"John Rowland" wrote in
:
Rumour has it that now that Livingstone has ordered Private Hire
vehicles (minicabs) have to carry an identifiying sticker on the
window, the Royal Parks Police are pouncing on any who drive through
Hyde Park and prosecuting them under the law which bans signed
commercial vehicles from the park!

So what is the the problem. If the law bans comercial vehicles then
the police are correct to "pounce on them".




--
Andrew Black
andrewblack at despammed.com
London

"Andrew Black (delete obvious bit)" wrote in
message ...
"John Rowland" wrote in
:
Rumour has it that now that Livingstone has ordered Private Hire
vehicles (minicabs) have to carry an identifiying sticker on the
window, the Royal Parks Police are pouncing on any who drive through
Hyde Park and prosecuting them under the law which bans signed
commercial vehicles from the park!

So what is the the problem. If the law bans comercial vehicles then
the police are correct to "pounce on them".


The problem is that the prohibition is absurd - why not allow minicabs in
the park?

"umpston" wrote in message
...
"Andrew Black (delete obvious bit)" wrote
in
message ...
"John Rowland" wrote in
:
Rumour has it that now that Livingstone has ordered Private Hire
vehicles (minicabs) have to carry an identifiying sticker on the
window, the Royal Parks Police are pouncing on any who drive through
Hyde Park and prosecuting them under the law which bans signed
commercial vehicles from the park!

So what is the the problem. If the law bans comercial vehicles then
the police are correct to "pounce on them".

Only if it's a good law.

The problem is that the prohibition is absurd - why not allow minicabs in
the park?

Ah: someone who's prepared to challenge the law rather than just parrot its
details and absurdities. Just because something is enshrined in law doesn't
mean that it's a good law. In my mind, every law, every speed limit, every
restriction should be subject to public scrutiny and accountability, and if
it can no longer be justified in its current form it should be abolished or
amended to punish those you want to punish and to have no effect on those
you want to permit.

Yes, prohibit HGVs and maybe large delivery vans from Royal Parks, and
restrict when/where ice cream vans etc can trade: when you're sitting in the
tranquillity of a Royal Park, you don't want noisy/smelly HGVs trying to
negotiate the access roads and you don't want ice-cream chimes or smelly
hot-dog-stall fumes. But why should a car be allowed in if it's a private
car and excluded if the same make/model of car is a taxi? If there is a
demand for taxi journeys to/from the parks, or the park road is the most
direct route between two points, that demand should be satisfied. In my
mind, anywhere that a private car can go, a taxi should be allowed to go and
to ply for trade.

In message ,
Martin Underwood writes
If there is a
demand for taxi journeys to/from the parks, or the park road is the most
direct route between two points, that demand should be satisfied. In my
mind, anywhere that a private car can go, a taxi should be allowed to go and
to ply for trade.

Taxis *are* allowed to use the royal parks. They can and *do* ply for
hire in the royal parks. They received special dispensation to use the
parks with the liveried taxis.

I believe that the Public Carriage Office have raised the question of
*licensed* Private Hire vehicles (minicabs) being prosecuted for using
the parks so that the matter can be properly resolved one way or the
other.

In the case of taxis, they re supposed to use take the *shortest* route
to their destination (unless the customer agrees to a different route).
As taxis have meters any longer route will cost more. Minicabs do not
have meters and many of them quote a fixed price for the job.

There is a vast difference in the knowledge requirements between the two
of course. This is reflected in the fact that taxis can use most (but
not all) of the bus lanes, to encourage people to use them in preference
to their cars.


--
Mike Hughes
A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton
at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England

"Mike Hughes" wrote in message
...
In message ,
Martin Underwood writes
If there is a
demand for taxi journeys to/from the parks, or the park road is the most
direct route between two points, that demand should be satisfied. In my
mind, anywhere that a private car can go, a taxi should be allowed to go
and
to ply for trade.

Taxis *are* allowed to use the royal parks. They can and *do* ply for
hire in the royal parks. They received special dispensation to use the
parks with the liveried taxis.

I believe that the Public Carriage Office have raised the question of
*licensed* Private Hire vehicles (minicabs) being prosecuted for using
the parks so that the matter can be properly resolved one way or the
other.

In the case of taxis, they re supposed to use take the *shortest* route
to their destination (unless the customer agrees to a different route).
As taxis have meters any longer route will cost more. Minicabs do not
have meters and many of them quote a fixed price for the job.

There is a vast difference in the knowledge requirements between the two
of course. This is reflected in the fact that taxis can use most (but
not all) of the bus lanes, to encourage people to use them in preference
to their cars.

Ah, so the information in the OP was incorrect - I was just quoting it and
assuming that it was correct.

What precisely is the difference between a taxi and a minicab? Do minicabs
have to carry a licensing plate (quoting registration number and maximum
number of occupants) like taxis do? How does a user know whether he's
getting into a taxi or a minicab?

