http://www.thestar.co.uk/letters/Dont-limit-taxi-numbers.3646185.jp

Rather than writing to the Star to respond, I might as well do it here, then copy and paste to the Star tomorrow.:)

The whole letter looked liked sour grapes to me.
It's misleading to people who don't understand the trade well, which most Star readers or anyone outside the trade would, and why would they?.
Taxi drivers marched around the town hall demanding I resign.
I can't imagine why, based on what I've read in this letter.
It was then, as it is now, not an easy subject to deal with, and it made me very unpopular.
Quite right, it's not an easy subject... but if this is true...
As the chair of the licensing board in 2000, and having had five years experience as a member of that board, I had the experience to take this issue forward.
5 years? I could explain in half an hour what Sheffield needed. See below..
The limit in 2000 was 300 – nowhere near the number of taxis needed in Sheffield at that time. The survey then recommended 500 plus.
Anyone could see that 300 (310) wasn't enough. But the recommendation said 500 plus... so doesn't the idea of 820 (current amount, and increasing at the rate of 80 per year as quoted) seem more than slightly higher than 500+?:confused:

I read 500+, as being a little over 500, not nearing on double that amount.
(Private hire taxis were around 12,000 at that time, I believe).
If she was basing her figures on this, after 5 years on the board, then no wonder they are having problems now.
I will put my own opinion that this must be a typo to write that line.
The recommendation then was quite clear, after surveys were done, and that was that we should allow market forces to determine the limit. And they have.
300 wasn't enough. A survey would have said that around 1 cab per thousand people would be around average judging by the figures around the country. So between 500 and 600 would be about right.
If a good living was not there to be made then the demand for licenses would seize. And that is market forces at work.
5 years, to come to that conclusion? I'm sorry to be so harsh, but I have taught drivers with 2 months experience, how the trade works. The uncapped taxi trade is not as simple as normal business practice.
Sheffield has changed and is continuing to change: more hotels, more people use our city at night.
More people use the City at night? Maybe at weekends. But then I expect to wait longer for a drink at the bar on a Friday night in a bar, than a Monday afternoon, but unlike the taxi trade, a bar can pay people for Friday nights and Saturday nights only.

Also to counteract the new hotels etc in the centre, how many 'city centre living' is now in place? How many student residences are in the centre? To pull a figure out of the hat, I would say around 10,000 young people living happily in the centre, who no longer require cabs to venture out for an evening out.
The recent survey, done in 2007, suggests that although the demand is met during the day, it is not met at night.

And therefore the outcome of this recommendation was that a limit should not be recommended.
Has she been down West St on any evening lately? It is a queue of Hackneys all with yellow lights showing. Or try Fitzwilliam St, which due to the number of cabs, I think will have to end up a one way street.
Where in the world in a large city do you have to walk to a taxi rank to get a taxi, other than in Sheffield?
See above^^
In this last year, when I have gone to town, not only do I not have to walk to a rank, I can pick and choose what colour 'black' cab I wish to travel in.

If a good living was not there to be made then the demand for licenses would seize. And that is market forces at work.
No it isn't. This is another line that clearly emphasis's lack of knowledge in this trade.
I, along with other members at the time, made our decision based on what was best for the people of Sheffield.
That just sounds like a politician statement.
Officers from the licensing department recommend that there should be no limit.
I think they were wrong too then. Take a look at the diversity of new applicants. Jumping on the band wagon springs to mind. Shame they haven't realised the band wagon has a flat.
All limitation does is push the consumer toward private hire taxis, and this could cause more ply for hire.
Rubbish. A limit of 600 and there would be only minor problems at the worst. (i.e NE Derbs/Roth/Chesterfield) attempting to ply at Centertainment etc.
This issue has become a political vote catcher. And it is a disgrace.
I don't think it is. I don't think people care. People just want to get home of an evening. And there are plenty of cabs to get them home. If people don't expect to have to wait slightly longer on busy nights, then they are being unreasonable. Just as I'm being unreasonable when I want to not queue at the bar on West St on Friday night.
Taxi drivers are there to serve the people of Sheffield, because without us they would not have a job in the first place.
I couldn't agree more.

Therefore it is the job of the council to make sure that the demand for taxis is met and they can only do this by allowing market forces to prevail, and not put the limitation back.
Even near the end of the letter, she still doesn't seem to understand the trade. It worries me that in 5 years service, someone so high up didn't understand the market.:confused:

I look forward to a barrage of abuse and nit picking. :hihi:
And wish the writer all the best.:)

P.S

Do I win a bun for the most boring and long thread this year?

:hihi:

Do taxi drivers get paid other than via fares/tips and where does this money come from?

Often wondered this when I've seen a queue of about 50 taxis by the train station with the drivers idly reading newspapers.

Indeed Ash i read your post and managed to grasp most of it lol. Probably not the most boring post i've read on here regarding taxi licensing etc but its up there . ;)

The woman in question who has written this clearly has no idea about how little work there can be out there. Peak periods like xmas come and go and i've never seen west st so chocka with hackneys this year all plying for hire. New Years Eve is a prime example. I switched my radio on at 7 and sat there for an hour queuing desperately for work. Turned the radio off and decided it wasn't worth it. Too many drivers.

Taxi drivers need busy periods like anyone. We wouldn't do the job if 30 mins of every hour we have to wait for a five pound job.

Interesting post ash. I'd be interested to hear why you don't think market forces will help drive/naturally limit the number of cabbies in a city. Either you can make a living from it, or you can't - surely?

If there isn't the business, for example becuase the 'marketplace' is saturated and supply exceeds demand (basic economics), then how exactly does a cabbie pay the bills when his/her income ends up being less than their outgoings? Unless they're using taxi driving as a loss-leader for another business...? :confused:

I'd be interested to hear why you don't think market forces will help drive/naturally limit the number of cabbies in a city. Either you can make a living from it, or you can't - surely?

