Taxi - 9 year rule

Is this 9 year rule thing not from 01Jan2011 ? Should all the pre 2002 cars running about with taxi plates on them be on the road now ?

bigroad

Yea thats what i was thinking.somebody said on a different post ,that it wont affect some drivers till the end of the year not sure why.maybe only new drivers from now and others have the year to change cars.

Spook_ie

However, just to confuse the issue, anyone with a license that was eligible for renewal ( and renewed by ) 31st December 2010 could put any age car on the road, you are allowed to renew your SPSV license upto 90 days in advance of the expiry date

So it won't start taking legal effect until vehicles with licenses due for renewal from approx. 30th March 2011 OR those that were due between 1 Jan 2011 and 30th March 2011 that didn't manage to get them passed out prior to 31st December 2010 start being removed from the roads

ardle1

hEireann for the copy:

I am accusing the Commission for Taxi Regulation of having no regard and for putting extra unnecessary financial hardship on many of the taxi owners in Ireland. The Commission for Taxi Regulation has stated from the year 2007 right up to the end of the third quarter of 2009 that existing vehicle licence holders did not have to change their vehicles until licence renewal date in 2012. What the Regulator meant was that all vehicles older than 9yrs upon renewal date in 2012 would have to be changed for a vehicle under 9yrs old, for example if your vehicle was 8yrs 10months old and was presented for licence renewal in 2012 the vehicle would not be granted a licence because by the time of its next renewal date the vehicle would be 9yrs 10months old. The age of the vehicle is determined by the month and year the vehicle was first registered to go out on the road not necessary the number plate; so if the licence expired at end of Feb and the vehicle was first registered in May 03, then that vehicle would be entitled for one more licence renewal in 2012.

Then in late 2009 the Commission made changes to this law by fast tracking this nine year rule to renewal date 2011; many taxi vehicle licence holders are very angry and feel this act is unfair and unjust, they have made provisions with financial issues and personal issues that they may have and they believed that the dead line was 2012 to have these issues in order; there is no way that any licence holder would have thought any different because this information was explained in all of these booklets that were issued by the Commission for Taxi Regulation.

These are abstracts from these booklets of what the Commission said.

In the Commissions booklet National Vehicle Standards 2007 it states clearly that the age requirement of nine years for existing SPSV licence holders shall not commence until January 2012 (section 5 p 17). The Commission also repeats this again in the booklet Always Driving Forward, Action Plan 2008-2009 following an extensive process; new vehicle standards for the industry were published in November 2007. The new standards will introduce reforms across a wide range of areas within the sector on a phased basis from 2008 to 2009. Standards Taxis and Hackneys (for new applicants from 01/0/09, existing licence holders from 01/01/12. The Commission then also repeats this again in The Official Manual For Operating In The SPSV Industry 2009 The standards set out in the National Vehicle Standard document will apply in full to all new licences from 1 January 2010. Existing vehicle licence holders have until licence renewal during 2012 to comply (section 3 p65).

The commission put this information out to all in the taxi industry and many of us made provision in the belief, that by 2012 we would have existing loans on our cars and business cleared and that maybe in 2012 we might be able to look for more financial help to stay in the industry, many of us would not have used the year 2012 as our target only that the Commission expressed and implied that this was the year that the nine year rule came into effect for existing vehicle licence holders.

I myself am going to be out of pocket because of what the Commission expressed and implied. The Commission is now saying that the nine year rule will be fast tracked and come into effect at renewal date 2011, which means that I have to make provisions to seek more finance to replace my car and to also pay the finance on the loan that I had made agreements to repay in year 2012. In the economic down turn I know that this is not going to be possible for many others and myself, it will probably be the end for some of us in the taxi industry. I would be hoping that the Commission could be taken to task and be held liable for the losses and costs of what is incurred because of what was expressed and implied by the Commission.

Max Power1

So, as a TLDR of the last post:

Taxi drivers have no regard for their customers, and expect them to sit in to 15 year old corollas.

shawnee

I think it is a ridiculous rule and will again lengthen our dole queues. In the present climate it will be uneconomical for many drivers to upgrade their cars. I have no difficulty with the cars being asked to meet high standards, size , cleanliness , nct etc. Some drivers may have a 2000 Merc or similar in immaculate and are being told it is not fit for the crappy Irish roads. :rolleyes::

ardle1

ardle1 wrote: »

hEireann for the copy:

...........................
I myself am going to be out of pocket because of what the Commission expressed and implied. The Commission is now saying that the nine year rule will be fast tracked and come into effect at renewal date 2011, which means that I have to make provisions to seek more finance to replace my car and to also pay the finance on the loan that I had made agreements to repay in year 2012. In the economic down turn I know that this is not going to be possible for many others and myself, it will probably be the end for some of us in the taxi industry. I would be hoping that the Commission could be taken to task and be held liable for the losses and costs of what is incurred because of what was expressed and implied by the Commission.

You have current finance that you will not pay until 2012
And now you need to borrow more to replace your existing taxi ?
So you have finance on your current old yoke that you have made agreements to repay in 2010 ?

Weird. anyway one of the reasons for this legislation was presumably to get some taxi folk off the road.

Owen

Max Power1 wrote: »

So, as a TLDR of the last post:

Taxi drivers have no regard for their customers, and expect them to sit in to 15 year old corollas.

+1

10 PRINT "TaxiDriver: I own a taxi and can't afford a new one"
20 PRINT "Boardsie: Tough, a Taxi should be safe and fit for purpose"
30 GOTO 10.

We've been here before, we'll be here again. Very old basic cars without airconditioning, or more importantly safety aids such as Airbags and ABS, not to mention being big enough to carry a few people and their luggage are not suitable in this day and age. Suck it up, every other industry is forced to go with the times, Taxi drivers shouldn't get special exemption - especially when they're responsible for peoples lives. Given the standard of Taxi driving I'm seeing lately, the cars should also be covered in bubblewrap too just to be extra safe.

robtri

I agree completely with the taxi rule,

I do understand that there are certain cars over 9 years old used as taxi that are in great condition and have a lot of modern safety equipment, but the majority of the older taxi's dont.
and my opinion is that a rule shouldnt be made on the exception, especially when potential lives are at risk

stevenmu

I agree with the safety comments, but what the regulator really should have done was specified a minimum safety standard instead of a max age. There's cars out there older than 9 years with excellent safety features, and there's a few around that are much younger than 9 years which score much lower on safety.

Owen

That's not really feasible either Stevenmu, as the NCAP test itself has been refined over the years. A 4 star car from the start of the NCAP tests isn't the same as a 4 star car from a test today. A line had to be drawn in the sand somewhere. I'm not certain it's all about being younger than 9 years either ... isn't there a list of cars that have to be chosen from?

CabanasBoy

shawnee wrote: »

I think it is a ridiculous rule and will again lengthen our dole queues. In the present climate it will be uneconomical for many drivers to upgrade their cars. I have no difficulty with the cars being asked to meet high standards, size , cleanliness , nct etc. Some drivers may have a 2000 Merc or similar in immaculate and are being told it is not fit for the crappy Irish roads. :rolleyes::

I'm very sympathetic to taxi owners as I'm sure it ain't an easy way to make a living but they were whinging during the good years too.

1: taxi drivers are not entitled to dole (just like any other self employed person)

2: why do people trot out the same old line " a 10-15 year old Merc is still a fantastic car" eh? no, not as a Public Service Vehicle.

3: This 9 year rule has to start somewhere, taxi drivers will whinge no matter what rules are brought in, if they could see past the end of their own noses they'd see that a lot of these rules will improve things for them in the long term.

4: How could you still have finance outstanding on a 9+ year old car????
(why would you borrow money to purchase a 5,6,7 year old car?)
It doesn't make sense.

greeno

Are there many deaths each year attributed to unsuitable taxi's? Be interesting to find out I suspect very little. Also if a car is fit to pass an NCT (which is much more stringent for taxi's and hackneys) surely just because it is over 9 years old it doesn't mean that it isn't safe.

Nonsense rule to be honest.

Perhaps all cars over 9 years old should be banished from the roads if health and safety is being touted as the issue.

-Chris-

RoverJames wrote: »

You have current finance that you will not pay until 2012

AFAIK no car finance company will finance a car beyond 7 years old. Is there a special arrangement for Taxis because they're a business?

-Chris-

How are these cars for use as taxis?


http://www.carzone.ie/search/Ford/Mondeo/2.0-LX-1/201040199746377/advert?channel=CARS

http://www.carzone.ie/search/Opel/Vectra/LIFE-1.9/201018197872779/advert?channel=CARS

http://www.carzone.ie/search/Ssangyong/Rexton/rx270-xd/201043200024498/advert?channel=CARS

http://www.carzone.ie/search/Volkswagen/Bora/TDI-comf/201049200488934/advert?channel=CARS

http://www.carzone.ie/search/Toyota/Avensis/D4D-AURA/201041199879199/advert?channel=CARS

http://www.carzone.ie/search/Renault/Grand-Scenic/1.9-dsl/201042199913110/advert?channel=CARS

http://www.carzone.ie/search/Hyundai/Trajet/DSL-AIRC/201042199961702/advert?channel=CARS

Cionád

From looking at the model reports here, it seems 2007 and newer Kia Carnival will not meet licensing requirements as a 7-seater, and will have to be run as a 4 passenger taxi!

2006 and older Kia Carnival/Sedona will still meet the licensing requirements as a 7 seater (6-passenger taxi).

Seems they are being ridden both ways... does anyone know if this represents the final decision on model specification?

CabanasBoy

greeno wrote: »

Are there many deaths each year attributed to unsuitable taxi's? Be interesting to find out I suspect very little. Also if a car is fit to pass an NCT (which is much more stringent for taxi's and hackneys) surely just because it is over 9 years old it doesn't mean that it isn't safe.

Nonsense rule to be honest.

Perhaps all cars over 9 years old should be banished from the roads if health and safety is being touted as the issue.

AFAIK the NCT for taxi's is no more stringent than for regular cars, the suitability test (which follows the NCT test) only checks additional items like roof sign, meter, fire ex, first aid kit and most important of all, the torch!

Cocoon

CabanasBoy wrote: »

AFAIK the NCT for taxi's is no more stringent than for regular cars, the suitability test (which follows the NCT test) only checks additional items like roof sign, meter, fire ex, first aid kit and most important of all, the torch!

No most important of all is pen and paper

Gregor Samsa

shawnee wrote: »

I think it is a ridiculous rule and will again lengthen our dole queues. In the present climate it will be uneconomical for many drivers to upgrade their cars.

Taxi drivers themselves claim that there are too many taxis on our roads, because deregulation lowered the bar for entry to the industry. They want changes made that will raise the bar again - putting the "surplus" taxi drivers out of work.

Why the complaints now that this move will put drivers out work of when the bar is being raised in a different area - one that is of benefit to paying customers?

Surely the "professional" taxi drivers will get what they want from this - the "casual" ones won't want to invest in newer cars for the job, and will leave the industry.

CabanasBoy

CabanasBoy wrote: »

AFAIK the NCT for taxi's is no more stringent than for regular cars, the suitability test (which follows the NCT test) only checks additional items like roof sign, meter, fire ex, first aid kit and most important of all, the torch!

NCT test is not more stringent for PSVs

CabanasBoy

RoverJames wrote: »

NCT test is not more stringent for PSVs

Why did you quote me? I said the NCT was no more stringent for taxi's.

Blut2

phutyle wrote: »

Taxi drivers themselves claim that there are too many taxis on our roads, because deregulation lowered the bar for entry to the industry. They want changes made that will raise the bar again - putting the "surplus" taxi drivers out of work.

Why the complaints now that this move will put drivers out work of when the bar is being raised in a different area - one that is of benefit to paying customers?

Surely the "professional" taxi drivers will get what they want from this - the "casual" ones won't want to invest in newer cars for the job, and will leave the industry.

I agree entirely with this post. For ages taxi drivers have been moaning about the number of cars on the road. Then when a law is brought in to reduce the number of cars on the road in a way that benefits the consumer they moan again - it shows that most of them just really want a way to get rid of certain drivers they deem unworthy of the plates, the newer drivers.

Delighted with this law. Next step hopefully a standardisation of taxi colours, make them all white or yellow or something else that'll stand out and be easy to see.

CabanasBoy

CabanasBoy wrote: »

Why did you quote me? I said the NCT was no more stringent for taxi's.

lol
Because I read you post wrong maybe :pac:

sincere apologies

CabanasBoy

RoverJames wrote: »

lol
Because I read you post wrong maybe :pac:

sincere apologies

Sincerely accepted:)

I Was VB

Here is what im currently driving, its licenced untill September





Despite age and looks it drives great, and lots of room for the customers, I drove a immaculate 1996 Carina before this and it was my pride and joy but due to the licence expiry it had to be taken off the road, so im looking for the aboves replacement. Looking at either a GS300 or a E-Class.

mickdw

I cannot understand the outcry from taxi drivers. Surely someone whose car is their business should be about to afford at least a 20k car every 3 or 4 years.
Taxi drivers seem to want to drive around in 1k cars. It pretty sh1ty of them really.

There is a list of car costing 6k earlier in the thread. These are cars that can be used 3 or 4 years (based on age). Whats the problem? Asumming car is worthless when finished, thats 1500 per year in depreciation, thats 28 quid a week. I do feel sorry for the guys with for example a 00 S Class but this is in the pipeline for a while & arrangements should be made before now

CabanasBoy

mickdw wrote: »

I cannot understand the outcry from taxi drivers. Surely someone whose car is their business should be about to afford at least a 20k car every 3 or 4 years.
Taxi drivers seem to want to drive around in 1k cars. It pretty sh1ty of them really.

There is a list of car costing 6k earlier in the thread. These are cars that can be used 3 or 4 years (based on age). Whats the problem? Asumming car is worthless when finished, thats 1500 per year in depreciation, thats 28 quid a week. I do feel sorry for the guys with for example a 00 S Class but this is in the pipeline for a while & arrangements should be made before now

Exactly Mick,, a passenger getting into VB's taxi has to pay the very same as they would getting into a brand new taxi. I was VB probably keeps his car immaculate but that's not the point.

I Was VB

I Was VB wrote: »

Despite age and looks it drives great,

Sure you've more or less said there yourself it doesn't look great :pac:
BTW, what's with having the taxi plate so far back on the roof, few lads in Cork do that, it is the fashion or what ?

mickdw

RoverJames wrote: »

BTW, what's with having the taxi plate so far back on the roof, few lads in Cork do that, it is the fashion or what ?

Its a spoiler! It adds downforce dont ya know:D

VolvoMan

I Was VB wrote: »

I drove a immaculate 1996 Carina before this and it was my pride and joy but due to the licence expiry it had to be taken off the road, so im looking for the aboves replacement. Looking at either a GS300 or a E-Class.

What's the story with the Avensis then, has that not been your replacement?

billyboy01

9 years rule my eye, I saw a queue of taxi's today at a rank registered all in the early 90's. The oldiest being 93 D.

aujopimur

Once the car situation is sorted they need to lok at the personel hygiene of some of the drivers, smelly gits some of them.

CabanasBoy

billyboy01 wrote: »

9 years rule my eye, I saw a queue of taxi's today at a rank registered all in the early 90's. The oldiest being 93 D.

But they cannot renew their licences on these vehicles so it'll happen over the next 12 months.

I Was VB

VolvoMan wrote: »

What's the story with the Avensis then, has that not been your replacement?

Nah after years of driving anicent Toyota about the kip i'm gonna treat myself to a Merc or Lexus.

Max Power1

I Was VB wrote: »

Here is what im currently driving, its licenced untill September





Despite age and looks it drives great, and lots of room for the customers, I drove a immaculate 1996 Carina before this and it was my pride and joy but due to the licence expiry it had to be taken off the road, so im looking for the aboves replacement. Looking at either a GS300 or a E-Class.

Are you going to be selling it?

mickdw

I Was VB wrote: »

Nah after years of driving anicent Toyota about the kip i'm gonna treat myself my customers to a Merc or Lexus.

FYP

maidhc

CabanasBoy wrote: »

Exactly Mick,, a passenger getting into VB's taxi has to pay the very same as they would getting into a brand new taxi.

It is an open market. The public can tell the base operator they only want x car, and they don't have to get into the first car in the rank.

I'm not a taxi driver and don't know any taxi driver personally, but I think it is a stupid stupid rule and I cannot see one good reason for it. I agree the car should be roadworthy, but the NCTS are there to look after than side of things already.

The routemaster lasted in london for over 40 years, and even a lot of our public buses in Ireland are over 9 years old, so the fact a vehicle is a PSV should not have any bearing.

I Was VB

mickdw wrote: »

FYP

No, a customer is sitting in my car for max 20 mins. I'm sitting in the car for 12 hours, which do you think i care about more?? My comfort or the customers??

I buy a car for me not the customers.

Spook_ie

TBH the main crux is the way that the rule was brought forward by a year, I purchased a mid year 2002 car 2 years ago on the basis of when the rules were due to change, I now find that the calculated change over date is 12 months ahead of that budgeted for.

If people are given a timeframe to work to then it shouldn't be changed at the whim of some non answerable bureaucrat

mickdw

I Was VB wrote: »

I buy a car for me not the customers.

Thats unreal.

Imagine a bus driver with this attitude? Its laughable. You are providing a service & should remember that.

This is even more stunning as you appear to be one of the few that keep the car well maintained etc. Im just trying to imagine the attitude of some of the other drivers to their customers,the guys who dont even keep the car clean.

unkel

That's a bit harsh, Mick. I'm sure most taxi drivers have no problem to keep their car compliant with the rules and regulations. To keep it clean, safe and well maintained.

Within those regulations, would you not try and have a comfortable place to work? As VB said, he works up to 12 hours a day. A decent comfortable seat is a minimum requirement. Nobody is gonna pay a (self-employed) taxi driver any sick leave if he injures himself from sitting on a substandard seat for too long.

CabanasBoy

I Was VB wrote: »

No, a customer is sitting in my car for max 20 mins. I'm sitting in the car for 12 hours, which do you think i care about more?? My comfort or the customers??

I buy a car for me not the customers.

You've never sat in your car for 12 hours ye chancer, borderline part timer MPO.:D

CabanasBoy

mickdw wrote: »

Thats unreal.

Imagine a bus driver with this attitude? Its laughable. You are providing a service & should remember that.

This is even more stunning as you appear to be one of the few that keep the car well maintained etc. Im just trying to imagine the attitude of some of the other drivers to their customers,the guys who dont even keep the car clean.

Eh?? bus drivers have ZERO input on the buses they drive, never mind buy the things and bus drivers don't give two hoots about their pax comfort or safety so don't don't try that road. I agree with VB, the vehicle should be bought for the drivers comfort primarily, regulations take care of the customers needs.

mikemac

There's a 1993 battered Toyota at Ballyfermot SC rank that I won't miss.

At the same time I've been in 1990's Mercs and the drivers treated them like children, their pride and joy. Kept immaculately. And they'll be taken off the road the same as our friends in battered Toyotas.

Catch all rules have their flaws.

mickdw

CabanasBoy wrote: »

Eh?? bus drivers have ZERO input on the buses they drive, never mind buy the things and bus drivers don't give two hoots about their pax comfort or safety so don't don't try that road. I agree with VB, the vehicle should be bought for the drivers comfort primarily, regulations take care of the customers needs.

I was referring not to dublin bus type setup, more the local owner driver setup that is the common setup in country places like here in mayo. I can tell you the guy who starts operating with old dirty coaches instantly loses the business.
The fact remains, the taxi driver should respect the customer, offer an ever improving service, an safe new vehicle & the driver should be clean & well presented. Smoking in the car is not nice either.
Sure Id love if all the taxis were new EClass but for the drivers to be complaining about having to fork out about 5k for a car that meets the regs for maybe 3 years is sickening when your average private car owner is spending more than that on depreciation.

-Corkie-

Most bus companies have good gear now. A lot of old yokes are gone of the road. Havent Treacys a good fleet.

Stealthirl

mickdw wrote: »

The fact remains, the taxi driver should respect the customer, offer an ever improving service, an safe new vehicle & the driver should be clean & well presented. Smoking in the car is not nice either.
Sure Id love if all the taxis were new EClass but for the drivers to be complaining about having to fork out about 5k for a car that meets the regs for maybe 3 years is sickening when your average private car owner is spending more than that on depreciation.

what about the customer respecting the taxi ?
iv seen the results of passangers defacateing,urinateing,vomiting inside cars if that happend the driver could be out a nights pay at least + the cost of cleanup

-Chris-

And I've seen customers reverse into brand new cars on the garage forecourt and then drive quickly away hoping that no one saw them.

Does that mean that every garage should only display junkers just in case some one damages one?

Rubbish!

Spook_ie

But if you had 10 customers reverse into the same car, you might think differently and park a junker there instead of a new one

-Chris-

I'd certainly think about putting the car on display somewhere else, just like you'd think about not stopping to pick up someone who's obviously incredibly drunk.

I wouldn't put a junker on display anywhere on the forecourt. It would reflect badly on the business and the rest of the stock.

dr.fuzzenstein

Max Power1 wrote: »

So, as a TLDR of the last post:

Taxi drivers have no regard for their customers, and expect them to sit in to 15 year old corollas.

Good point, though I won't mind sitting in a well kept older Merc or Lexus.
And I'm sure there are 6-7 year old crappy taxis out there, but they're going to be OK.
Should be condition, not age.
This regulation is a "one size fits none" solution that won't achieve much