BIRMINGHAM:
Private hire vehicles in Birmingham will have semi-permanent licence plates fixed to their rear doors in a bid to improve pas- senger safety.
The new signs, which were introduced from October 1, will display the cab’s licence num- ber and confirm to passengers that they are climbing into a legitimate cab.
Each one of the city’s 4,900 PHVs will have to display the signs, for which the council
is paying a total of £35,000.
And, unlike magnetic signs, drivers will not be able to remove them when off duty. They can only be removed with a hairdryer.
The aim it so make it harder for unlicensed cars, as well as thieves and sex attackers, to ply for passengers on the streets. Cllr Peter Kane told the Birmingham Mail: “These signs do im- prove the situation, but
BRISTOL: DRIVERS BOW OUT OF FIGHT OVER RESPRAYING CABS
Taxi drivers have with- drawn an appeal against Bristol City Council’s decision to force them to paint their cabs blue.
The three drivers dropped their cases against the city coun- cil after they were advised they had little chance of winning. Stephen Sully, John Newcombe and Gulaid Nagan were last month ordered to each pay £2,000 in costs when they appeared before Bris- tol Magistrates’ Court to formally withdraw their appeals. They had already paid £500 per driver to lodge their appeals - mean- ing they have each been hit in the pocket for £2,500 with nothing to show for it.
After the case, a disap- pointed Mr Nagan told the Western Daily Press: “I’m not happy - you can’t take on big institutions. I now have regrets about launch- ing the appeal. I will have to pay £2,000 out of my own pocket and I don’t have the money.”
The authority told the city’s 800 hackney car- riage drivers in early
PAGE 74
2008 that they had to spray their cabs the colour of the famous “Bristol Blue”, at a cost of up to £4,000. But none of the major car makers produce the shade as a stan- dard colour,
each.
A fourth taxi driver, Bassam Shahin, also planned to appeal but Mr Schiller said his case was now unlikely to proceed.
which
means vehicles must be resprayed, even when they are bought new. By August, only around 80 cabs had been resprayed, which left more than 700 to be done before the May 2011 deadline. The drivers’ appeals were due to be heard before magistrates, but the appellants withdrew their appeals on the advice of their solicitor Antony Schiller.
It was their second bid to contest the ruling after a previous High Court appeal aimed at getting the colour con- dition revoked failed. Mr Schiller said he had received a document from the city council which meant his clients’ chances of being successful had been severely re- duced. He said he negotiated with the city council to reduce the drivers’ costs from £4,500 each to £2,000
Shafiq Ahmed, chair- man of the National Taxi Association for Bristol and district, previously said the drivers were taking the council to court as a “last resort”.
He said cabbies were not properly consulted about the conditions. The council says the decision to introduce blue taxis was taken after talks with repre- sentatives from the trade and was primari- ly a safety measure to ensure that people knew they were hailing genuine licensed taxis.
The authority disputes the respray cost quot- ed by the taxi drivers and has allowed shades close to Bristol Blue as well as a blue- coloured plastic skin which can be applied to vehicles. The coun- cil has warned that if cabbies do not comply with the new regula- tions by May next year, their licences will not be renewed.
ROUND THE.. COLCHESTER:
NEW CAB SIGNS PLAN TO IMPROVE SAFETY
it would still not be beyond a determined person to create false signs for illicit purposes. “We should have insisted, as was sug- gested a couple of years ago, that all cabs are a single colour.” The Licensing Com- mittee was forced to back track on a single colour cab scheme in the face of vehement opposition from the drivers who said they could not afford the re- spray costs during the recession.
POSSIBLE BOYCOTT OVER TAXI QUEUE ROW
Taxi drivers could refuse to head into town on a Saturday night in protest over the lack of support for the night- time economy. Tony Saunders, chair- man of Colchester Hackney Carriage Association, has re- newed his call for a per- manent marshal to help keep revellers safe as they go home.
He said recent incidents had left his members with grave concerns. A taxi’s bonnet was damaged and a young woman was dumped on the pavement by two men who thought she was queue jumping. Mr Saunders told the colchester Daily Ga- zette: “Who is going to pay for the damage to that car? It is not worth claiming on the insur-
ance, so it will have to come out of the driver’s pocket.
“I was very upset when I heard about what hap- pened to that woman.” High Street club Liq- uid/Envy is meant to provide a marshal dur- ing its opening hours as part of its licensing agreement.
Mr Saunders added: “The council needs to pay for someone to be there all the time, espe- cially after the club shuts.”
He said: “It has got to the point where we might all just stay away one Saturday night to see what happened. What would everyone pouring out of the clubs do then? I am not say- ing this as a threat, but people need to realise what it is like.
SLOUGH: ‘NO SEX’ RULE FOR TAXI DRIVERS
Cabbies will lose their jobs if they have sex in their taxis.
And those who assault passengers will no longer be able to plead that their victims consented.
The crackdown, backed by the police, comes after eight attacks in Slough over the past three years. Council licensing chiefs have brought recommendations into line with neighbouring boroughs, such as Windsor and Maiden- head, to protect vulnerable passengers. According to the Wind- sor and Ascot Express, the new condition, rec- ommended by Thames Valley police, says: “Drivers may not initiate in any dialogue of a ‘sexual nature’ with a passenger. “Licensed drivers are not permitted to become involved ‘sex- ually’, or have sexual contact, even with
consent, while in a licensed vehicle.” The offences were notified to the bor- ough’s licensing team by the Thames Valley Police notifiable occu- pations co-ordinator. Licensing manager Michael Sims said in a report to the licensing committee: “By adopt- ing the new condition it will assist further in protecting all vulnera- ble persons and in particular, women in Slough.”
Neighbouring authori- ties agreeing to the new condition are the Royal Borough, Bracknell Forest and Reading. There have been two more attacks since April 1 this year, but the areas have not been specified.
A Slough Borough Council spokesman said: “They could be recorded attacks but not convictions. “The attacks may have been in Slough but the
drivers may have been based elsewhere.” Paramjit Badial, chair- man of the Slough Taxi Drivers’ Association said: “We agree with what the police are doing but it does not mean that Slough taxi drivers are the offend- ers. “The
drivers could
come from anywhere.” Speaking at a briefing last month Superintend- ent Richard Humphrey, the town’s police com- mander, said that it is a national policy which is being adopted and that such assaults ‘are extremely rare’.
He said: “I would like to say it is far more com- mon for taxi drivers to be victims of crime than to be the perpetrators of crime in Slough.”
Mmmm...This condi- tion is still very much open to misinterpreta- tion; also, we are not aware of it being a “national policy which is being adopted.” - Ed.
PHTM NOVEMBER 2010
“Yes, it would affect profits, but action needs to be taken.” Simon Harvey, licensing officer for Colchester Council, said it was investigating what had happened over the weekend of October 9 and 10, and would be having a meeting with the hackney carriage association.
He said: “My under- standing is the club provides the marshal as part of its licensing agreement, but it seems they were not there on this occasion. “We will do all we can to try to remedy the prob- lem, including talking to the police, but I cannot promise a full-time mar- shal. Our utmost concern is keeping the public and taxi drivers safe.”
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 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104