Coz there will always be an army of people willing to try the profession out so that will never happen unless its capped.

If there isn't the business, for example becuase the 'marketplace' is saturated and supply exceeds demand (basic economics), then how exactly does a cabbie pay the bills when his/her income ends up being less than their outgoings? Unless they're using taxi driving as a loss-leader for another business...?

If u think i work antisocial hours for a loss then i wouldnt do the job. I think we are just trying to protect our livelihood. Capping the amount of drivers is the way forward. Do i want to see my firm employ another hundred or so drivers? Nope i don't think so. Like anyone in the workplace you like to protect your interests.

Surely it's up the the market to regulate itself, like any other market? If there's not enough work then people will find some other income.

Personally I'd remove the protected minimum charge too and let them compete like everyone else.

The Council doesn't owe them a protected living.

Why should only cabbies have this protection?

Why aren't controls placed on the numbers in other trades/businesses in order to protect their income?

"If a good living was not there to be made then the demand for licenses would seize. "

Does she mean "would CEASE"?

Granma.

best thing to do is scap taxi's and buses, use a car instead!

So i take it then colours have already been 'nailed' to the mast in how each party is to vote tomorrow?

Do taxi drivers get paid other than via fares/tips and where does this money come from?
No.

Often wondered this when I've seen a queue of about 50 taxis by the train station with the drivers idly reading newspapers.
They are earning nothing while they are sat there. And just on that subject, if the number of cabs who can ply for trade at the station wasn't limited, there would be probably be a lot more sat there. Although (and also slightly off topic) if the road design had been better the speed of turnover when a major train arrives would shift them much quicker, and make things better for everyone.

i have a question on this might be daft but dose anybody know where the proper taxi ranks are apart from bus/train station?????

also agree with more compertion for fares as they all start with same rate on clock or is it just me ???

i might be wrong.

I'd be interested to hear why you don't think market forces will help drive/naturally limit the number of cabbies in a city. Either you can make a living from it, or you can't - surely?
Surely it's up the the market to regulate itself, like any other market? If there's not enough work then people will find some other income.
Why should only cabbies have this protection?
Why aren't controls placed on the numbers in other trades/businesses in order to protect their income?
All good points. I was more suprised this was questioned/ or mentioned by the former Chair of the board.

It's not the same type of business as other trades. It's relatively easy to get into starting up. Around £500 to pass all the tests.
I assume that the board thought that the market would get to around 600, then level out.I thought that too. But it continues to increase. Causing problems everywhere with lack of space to rank, and lack of trade.

What people don't see is that a few years ago, hackneys were hailed, and PHVs took private bookings. That the trade was seperated. With the high number now, cab drivers are car sharing to make ends meet, and more and more cabs are getting radios from PHV companies. It's all good for PHV companies taking more profit from them, but it then digs into the PHV market.

Close to saturation? Maybe. I think so. If running costs of cabs wasn't so high, then the trade could work much better. Drivers doing there own seperate jobs in the week, then coming out to cover the busy periods when demand is high at weekends for example would keep everyone happy.

My example of pubs which I used tried to explain this also shows the difference in trades. (though probably not the best analogy)

Pubs can employ more staff at weekends when it's busy. And keep their costs down during quiet periods by employing less staff.
If pubs had to find a way of paying their staff throughout the week, with no trade, pubs would die off.

Sorry that's a bit scrambled and out of order but I'm off to work. I'll respond to anything else later :)

And 1 point i would like to make is get all black cabs off private hire
companies and let them do there own job like picking up from taxi ranks
or flag downs and not doing private hire work, they have the same badge
but with a different cab have the best of both worlds and it's the private hire
driver who is losing money.

Surely it's up the the market to regulate itself, like any other market? If there's not enough work then people will find some other income.

Personally I'd remove the protected minimum charge too and let them compete like everyone else.

The Council doesn't owe them a protected living.


You can't remove the minimum charge because you'd get people catching taxis which had been queueing hours for a fare, only to go e.g. from the railway station to the bus station. The driver would only be able to charge them a few pence then have to drive to the back of the queue again.

i have a question on this might be daft but dose anybody know where the proper taxi ranks are apart from bus/train station?????
There are a few sprinkled around the Town centre, and on Ecclesall Rd. And many more 'non official ranks' where drivers sit during quiet periods.

also agree with more compertion for fares as they all start with same rate on clock or is it just me ???

i might be wrong.
Cabs have different tariffs for different times in the day.

why not have like in other citys (liverpool for example) all cabs as hackneys? surely then the council can make use the survey for what is needed how many etc. per head of population.

then everyone would be on the level playing field and fares/cabs/drivers could be more regulated by either themselves or the council.

just a sugestion as then also then as quoted above "no best of both worlds" and no drivers would lose out

best thing to do is scap taxi's and buses, use a car instead!

good idea. Why also are taxis allowed to use bus lanes, thats not right

why not have like in other citys (liverpool for example) all cabs as hackneys? surely then the council can make use the survey for what is needed how many etc. per head of population.

then everyone would be on the level playing field and fares/cabs/drivers could be more regulated by either themselves or the council.

just a sugestion as then also then as quoted above "no best of bost worlds" and no drivers would lose out


Sheffield city council would love all badged drivers to have hackney carriage and what would happen if
the private hire drivers all of a sudden wanted a black cab,
would the council allow it or let the private hire drivers
go on the dole....

With the high number now, cab drivers are car sharing to make ends meet,
Close to saturation? Maybe. I think so. If running costs of cabs wasn't so high, then the trade could work much better. Drivers doing there own seperate jobs in the week, then coming out to cover the busy periods when demand is high at weekends for example would keep everyone happy.
Aren't they both examples of the market self regulating itself?

