that the council is not acting in the public best interest. so should we stop.

 

Things will happen. its slow but its coming. You are seeing for the first time there was problems back in 06 that what I am showing you, that it is not a new thing.

Just a council who do not know how to act to this issue, That are unwilling to put any one in the firing line, That are unwilling to act on a public safety issue hoping it will go away.

This issue should have been rectified over two years ago.

But if something would to happen, where some poor member of the public was say ?injured or killed? you be the first to complain that the council did nothing.

As long as there is a public safety issue here I am not going to give up. sorry you think and feel that I should. :(

 

Ask Gary ask him as he ever had clarification on this issue and Gary remembers is the press and the end of the day he is a reporter and knows who to ask and where to ask this could have been over years ago as the press would have put out at statement

 

(This is the first and only time I will ask Gary in public )

do yo think i should put an end to this issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is one for you there are only a couple of people know this when taking on this issue I handed my badges back to take on this issue. I do not drive a taxi or private hire car or licensed and have not been for a year and half. because taking on this issue would be a conflict of interest if still working as a driver.

 

This is why when replying to some taxi topic or private hire I will tell you as it is strait I am taking no sides I will give you the information that you the public should know and the help there is for you without taking sides. I will give you the information that you need to act against any taxi or private hire without a conflict of interest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry TD... my earlier post was said slightly 'tongue in cheek'.

 

.......although it does seem to be taking rather a long time to sort something out that on paper would seem quite straight forward eh ?

 

There must be a lot more too it I guess or a reason behind it all that we are better off not knowing about 8):wink:

 

Sorry again if I offended you in any way as I realise this is quite rightly something that you and others feel very strongly about :oops:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hay Dismayed I was not getting at you trust me. I feel like you do I would like to put this one to rest.

sorry you felt I was getting at you. I know you where tong and cheek with it, but trust me I am on your side. But I know its sometime looks like we are not getting there but its moving slowly but its moving. like I said I will keep you informed on what?s going on and any information received. as it concerns the public and me and you and others.

 

But do not ever worry about if you think. I am getting at you. I am not but if you ever feel that you think that I am. just drop me a PM and I will assure you that you will not up set me also just in case you my have misconstrued what I am writing. always feel free to drop me a PM your welcome :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just in the latest

 

 

Road Safety Act 2006: Sections 53 and 54

Introduction

 

1. This note relates to private hire vehicles (PHVs) in England and Wales only, as PHV licensing is devolved in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

 

2. It responds to the main questions that have been raised with the Department by local licensing authorities, and others, concerning two forthcoming changes to PHV licensing legislation provided for in the Road Safety Act 2006 (?the 2006 Act?):-

- Section 53 of the 2006 Act repeals section 75(1)(B) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 (which is commonly known as "the contract exemption", and currently exempts from PHV licensing requirements vehicles engaged on contracts lasting not less than seven days). The provision affects England and Wales outside London; our letter of 28 February 2007 (copy attached), stated that the intention was to bring the provision into force in January 2008 and Ministers have now decided that the precise coming into force date will be 28 January 2008.

 

- Section 54 of the 2006 Act amends the definition of "private hire vehicle" in the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998 - which has much the same end result in terms of requiring vehicles in London engaged on contracts (to provide services to specific groups rather than the public at large) to be licensed. As also foreseen in our February letter, Ministers have decided that this change will come into force on 31 March 2008.

 

3. Whilst this note is written largely in terms of the impact that the repeal of the contract exemption will have outside London, the points it makes are also generally relevant to what will be the position within London when section 54 of the 2006 Act comes into force.

 

 

 

 

What is a private hire vehicle?

7. A PHV is defined in legislation as ?a motor vehicle constructed or adapted to seat fewer than nine passengers, other than a hackney carriage or public service vehicle or a London cab or tramcar, which is provided for hire with the services of a driver for the purpose of carrying passengers?. The repeal of the contract exemption will not change this definition. All that will happen when the contract exemption is repealed is that vehicles outside London which fall within the definition of a PHV in the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 (?the 1976 Act?) and which have not been licensed because of relying on the contract exemption will be brought within the PHV licensing regime.

8. PHVs are often referred to as "minicabs" but the definition brings into the PHV licensing regime a wider range of vehicles than just the conventional minicab. For example, in considering whether a particular vehicle falls within the definition of "private hire vehicle" it is not relevant that all hirings are charged through a business account without any cash changing hands between the driver and passenger; what is relevant is whether the vehicle has fewer than nine passenger seats and is made available for hire with the services of a driver for the purpose of carrying passengers. Nor does the definition say that the vehicle has to be hired frequently or for a number of different purposes for it be a PHV. It is not relevant, for example, whether the vehicle only carries out one trip per day on the same route; what is relevant is whether the vehicle is provided for hire with the services of a driver for the purpose of carrying passengers. This is explained in more detail in the sections which follow below.

 

9. A further general point to note is that PHV licensing is designed to cover exclusive hirings, where the vehicle is hired as a whole. It is therefore necessary to consider the manner in which the vehicle is provided. If passengers pay individual fares as part of the contractual arrangements PHV licensing is unlikely to apply. Where a vehicle is not being exclusively hired it may be that the vehicle is being used to carry passengers for hire or reward at separate fares, which would make the Public Service Vehicle (PSV ie bus) licensing regime relevant. It would then also be relevant whether the vehicle is being used "in the course of a business of carrying passengers" (for the purposes of the definition of a PSV in the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981). The various categories into which the vehicles could fall are described in greater detail below.

