Taxi drivers in shock High Court battle with Worcester City Council

Worcester News: Taxis in Worcester's Foregate Street Taxis in Worcester's Foregate Street

FURIOUS taxi drivers in Worcester are taking the city council to the High Court in a bitter dispute over buying new vehicles.

The taxi trade say they face "ruins" because of a new rule which means some drivers must fork out nearly £40,000 to stay on the roads.

Under city council rules, hackney carriage drivers typically need to replace their taxi once it reaches the age of around 12, subject to a mechanic's assessment.

Up until last November, a new vehicle aged up to three years old was deemed acceptable, but a new rule then kicked in which the replacement must be brand new.

Worcester Taxi Drivers Association says the change has infuriated the trade, with many saying they cannot possibly afford new vehicles straight off the production line.

Drivers have clubbed together to raise around £35,000 and have instructed a law firm to start High Court proceedings via a judicial review.

Lesley Borthwick, from the association, said: "In this day and age who can afford £30,000 or more for a brand new taxi?

"We haven't got the money, drivers are scratching around trying to make a living as it is.

"People say 'why don't you get another job' but for us, what other work is out there?

"The difference between a new vehicle and one nearly three years old is around ten grand - we're talking one hell of a difference.

"There are great implications to what the council has done."

The driver's case is being handled by Nolan Licensing Consultants & Advocates, a specialist firm which handles taxi disputes around the country.

Councillor Paul Denham, chairman of the council's licensing committee, said: "I'm very disappointed to hear that's the avenue they are going down.

"As far as I am concerned we are willing to listen to what they have to say - they are taking a tremendous risk in taking it to court.

"In November it was a sort of emergency decision, because we hadn't yet got a cap in place and wanted to do something to help limit numbers."

He said a forum between the taxi drivers and council was taking place on Thursday, and he hoped fresh talks could take place over it.

The city council also says it has yet to receive formal notification of the challenge, and that it could be out of date because three months is the standard cut off time for a judicial review on such a decision.

Last month the council voted through a new rule which means no more cabbies will be allowed a licence until numbers fall sharply.

Worcester currently has 263 hackney carriages, and the cap is set at 230, which means at least 34 must quit before any more are dished out.

Comments (34)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:46am Sat 29 Mar 14

kidderlord says...

The action of the City Council is absolutely right and I hope they defeat this challenge by the taxi drivers. They (drivers) have run roughshod over both the council and passengers for far too long. They seem to think they can park wherever and whenever, cut up other road users, and generally please themselves. Plus as they have admitted there are far too many of them licensed in Worcester. This will sort out the men from the boys - the genuine experienced good drivers will be able to pay, effectively those that can not will come off the road, reducing the over populated licenses, and the consumer will be certain they are travelling in a vehicle that is safe and fully adapted to current licensing and disability laws. A car over three years old needs an MOT a new one doesn't, and we all know that it is possible to obtain "dodgy" ones (fact not accusation) so this is a good step. Well done Worcester City.
The action of the City Council is absolutely right and I hope they defeat this challenge by the taxi drivers. They (drivers) have run roughshod over both the council and passengers for far too long. They seem to think they can park wherever and whenever, cut up other road users, and generally please themselves. Plus as they have admitted there are far too many of them licensed in Worcester. This will sort out the men from the boys - the genuine experienced good drivers will be able to pay, effectively those that can not will come off the road, reducing the over populated licenses, and the consumer will be certain they are travelling in a vehicle that is safe and fully adapted to current licensing and disability laws. A car over three years old needs an MOT a new one doesn't, and we all know that it is possible to obtain "dodgy" ones (fact not accusation) so this is a good step. Well done Worcester City. kidderlord
  • Score: 52

10:13am Sat 29 Mar 14

Jabbadad says...

Yep well done.
Yep well done. Jabbadad
  • Score: 18

11:18am Sat 29 Mar 14

Hamilton60 says...

No sympathy for them whatsoever. This protest by the taxi drivers should not be heard until the numbers of taxi drivers is down to the cap set by the Council, one which the Council themselves have flouted by dishing out all the extra licences. If they complain, tough. There are rules for the taxi drivers in Worcester and rules for everyone else. Can't they see the benefits in having up to date, safe, clean cars to serve the public? If you don't like heat ..... get a different job.
No sympathy for them whatsoever. This protest by the taxi drivers should not be heard until the numbers of taxi drivers is down to the cap set by the Council, one which the Council themselves have flouted by dishing out all the extra licences. If they complain, tough. There are rules for the taxi drivers in Worcester and rules for everyone else. Can't they see the benefits in having up to date, safe, clean cars to serve the public? If you don't like heat ..... get a different job. Hamilton60
  • Score: 40

12:05pm Sat 29 Mar 14

Papermill says...

Taken From Motorpoint website -
FORD MONDEO 1.6 TDCi Eco Zetec Business Edition Estate
£15,299 Cost
New £22,890
Save £7,591
Includes £200 fitted extras
Reg 2013 (63 Plate)
Mileage: 7092
Colour: Frozen White
Road tax: £30
Mpg: 65.7
Transmission: Manual
Fuel: Diesel

C02:
112 g/km
Doors:
5
Seats:
5
Taken From Motorpoint website - FORD MONDEO 1.6 TDCi Eco Zetec Business Edition Estate [SS] £15,299 Cost New £22,890 Save £7,591 Includes £200 fitted extras Reg 2013 (63 Plate) Mileage: 7092 Colour: Frozen White Road tax: £30 Mpg: 65.7 Transmission: Manual Fuel: Diesel C02: 112 g/km Doors: 5 Seats: 5 Papermill
  • Score: 3

1:30pm Sat 29 Mar 14

take a deep breath says...

These taxi drivers have put £35,000 together to fight the case........must be some money in this occupation and therefore no wonder there are taxi drivers clogging up all the side roads!!
These taxi drivers have put £35,000 together to fight the case........must be some money in this occupation and therefore no wonder there are taxi drivers clogging up all the side roads!! take a deep breath
  • Score: 29

1:44pm Sat 29 Mar 14

New Kid on the Block says...

Papermill wrote:
Taken From Motorpoint website -
FORD MONDEO 1.6 TDCi Eco Zetec Business Edition Estate
£15,299 Cost
New £22,890
Save £7,591
Includes £200 fitted extras
Reg 2013 (63 Plate)
Mileage: 7092
Colour: Frozen White
Road tax: £30
Mpg: 65.7
Transmission: Manual
Fuel: Diesel

C02:
112 g/km
Doors:
5
Seats:
5
Reg Date 2013 Mileage 7092 means not brand new so therefore this vehicle would not be allowed as a replacement Taxi.
Though personally I cant see why it shouldn't be allowed.
[quote][p][bold]Papermill[/bold] wrote: Taken From Motorpoint website - FORD MONDEO 1.6 TDCi Eco Zetec Business Edition Estate [SS] £15,299 Cost New £22,890 Save £7,591 Includes £200 fitted extras Reg 2013 (63 Plate) Mileage: 7092 Colour: Frozen White Road tax: £30 Mpg: 65.7 Transmission: Manual Fuel: Diesel C02: 112 g/km Doors: 5 Seats: 5[/p][/quote]Reg Date 2013 Mileage 7092 means not brand new so therefore this vehicle would not be allowed as a replacement Taxi. Though personally I cant see why it shouldn't be allowed. New Kid on the Block
  • Score: 9

2:28pm Sat 29 Mar 14

gobialoo says...

Mr breaths raising £35,000 between 260 drivers, which works out approx £135 each, is small change compared to having to spend in excess of £30,000 for a vehicle. As for having sympathy for the city council, it was the council which REFUSED to put a cap on taxis 10 YEARS ago when a survey was completed by an independent advisory paid by the Taxi Association, which had told the council that were far too many taxis in worcester, the council shut them out refused to listen and carried on authorising taxi plates.
Mr breaths raising £35,000 between 260 drivers, which works out approx £135 each, is small change compared to having to spend in excess of £30,000 for a vehicle. As for having sympathy for the city council, it was the council which REFUSED to put a cap on taxis 10 YEARS ago when a survey was completed by an independent advisory paid by the Taxi Association, which had told the council that were far too many taxis in worcester, the council shut them out refused to listen and carried on authorising taxi plates. gobialoo
  • Score: 9

3:24pm Sat 29 Mar 14

Jabbadad says...

And in all fairness so were the Taxi drivers of that day complaining about too many Taxis, saying they struggled to make £100 per day.
But I have to remind people that a driving force behind the Taxis were / are the mosque, and Mullahs have attended the council meetings with the large numbers of drivers in good support over this issue. To which I say well done.
And yes they also have a supporting influence over the Cathedral Ward.
There was a time when Coun Riaz with previous Taxi connections was the Chairman of the licensing committee.
This may all mean nothing but it's how it has been.
And in all fairness so were the Taxi drivers of that day complaining about too many Taxis, saying they struggled to make £100 per day. But I have to remind people that a driving force behind the Taxis were / are the mosque, and Mullahs have attended the council meetings with the large numbers of drivers in good support over this issue. To which I say well done. And yes they also have a supporting influence over the Cathedral Ward. There was a time when Coun Riaz with previous Taxi connections was the Chairman of the licensing committee. This may all mean nothing but it's how it has been. Jabbadad
  • Score: -3

4:02pm Sat 29 Mar 14

gobialoo says...

Jabbadad wrote:
And in all fairness so were the Taxi drivers of that day complaining about too many Taxis, saying they struggled to make £100 per day.
But I have to remind people that a driving force behind the Taxis were / are the mosque, and Mullahs have attended the council meetings with the large numbers of drivers in good support over this issue. To which I say well done.
And yes they also have a supporting influence over the Cathedral Ward.
There was a time when Coun Riaz with previous Taxi connections was the Chairman of the licensing committee.
This may all mean nothing but it's how it has been.
Driving force behind the taxi are or is the mosque and the mullahs, and how did you come to that conclusion, if you are going to give a source please a credible and not hear say.
[quote][p][bold]Jabbadad[/bold] wrote: And in all fairness so were the Taxi drivers of that day complaining about too many Taxis, saying they struggled to make £100 per day. But I have to remind people that a driving force behind the Taxis were / are the mosque, and Mullahs have attended the council meetings with the large numbers of drivers in good support over this issue. To which I say well done. And yes they also have a supporting influence over the Cathedral Ward. There was a time when Coun Riaz with previous Taxi connections was the Chairman of the licensing committee. This may all mean nothing but it's how it has been.[/p][/quote]Driving force behind the taxi are or is the mosque and the mullahs, and how did you come to that conclusion, if you are going to give a source please a credible and not hear say. gobialoo
  • Score: 0

4:35pm Sat 29 Mar 14

Jabbadad says...

I actually attended some of the meetings. And please note that I applauded the community sprit shown by the drivers etc.
I actually attended some of the meetings. And please note that I applauded the community sprit shown by the drivers etc. Jabbadad
  • Score: -5

4:58pm Sat 29 Mar 14

gobialoo says...

And in those meetings the imam of the mosque was the one in dialogue with the council, as I said a credible source to back your claim. Its insulting to throw blame at mosque, muslims and islam.
And in those meetings the imam of the mosque was the one in dialogue with the council, as I said a credible source to back your claim. Its insulting to throw blame at mosque, muslims and islam. gobialoo
  • Score: -10

5:57pm Sat 29 Mar 14

worcswolf says...

I personally think that everyone has the right to earn a decent wage and over the years the overheads in this field of business has gone up considerably. If the reason for the council forcing drivers to buy new cars was for omissions I could agree but I feel for them these guys work hard and unsociable hours in an overcrowded sector. Maybe they all should buy cars together? I dont see how race should be brought up in this debate poor
I personally think that everyone has the right to earn a decent wage and over the years the overheads in this field of business has gone up considerably. If the reason for the council forcing drivers to buy new cars was for omissions I could agree but I feel for them these guys work hard and unsociable hours in an overcrowded sector. Maybe they all should buy cars together? I dont see how race should be brought up in this debate poor worcswolf
  • Score: 2

6:16pm Sat 29 Mar 14

Jabbadad says...

Please don't try to twist my words if you read my postings carefully I have actualy praised the community. and having visited the mosque I have worked with Malek on issues, and I have no problems with this or any religion across the world. I do have problems with people like you who seem to be trying to use the race card during a debate.
I have no qualms as to where I stand and what I say on these postings.
Please don't try to twist my words if you read my postings carefully I have actualy praised the community. and having visited the mosque I have worked with Malek on issues, and I have no problems with this or any religion across the world. I do have problems with people like you who seem to be trying to use the race card during a debate. I have no qualms as to where I stand and what I say on these postings. Jabbadad
  • Score: -3

12:09pm Sun 30 Mar 14

mauro balbino says...

gobialoo wrote:
And in those meetings the imam of the mosque was the one in dialogue with the council, as I said a credible source to back your claim. Its insulting to throw blame at mosque, muslims and islam.
Who is blaming Islam? Why are you being oversensitive?
But some true facts were mentioned, you like them or not.
Politicians allowed it to happen and drivers abused.
Tax-payers and road users had to fork it over.
[quote][p][bold]gobialoo[/bold] wrote: And in those meetings the imam of the mosque was the one in dialogue with the council, as I said a credible source to back your claim. Its insulting to throw blame at mosque, muslims and islam.[/p][/quote]Who is blaming Islam? Why are you being oversensitive? But some true facts were mentioned, you like them or not. Politicians allowed it to happen and drivers abused. Tax-payers and road users had to fork it over. mauro balbino
  • Score: 12

1:20pm Sun 30 Mar 14

thompson9100 says...

Just had a browse on taxi direct and found a 2014 63 plate Citroën Burlingo of the type now specified with rear wheelchair access for under 13 Grand. Not sure how people come up with the 30 to 40k price. I'm sure depreciation on this model isn't that high! Playing costs are also not that high either.
Just had a browse on taxi direct and found a 2014 63 plate Citroën Burlingo of the type now specified with rear wheelchair access for under 13 Grand. Not sure how people come up with the 30 to 40k price. I'm sure depreciation on this model isn't that high! Playing costs are also not that high either. thompson9100
  • Score: 11

1:55pm Sun 30 Mar 14

Jabbadad says...

I was watching central Tv news recently about the London Cab manufacturing being saved in the Midlands and £30,000 for a cab was mentioned. And of course they were built to go around the world in mileage, I met a driver owner at a local car wash and commented on how well his London Cab looked for it's year and asked about the Mileage, and it had covered over 800,000 miles(same Engine). So with the age of the cabs allowed being cut, these cabs will vanish and yes it will be become a problem I am sure, and more than likely drive many off the ranks.
I was watching central Tv news recently about the London Cab manufacturing being saved in the Midlands and £30,000 for a cab was mentioned. And of course they were built to go around the world in mileage, I met a driver owner at a local car wash and commented on how well his London Cab looked for it's year and asked about the Mileage, and it had covered over 800,000 miles(same Engine). So with the age of the cabs allowed being cut, these cabs will vanish and yes it will be become a problem I am sure, and more than likely drive many off the ranks. Jabbadad
  • Score: -1

5:02pm Sun 30 Mar 14

pinkfluff says...

Jabbadad wrote:
And in all fairness so were the Taxi drivers of that day complaining about too many Taxis, saying they struggled to make £100 per day.
But I have to remind people that a driving force behind the Taxis were / are the mosque, and Mullahs have attended the council meetings with the large numbers of drivers in good support over this issue. To which I say well done.
And yes they also have a supporting influence over the Cathedral Ward.
There was a time when Coun Riaz with previous Taxi connections was the Chairman of the licensing committee.
This may all mean nothing but it's how it has been.
I was waiting for someone to bring race into this.....it was you Jabba!! First prize for the unnecessary mention of race goes to Jabba. Please come and get your prize. SPEECH!!


Warning! The above comment ^ may contain sarcasm.
[quote][p][bold]Jabbadad[/bold] wrote: And in all fairness so were the Taxi drivers of that day complaining about too many Taxis, saying they struggled to make £100 per day. But I have to remind people that a driving force behind the Taxis were / are the mosque, and Mullahs have attended the council meetings with the large numbers of drivers in good support over this issue. To which I say well done. And yes they also have a supporting influence over the Cathedral Ward. There was a time when Coun Riaz with previous Taxi connections was the Chairman of the licensing committee. This may all mean nothing but it's how it has been.[/p][/quote]I was waiting for someone to bring race into this.....it was you Jabba!! First prize for the unnecessary mention of race goes to Jabba. Please come and get your prize. SPEECH!! Warning! The above comment ^ may contain sarcasm. pinkfluff
  • Score: -7

7:38pm Sun 30 Mar 14

Jabbadad says...

It bothers me not what you award pink fluff, however my words were not racist but actual facts of the meetings that took place over the taxi issues. Now I attended these meetings did you, or are you beleiving some tittle tattle over the garden wall? And if you don't recognise or are unaware of the influences in the Cathedral ward you need to turn the telly off and get out more. Or ask Franky Lancaster why he lost his seat?
It bothers me not what you award pink fluff, however my words were not racist but actual facts of the meetings that took place over the taxi issues. Now I attended these meetings did you, or are you beleiving some tittle tattle over the garden wall? And if you don't recognise or are unaware of the influences in the Cathedral ward you need to turn the telly off and get out more. Or ask Franky Lancaster why he lost his seat? Jabbadad
  • Score: 7

8:31pm Sun 30 Mar 14

pinkfluff says...

Jabbadad wrote:
It bothers me not what you award pink fluff, however my words were not racist but actual facts of the meetings that took place over the taxi issues. Now I attended these meetings did you, or are you beleiving some tittle tattle over the garden wall? And if you don't recognise or are unaware of the influences in the Cathedral ward you need to turn the telly off and get out more. Or ask Franky Lancaster why he lost his seat?
Call that a speech!? I'm disappointed :(
[quote][p][bold]Jabbadad[/bold] wrote: It bothers me not what you award pink fluff, however my words were not racist but actual facts of the meetings that took place over the taxi issues. Now I attended these meetings did you, or are you beleiving some tittle tattle over the garden wall? And if you don't recognise or are unaware of the influences in the Cathedral ward you need to turn the telly off and get out more. Or ask Franky Lancaster why he lost his seat?[/p][/quote]Call that a speech!? I'm disappointed :( pinkfluff
  • Score: -7

9:27am Mon 31 Mar 14

Spetchley Dave says...

The Civil Procedure Rules require an application for judicial review to be lodged promptly and in any event within three months from the date when the grievance arose.

If the taxi drivers are challenging a decision that was made by the Council in November, they may find that they are too late to do so.
The Civil Procedure Rules require an application for judicial review to be lodged promptly and in any event within three months from the date when the grievance arose. If the taxi drivers are challenging a decision that was made by the Council in November, they may find that they are too late to do so. Spetchley Dave
  • Score: 4

2:32pm Mon 31 Mar 14

Incognito181 says...

I think the general public aren’t privy to what conversations have previously taken place between the association and the council. The rule of a vehicle needing to be brand new at the time of entry in Worcesters current fleet was only a stop gap measure. This was introduced in November whilst the 3 months consultation began; the simple purpose behind it was to act as a deterrent against more vehicles applying for a hackney licence.