You can't remove the minimum charge because you'd get people catching taxis which had been queueing hours for a fare, only to go e.g. from the railway station to the bus station.
But on the flip side I use black cabs maybe four or five times a week, rarely for more than a couple of miles but I get stung with a four pound fare, usually on a route that the cab was taking anyway (eg Broomhill to Ecclesall Road).

I also reckon that there's a good argument to remove the minimum charge to help regulate the number of cabs.




By the sound of it the taxi market is sorting itself out by reaching some sort of saturation so it doesn't need any commercial protection from the Council. Price fixing is usually illegal, so why do taxi's get away with it?

.

Sheffield city council would love all badged drivers to have hackney carriage and what would happen if
the private hire drivers all of a sudden wanted a black cab,
would the council allow it or let the private hire drivers
go on the dole....

No, point trying to make is that same vehicle limit could be set so that PH drivers with vehicles can exchange plate for plate ie Private Hire to Hackney. nobody on the dole.

also beneficial surely to drivers as in:
no plying for hire offences on Sheffield cabbies
easier for licensing officers to regulate
easier to pick out 'out of towners' "goosing"
more prosecutions against these drivers
safer for public

now surely some of these points people must agree on?

No point trying to make is that same vehicle limit could be set so that PH drivers with vehicles can exchange plate for plate ie Private Hire to Hackney. nobody on the dole.

also beneficial surely to drivers as in:
no plying for hire offences on Sheffield cabbies
easier for licensing officers to regulate
easier to pick out 'out of towners' "goosing"
more prosecutions against these drivers
safer for public

now surely some of these points people must agree on?


N.E. Derbyshire,rotherham and chesterfield taxi's goose
all around sheffield and all they get is a fine,they use bus lanes
when they dont pay nothing towards S.C.C.
It's about time something was done about this!!!!
Like 3 months prison:hihi:

I also reckon that there's a good argument to remove the minimum charge to help regulate the number of cabs.
There is no minimum charge, protected or otherwise. The council sets the maximum charge. Any taxi driver is fully able to bill their passenger anything at all up to that maximum charge, including nothing!.

There's always a good few quid on the meter before the driver sets off. :huh:

Maybe the demand side of the market is lagging behind the supply side. As people notice that there's a glut of cabs then will they change their behaviour and use a cab rather than drive when they, say, visit friends for dinner in an out-of-the-way area?

Surely it's up the the market to regulate itself, like any other market? If there's not enough work then people will find some other income.

Personally I'd remove the protected minimum charge too and let them compete like everyone else.

The Council doesn't owe them a protected living.

Taxis and private hire are regulated trades. Applicants must pass a medical examination, a knowledge test, an English and maths test, a criminal records check and a driving license check. Where applicable, they also have to have a strigent vehicle check for road worthiness - repeated at 12 month intervals. Nearly all the costs are borne by the applicant. Licenses are issued for 18 months, and have to be reapplied for.

If the trade was not regulated, then any tom, dick or harry could simply call themselves a taxi driver and start plying for hire. This would place the public at risk of travelling with a drivers who would be, to put it in the legal jargon not "a fit and proper person" to hold a license.

For example, I am (in my capacity as a member of the Licensing Board) aware of an applicant who had been banned for driving on more than one occasion, had served a term of imprisonment for a driving offence, had at one stage accummulated over 20 points on their driving license, and had no less than six offences of driving without insurance. Who, in their right mind, would want to get into a taxi driven by someone with that history?

That's but one example of why the taxi and private hire trade is regulated - in order to protect the travelling public.

It is not a free market, but a regulated trade. As a regulated trade, the council's Licensing Board determines who is a 'fit and proper person" to hold a license, regulates maximum fares, regulates the age of vehicles, and also regulates that taxis must be adapted for disabled passengers. The cost of an adapted taxi for disabled passengers is considerable, and without regulation, taxi drivers could simply opt for a less costly unadapted vehicle and refuse to convey disabled passengers.

The council can also set a limit on the number of badges issued - which is the issue which the council will determine tomorrow (Wed 09 Jan).

Do taxi drivers get paid other than via fares/tips and where does this money come from?

Often wondered this when I've seen a queue of about 50 taxis by the train station with the drivers idly reading newspapers.

No.

Taxi drivers only get paid for journeys undertaken by fare-paying passengers, and any tips they might receive. The only exception I can think of is that some taxi drivers are occasionally used to transport urgent medical supplies between hospitals (e.g., blood supplies for tranfusions).

Not really wishing to go over old ground again, but it is perfectly possible to regulate without income protection.

I and many others are happy for taxis to be regulated.
Many drivers are happy to enter this regulated market without capping.

Regulation does not justify capping/income protection.

...........

Why should only cabbies have this protection?

Why aren't controls placed on the numbers in other trades/businesses in order to protect their income?

Because very few other trades/businessess are licensed, regulated trades.

Licensed premises (i.e., pubs, clubs, night-clubs, and shops/stores selling alcohol) are licensed - but not regulated - trades under the Licensing Act 2003. However that is different legislation to that which covers the taxi and private hire trade. The Licensing Act 2003 actually legislates against a limitation policy - unless the council instigates a saturation policy for a specified area.

It only been the last few months that I've noticed there seems to be more cabs about. Are attempts being made to tell people that they now have more chance of hailing a black cab? I.e. drum up demand rather than restrict supply. Perhaps publicising that there's lots of cabs and too little business will discourage some new drivers from training.

So i take it then colours have already been 'nailed' to the mast in how each party is to vote tomorrow?

It would seem that most of the political parties are playing their cards (on how they will vote) close to their chest. With a hung council, i.e., no one party having a majority, it may well be the minor parties (2 Greens; 2 Sheffield Group) who determine the issue.