Having only rarely used "taxis" (in the widest sense of the word) I'd
assumed that all such vehicles charged by distance (with surcharges for
number of people, for night-time and for en-route waiting time) - I hadn't
realised that minicabs negotiate an up-front charge. I believe that taxis
are allowed to be hailed in the street by passing pedestrians, whereas
minicabs can only be hired by phone to pick up at a stated address, but I'm
sure whenever I've booked "a taxi" to call for me at home, it's always had a
meter and I've been charged exactly what is described on that meter.

In message ,
Martin Underwood writes
"Mike Hughes" wrote in message
...
In message ,
Martin Underwood writes
If there is a
demand for taxi journeys to/from the parks, or the park road is the most
direct route between two points, that demand should be satisfied. In my
mind, anywhere that a private car can go, a taxi should be allowed to go
and
to ply for trade.

Taxis *are* allowed to use the royal parks. They can and *do* ply for
hire in the royal parks. They received special dispensation to use the
parks with the liveried taxis.

I believe that the Public Carriage Office have raised the question of
*licensed* Private Hire vehicles (minicabs) being prosecuted for using
the parks so that the matter can be properly resolved one way or the
other.

In the case of taxis, they re supposed to use take the *shortest* route
to their destination (unless the customer agrees to a different route).
As taxis have meters any longer route will cost more. Minicabs do not
have meters and many of them quote a fixed price for the job.

There is a vast difference in the knowledge requirements between the two
of course. This is reflected in the fact that taxis can use most (but
not all) of the bus lanes, to encourage people to use them in preference
to their cars.

Ah, so the information in the OP was incorrect - I was just quoting it and
assuming that it was correct.

What precisely is the difference between a taxi and a minicab? Do minicabs
have to carry a licensing plate (quoting registration number and maximum
number of occupants) like taxis do? How does a user know whether he's
getting into a taxi or a minicab?

Let's deal with London first.

London's taxis have to comply with the PCO's 'Conditions of Fitness' to
be licensed as a taxi. The one that most people will know about is the
25ft turning circle - ideal for getting through some of the narrow
streets in the City and also for making U turns. This is why they are of
a specific shape and size and what makes them unique.

They must have an approved meter which is sealed by the PCO. They have
the right to 'ply for hire' (with a lighted sign on the roof) either on
the street or at authorised taxi ranks. The driver must have been police
(now CRB) checked, medically fit, of good character and have passed the
'knowledge' of London which takes on average 3 years.[1]

'Minicabs' were, until recently (2001 I believe) totally unlicensed
vehicles. There was no regulation of them and the drivers would often
not have insurance. Many of the drivers had criminal convictions. There
was in one year (2003) 233 cases of indecent assault and 54 rapes
*reported*. It is believed that the true figure is at least five times
those numbers as many victims do not report the assaults/rapes.

Minicab licensing started with the companies, who were first to be
registered, then with the drivers and now (since June 2004) the
vehicles. I know of one minicab firm who lost 21 out of a total of 140
drivers when licensing became effective in 2003. Apparently the reasons
given included questionable immigration status, criminal records and
income tax status!

Since licensing has taken place, the new 'Private Hire' minicabs are
having to pay better rates to retain or recruit licensed drivers. This,
coupled with other costs associated with licensing means that most have
raised their prices considerably. In fact many minicabs are more
expensive that the traditional taxi (known as 'black cabs') !!

Private Hire vehicles in London are identified by a yellow disc with a
diamond shaped licence which is displayed on the front and rear window
of the vehicle. (too small to be read unless you're standing less than 2
ft from the vehicle). They cannot ply for hire and *must* be pre-booked.
Many still pick up from the streets, and in these cases their insurance
immediately becomes invalid, no matter if they have one which covers
'for hire and reward' as the insurance is only valid for pre-booked
jobs.

Having only rarely used "taxis" (in the widest sense of the word) I'd
assumed that all such vehicles charged by distance (with surcharges for
number of people, for night-time and for en-route waiting time) - I hadn't
realised that minicabs negotiate an up-front charge.

They don't always do so, but legally the fare should be negotiated at
the start of the hiring. This can be per mile, for time, for the whole
job or any combination (you can also negotiate with a taxi but they
cannot legally charge more than the amount on the meter unless the
journey starts or finishes outside the taxi's licensing area).

I believe that taxis
are allowed to be hailed in the street by passing pedestrians, whereas
minicabs can only be hired by phone to pick up at a stated address, but I'm
sure whenever I've booked "a taxi" to call for me at home, it's always had a
meter and I've been charged exactly what is described on that meter.


There are some places where the Private Hire vehicles work alongside
taxis (Brighton and Hove is one). The PH vehicles also have meters which
are usually set at the same rate as the taxis. I don't know what the
situation is where you live.

[1] I recently wrote an article for TAXI "talk" magazine about the
knowledge of London. If any one is interested send me a request to my
e-mail address and I'll send it by return. It is quite long - it took up
6 pages of the magazine so you have been warned :-)

Mike

--
Mike Hughes
A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton
at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England

"Mike Hughes" wrote in message
...
In message ,
Martin Underwood writes
"Mike Hughes" wrote in message
...
In message ,
Martin Underwood writes
What precisely is the difference between a taxi and a minicab? Do
minicabs
have to carry a licensing plate (quoting registration number and maximum
number of occupants) like taxis do? How does a user know whether he's
getting into a taxi or a minicab?


Thanks for this very detailed and informative answer.


Let's deal with London first.

London's taxis have to comply with the PCO's 'Conditions of Fitness' to
be licensed as a taxi. The one that most people will know about is the
25ft turning circle - ideal for getting through some of the narrow
streets in the City and also for making U turns. This is why they are of
a specific shape and size and what makes them unique.

The turning circle of TX1 black cabs is incredibly small - makes me wonder
why all cars of an equivalent size aren't designed with similar turning
circles. Are they front or rear wheel drive? If they are FWD, the universal
joints in the drive-shafts must take some hammering when the taxi is on full
lock. I was caught out by a taxi's turning circle the other day: I was
passing a taxi rank and a taxi signalled to pull away, so I flashed him to
let him out, expecting him to move into the space ahead of me; instead he
did a U turn in front in me - quite legally, but I wasn't expecting it
(there was no way he'd have been able to do so in an ordinary car) and I had
to brake because he then blocked the road until the traffic in the other
direction let him in.

They must have an approved meter which is sealed by the PCO. They have
the right to 'ply for hire' (with a lighted sign on the roof) either on
the street or at authorised taxi ranks. The driver must have been police
(now CRB) checked, medically fit, of good character and have passed the
'knowledge' of London which takes on average 3 years.[1]

Do any other cities require their licensed taxi drivers to display a similar
level of 'knowledge'? I suppose the real skill comes when you know the
sensible diversionary routes between any two places as well as just the
shortest one so you can avoid traffic hold-ups. I remember when I saw Jack
Rosenthal's "The Knowledge" being surprised at how large an area was
included - not just central London.

'Minicabs' were, until recently (2001 I believe) totally unlicensed
vehicles. There was no regulation of them and the drivers would often
not have insurance. Many of the drivers had criminal convictions. There
was in one year (2003) 233 cases of indecent assault and 54 rapes
*reported*. It is believed that the true figure is at least five times
those numbers as many victims do not report the assaults/rapes.

As shown on many of the indecent assault or rape cases featured on
Crimewatch: many of them involve(d) young women getting into unlicensed
minicabs - or even private cars that they *think* are minicabs.

Minicab licensing started with the companies, who were first to be
registered, then with the drivers and now (since June 2004) the
vehicles. I know of one minicab firm who lost 21 out of a total of 140
drivers when licensing became effective in 2003. Apparently the reasons
given included questionable immigration status, criminal records and
income tax status!

Since licensing has taken place, the new 'Private Hire' minicabs are
having to pay better rates to retain or recruit licensed drivers. This,
coupled with other costs associated with licensing means that most have
raised their prices considerably. In fact many minicabs are more
expensive that the traditional taxi (known as 'black cabs') !!

I hadn't realised that minicabs and taxis charged different rates: I assumed
that they were required to charge the same.

Private Hire vehicles in London are identified by a yellow disc with a
diamond shaped licence which is displayed on the front and rear window
of the vehicle. (too small to be read unless you're standing less than 2
ft from the vehicle). They cannot ply for hire and *must* be pre-booked.
Many still pick up from the streets, and in these cases their insurance
immediately becomes invalid, no matter if they have one which covers
'for hire and reward' as the insurance is only valid for pre-booked
jobs.

I've always wondered why the pre-booked-only rule applies. Is it to avoid
minicabs taking away business from taxis or is there another reason?

"Mike Hughes" wrote in message
...

Let's deal with London first.

They must have an approved meter which is sealed by
the PCO. They have the right to 'ply for hire' (with a
lighted sign on the roof) either on
the street or at authorised taxi ranks.

i.e. *moving* on the street or parked at ranks. Taxis are not allowed to ply
for hire parked at a random spot, even if there are no parking restrictions
at that spot. I can't think why. It seems bizarre that a taxi driver can
park outside the cinema for 2 hours and watch the film, but if he rushes out
the second the film is over and puts his light on, and waits while the crowd
emerges from the cinema, he can be busted.

The driver must have been police (now CRB) checked,
medically fit, of good character and have passed the
'knowledge' of London which takes on average 3 years.[1]

As you know, Mike, you are describing the "Green Badge" knowledge which
gives the right to ply for hire anywhere in Greater London, including
Heathrow. Outer London (excluding Heathrow) is also divided into 9 "Yellow
Badge" knowledge sectors which each give the right to ply for hire in a few
boroughs. The Yellow Badge knowledge takes considerably less time to
complete than the Green Badge. Although Green Badge drivers are allowed to
sit at Outer London ranks, they rarely do, because it is more lucrative to
head back into the centre.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes