In message , at 18:08:12 on Tue,
26 Apr 2016, Graham Murray remarked:

As no unattended parking is allowed by the Police, what's the
difference between a Waiting and a Parking restriction?

Whether or not the engine is turned off, and for automatics whether it
is in 'neutral' or 'park'?

Waiting has nothing to do with whether the vehicle is occupied,
otherwise there could be no 20-minute general exemption for people doing
"loading/unloading" in the absence of a specific additional prohibition
for that.
--
Roland Perry

In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:

On 26/04/2016 18:19, wrote:
In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:

On 25/04/2016 14:18, David Cantrell wrote:

On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 06:13:47PM +0100, JNugent wrote:

There's always been a good case for the advance booking period for a
so-called "private hire car" to be at least twenty-four hours.

No there hasn't.
Imagine, for example, that you are in an industrial estate in Peckham.
There are no black cabs cruising the industrial estate looking for
passengers.
How do you get home?

The whole reason why unlicensed* "private hire cars" (so-called) can
operate with their unlicensed* drivers is a loophole in the law which
distinguishes immediate hirings from advance bookings.

Immediate hirings - taxis.

Advance bookings - taxis (of course) *or* "private hire cars".

But unless a significant minimum period for that advance booking is
established and enforced, in practice, the law prohibiting unlicensed
plying-for-hire cannot be operated properly.

[* "licensed" here means licensed as a taxi or as a taxi-driver.]

Isn't the number of taxis limited a certain number while there are no
such limits to the number of hire cars because the law doesn't allow it?

No.

That was certainly the situation in Cambridge until 2001, with the
number of taxi licences clearly far too few for the business on offer.
I'm surprised you would support such monopolistic practice if there is
a limit.

The Transport Act of either 1995 or 2005 (I forget which, though 1995
rings the louder bell) forbade such limitation of the number of taxi
vehicles licences.

Limitation - if used (it isn't used everywhere) - now has to be
determined by quasi-scientific means. The usual method is to survey
the trade at "busy" times, whereas the correct method would be to
survey the trade at non-busy times, eg: a fine dry Tuesday
mid-morning in April.

Such limits are still legal outside London since the 1985 Transport Act (the
one that deregulated buses) but as you say only when supported by survey
evidence of "no unmet demand".

The trade are notorious for all sorts of dodgy practices while such surveys
are carried out to persuade survey firms there is no unmet demand.

After Labour regained control of Cambridge City Council in 2014 they
re-imposed a limit at the number of licences then held. To be fair, without
a limit the number of hackneys had been pretty static for some time
following a sharp rise after the Council, under Liberal Democrat control,
removed the limit in 2001.

One important difference between Cambridge and London is that hire cars have
meters and, though they don't have to, do in fact charge the same fares as
hackneys (with the city at least). Several operators have mixed fleets with
hackneys, city-licensed hire cars and South Cambs DC licensed hire cars
(which outnumber the rest by a large margin). So someone ring them up may
get any time of vehicle but will always be charged the same fare.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 19:24:53 on Mon, 25 Apr 2016,
tim... remarked:
Unfortunately that looks like a Parking restriction, not a Waiting
restriction.

I don't think you can have a session-limited "No Waiting" sign.

As no unattended parking is allowed by the Police, what's the
difference between a Waiting and a Parking restriction?

That's not a compulsory sign, though. And the whole problem is that the
police *don't* enforce anything in practice.

surely that's because it has been "devolved" to the council

LAPE, but the things mentioned in the "Police" notice are not within their
jurisdiction.

I spent ten minutes there earlier today, and it's a toss-up between people
who think that if they put on their hazard flashers

I had to wait in a line to pass someone who had turned on their "yes I know
I am a selfish ****** who has left their car as an obstruction to everyone
else whilst I wait for my passenger" lights, only yesterday.

It isn't just central London, and it isn't just taxis

tim

JNugent wrote:
On 26/04/2016 17:11, Recliner wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 26/04/2016 16:23, David Walters wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 07:14:45 -0700 (PDT), Steve Lewis wrote:
You can go to the trouble of finding out the phone number of a taxi
firm in your current locality. Or you can just use the Uber app that
you have already installed on your smartphone.

But that wouldn't help in the situtation being discussed where private
hire requires 24 hours notice and I require a cab in my bit of suburban
North London right now for an emergency so need a black cab.

Although if private hire did require 24 hours notice there might be more
black cabs about serving the short notice requirement.

No London green-badged cab driver can afford to hang around in the
suburbs where there isn't enough work to keep him busy.
However, there is the London yellow-badged driver, licensed only to ply
for hire within certain London suburban areas (known as sectors). They
are available in the whole of outer London:
http://www.theknowledgetaxi.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/suburban.jpg

Why would someone ring for one of those when they could equally well ring a
local mini cab firm, which would be much cheaper, and provide a less
polluting vehicle (probably a modern hybrid car, not a rattling, smelly
diesel)?