All political groups hold their own separate group meetings prior to the council meeting - which is where I suspect their voting intentions on this issue may be determined. However, there is always the power of persuasion during the actual debate. Even as the last councillor rises to speak, there is still the opportunity of influencing how the vote will go.

i have a question on this might be daft but dose anybody know where the proper taxi ranks are apart from bus/train station?????

also agree with more compertion for fares as they all start with same rate on clock or is it just me ???

i might be wrong.

Fares are regulated by the Licensing Board.

If standardised fares were abolished, taxis could charge whatever fee they wanted - and the fare-paying public would not receive any protection from any unscrupulous drivers who were simply out to make a fast buck.

good idea. Why also are taxis allowed to use bus lanes, thats not right

That's a decision of the Planning & Area Highways Boards. It's in order to improve the flow of traffic by giving priority to buses and taxis alike - as they both convey fare-paying passengers. In addition, taxis are also used to convey urgent medical supplies between hospitals (e.g., for blood transfusions) - and traffic delays might seriously compromise a patient's health if they weren't allowed to use bus lanes.

I'll just wander into this discussion with a very simplistic take on the subject as a member of the travelling public.

Generally, due to the cost of using taxis, I only use them at times the buses aren't running - basically at night after a night out - or perhaps if I arrive in the city by train with heavy luggage after a trip away and want the easy option to get home.

Generally when I am catching buses in the daytime there always seems to be lines and lines of taxis on the rank, midweek evenings generally aren't a problem (on the times when the last bus home hasn't turned up I've easily got a taxi instead, although winced at the cost), however on a Friday and Saturday night it's a struggle - especially on ranks as the taxis never seem to make it to the rank as they get flagged down. It seems much harder in Sheffield to find a taxi on a weekend night than in other towns and cities.

However, in terms of the cap or not to cap debate, I can see that outside the 2 nights of peak demand when taxis are in short supply, we do have more taxis working than there needs to be, which clearly impacts on taxi drivers income. I doubt we are likely to get part time drivers who only work weekends, so something has to give somewhere.

I have come to the opinion that a cap at current levels is probably the right thing to do now, BUT only in conjunction with initiatives to help ease the Friday/Saturday night problems - introduction of night buses springs to mind.

That's a very fair post Andy.
Just to snip out 2 points you have made.
<snip>I doubt we are likely to get part time drivers who only work weekends, so something has to give somewhere.<snip>
That could solve everything in an ideal world, but can't be ever resolved in the trade. The only overhead that really changes in a week is the fuel bill. The rest are the same each week.
For example, when I used to drive, Insurance/radio/car totalled £237/week (at todays prices)
Fuel for a week ran at around £100-150/week.

If drivers just worked Friday and Sat, the fuel bill obviously would be less, but still got the other overheads.

Generally, due to the cost of using taxis, I only use them at times the buses aren't running - basically at night after a night out - or perhaps if I arrive in the city by train with heavy luggage after a trip away and want the easy option to get home.
You have pretty much described almost the entire taxi trade in that bit. :hihi:

why not have like in other citys (liverpool for example) all cabs as hackneys? surely then the council can make use the survey for what is needed how many etc. per head of population.

then everyone would be on the level playing field and fares/cabs/drivers could be more regulated by either themselves or the council.
I think this would be a great idea jaklucy. If it meant all PHV cars had to convert to Hackney vehicles.

However, would be extremely difficult to implement.

If the council stopped allowing 'normal cars' as taxis until there were only Hackneys in place. (obviously no cap would be needed here) then problems would arise if someone crashed into a PHV and the insurance wouldn't cover the cost of buying a new Hackney rather than another normal car. And the driver would be out of work.

If taxiing in Sheffield was ONLY Hackneys, then I agree that a cap wouldn't be necessary, and that the market would decide how many cabs were running.

As it is now, it's relatively cheap to get into PHVs.

If PHVs didn't exsist and the only way into the industry was to buy a 32 grand Hackney, then I doubt so many would even bother starting.

There is no minimum charge, protected or otherwise. The council sets the maximum charge. Any taxi driver is fully able to bill their passenger anything at all up to that maximum charge, including nothing!.

Last year in Antwerp, Belgium, I got a taxi to holland, I went to Maastrict (a journey of 150 miles), I gave the driver around 5 beers, various smoke and had a very interesting conversation, he charged me no fare. The cost to me was around two euros, and I made a good friend.

Last year in Antwerp, Belgium, I got a taxi to holland, I went to Maastrict (a journey of 150 miles), I gave the driver around 5 beers, various smoke and had a very interesting conversation, he charged me no fare. The cost to me was around two euros, and I made a good friend.

That's a rare thing. The nearest I ever got to that, was when I was offered a ticket into an England game in Germany-(rocking horse turd tickets), in exchange for the drive for nowt other than fuel and the cost of my taxi on the ferry.

Tempting but I turned it down.

There is no minimum charge, protected or otherwise. The council sets the maximum charge. Any taxi driver is fully able to bill their passenger anything at all up to that maximum charge, including nothing!.
That's an interesting point about the legalities of it, thanks. :)

As I'm sure you've noticed yourself the sticker in the cabs alludes to a minimum charge so the operators obviously treat it as such. In which case perhaps the Council can look at doing away with this minimum charge?

In practice, the effect of the 'maximum charge' is in practice to create a minimum charge and I'm aware of constant bleats from the trade bodies to increase it... so that's obviously how they see it too.

There are good arguments to let them charge what they want, high or low. You might well quickly see the operators sorting out a competitive market.

Because very few other trades/businessess are licensed, regulated trades.
There are plenty. You're confusing a 'regulated trade' with a 'free market'. They are quite different things. I completely agree that drivers and vehicles should be regulated but that has no bearing on how a fit and proper person with an approved vehicle plies his or her trade.