 

 

 

 

Road Safety Act 2006: Private Hire Vehicles

 

 

Introduction

1. This note relates to private hire vehicles (PHVs) in England and Wales only, as PHV licensing is devolved in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

2. It responds to the main questions that have been raised with the Department by local licensing authorities, and others, concerning two forthcoming changes to PHV licensing legislation provided for in the Road Safety Act 2006 (?the 2006 Act?):-

- Section 53 of the 2006 Act repeals section 75(1)(B) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 (which is commonly known as "the contract exemption", and currently exempts from PHV licensing requirements vehicles engaged on contracts lasting not less than seven days). The provision affects England and Wales outside London; our letter of 28 February 2007 (copy attached), stated that the intention was to bring the provision into force in January 2008 and Ministers have now decided that the precise coming into force date will be 28 January 2008.

- Section 54 of the 2006 Act amends the definition of "private hire vehicle" in the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998 - which has much the same end result in terms of requiring vehicles in London engaged on contracts (to provide services to specific groups rather than the public at large) to be licensed. As also foreseen in our February letter, Ministers have decided that this change will come into force on 31 March 2008.

3. Whilst this note is written largely in terms of the impact that the repeal of the contract exemption will have outside London, the points it makes are also generally relevant to what will be the position within London when section 54 of the 2006 Act comes into force.

 

 

Childminders

 

39. There are a considerable variety of childminding arrangements. In considering whether the repeal of the contract exemption is relevant, much will depend on the particular facts of each case.

40. The Department?s view is that it is possible that a childminder who uses his or her own car to drive a child to and from school or for any outings as part of his/her childminding business might fall within the PHV definition. However we consider it unlikely that a court would consider that Parliament intended that the majority of the many thousands of childminders across England and Wales should have to obtain PHV licences in order to be able to transport children in their care. As such, we would expect the courts to seek to interpret the definition of a PHV in such a way that most typical childminder arrangements do not fall within its scope.

41. In our view the following further considerations are also likely to be relevant:-

- Whether the childminder actually has the transport of the child in his or her care in the motor vehicle as a requirement of the contract, (ie whether the child has a right to be carried in the childminder?s vehicle in return for the payment provided, or whether other modes of transport are an option).

- Whether the vehicle is hired as a whole - the concept of exclusive hirings is covered in paragraph 14. Childminders may be caring for different children under different contracts at the same time. These children may be simultaneously carried in the vehicle for the same journeys (e.g. where the children attend the same school) or for overlapping journeys (e.g. if children are dropped off or collected in turn from different schools). Where this is the situation, the vehicle as a whole has not been exclusively hired by any particular parent.

- Whether separate fares are being charged; if they are, the vehicle

is not a PHV.

42. If a vehicle only provides a service which would place it in the PHV category only for part of the year (eg during term time) and not during other times, it would still require a PHV licence in order to provide a lawful PHV service at the times when it is operating as such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2005_04_taxicrash.jpg

 

Helpppppppp, I must admit I haven't read any of the above nor will I plated or unplated... I'm currently Down Town Warrington and look at the mess that's been caused by taxis trying to see who is and who isn't :cry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geoff.... I have a number for my friend that you can have. I really think you need to see him.... he can help you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to have a good old laugh at this at on the web site called cabs for women by women plus spring clean this room

 

In London alone, 10 women are attacked each month after getting into an unlicensed mini-cab. No wonder that many women feel safer taking a taxi driven by a woman.( yes but they are unlicensed them self?s )

Pink Ladies spotted a business opportunity, and created the UK's first women-only private car hire franchise. ( they are not private hire ) The Pink Ladies drive Renault Kangoos that are pink inside and out, making them highly visible. Passengers sign up as members, and fares are either pre-paid, paid by credit card or with a 'pink account', which is both convenient for members and safe for drivers. ( breaking the law by saying private hire law when they are not so are not insured)Booking is done over the phone, and a text message is sent to the customer to let her know the vehicle is approaching, which means she doesn't have to wait outside. Drivers are trained in self-defense and will wait outside a customer's home after a drop-off to ensure she gets in safely. Promoting safety and reducing risk for women ? the Pink Ladies concept should work well anywhere! ( that?s why its gone bust time after time )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Statement

 

Pink ladies

 

David Boyer, head of sustainable transport at the council said:

 

?There is to be a pre trial review tomorrow at Warrington Magistrates court following the conclusion of an investigation by the Council?s taxi and private hire enforcement officers earlier this year.

 

?Enforcement work is continuously undertaken to ensure the safety of passengers and that all legal requirements are met in relation to taxi and private hire licensing.

 

?Each of the company?s directors has received summons detailing six separate offences in relation to operating an unlicensed private hire company, operating unlicensed vehicles, employing an unlicensed driver and operating uninsured vehicles.

 

?The scheduled pre trial review will consider any points of law that need clarifying before the main court appearance, determining the number of witnesses required, how long the court will be in session and to set a date for the court hearing.?

 

Ends

 

Issued by: Katy Block, Press Officer

Date: Tuesday 5 May 2009

Release: Immediate

 

Given the above might I suggest that the aforementioned, Pink Ladies, are no longer discussed until the trial is concluded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...