Wheelchair passengers
One of the main topics in recent
Mailshot pages concerns the carriage
of wheelchair passengers. Questions have
come into Call Sign on
most aspects of that part of our job –
training, the use of restraining straps,
wheelchair size, the loss of
Dial-a-Cab’s W attribute - which
used to inform the driver that the
passenger was in a wheelchair but has
been ended by the Disability
Discrimination Act - and also about
insurance coverage.
I’m happy to pick up wheelchair users with the ramp that most
TX2/TX4 cabs have. It’s true that as
Keith Cain points out in an answer
to Michael Beevor (N76) in this
issue, that placing a wheelchair into
the taxi is part of the PCO driving
test, but it is also a fact that many
wheelchair users for their own reasons,
do not want to be strapped in. Perhaps
they are concerned about escape in case
of an accident or quite possibly, just
don’t want to be seen as being a burden.
In the recent Call Sign trip to LTI’s factory in Coventry,
the question of wheelchairs came up and
all 10 drivers agreed that they had
never strapped any wheelchair passengers
in and even stranger, that not one
wheelchair-bound passenger had ever
asked them to use the restrainers!
I phoned the longest established taxi insurance specialists, The
Westminster, and asked Luke Robson
about cover in the case of an accident.
After confirming the answers with another department, the situation
is this; it is the driver’s
responsibility to tell wheelchair
passengers that they should be strapped
in for their own safety, just as it is
the driver’s responsibility to tell
able-bodied passengers that they should
use their seatbelt. That you informed
them and they refused is a legitimate
excuse in any claim, but of course that
would involve the passenger agreeing
with you.
If you have a wheelchair passenger in the cab and are involved in
an accident where the passenger was
injured - regardless of whether they
were strapped in or not - their right to
claim would be unaffected. If you had an
accident putting the chair into or
taking it out of the taxi and the
passenger was injured, again they would
be covered. If the chair fell onto your
foot and you couldn’t drive, you would
not be covered any more than if you
tripped getting out of the driver’s
compartment. If you were injured in an
accident that wasn’t your fault, then
many insurance companies including
The Westminster, would fight on your
behalf to get compensation for personal
injury in addition to damage to the cab.
If you are injured with no other vehicle
involved, then the only answer is a
personal injury policy. I’m not sure how
much the above helps because it solves
nothing other than explaining the
situation…
Elections
It isn’t difficult to understand why
Prime Minister Gordon Brown didn’t want
an election when he took over from Tony
Blair. To get his party’s apparent
overspending |
under control, he
introduces
stealth taxes galore under the pretence
that Labour has everything in order.
From where I’m sitting, it doesn’t look
that way – although in all fairness, I
do
not set myself up as any kind of expert
in these matters, I’m just someone who
drives a taxi and has the opportunity of
telling anyone that reads this, what I’m
thinking. And what I’m thinking is that
Labour couldn’t care less about us.
When Labour first came back into power in 1997, diesel was 54.9p a
litre and it was put to the-then
Chancellor Gordon Brown by Call
Sign that London taxis were an
important part of the transport system
(no TfL back then) and that it wouldn’t
be too difficult to put us on a par with
buses when it came to filling our cabs
with diesel. They are subsidised, so why
couldn’t we be as well?
The request was thrown out as not being feasible due to the
paperwork that would be involved,
although what that paperwork would have
involved was never explained to us.
As a result, we are now paying around 112p a litre – unless you are
unfortunate enough to only have Texaco
as an option, in which case you can add
a few more pennies on - a note to
Texaco, if you are Googling this why are
your prices always more expensive than
anyone else’s at a time when prices are
horrific anyway)?
Then last year, the TX4 and late TX2s were banded with so-called
gas-guzzlers*
because those taxi owners went out and
bought new cabs that took them up to
Euro 4 spec and were punished by having
their road tax put up from £215 to £300.
The cabs that weren’t up to Euro 4 had
increases of £5 or £10. This magazine
wrote in a complaint to the Treasury,
mentioning that by ferrying people
around who would otherwise have used
their cars, surely we were helping to
keep emissions down? This was recognised
with a curt response saying that my
points would be looked at, but that the
increases were nothing to do with
emissions, purely to do with newly
formulated bands – of which the TX4 was
in a high one. That leaves us in the
ridiculous situation of the new TX4
costing far more in road tax than any of
its predecessors from early TX2s down,
because it is in a higher band having
emissions of 226 grams per km whereas
had there been fewer, we’d have been in
a lower band – yet according to HM
Treasury it has nothing to do with
emissions!
Yet even the ridiculous situation of the new TX4 with its Euro 4
spec costing far more in road tax than
any of its predecessors has been well
and truly beaten by the latest in
stealth taxes - £950 first |
year road tax if you now
buy a new cab?
But Labour have no need to worry about the Tories current 15 point
lead in the opinion polls. Sometime in
2009 there will be an election and we’ll
be given all the usual goodies in the
budget before, so many will forget the
disasters in between. What do you mean
you won’t!
Would the Tories be better? I doubt it, but when the party of the
so-called working class seems to have
lost its way – although appearently
knowing exactly where they are going (or
NOT going) so far as claiming expenses
is concerned – our election system
dictates that you should give other
parties a chance to do better – whether
any party could do worse is a moot
point....
*Gas-guzzlers have been determined as vehicles
emitting 225 or more grams per kilometer
of Carbon Dioxide. The TX4 has 226 grams
per km whilst older cabs have less.
Cover up?
A DaC driver phoned me last week with an
interesting point. He said that he was
parked in Elgin Avenue eating a sandwich
when a Parking Attendant (where have the
wardens gone) asked him to move.
"He was very polite," the driver told me, "and it wasn’t as though
he tried to give me a sly PCN."
But the strange part was that also parked there was a motorcycle with a
cover over it. Our driver asked the PA
why he didn’t give a ticket to the bike?
According to the warden (there, I’ve
said it), he wasn’t allowed to issue a
ticket to a vehicle that was covered up.
So the driver has asked me to pass onto
the Board a request for next Christmas
of cab covers so that we can park
anywhere! What? You don’t believe we’d
get away with it either?
Ah well… at least it’s almost summer!
Sponsoring good
causes
Some ground
rules! Call Sign is – and
always has been – happy to help in
sponsorship for good causes. But sadly,
we cannot help the world! Those ground
rules are that we cannot just make
donations; but if you are a driver,
member of staff or linked to those two
groups more than just sharing the same
milkman and you are doing an event for
charity, this magazine will sponsor you
for £50 in exchange for a report on how
you did, plus a photo - and no, not of
the milkman! Over the years, this
magazine has sponsored numerous people
running marathons or lesser distances,
some ultra-weird events and even a
driver’s daughter attempting a relay
cross channel swim in this issue.
So yes, Call Sign is always ready to help sponsoring
good causes, but only so long as the
above ground rules are taken note of.
Yes, I know I’m a heard-hearted so and
so, but having been asked for a donation
to help bring NASCAR racing to London, I
thought I’d just stake my post into the
ground!!??
Alan Fisher
callsignmag@aol.com |
