Taxis - why are they allowed to use bus lanes?

[homes4rent 10]

StannD...... buses use Bus Lanes coz they're public transport, taxis use bus lanes coz they're public transport... its quite simple, if u dont wanna get stuck in traffic going to work, catch a bus or a taxi

[StannD 10]

StannD...... buses use Bus Lanes coz they're public transport, taxis use bus lanes coz they're public transport... its quite simple, if u dont wanna get stuck in traffic going to work, catch a bus or a taxi

 

Just found this again.

 

What is the difference between a taxi with one person in it and me trying to get to work?

[Rupert_Baehr 10]

use bus lanes?

 

I understand people (usually 1 customer) are paying a taxi to take them out/to work etc. but I'm sat queueing in traffic, taking longer than I should using my fuel.

So why?

...

 

Because people who can afford to use taxis are far too important to be held up by the rest of the world.

 

because people aren't using/owning their own cars and the less cars there are, the better.

 

But if Mr A uses a car to drive the 5 miles from X to Y, then when he gets to Y, he gets out of the car and it stops running.

 

If he calls a private hire taxi from 5 miles away, it drives 5 miles to X, carries him 5 miles to Y, then drives back to where it came from.

 

Fewer cars doing more mileage.

 

Got to be good for the environment.

 

Every time you see a privately owned an operated vehicle, there is always at least one person in it who wants to get to where it is going.

 

Can you say that about a bus or a taxi?

[Phanerothyme 12]

This ruined your entire arguement.

 

Edit: I'm afraid if you wish to have a "good quality debate" using Wikipedia ruins your credibility.

 

Why, because it's more accurate than Encyclopaedia Brittanica?

 

Just because you don't know how to use it, doesn't mean it isn't an accurate and useful source of information.

[WARANTED 10]

Because people who can afford to use taxis are far too important to be held up by the rest of the world.

 

 

 

But if Mr A uses a car to drive the 5 miles from X to Y, then when he gets to Y, he gets out of the car and it stops running.

 

If he calls a private hire taxi from 5 miles away, it drives 5 miles to X, carries him 5 miles to Y, then drives back to where it came from.

 

Fewer cars doing more mileage.

 

Got to be good for the environment.

 

Every time you see a privately owned an operated vehicle, there is always at least one person in it who wants to get to where it is going.

 

Can you say that about a bus or a taxi?

Your portrayal of how taxis operate is somewhat flawed, why would a taxi which drops a passenger off then need to go to where it started and why would the taxi have to travel five miles to get to you? They may have worked like that some thirty years ago but with advent of GPS links and use of up to date dispatch systems by companies such as Mercury and City Taxis the waste mileage is minimum. Without going into detail I can confidently say your image of how taxis work is way off the mark.

 

It has already been to death that the law to regard taxis as public service has been developed in recent times but goes back further than the environment and the MPG consumption figures of cars becoming important, so why the comparison when it isn't even relevant?

Edited March 19, 2011 by WARANTED

[skinz 10]

So you refuse to listen to the actual answers and want someone to make something up that is of more interest to you?

The question in the OP has been answered plenty of times, try reading.

 

I've read it and I come to same conclusion as quisquose. No it hasn't

 

You have been given 'fact' but as you said earlier in the thread you would rather have replies that made an interesting thread. Maybe the OP wanted a genuine answer rather than what you want?

 

The only facts submitted are opinion, conjecture or speculation. You or no other have submitted facts as to WHY.

 

This ruined your entire arguement.

 

Edit: I'm afraid if you wish to have a "good quality debate" using Wikipedia ruins your credibility.

 

All you've used to date is nothing more than guesswork. Anyone can do that, inc both sides of the debate. It doesn't matter what you think is right or wrong regarding the use of bus lanes. The question is who decided that bus lanes could be used by private hire firms and MORE importantly WHY?

 

Now, unless you sat on a public transport panel when the decision was made as regards the legalities of their use I would humbly suggest that "making "something up" has been your argument throughout.

 

So, "The question still remains unanswered as far as I'm concerned. Why are taxis allowed to use bus lanes?"

 

Do you have an answer? If not, the question remains unanswered.

[WARANTED 10]

I've read it and I come to same conclusion as quisquose. No it hasn't

 

 

 

The only facts submitted are opinion, conjecture or speculation. You or no other have submitted facts as to WHY.

 

 

 

All you've used to date is nothing more than guesswork. Anyone can do that, inc both sides of the debate. It doesn't matter what you think is right or wrong regarding the use of bus lanes. The question is who decided that bus lanes could be used by private hire firms and MORE importantly WHY?

 

Now, unless you sat on a public transport panel when the decision was made as regards the legalities of their use I would humbly suggest that "making "something up" has been your argument throughout.

 

So, "The question still remains unanswered as far as I'm concerned. Why are taxis allowed to use bus lanes?"

Do you have an answer? If not, the question remains unanswered.

Not wishing to repeat what's said please read radar's post number 38 and explain how it doesn't answer your basic question?

[skinz 10]

Not wishing to repeat what's said please read radar's post number 38 and explain how it doesn't answer your basic question?

 

Thanks warrented. But I don't see anything within radars informative post which leads to "why". Yes it explains the "why" but it doesn't define it. If I drive my car into work with 4 of my colleagues on board would I have an argument as to providing a public service, saving fuel, reducing carbon f'print and reducing levels of traffic? If not why? I'm doing no different other than not exchanging money. I wasn't interested in the result of a decision it was more a need for information behind the logic of the decision.

Edited March 19, 2011 by skinz

[Lucifer 10]

use bus lanes?

 

I understand people (usually 1 customer) are paying a taxi to take them out/to work etc. but I'm sat queueing in traffic, taking longer than I should using my fuel.

So why?

 

+ I don't drive like a complete moron, do u-turns anywhere I feel, park up in the middle of a main road to let people out etc. etc. etc.

 

Everybody should use bus lanes, except buses, its the buses and cyclists that hold us up.

Edited March 19, 2011 by Lucifer
change text

[WARANTED 10]

Thanks warrented. But I don't see anything within radars informative post which leads to "why". Yes it explains the "why" but it doesn't define it. If I drive my car into work with 4 of my colleges on board would I have an argument as to providing a public service, saving fuel, reducing carbon f'print and reducing levels of traffic? If not why? I'm doing no different other than not exchanging money. I wasn't interested in the result of a decision it was more a need for information behind the logic of the decision.

Hmm, interesting point, I would agree with you if you were providing that free service for anybody that required it and not just when you felt like it to benefit your own friends, then I would agree you would have a case for applying to the authorities for a dispensation to use the bus lanes legally.

I don't think the law has developed for environmental considerations though but recognised taxis in law as a Hackney carriage service provided to the public since even before the buses were invented. Needless to say even before the petrol driven version was introduced. The private hire seem to have jumped on the bandwagon at a later stage tho in law they are not recognised as a public service. The description of a taxi in law as a vehicle used for conveyance or transport of passengers from one point to another is vague enough for the private hire confederation to have argued they are that they essentially are doing the same thing and so after a debate were given permission to use or as in many cases abuse bus lanes and gates.

Edited March 19, 2011 by WARANTED

[Hots on 10]

 

What is the difference between a taxi with one person in it and me trying to get to work?

 

That is a very good question actually.

[Hots on 10]

GOT IT ! is it because many of the over paid council employees take taxis??