You seem very certain of that.

The much lower cost or the modern, hybrid car? The former is indeed a
certainty, the latter has invariably been the case every time I've used a
mini cab in the last year or so.

On 26/04/2016 19:28, wrote:
In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:

On 26/04/2016 18:19, wrote:
In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:

On 25/04/2016 14:18, David Cantrell wrote:

On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 06:13:47PM +0100, JNugent wrote:

There's always been a good case for the advance booking period for a
so-called "private hire car" to be at least twenty-four hours.

No there hasn't.
Imagine, for example, that you are in an industrial estate in Peckham.
There are no black cabs cruising the industrial estate looking for
passengers.
How do you get home?

The whole reason why unlicensed* "private hire cars" (so-called) can
operate with their unlicensed* drivers is a loophole in the law which
distinguishes immediate hirings from advance bookings.

Immediate hirings - taxis.

Advance bookings - taxis (of course) *or* "private hire cars".

But unless a significant minimum period for that advance booking is
established and enforced, in practice, the law prohibiting unlicensed
plying-for-hire cannot be operated properly.

[* "licensed" here means licensed as a taxi or as a taxi-driver.]

Isn't the number of taxis limited a certain number while there are no
such limits to the number of hire cars because the law doesn't allow it?

No.

That was certainly the situation in Cambridge until 2001, with the
number of taxi licences clearly far too few for the business on offer.
I'm surprised you would support such monopolistic practice if there is
a limit.

The Transport Act of either 1995 or 2005 (I forget which, though 1995
rings the louder bell) forbade such limitation of the number of taxi
vehicles licences.

Limitation - if used (it isn't used everywhere) - now has to be
determined by quasi-scientific means. The usual method is to survey
the trade at "busy" times, whereas the correct method would be to
survey the trade at non-busy times, eg: a fine dry Tuesday
mid-morning in April.

Such limits are still legal outside London since the 1985 Transport Act (the
one that deregulated buses) but as you say only when supported by survey
evidence of "no unmet demand".

The trade are notorious for all sorts of dodgy practices while such surveys
are carried out to persuade survey firms there is no unmet demand.

After Labour regained control of Cambridge City Council in 2014 they
re-imposed a limit at the number of licences then held. To be fair, without
a limit the number of hackneys had been pretty static for some time
following a sharp rise after the Council, under Liberal Democrat control,
removed the limit in 2001.

One important difference between Cambridge and London is that hire cars have
meters and, though they don't have to, do in fact charge the same fares as
hackneys (with the city at least). Several operators have mixed fleets with
hackneys, city-licensed hire cars and South Cambs DC licensed hire cars
(which outnumber the rest by a large margin). So someone ring them up may
get any time of vehicle but will always be charged the same fare.

The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, under which
most districts license private hire (so-called) cars provides that where
a meter is fitted to a private hire [sic] vehicle, it has to be
regulated to the rates charged by local taxis.

On 26/04/2016 21:02, Recliner wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 26/04/2016 17:11, Recliner wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 26/04/2016 16:23, David Walters wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 07:14:45 -0700 (PDT), Steve Lewis wrote:
You can go to the trouble of finding out the phone number of a taxi
firm in your current locality. Or you can just use the Uber app that
you have already installed on your smartphone.

But that wouldn't help in the situtation being discussed where private
hire requires 24 hours notice and I require a cab in my bit of suburban
North London right now for an emergency so need a black cab.

Although if private hire did require 24 hours notice there might be more
black cabs about serving the short notice requirement.

No London green-badged cab driver can afford to hang around in the
suburbs where there isn't enough work to keep him busy.
However, there is the London yellow-badged driver, licensed only to ply
for hire within certain London suburban areas (known as sectors). They
are available in the whole of outer London:
http://www.theknowledgetaxi.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/suburban.jpg

Why would someone ring for one of those when they could equally well ring a
local mini cab firm, which would be much cheaper, and provide a less
polluting vehicle (probably a modern hybrid car, not a rattling, smelly
diesel)?

You seem very certain of that.

The much lower cost or the modern, hybrid car? The former is indeed a
certainty, the latter has invariably been the case every time I've used a
mini cab in the last year or so.

"Invariably" meaning... what?

JNugent wrote:
On 26/04/2016 21:02, Recliner wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 26/04/2016 17:11, Recliner wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 26/04/2016 16:23, David Walters wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 07:14:45 -0700 (PDT), Steve Lewis
wrote:
You can go to the trouble
of finding out the phone number of a taxi
firm in your current locality. Or you can just use the Uber app that
you have already installed on your smartphone.

But that wouldn't help in the situtation being discussed where private
hire requires 24 hours notice and I require a cab in my bit of suburban
North London right now for an emergency so need a black cab.

Although if private hire did require 24 hours notice there might be more
black cabs about serving the short notice requirement.

No London green-badged cab driver can afford to hang around in the
suburbs where there isn't enough work to keep him busy.
However, there is the London yellow-badged driver, licensed only to ply
for hire within certain London suburban areas (known as sectors). They
are available in the whole of outer London:
http://www.theknowledgetaxi.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/suburban.jpg

Why would someone ring for one of those when they could equally well ring a
local mini cab firm, which would be much cheaper, and provide a less
polluting vehicle (probably a modern hybrid car, not a rattling, smelly
diesel)?

You seem very certain of that.

The much lower cost or the modern, hybrid car? The former is indeed a
certainty, the latter has invariably been the case every time I've used a
mini cab in the last year or so.

"Invariably" meaning... what?

What do you think it means? Consult a dictionary if in doubt.

JNugent wrote:
On 26/04/2016 19:28, wrote:
In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:

On 26/04/2016 18:19, wrote:
In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:

On 25/04/2016 14:18, David Cantrell wrote:

On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 06:13:47PM +0100, JNugent wrote:

There's always been a good case for the advance booking period for a
so-called "private hire car" to be at least twenty-four hours.

No there hasn't.
Imagine, for example, that you are in an industrial estate in Peckham.
There are no black cabs cruising the industrial estate looking for
passengers.
How do you get home?

The whole reason why unlicensed* "private hire cars" (so-called) can
operate with their unlicensed* drivers is a loophole in the law which
distinguishes immediate hirings from advance bookings.

Immediate hirings - taxis.

Advance bookings - taxis (of course) *or* "private hire cars".

But unless a significant minimum period for that advance booking is
established and enforced, in practice, the law prohibiting unlicensed
plying-for-hire cannot be operated properly.

[* "licensed" here means licensed as a taxi or as a taxi-driver.]

Isn't the number of taxis limited a certain number while there are no
such limits to the number of hire cars because the law doesn't allow it?

No.

That was certainly the situation in Cambridge until 2001, with the
number of taxi licences clearly far too few for the business on offer.
I'm surprised you would support such monopolistic practice if there is
a limit.

The Transport Act of either 1995 or 2005 (I forget which, though 1995
rings the louder bell) forbade such limitation of the number of taxi
vehicles licences.

Limitation - if used (it isn't used everywhere) - now has to be
determined by quasi-scientific means. The usual method is to survey
the trade at "busy" times, whereas the correct method would be to
survey the trade at non-busy times, eg: a fine dry Tuesday
mid-morning in April.

Such limits are still legal outside London since the 1985 Transport Act (the
one that deregulated buses) but as you say only when supported by survey
evidence of "no unmet demand".

The trade are notorious for all sorts of dodgy practices while such surveys
are carried out to persuade survey firms there is no unmet demand.

After Labour regained control of Cambridge City Council in 2014 they
re-imposed a limit at the number of licences then held. To be fair, without
a limit the number of hackneys had been pretty static for some time
following a sharp rise after the Council, under Liberal Democrat control,
removed the limit in 2001.

One important difference between Cambridge and London is that hire cars have
meters and, though they don't have to, do in fact charge the same fares as
hackneys (with the city at least). Several operators have mixed fleets with
hackneys, city-licensed hire cars and South Cambs DC licensed hire cars
(which outnumber the rest by a large margin). So someone ring them up may
get any time of vehicle but will always be charged the same fare.

The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, under which
most districts license private hire (so-called) cars provides that where
a meter is fitted to a private hire [sic] vehicle, it has to be
regulated to the rates charged by local taxis.

Why the 'sic'? If it's the correct legal term, there's no need for it. And
if it's not, use the correct term. The 'sic' should only be used when
quoting someone else's incorrect use of a word, like your incorrect use of
'sic'. Just because you disapprove of cheaper, more convenient, cleaner,
legal competitors doesn't make them illicit. It just makes you look like a
white (or, actually) black elephant.

I don't know the answer to any of those questions! I suppose
a trawl of the Internet might produce some information.

wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 18:08:12 +0100, Graham Murray
wrote:

Recliner writes:

As no unattended parking is allowed by the Police, what's the
difference between a Waiting and a Parking restriction?

Whether or not the engine is turned off,

The adoption of automatic engine shut down and almost instantaneous
restart that manufacturers have develpoed to reduce emissions and fuel
consumption could fudge using that, as will hybrids whose IC engine
has shutdown as the batteries are charged enough.

Yup, lots of mini cabs are now Toyota Prius's and the like, whose engines
nearly always shut down before the car stops, and don't start again till
some distance after it moves off. That's a lot better than a rank of
smelly, rattly black cabs.