The trade and the council agreed on this stop gap measure with explicit assurances given that this would revert back to the 3 year old rule once the long awaited cap could be introduced.

As reported by WN the cap was implemented in February which should have meant the rule reverted back to the former licensing criteria. It is in fact the council who have reneged on this agreement by now stating the rule which was a measure as a stop gap is to remain.

The council have clearly lied and the meeting which took place in November was minuted in which council assurances were given about the change in the rule.

Hopefully your WN readers are a little more informed and can make a balanced and well informed decision on who the blame for this debacle sits with.

Finally, I’d like to add the way the council treats taxi drivers with such disdain would never be tolerated by any other public servants, that’s exactly what the taxi trade is. Having to spend thousands on pounds on vehicles and an extortionate amount on annual licensing fees the taxi trade is providing a vital public service for which little consideration is ever given.

Instead drivers are subjected to constant right wing negative press, regular racial and physical assault for which the authorities in Worcester care little to do anything about, and now the council has become soo brazen it reneges on a verbal and written agreement. But I agree with sentiment, ‘Blame the taxi driver’.. Sigh
I think the general public aren’t privy to what conversations have previously taken place between the association and the council. The rule of a vehicle needing to be brand new at the time of entry in Worcesters current fleet was only a stop gap measure. This was introduced in November whilst the 3 months consultation began; the simple purpose behind it was to act as a deterrent against more vehicles applying for a hackney licence. The trade and the council agreed on this stop gap measure with explicit assurances given that this would revert back to the 3 year old rule once the long awaited cap could be introduced. As reported by WN the cap was implemented in February which should have meant the rule reverted back to the former licensing criteria. It is in fact the council who have reneged on this agreement by now stating the rule which was a measure as a stop gap is to remain. The council have clearly lied and the meeting which took place in November was minuted in which council assurances were given about the change in the rule. Hopefully your WN readers are a little more informed and can make a balanced and well informed decision on who the blame for this debacle sits with. Finally, I’d like to add the way the council treats taxi drivers with such disdain would never be tolerated by any other public servants, that’s exactly what the taxi trade is. Having to spend thousands on pounds on vehicles and an extortionate amount on annual licensing fees the taxi trade is providing a vital public service for which little consideration is ever given. Instead drivers are subjected to constant right wing negative press, regular racial and physical assault for which the authorities in Worcester care little to do anything about, and now the council has become soo brazen it reneges on a verbal and written agreement. But I agree with sentiment, ‘Blame the taxi driver’.. Sigh Incognito181
  • Score: 5

9:01am Tue 1 Apr 14

The Villan says...

Wouldn't it make economic sense for the taxi owners to car share? Surely a 10 hour shift is more than appropriate..

Or they could lease their vehicles from a specialist taxi provider.
Wouldn't it make economic sense for the taxi owners to car share? Surely a 10 hour shift is more than appropriate.. Or they could lease their vehicles from a specialist taxi provider. The Villan
  • Score: 4

6:31pm Tue 1 Apr 14

ray1111 says...

it is about time that the council cracked down on the taki and private hire driver in worcester . they have had things their own way for years and shaking them up is long overdue . I can not think of any other ciity which has cabs and private hire cars as old as those used in worcester . How many times are we told that on spot checks over 30% of these vehicles fail safety checks . the drivers dont care about their customers just the money they can make and having a job with hours to suit. Mr riaz being former chairman of the licensing committee whilst his relatives are leading members of the taxi drivers association and he himself being a former taxi driver has to raise questions of his loyalties.
Worcester deserves professional taxis and drivers , not people who think that it can fill a few hours earn some cash and is better than signing on....I am suprised that to date no one has been seriously injured in an accident with some of the decrepid vehicle stock on the taxi ranks today .
it is about time that the council cracked down on the taki and private hire driver in worcester . they have had things their own way for years and shaking them up is long overdue . I can not think of any other ciity which has cabs and private hire cars as old as those used in worcester . How many times are we told that on spot checks over 30% of these vehicles fail safety checks . the drivers dont care about their customers just the money they can make and having a job with hours to suit. Mr riaz being former chairman of the licensing committee whilst his relatives are leading members of the taxi drivers association and he himself being a former taxi driver has to raise questions of his loyalties. Worcester deserves professional taxis and drivers , not people who think that it can fill a few hours earn some cash and is better than signing on....I am suprised that to date no one has been seriously injured in an accident with some of the decrepid vehicle stock on the taxi ranks today . ray1111
  • Score: 1244

7:16pm Tue 1 Apr 14

SgtAl says...

Taxi drivers are NOT public servants, they may provide a service (debatable) to the public by and large but they are not accountable to that very same public. Taxi drivers are very much private sector; they operate solely to make a profit.

Is 1237 some sort of record for 'likes' on a comment?
Taxi drivers are NOT public servants, they may provide a service (debatable) to the public by and large but they are not accountable to that very same public. Taxi drivers are very much private sector; they operate solely to make a profit. Is 1237 some sort of record for 'likes' on a comment? SgtAl
  • Score: 4

11:08pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Jabbadad says...

I think we might find that there are certain requirements/ commitments of the Hackney carriage license which they all have to operate off the ranks (without over ranking, which carries a considerable fine of I hear £100) or to pick up along the roads / streets. I also wonder if it's within the license requirments when twice a day the ranks are empty.
Before I receive a flurry from certain people, I repeat this is nor a criticism, nor racist but an interested enquiry.
I think we might find that there are certain requirements/ commitments of the Hackney carriage license which they all have to operate off the ranks (without over ranking, which carries a considerable fine of I hear £100) or to pick up along the roads / streets. I also wonder if it's within the license requirments when twice a day the ranks are empty. Before I receive a flurry from certain people, I repeat this is nor a criticism, nor racist but an interested enquiry. Jabbadad
  • Score: 0

10:33am Wed 2 Apr 14

poontangy says...

in germany all of the cabs have to be white mercs. Taxis need to be standardised.
in germany all of the cabs have to be white mercs. Taxis need to be standardised. poontangy
  • Score: 3

12:06am Thu 3 Apr 14

ideas4all says...

Y should taxis need to b brand new 3 year olds r very safe although accidents occur between all types .next you will b asking all buses to b brand new
Y should taxis need to b brand new 3 year olds r very safe although accidents occur between all types .next you will b asking all buses to b brand new ideas4all
  • Score: -4

2:49pm Thu 3 Apr 14

The Villan says...

ideas4all wrote:
Y should taxis need to b brand new 3 year olds r very safe although accidents occur between all types .next you will b asking all buses to b brand new
A sentence in proper grammar would be appreciated. So-called 'text typing' is reserved for mobile phones.
[quote][p][bold]ideas4all[/bold] wrote: Y should taxis need to b brand new 3 year olds r very safe although accidents occur between all types .next you will b asking all buses to b brand new[/p][/quote]A sentence in proper grammar would be appreciated. So-called 'text typing' is reserved for mobile phones. The Villan
  • Score: 4

3:03pm Thu 3 Apr 14

scott.hannaford says...

"A sentence in proper grammar would be appreciated. So-called 'text typing' is reserved for mobile phones."

...and for idiots.
"A sentence in proper grammar would be appreciated. So-called 'text typing' is reserved for mobile phones." ...and for idiots. scott.hannaford
  • Score: 3

6:19pm Thu 3 Apr 14

pinkfluff says...

The Villan wrote:
ideas4all wrote:
Y should taxis need to b brand new 3 year olds r very safe although accidents occur between all types .next you will b asking all buses to b brand new
A sentence in proper grammar would be appreciated. So-called 'text typing' is reserved for mobile phones.
Maybe they were typing on their mobile phone. You can access the internet on a mobile phone btw.
[quote][p][bold]The Villan [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ideas4all[/bold] wrote: Y should taxis need to b brand new 3 year olds r very safe although accidents occur between all types .next you will b asking all buses to b brand new[/p][/quote]A sentence in proper grammar would be appreciated. So-called 'text typing' is reserved for mobile phones.[/p][/quote]Maybe they were typing on their mobile phone. You can access the internet on a mobile phone btw. pinkfluff
  • Score: 0

6:21pm Thu 3 Apr 14

pinkfluff says...

scott.hannaford wrote:
"A sentence in proper grammar would be appreciated. So-called 'text typing' is reserved for mobile phones."