If the trade was not regulated, then any tom, dick or harry could simply call themselves a taxi driver and start plying for hire. There's a whole other discussion around that point, but that's not for this thread. ;)

If standardised fares were abolished, taxis could charge whatever fee they wanted - and the fare-paying public would not receive any protection from any unscrupulous drivers who were simply out to make a fast buck. They do that already with the assistance of SCC and the minimum / maximum fare (it's the same difference in practice) My monthly cab bill is around £120 and I travel maybe a hundred miles without a bus alternative. That's not right is it?

It is not a free market, but a regulated trade.
I think you do the free market a disservice. It's not somehow better or more regulated or fairer just because the Local Authority happen to have been charged with dishing out the badges. This thread is full of people telling us that the system could be better for customers.

Please don't get too defencive of the system just because you happen to be on the licensing board. ;)

Let as many (fit and proper) persons have badges and cabs as they like!

(Tony, taxi customer with a £120/mth habit)

Morning everyone well todays the day, no doubt further discusion or maybe even a new forum to discuss pro's or cons of the decision made this afternoon.

Take it no chance of a cab then in city centre from 1.30?

Labour proposed a limitation of 830 taxis. Lib-Dems proposed an amendment to limit taxis to 865. On a recorded vote, the Labour motion succeeded.

There was a further amendment, by Labour, recommending that the Licensing Board take into account that the trade and public alike had not shown any support for the suggested £5 starting tariff post midnight. This was carried.

Thanks for the prompt report, redrobbo. Now get back in there! :)

So all supported a cap, albeit at (slightly) different levels.

I think there will be a review next year.

I hope (against my better judgement) that the right decision has been made.

Labour proposed a limitation of 830 taxis. Lib-Dems proposed an amendment to limit taxis to 865. On a recorded vote, the Labour motion succeeded.

There was a further amendment, by Labour, recommending that the Licensing Board take into account that the trade and public alike had not shown any support for the suggested £5 starting tariff post midnight. This was carried.

so no more hackneys and fares stop the same?

so hackney's have now doubled in value then i take it, wow wish i'd got one :hihi:

Labour proposed a limitation of 830 taxis. Lib-Dems proposed an amendment to limit taxis to 865. On a recorded vote, the Labour motion succeeded.

There was a further amendment, by Labour, recommending that the Licensing Board take into account that the trade and public alike had not shown any support for the suggested £5 starting tariff post midnight. This was carried.

What happened to the proposal from the Lib Dems that the idea of a £5 starting fare at night be thrown out at todays council meeting?

So what happens to the people that applied for a licence in Dec 2007 and were told to wait till today?

Having owned my own hackney carriage and worked in private hire for 25 years, I can quite categorically state that the letter Gail Smith, the Liberal Democrat for Mosborough wrote to the Star, demonstrates that she has not got a single clue what she is talking about.

I can pick massive holes in every single comment she makes but I'll just take the following one for now :-

"Taxi drivers cannot work day and night. Working nights is the nature of the job and therefore the drivers need to be more proactive at being in the right place at the right time... moving around the city centre not stuck on ranks."


How would a taxi driver know where the right place to be at any particular time is in the hours when business is slow? And what about parking restrictions? She really does believe that taxi drivers should use all their expensive fuel and wear their cars out by driving around aimlessly in the hope that someone will flag them down.

just one question, at weekends (yes i understand this is peak time) how come you cant get a hackney in the city centre after 2am? you end up walking and 'hope' to pick one up coming back into the centre. Can the hackney drivers please please not pick up and make their way back into the centre where people are waiting.

Also can the hackney drivers not make up the excuse when you want to go (like me) out to halfway "am booked love sorry" even tho the light is on and they just want to do the quick £5 jobs up and down west street for the students.

I hope 'red robbo' reads this and can use his undoubted influence with the trade and at least try and as otherwise the plying for hire on private cabs will get out of hand and people's safety becomes a factor.

......
Also can the hackney drivers not make up the excuse when you want to go (like me) out to halfway "am booked love sorry" even tho the light is on
.......

You have to do your bit too, though.

If you want to effect change, you need to report such incidents (time, place, vehicle registration, Cab License Number and, if possible, Driver's License number) to the Council Taxi Licensing Office.

""If a good living was not there to be made then the demand for licenses would seize. And that is market forces at work.""


The Rotherham licensing officers were also under the false impression that taxi drivers made a fortune. They don't seem to have any concept of the large overheads involved. They too issued too many hackney plates but didn't provide any extra rank spaces, which resulted in humiliating scenes of drivers having to argue and plead with traffic wardens to allow them to earn a living.

I see in today's Star that Green Party councillor Jillian Creasy has made the sensible suggestion of looking at the idea of additional licences for Friday and Saturday nights only: this would help address the serious cab shortage at peak times.

I see in today's Star that Green Party councillor Jillian Creasy has made the sensible suggestion of looking at the idea of additional licences for Friday and Saturday nights only: this would help address the serious cab shortage at peak times.

Someone else with their head in the clouds then.

If she can recommend an insurance company that will cover insurance for 2 nights a week, for 2/7ths of the cost. It's a possible starter.

And it's not a serious shortage either, as she may state (I haven't read it). It was, some years ago when only 310 were working.

When something is demand you wait longer. :confused:

I cannot grasp why no one gets this.

When something is demand you wait longer. :confused:

I cannot grasp why no one gets this.

When supermarkets are busy they open more tills (usually) ?

I can recall occasions (going back a while now admittedly) when I've had to wait a very long time at Barkers Pool.

I don't know about the insurance aspect: that might be a stumbling block as you suggest.

When supermarkets are busy they open more tills (usually) ?

I can recall occasions (going back a while now admittedly) when I've had to wait a very long time at Barkers Pool.

