tab1 Posted December 25, 2006 Share Posted December 25, 2006 I'm suprised that it's being partly funded by the council. I've seen some of the devices, and to me they look extremely over priced, considering they only take a few snaps. They've got some strict rules for these cameras, so here is what I took fro the taxi drivers website: Sheffield City Council HACKNEY CARRIAGE & PRIVATE HIRE LICENSING Image recording systems may be used in hackney carriage and private hire vehicles licensed by Sheffield City Council only where the equipment and systems complies with the specification (copy attached) and where consent in writing has been issued to the licensee of the vehicle. Any vehicle licensee wishing to install image-recording equipment must apply in writing to the Private Hire and Taxi Licensing Section providing such information is as to determine the application. Specification for Closed Circuit Television Cameras in Hackney Carriages and Private Hire vehicles. 1. Data Protection. All image recording equipment must comply with the requirements of current Data Protection legislation. Documentary evidence of compliance must be provided with any application for consent to use such equipment. 2. Installation. Equipment must be installed in such a way that it will not cause injury to the driver or the passengers. Equipment must be secure and not interfere with the safe operation of the vehicle. All wiring must be fused at source and appropriately routed. 3. Operation and image security. Images captured must remain secure at all times and be accessible only to Authorised Officers of Sheffield City Council, Police Officers or other bodies specifically approved by Sheffield City Council. Some form of encryption and access code will be required to ensure permanent security of images. Recorded images must show the date and time image was captured and identify the vehicle to which the equipment is installed. 4. Signage There must be a sign informing passengers that the vehicle is fitted with surveillance equipment. The recommended wording on the sign is as follows. PASSENGER NOTICE This taxi/private hire vehicle is protected by a Digital surveillance Camera. Any images recorded are held in a secure format and can only be viewed by the police and the licensing authority SYSTEM PROVIDERS DETAILS Signs shall not be less than 88sq CM (11 x 8 cm) The proposed signage must be submitted to the Council for approval. The signs shall be located on each passenger door window and legible from outside the vehicle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*_ash_* Posted December 25, 2006 Share Posted December 25, 2006 Take it to any taxi driver and see if he is offended by my comments or those infering their inferiority by winging on about their windows having more importance over these guys safety. No offence taken here, I understood your meaning:hihi: Not bad for a thicko! Yeah I read all these rules, and I reaslise why it has to be expensive, with so many 'ways out' for people to use, and data protection and security (meaning, who can view it), for legal purposes, these things and the rules must be absolutely water tight. I wouldn't mind paying for the lot if I still worked full-time. Although the likelihood of any attack is extremely rare, it's probably worth it. In 5 years, I've would only twice have had reason to use, and that's very few considering how many thousand jobs I've done. Happy Christmas all ash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litotes Posted December 25, 2006 Share Posted December 25, 2006 Sheffield City Council HACKNEY CARRIAGE & PRIVATE HIRE LICENSING Image recording systems may be used in hackney carriage and private hire vehicles licensed by Sheffield City Council only where the equipment and systems complies with the specification (copy attached) and where consent in writing has been issued to the licensee of the vehicle. Any vehicle licensee wishing to install image-recording equipment must apply in writing to the Private Hire and Taxi Licensing Section providing such information is as to determine the application. Specification for Closed Circuit Television Cameras in Hackney Carriages and Private Hire vehicles. 1. Data Protection. All image recording equipment must comply with the requirements of current Data Protection legislation. Documentary evidence of compliance must be provided with any application for consent to use such equipment. 2. Installation. Equipment must be installed in such a way that it will not cause injury to the driver or the passengers. Equipment must be secure and not interfere with the safe operation of the vehicle. All wiring must be fused at source and appropriately routed. 3. Operation and image security. Images captured must remain secure at all times and be accessible only to Authorised Officers of Sheffield City Council, Police Officers or other bodies specifically approved by Sheffield City Council. Some form of encryption and access code will be required to ensure permanent security of images. Recorded images must show the date and time image was captured and identify the vehicle to which the equipment is installed. 4. Signage There must be a sign informing passengers that the vehicle is fitted with surveillance equipment. The recommended wording on the sign is as follows. PASSENGER NOTICE This taxi/private hire vehicle is protected by a Digital surveillance Camera. Any images recorded are held in a secure format and can only be viewed by the police and the licensing authority SYSTEM PROVIDERS DETAILS Signs shall not be less than 88sq CM (11 x 8 cm) The proposed signage must be submitted to the Council for approval. The signs shall be located on each passenger door window and legible from outside the vehicle. The signage does not comply with the Disability Discrimination Act - what about blind people? It does not comply with Race Discrimination Act - what about non-english speakers (readers)? So are we, the tax payers, going to be footed with the bill when the taxi company gets taken to court , and they in turn sue the council? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purdyamos Posted December 25, 2006 Share Posted December 25, 2006 Yes I did sir and my saying so is in context perhapse beyond your understanding. Take it to any taxi driver and see if he is offended by my comments or those infering their inferiority by winging on about their windows having more importance over these guys safety. Beyond my understanding? Don't patronise me. And don't call me 'sir'. You want to turn it into a race issue when it is not, it is about private businesses paying for their own security, and not taxpayers. Take the chip off your shoulder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tab1 Posted December 25, 2006 Share Posted December 25, 2006 Beyond my understanding? Don't patronise me. And don't call me 'sir'. You want to turn it into a race issue when it is not, it is about private businesses paying for their own security, and not taxpayers. Take the chip off your shoulder. Sorry my dear, but a statement such as this A little selfish and perhapse with racist overtones too methinks. Does NOT turn it into a race issue unless you decide to but merely poses a question that may be a reason for objecting to this trial. The point I made in the original reply was clear in that these guys have at least put THEIR money into the system which is more than some people that are objecting to it. You're seeking to turn it into a race issue, be my guest, but that wasn't the essence of the point I made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tab1 Posted December 25, 2006 Share Posted December 25, 2006 The signage does not comply with the Disability Discrimination Act - what about blind people? It does not comply with Race Discrimination Act - what about non-english speakers (readers)? So are we, the tax payers, going to be footed with the bill when the taxi company gets taken to court , and they in turn sue the council? The rules are drawn up by the council and perhapse you should take it up officially with them. At the same time however can you point out in how many languages are the signs at Hospitals saying that anyone abusing or violent towards staff will be prosecuted and are there recordings going on there? Or mabe at the local offy, please keep it in perspective, it's a trial (which I don't agree with) and it can only help. The money is probably coming from the licensing office which is funded by the licensees themselves anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 You seem to be missing the point here, please read my reply again, maybe you've got the wrong impression unless of course you feel these inferior beings don't deserve to work in a safe environment? To point out again that not all taxi drivers are asians, and even if they look foreign but majority of younger contingent are born and bred Sheffielders. I didn't miss the point. I think you might have missed mine though. There was not even the faintest whif of racism in this thread until you managed to mention it and the race of someone in the same thread. Maybe you've got racism on the mind or something, but stop projecting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 Sorry my dear, but a statement such as this Does NOT turn it into a race issue unless you decide to but merely poses a question that may be a reason for objecting to this trial. The point I made in the original reply was clear in that these guys have at least put THEIR money into the system which is more than some people that are objecting to it. You're seeking to turn it into a race issue, be my guest, but that wasn't the essence of the point I made. If that wasn't your intent then you need to think very carefully about how you word things. No one had mentioned race, nor (I think) gave a thought to it at all. You seem to be the only one mentioning race and at the same time managing to be racist with comments like this unless of course you feel these inferior beings don't deserve to work in a safe environment? This is the first borderline racist comment in the thread, despite you throwing around unwarranted and wild accusations earlier on. People have voiced concerns that the council has paid for this trial. Personally I don't think it's unreasonable to pay for the trial (although why the other cities trials couldn't just be looked at I don't know). Like any other small business though, if this is implemented on a wider scale then the businesses involved should be paying for their own secutiry. Litotes - what requirements on signage are imposed by those two acts? We certainly can't have signs in every language of the world, nor indeed spoken versions incase someone is illiterate. And what about if they were from Peru, illiterate and deaf? It starts to get quite silly quite quickly. I don't believe that there is any real legislative requirement to put signage in any language other than enlish, nor is there any requirement to make special arrangements for the disabled regarding the signage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tab1 Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 Advice appreciated Cyclone, but as to how offensive my comments were to the taxi trade, I refer you to ash's reply who I understand is a taxi driver himself No offence taken here, I understood your meaning:hihi: But I am surprised you think my questioning of the motive behind an objection is somehow wrong in itself. These lads get a raw deal at the hands of some passengers and then the law lets them down as well, and so do need this redress by providing evidence that no one can refute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 Feel free to raise a question, but I can give you the answer in post #9. I still don't see where anyone else has made a race issue out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.