Thought there must be more to the story than the headline, but no – it really is some councillors with absolutely nothing better to do than shut down someone doing a good thing. This sort of bureaucracy achieves nothing.
[deleted] on
[deleted]
oliverprose on
Alternative headline: Unlicensed taxi driver banned from operating, after making no apparent effort to check whether taking money for transportation required a licence.
It’s noble, and I can see where he’s coming from with the pubs struggling and his personal charity fundraising desires, but there are reasons why taxis are a regulated industry.
SuperrVillain85 on
I doubt he’s properly insured to use his vehicle as a taxi if he doesn’t have a licence.
BarrieTheShagger on
>The letter directed at Mr Hartfield said that his offer of a trip home in a “private hire vehicle” meant he was now subject to “requirements for local authority licensing”.
>They then directed the landlord to the relevant licensing web page on the council’s website.
While this headline makes it seem like a council overreacting, its actually doing its job because this type of service could easily be abused and could even become a loophole for businesses to abuse,
you have no way of ensuring he doesn’t take advantage of solo passengers
no way of ensuring the vehicle is safe for the use of public transport
most importantly it is not a charity if it actively helps his business to survive, that is a complete conflict of interest whether well meaning or not it wouldn’t take long for others to try and take the piss with similar ideas.
NonagoonInfinity on
I don’t really think we should be encouraging pub landlords taking people home after getting drunk. Seems like a disaster waiting to happen.
Overall-Lynx917 on
The Landlord may be driving a TX4 but he’s not operating a Taxi. The late Prince Philip has one to drive around London – believe me, he was not plying for hire😂
Just because it looks like a taxi it doesn’t mean it’s a taxi
BroodLord1962 on
Love the ‘utterly ridiculous’ line for an unlicensed taxi driver.
alfius-togra on
Once again, a jobsworth is someone who won’t go out of their way to do something that’s strictly outside of their area of responsibility. It is not someone operating within their area of responsibility in a way you do not like.
carlostgerbil on
This isn’t about being a jobsworth.
Councils and the police do not let people run unlicensed taxis for very good reasons.
Noble though this chap’s intentions are, I would not want anyone I know, drunk or not, getting into a taxi unless the driver has been checked for criminal convictions, such as drink driving or sexual assault, has been checked for valid insurance to cover all passengers, and has had the vehicle thoroughly inspected for safety in the event of an accident or fire.
Nothing is stopping him from following the same protocols as every other taxi driver.
10 commenti
Thought there must be more to the story than the headline, but no – it really is some councillors with absolutely nothing better to do than shut down someone doing a good thing. This sort of bureaucracy achieves nothing.
[deleted]
Alternative headline: Unlicensed taxi driver banned from operating, after making no apparent effort to check whether taking money for transportation required a licence.
It’s noble, and I can see where he’s coming from with the pubs struggling and his personal charity fundraising desires, but there are reasons why taxis are a regulated industry.
I doubt he’s properly insured to use his vehicle as a taxi if he doesn’t have a licence.
>The letter directed at Mr Hartfield said that his offer of a trip home in a “private hire vehicle” meant he was now subject to “requirements for local authority licensing”.
>They then directed the landlord to the relevant licensing web page on the council’s website.
While this headline makes it seem like a council overreacting, its actually doing its job because this type of service could easily be abused and could even become a loophole for businesses to abuse,
you have no way of ensuring he doesn’t take advantage of solo passengers
no way of ensuring the vehicle is safe for the use of public transport
most importantly it is not a charity if it actively helps his business to survive, that is a complete conflict of interest whether well meaning or not it wouldn’t take long for others to try and take the piss with similar ideas.
I don’t really think we should be encouraging pub landlords taking people home after getting drunk. Seems like a disaster waiting to happen.
The Landlord may be driving a TX4 but he’s not operating a Taxi. The late Prince Philip has one to drive around London – believe me, he was not plying for hire😂
Just because it looks like a taxi it doesn’t mean it’s a taxi
Love the ‘utterly ridiculous’ line for an unlicensed taxi driver.
Once again, a jobsworth is someone who won’t go out of their way to do something that’s strictly outside of their area of responsibility. It is not someone operating within their area of responsibility in a way you do not like.
This isn’t about being a jobsworth.
Councils and the police do not let people run unlicensed taxis for very good reasons.
Noble though this chap’s intentions are, I would not want anyone I know, drunk or not, getting into a taxi unless the driver has been checked for criminal convictions, such as drink driving or sexual assault, has been checked for valid insurance to cover all passengers, and has had the vehicle thoroughly inspected for safety in the event of an accident or fire.
Nothing is stopping him from following the same protocols as every other taxi driver.