I don't know about the insurance aspect: that might be a stumbling block as you suggest.
Yeah it is. There are a few more stumbling blocks. But this I think is probably a bigger one.

As to your analogy. We could swap analogies all night.

But as I've posted before, weekly costs (like insurance as mentioned) mean that part time workers can't exist in this trade, whereas a supermarket can pay anyone a few quid to sit on a till at busy periods.

At Christmas time when everyone is shopping, they could open 100 tills, and there still would be queues. So should Tescos have 100 tills open all week and all year round? Of course not. They would lose money for 350 days a year.

....... part time workers can't exist in this trade, ......

But they do!

Look at the family owned cab with several drivers over the day.

But they do!

Look at the family owned cab with several drivers over the day.

Well maybe. I'm on my own, so maybe that's why I had to find alternative employment. :rolleyes::(

From todays star:


Uproar over cap on cabs


ARGUMENTS broke out between cabbies following a controversial decision by Sheffield Council to limit the number of black taxis - without taking into account new drivers who are still waiting for licences.
There are currently 822 taxis in Sheffield, but decisions on another four licences are pending and 35 more applications are still to be considered.

But Labour councillors' plan for an 830 limit on the number of vehicles was approved at a full council meeting - meaning few of the new applicants, who have paid up to £10,000 to set themselves up in business, will be allowed to hit the road.

What do you think about the scheme? Add your comment below.

A Liberal Democrat amendment to the policy, calling for the limit to be set at 865, failed.

Following the decision, there was a heated debate between drivers who had opposing views on the matter, as they filed out of the Town Hall public gallery.

Hafeas Rehman, chairman of Sheffield Taxi Trade Association, welcomed the outcome.

He said: "I feel there are sufficient taxi drivers and we have been saying this for two or three years now. Most of the people who applied recently for licences would have known a limit was likely to be put in place because they would have been told when they made their application.

"It's not a cheap profession to come into but this only affects 35 drivers, compared with more competition on over 820 drivers who are struggling to earn a living."

But Mohammed Arif, a former chairman of the organisation and a taxi driver for 19 years, said: "It's not fair. These people who are applying at the moment have spent £10,000 to £15,000."

His comments were echoed by Lib Dem leader Coun Paul Scriven, who said he was "disappointed" the affected drivers had been "penalised".

Labour's policy was appro-ved with the support of Green Party councillors Jillian Creasy and Bernard Little.

The only councillor to oppose any restrictions was Conservative Coun Anne Smith, who claimed the public would suffer by having to stand in "lengthy queues" at night for taxis.

Labour's cap was proposed despite a recent report to the council on taxi provision, which recommended a limit on taxi numbers - scrapped in 2000 - should not be reintroduced because, although there was a surplus of taxis during the day, more were needed at night.

But Mr Rehman said demand is now being met because 100 extra black cabs are operating now.

An amendment was also passed recommending the licensing board should not introduce an additional £5 starting rate for black cabs late at night.

Comments

Taxi_user,Sheffield 10/01/2008 10:57:53

Why not let the additional 35 drivers obtain a licence and then it is fair for everybody?
Some of these individuals have spent between £10-£15k and are now out of a job.

amazing the STTA (taxi trade) want a limit, they get a limit and then want a bigger limit? am dazed and confused. which way do you drivers want it?

a limit but we'll say how many?

I have to ask the question since when has 800 people (taxi drivers in this case) held a city of 500k+ people to ransom? only in britain where minority rule as not to upset them. What of the rest of us standing/walking in the rain & cold trying to get a hackney at 2 in the morning? oh you lot dont count. cheers

The 35 more applications need to be looked into in more detail - are they 35 more drivers or are they multiple applications made by a few drivers. If that's the case, they should only be allowed 1 plate each, therefore the final number may be lower anyway.

The 35 more applications need to be looked into in more detail - are they 35 more drivers or are they multiple applications made by a few drivers. If that's the case, they should only be allowed 1 plate each, therefore the final number may be lower anyway.

You seem to know a lot:suspect:

how come you seem to be 'in the know' ?

just a question or are you spy? a driver? or from the council?

my guess is a driver

amazing the STTA (taxi trade) want a limit, they get a limit and then want a bigger limit? am dazed and confused. which way do you drivers want it?

a limit but we'll say how many?

Please read the article again and your rant isn't warranred, and the STTA have got what they wanted and not as you suggest asking for a bigger limit. So don't confuse and daze yourself anymore, sorted.:hihi:
The guy arguing for more cabs was an ex chairman and therefore is a "has been" and by no means represents the STTA.

I feel this lady Ann Smith misses the point that we are at this situation because we have more than enough taxis, and we are not taking taxis away but restricting more even more from joining, and that only for this year.The only councillor to oppose any restrictions was Conservative Coun Anne Smith, who claimed the public would suffer by having to stand in "lengthy queues" at night for taxis.:loopy:

You seem to know a lot:suspect:

how come you seem to be 'in the know' ?

just a question or are you spy? a driver? or from the council?

my guess is a driver

I'm none of the above:)
However I have an interest in this situation because I have friends in the trade. I just think it's fair that those who applied for a single plate before the meeting took place are entitled to a plate.
I think it's Ludicrous that this group of people are robbed of their livings.
And how very representative of Mr Rehman - the very people he is supposed to be helping (i.e Taxi badge holders applying for a cab) he is not bothered about. All he is concerned about is how much money he is going to lose out of his own pocket!

And how very representative of Mr Rehman - the very people he is supposed to be helping (i.e Taxi badge holders applying for a cab) he is not bothered about. All he is concerned about is how much money he is going to lose out of his own pocket!
I agree that those who stand to lose money ought to be considered but I must disagree about Mr Rehman's representing the badgeholders. He represents his members who have paid into the organisation and who largely do not want any more cabs, so he is doing what is required of him by the membership.

