In message , at 20:14:34 on Sat, 22 Oct
2016, Basil Jet remarked:
Hackney carriage drivers have meters to keep them honest of course. One
reason why licensed hire cars in Cambridge have meters.

The habit of refusing to use them seems particularly popular late at
night in MK. And they *all* refuse, so you can't just get in the one
behind. And the Council has no interest in removing their licences for
doing so.

If they refuse to use the meter is the passenger able to refuse to pay
the fare?

Fixed fares are generally paid up front.

Is that a Milton Keynes thing? I've never paid any sort of taxi/minicab
fare up front.

Only had one dispute, too (a classic failure of 'the knowledge') where a
driver added the cost of short-term parking at Birmingham Airport to the
fare, despite me having been given a fixed quote by the minicab firm. As
it was about the same as the tip I'd have given him anyway, we parted
company with him getting the parking fee and no tip.
--
Roland Perry

[quote='D A Stocks[_2_];158826']"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On 2016-10-18 14:38:42 +0000, said:

Hackney carriage drivers have meters to keep them honest of course. One
reason why licensed hire cars in Cambridge have meters.

The habit of refusing to use them seems particularly popular late at night
in MK. And they *all* refuse, so you can't just get in the one behind.
And the Council has no interest in removing their licences for doing so.



If they refuse to use the meter is the passenger able to refuse to pay the
fare?

The de-regulated (or, more properly, re-regulated) taxis in Dublin have to
provide a printed receipt from the the meter. If the driver tells you they
can't print a receipt (and I have had a few that did this) you're perfectly
entitled to tell them you can't pay the fare. BTW, a standard Uber taxi has
to operate in Dublin under exactly the same rules as a licensed taxi, which
is why Uber hasn't really caught on there.

Personally, I think it's about time the London taxi/cab rules were
re-written to provide a level-playing field where
- all drivers operate under a common license
- no distinction between vehicles hailed on the street, picked up at a rank
or pre-booked
- all vehicles metered with printed receipts
- no special vehicles required, other than an incentive to provide a minimum
number of wheelchair adapted vehicles.
- common (and sensible, given the use of sat-nav) level of 'knowledge' and
language skill requirements for drivers.

The above (which AIUI is how the industry works in Dublin) would mean the
Hackney Carriage as we know it would die.


--
DAS

Many Londoners would like that system but it would be
opposed fanatically by the Hackney Cab trade, by owners
of minicab firms and by politicians.

On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 10:04:08 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 08:34:29 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

Lots of noise and blocked traffic when I walked past yesterday in
Southwark.
Anyone know what they're protesting about this week? Is it Uber, fares, or
they just don't like TfL in general?

They want the world to stand still, for regulation to remain as it has
done since they gained their monopoly, for technological process to be
banned and for TfL to be their "bestest ever friend in the whole wide
world" so taxi drivers can not suffer the consequences that anyone
whose job or trade has been forcibly changed by progress has had to
do. In short TfL and the Mayor should do what the taxi drivers
f*ckin' tell them to do.

Ironic really when you consider the general political slant of many
taxi drivers. You'd imagine they'd be against protectionism, would
love innovation and would be swashbuckling supporters of competition.

I have a bit of sympathy for them but not engaging with the world as
it is rther than how they wish it was is a rather stupid approach to
take.

I agree

Arguing that they shouldn't have to compete with a competitor who structures
his business in a way that facilitates tax evasion (yes, I said evasion) is
one thing (not suggesting that Uber evades tax, but ISTM that the casual
relationship that they have with drivers enables them to do so, if they are
so minded)

Surely an Uber driver has far *less* opportunity to evade tax than
other mini cab or black cab drivers? All fares are collected via
Uber, so there are no undocumented cash payments. As for Uber itself,
it has no opportunity to evade tax, but it certainly has a typical
tax-efficient multinational financial structure that will allow it to
minimise taxes when it gets into profit. You may not like that, but it
isn't tax evasion.

On 23.10.16 8:44, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 20:14:34 on Sat, 22 Oct
2016, Basil Jet remarked:
Hackney carriage drivers have meters to keep them honest of course.
One
reason why licensed hire cars in Cambridge have meters.

The habit of refusing to use them seems particularly popular late at
night in MK. And they *all* refuse, so you can't just get in the one
behind. And the Council has no interest in removing their licences for
doing so.

If they refuse to use the meter is the passenger able to refuse to pay
the fare?

Fixed fares are generally paid up front.

Is that a Milton Keynes thing? I've never paid any sort of taxi/minicab
fare up front.

Speaking of Milton Keynes, what is the deal with the PRT project there
these days?

On 2016-10-23 07:44:00 +0000, Roland Perry said:

Is that a Milton Keynes thing? I've never paid any sort of taxi/minicab
fare up front.

If you negotiate a fare, that usually happens up front. Perhaps that
kind of misbehaviour is confined to the disreputable MK Hackney
carriages.

Only had one dispute, too (a classic failure of 'the knowledge') where
a driver added the cost of short-term parking at Birmingham Airport to
the fare, despite me having been given a fixed quote by the minicab
firm. As it was about the same as the tip I'd have given him anyway, we
parted company with him getting the parking fee and no tip.

Could well be a failure of the company who should have added it onto
the quote. But if it was an issue, for future reference, just get him
to drop/collect you at the railway station instead, where there are no
such nonsensical fees.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On 2016-10-23 14:38:20 +0000, said:

Speaking of Milton Keynes, what is the deal with the PRT project there
these days?

Progressing, but still an utter waste of money. And I still don't want
vehicles of any kind operating on footways, as they are proposed to do,
whether self-driven or not.

The "Transport Systems Catapult" (based just over from the station) is
an interesting organisation - some of what it does makes sense, but it
also seems to back some very odd ideas at times.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

On 2016-10-23 07:44:00 +0000, Roland Perry said:

Is that a Milton Keynes thing? I've never paid any sort of
taxi/minicab fare up front.

If you negotiate a fare, that usually happens up front. Perhaps that
kind of misbehaviour is confined to the disreputable MK Hackney
carriages.

Only had one dispute, too (a classic failure of 'the knowledge')
where a driver added the cost of short-term parking at Birmingham
Airport to the fare, despite me having been given a fixed quote by
the minicab firm. As it was about the same as the tip I'd have
given him anyway, we parted company with him getting the parking
fee and no tip.

Could well be a failure of the company who should have added it onto
the quote. But if it was an issue, for future reference, just get
him to drop/collect you at the railway station instead, where there
are no such nonsensical fees.

I live within the city centre in Cambridge so have always used the meter in
taxis and hire cars but from cases that came before me as a councillor I can
see that the usual arrangement with out boundary fares, which have to be
agreed before travel and aren't metered, is payment at the end of the hire.
However, from the problems brought before us, I can see why drivers might
want up-front payment.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 2016-10-23 22:48:00 +0000, said:

I live within the city centre in Cambridge so have always used the meter in
taxis and hire cars but from cases that came before me as a councillor I can
see that the usual arrangement with out boundary fares, which have to be
agreed before travel and aren't metered, is payment at the end of the hire.
However, from the problems brought before us, I can see why drivers might
want up-front payment.

I do see that, but it's no excuse not to use the meter. The drivers
will have a good idea of what the metered fare is for most common
destinations, so have no practical need to overcharge.

To be honest, I'd rather see the system move to a zonal one in large
cities, then payment could validly be up front.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

In message , at 19:32:48 on Sun, 23
Oct 2016, Neil Williams remarked:
Only had one dispute, too (a classic failure of 'the knowledge')
where a driver added the cost of short-term parking at Birmingham
Airport to the fare, despite me having been given a fixed quote by
the minicab firm. As it was about the same as the tip I'd have given
him anyway, we parted company with him getting the parking fee and no tip.

Could well be a failure of the company who should have added it onto
the quote.

Yes, the failure of the cab company's "knowledge" that the pickup at
Birmingham airport has a fee.

--
Roland Perry

In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

On 2016-10-23 22:48:00 +0000, said:

I live within the city centre in Cambridge so have always used the meter
in taxis and hire cars but from cases that came before me as a
councillor I can see that the usual arrangement with out boundary fares,
which have to be agreed before travel and aren't metered, is payment at
the end of the hire. However, from the problems brought before us, I can
see why drivers might want up-front payment.

I do see that, but it's no excuse not to use the meter. The drivers
will have a good idea of what the metered fare is for most common
destinations, so have no practical need to overcharge.

To be honest, I'd rather see the system move to a zonal one in large
cities, then payment could validly be up front.

The, as far as I can see, main reason for not using the meter is to make
costs of long journeys outside the city cheaper than they would be on the
meter and predictable at the outset. Imagine the meter rate for a trip from
Cambridge to Heathrow for example!

--
Colin Rosenstiel