...and for idiots.
I can still read it just fine. Who is the idiot!?
[quote][p][bold]scott.hannaford[/bold] wrote: "A sentence in proper grammar would be appreciated. So-called 'text typing' is reserved for mobile phones." ...and for idiots.[/p][/quote]I can still read it just fine. Who is the idiot!? pinkfluff
  • Score: 0

7:07pm Thu 3 Apr 14

The Villan says...

pinkfluff wrote:
The Villan wrote:
ideas4all wrote:
Y should taxis need to b brand new 3 year olds r very safe although accidents occur between all types .next you will b asking all buses to b brand new
A sentence in proper grammar would be appreciated. So-called 'text typing' is reserved for mobile phones.
Maybe they were typing on their mobile phone. You can access the internet on a mobile phone btw.
Maybe they were, but surely when commenting on a news story and not your friends, one should use correct grammar? Sorry, it is one of my Room 101 pet hates.
[quote][p][bold]pinkfluff[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Villan [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ideas4all[/bold] wrote: Y should taxis need to b brand new 3 year olds r very safe although accidents occur between all types .next you will b asking all buses to b brand new[/p][/quote]A sentence in proper grammar would be appreciated. So-called 'text typing' is reserved for mobile phones.[/p][/quote]Maybe they were typing on their mobile phone. You can access the internet on a mobile phone btw.[/p][/quote]Maybe they were, but surely when commenting on a news story and not your friends, one should use correct grammar? Sorry, it is one of my Room 101 pet hates. The Villan
  • Score: 2

2:47pm Fri 4 Apr 14

ideas4all says...

pinkfluff wrote:
scott.hannaford wrote:
"A sentence in proper grammar would be appreciated. So-called 'text typing' is reserved for mobile phones."

...and for idiots.
I can still read it just fine. Who is the idiot!?
Thank u pink point well made if u r able 2 read it then then what's the harm
[quote][p][bold]pinkfluff[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scott.hannaford[/bold] wrote: "A sentence in proper grammar would be appreciated. So-called 'text typing' is reserved for mobile phones." ...and for idiots.[/p][/quote]I can still read it just fine. Who is the idiot!?[/p][/quote]Thank u pink point well made if u r able 2 read it then then what's the harm ideas4all
  • Score: -2

3:51pm Fri 4 Apr 14

1twogo says...

Don’t the taxi drivers use a normal business plan where depreciation is taken into consideration when preparing their budgets and year end accounts? For a taxi purchased at £30000 a simple method is to divide the cost of the asset over the period for which it will be used or its expected lifetime.
So £30000 divided by 12 years is a yearly depreciation of £2500 per year. If this figure cannot be afforded within the first business plan then one should not start the business. Obviously this is a very basic, simple model but one that works.

Being a taxi owner is not just simply riding about sat in a car, waiting at the curb side or blowing a horn outside houses. You have to run your business effectively and not fall into the trap that seems very apparent here.
Don’t the taxi drivers use a normal business plan where depreciation is taken into consideration when preparing their budgets and year end accounts? For a taxi purchased at £30000 a simple method is to divide the cost of the asset over the period for which it will be used or its expected lifetime. So £30000 divided by 12 years is a yearly depreciation of £2500 per year. If this figure cannot be afforded within the first business plan then one should not start the business. Obviously this is a very basic, simple model but one that works. Being a taxi owner is not just simply riding about sat in a car, waiting at the curb side or blowing a horn outside houses. You have to run your business effectively and not fall into the trap that seems very apparent here. 1twogo
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree