cabbie who took the photos is stuck right at the back on the rank. Thankfully the two vehicles got deserved PCNs.
I want to make it clear; we do not have ‘rest ranks’. We only have ranks used for local hackney drivers/vehicles to stand for hire on. If you’re a London cab driver, or an out-of-town hackney or PH, and you use our ranks for free parking, you’ll definitely be issued a PCN as we have a hot line to call parking enforcement.
When I posted a similar photo on Twitter last month, I did get a barrage of expletive replies along with the quant old saying ‘Snitches get Stiches’ from the usual lowlife keyboard warriors which did make me chuckle. However, of course, what we won’t do is to follow the ‘suggestions’ offered by several local cab drivers on our local social media network to “let tyres down” or “smear the windscreen with eggs” and even worse, because that is not big and not clever.
MINIMUM STANDARDS
It was recently announced that the DfT is looking at what it has referred to as ‘Minimum Standards’ for the trade. So, here we go again, will this be yet another ‘Best Practice Guide’ which can be ignored by councils?
Being the absolute sceptic that I am, this will only actually encourage ‘cross- border hiring’ sorry I mean ‘licence skipping’, because every Tom, Dick and Harriot will then be able to say: “I am up to the Minimum Standard’ so I can work absolutely anywhere.” Maybe this is the intention of the DfT?
Don’t be misled, no matter what the ‘Minimum Standards’ turn out to be, councils will still be able to have their own specific local conditions of licensing. This will then still not mean a level playing field when out-of-town drivers ‘licence skip’, such as the likes of the Wolverhampton brigade that (currently) do not have compulsory CCTV, which may I add is only because the council would have to be the data controller of all those thousands of vehicles (in my opinion) much to the irreverence of public safety.
PHTM JUNE 2024
Let’s presume that a ‘Minimum Standard’ is passed and applied, whatever that may be. Will this be both for the London trade, both hackney and private hire, the latter of which works under the 1998 London Private Hire Act and also the rest of us that work under the 1976 LGMP Act? Just on this point isn’t it crazy that TfL minicabs that have conditions under the 1998 LPHA can work many miles away from London and now I hear there are Wolves cars that have conditions under the 1976 LGMP Act working in London!
Just to add that at one time Reigate & Banstead allowed dual licensing of vehicles that held licences under both TfL (under the 98 LPHA) and locally (under the 76 LGMPA). I don’t know if this is still the case?
What a complete and utter mess this trade is in when it’s actually so simple! So may I contribute to the ‘Minimum Standards’ consultation with the main minimum stand- ard being: ‘Yer only allowed to work yer own licensing area!’. There we go… minimum standards solved.
However, let me give an example of some conditions of licensing here in Brighton & Hove. As the hackneys are mainly white, albeit with aquamarine boots and bonnets, no B&H PHV can be white. However, we have many white out-of-town PHVs predominantly working here. Another example is that if a proprietor of a PHV wants to have a multi-seater then it has to be WAV compliant, which of course is very expensive. Yes, you guessed it! We have many out-of-town multi-seater PHVs predominantly working here that are not WAV compliant. Is that a level playing field Mr DfT Bods?
The same goes for our locally controlled compulsory CCTV, where cars that predominantly work here, such as from Chichester, have no such conditions. Even so, if there are out-of-towners that have CCTV then their non- existent respective local enforcement can never check that the systems are functioning correctly, unless they decide to do a 100 mile or so round trip to check. Please note that I do not blame those other distant local licensing officers as it’s what we have ended up with.
To conclude my rant; If some outside the trade are congratulating themselves on coming up with what they presume to be a fantastic cure-all ‘Minimum Standards’ policy that will solve all the ‘so-called’ issues within the trade then they are well and truly kidding themselves!
A last thought on ice-cream vans. I wonder if licensing would let me play ‘Greensleeves’ as I ply for hire around the city….now there’s a thought!
65
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76