That hardly makes him a voice of reason.

http://sitebuilder.blueyonder.co.uk/sb/dialavan/1.html

That hardly makes him a voice of reason.Perhaps not from your perspective but let's not forget that he didn't decide the outcome but only represented his memberships' interests, and no fault with that even though I may not agree with his views.

And "cgksheff" what is the point of posting a link to an example of what a STTA page may look like? That is not the STTA website, so how is it rellevant?

There are currently 822 taxis in Sheffield, but decisions on another four licences are pending and 35 more applications are still to be considered.
But Labour councillors' plan for an 830 limit on the number of vehicles was approved at a full council meeting - meaning few of the new applicants, who have paid up to £10,000 to set themselves up in business, will be allowed to hit the road.

Hmm, after the last thread I posted in, I'm worrying about my numbers now...:hihi:

If 4 plates are pending, the new limit will allow them in.

The 35 more applicants have paid up to £10,000?:confused:

Upto?? To plate a cab involves buying a cab that is less than 5 years old (or thereabouts, correction later).

I'm unaware of ANY cabs that are in that price range, of the age required by SCC.

What have they bought? Even if they hadn't bought a 'new one' they could easily buy one of a current owner. The 'inflated price' scenario that happened last time won't happen with the limit so high. (IMO). Maybe a grand tops- at first, until people get used to it.

And "cgksheff" what is the point of posting a link to an example of what a STTA page may look like? That is not the STTA website, so how is it rellevant?

The site did have 3 pages of semi-literate text and information.
They have now been removed.

Possibly since I had linked to it?

Are you 'afTAB_hanif'?

The site did have 3 pages of semi-literate text and information.
They have now been removed.

Possibly since I had linked to it?

Are you 'afTAB_hanif'?

I was refering to the same semi-literate text before it went, but didn't see any information from the official trade body. I only pointed out that since it's not an official site then no point in having a link to it.
Messing around with websites isn't my line of work.
Those pages were linked in the past to the taxi forum site and not representing STTA, who have confirmed that they are in process of setting up an official site which may be a little more accurate. :thumbsup: I hope.

The 'inflated price' scenario that happened last time won't happen with the limit so high. (IMO). Maybe a grand tops- at first, until people get used to it.
The best thing to come out of this is the limit and only for a year. This acts as a safety valve and keeps the pressure off for a price hike. If it had been three years as demanded by STTA then that would've meant two to three grand premium, but as things are, I agree with you Ash, it's not going to get to stupid prices. I know of one lad whos' cab was stolen, and he informed the council and in doing so was asked to sign a piece of paper relinquishing any connection with the licence. He got paid out by insurance and checked wwith SCC before buying a replacement, and was told to go and stand in that queue of the 35 (who didn't get the plates) because he was no longer a licence holder. There are many such cases, including one that "Suave" mentioned recently.

The best thing to come out of this is the limit and only for a year. This acts as a safety valve and keeps the pressure off for a price hike. If it had been three years as demanded by STTA then that would've meant two to three grand premium, but as things are, I agree with you Ash, it's not going to get to stupid prices. I know of one lad whos' cab was stolen, and he informed the council and in doing so was asked to sign a piece of paper relinquishing any connection with the licence. He got paid out by insurance and checked wwith SCC before buying a replacement, and was told to go and stand in that queue of the 35 (who didn't get the plates) because he was no longer a licence holder. There are many such cases, including one that "Suave" mentioned recently.
Yep, I can see that as an issue. Similar to the one PHVs were in a couple of years ago when the 'new plate' age was originally lowered.

If the cap is only for a year (didn't see that bit)-then that's a vast improvement. Shame when the cap was removed last time, they didn't up it from 310 to 'say' 600 (which was how I read the original recommendation). Then seen how the 'second hand plate' value worked out. If it was minimal, that would have seen a fairer reflection on demand.

The way I read it, I don't see that the cap is definitely limited to one year.
It says that there will be a review after one year but, without wanting to split hairs, that is not exactly the same thing.

(thanks for the clarification about that website, tab1)

The review should be an interesting one because the licensing officers do have a recommendation on the issue. I understand that there are finacial considerations at stake for the licensing section who had budgetted for licence fees of about 70 cabs joining this year and now have to find money elsewhere. They want more cabs and that coupled with pressure from new applicants may sway a decission on increasing the number by a few. This hopefully would keep business premiums (plate value) low. See how it goes.:cool:

(cgksheff, :thumbsup: no probs :lol:)

[QUOTE=tab1;3020145]I understand that there are finacial considerations at stake for the licensing section who had budgetted for licence fees of about 70 cabs joining this year and now have to find money elsewhere.

Solution to monatary problem for licensing:

Hackney drivers wanted limit on:) they got it:)
RAISE the hackney license fees and leave Private hire as they are as they didnt ask for anything:hihi::hihi::hihi::hihi:

Like everthing else in this world you want something you have to pay for it:roll::roll:

Hackney drivers wanted limit on:) they got it:)
RAISE the hackney license fees and leave Private hire as they are as they didnt ask for anything:hihi::hihi:

Like everthing else in this world you want something you have to pay for it:roll:
If only life was as simple as that.:)
I think you lads can expect an increase in all sectors like licensing of drivers and vehicles and regardless of PH or Hacks.:rolleyes: Their concern is keeping the department going and not to cater for driver oppinions.:mad:

There is a problem : during some times of day you are short of taxi's ie 2am when people are heading home from town at other times there is too little work , the taxis are chasing work and therefore there are more taxi's out than needed and before the taxi brigade start streaming :

Look at midland station between 6pm - 8pm when the que of taxis is round the block causing a traffic hazzard look king street when the road is blocked because there are too many.

It is time that the rules were enforced if taxi's are causing an obstruction then they get nicked the fine is paid and they dont appeal or try to get out of it , we get the litter wardens to patrol the taxi areas wicker and if they are eating meals and throwing rubish out then again they get nicked and the matter is brought to the attention of the licencing authority . More checks on vehicle condition and driver licence.

It is getting better (I will wait for the howls of laughter to subside)since the the taxi plates have the make and reg number of the car on I have nev er seen one with the wrong plate on

One thing that does worry me is the amount of ne derbyshire private hire cars working in this area

Yes we need taxis but they need to be controlled so as they provide a service but dont cause a problem.

Sorry to be somewhat late in replying to various posts. At the end of the council meeting last Wed, I left immediately for Nottingham to care for my elderly mother (as my father had an operation that day) - and I've only returned home to Sheffield this afternoon.

What happened to the proposal from the Lib Dems that the idea of a £5 starting fare at night be thrown out at todays council meeting?

There was a Labour amendment to the main motion proposing that the Licensing Board take into account that neither the taxi trade nor the public appear to support a £5 fixed rate charge after midnight. The amendment was passed.

The Licensing Board has the final responsibility for setting taxi charges, and I expect that at their next policy meeting they will receive a report confirming the view of full council and act appropriately.

So what happens to the people that applied for a licence in Dec 2007 and were told to wait till today?

I don't know.

I am assuming that the Licensing Board may receive a report with details of any difficulties that the limitation policy might have caused and how they may be resolved. But, as I type this post, I do not know if there are any problems.

just one question, at weekends (yes i understand this is peak time) how come you cant get a hackney in the city centre after 2am? you end up walking and 'hope' to pick one up coming back into the centre. Can the hackney drivers please please not pick up and make their way back into the centre where people are waiting.

Also can the hackney drivers not make up the excuse when you want to go (like me) out to halfway "am booked love sorry" even tho the light is on and they just want to do the quick £5 jobs up and down west street for the students.

I hope 'red robbo' reads this and can use his undoubted influence with the trade and at least try and as otherwise the plying for hire on private cabs will get out of hand and people's safety becomes a factor.

The issue of plying for hire by private cabs (nb which is illegal - as there is no insurance cover) is an ever present problem.

One of the recommendations arising out of the survey report was to increase the number of licensing officer checks. These currently take place during the day, night and early hours at both weekdays and weekends. Some checks are joint operations with the police.

The Licensing Board take any such cases of illegal plying for hire very seriously. Infrigements can, and do, result in the immediate revocation of a private hire license, and a criminal prosecution is also usually undertaken.

From todays star:


Uproar over cap on cabs

.....

Labour's policy was appro-ved with the support of Green Party councillors Jillian Creasy and Bernard Little.

The only councillor to oppose any restrictions was Conservative Coun Anne Smith, who claimed the public would suffer by having to stand in "lengthy queues" at night for taxis.



Cllr Anne Smith (Sheffield Group - Conservative) did indeed speak against any limitation, but abstained on both the Labour motion (setting a limitation of 830 licenses) and on the Lib-Dem amendment (setting a limitation of 865 licenses).

Cllr Martin Davis (Sheffield Group - Independent) voted against the Labour motion and for the Lib-Dem amendment.

Cllrs Jillian Creasy and Bernard Little (Green Party) both voted for the Labour motion and against the Lib-Dem amendment.

One Labour councillor declared a personal interest (as he is a taxi driver) and did not take part in the debate and did not vote.

One Labour councillor was absent (in hospital) and one Lib-Dem councillor was also absent (in hospital - having broken her arm only minutes before the council meeting commenced!).

To the point....

There should be 1 cab to every 1 set of customers so customers dont have to wait!!!!
(we would all do 1 job and go home...BRILLIANT)

Taxis should'nt be allowed to use bus lanes(When the meter jumps in traffic who complains)...NOT ME.....!!!

At weekends taxi drivers should ignore everybody who flags them down and return to Barkers Pool 'Rank'...(You are the most important and only you are paying!!!!!!!)

Theres never going to be a real solution as like with everything else...

The council should sort out the problems from the bottom....
1. Chesterfield, Rotherham and Doncater Private Hire GO HOME.
2. Bangers and heaps take them of the road. (FAIRWAYS)
3. ASK US WHAT WE WANT!!!!!! WE ONLY WANT TO MAKE A LIVING.........

THANKS

Don't let it get to you hypester, no one here wishes to make life diffucult for you but if there are genuine concerns then don't you agree they should be aired and solutions sought?
Incidentally, the plates issue has been sorted by the 35 applications that were initially refused have been dealt with and most have been given their licenses to work. I hope "Suave" your friend is one of them who is now able to work at last.

Don't let it get to you hypester, no one here wishes to make life diffucult for you but if there are genuine concerns then don't you agree they should be aired and solutions sought?
Incidentally, the plates issue has been sorted by the 35 applications that were initially refused have been dealt with and most have been given their licenses to work. I hope "Suave" your friend is one of them who is now able to work at last.

A slight correction tab1.

You refer to "35 applications that were initially refused". There were a number of outstanding applications that had not been processed at the point council voted for a limitation policy.

When council voted (on 09 January) for a limitation policy, it also voted to remove the previously delegated powers of officers to determine such applications. Thus it is now the Licensing Board that has to determine any new applications, and it also had to determine all outstanding applications. Thus, none of the outstanding applications had been, as you stated, "initially refused" - they had simply not then been processed.

Licensing Board has recently met on three consecutive days to hear all the outstanding applications. As you correctly stated, all the outstanding applications (nb. less two that had been withdrawn) were granted.

A misunderstanding on my part then Red, I was under the impression that these applications formed a part of the LD ammendment to give the licenses to and were rejected in favour of keeping the limit at 830.:huh::) Thanks for clarification.