Taxi drivers threaten to blockade Southampton city centre

Daily Echo: Taxis in Southampton Taxis in Southampton

TAXI drivers in Southampton could bring the city to a standstill over a double council U-turn they say will hit their livelihoods.

Angry cabbies say they could strike and blockade the city centre if council chiefs go back on plans to help pay for CCTV cameras and extend the lifespan of city taxis.

They are also threatening legal action against city chiefs.

The row has erupted because council officers want to scrap the £250 subsidy to fit controversial “spy” cameras in ever cab, which it made compulsory back in 2009.

It would mean drivers having to pay the full £700 cost themselves.

They also want to limit the lifespan of cabs to seven years, ten if they are wheelchair adapted.

Councillors on the licensing committee are due to vote on the measures today.

Both would reverse decisions made last September.

Cabbies have reacted furiously saying it comes at a time when finances are tough for many in the trade.

Clive Johnson, from the Southampton Trade Association, said: “There is talk about demonstrations and blockading, because we are angry about the fact that the councillors voted to extend the lifespan, but now they want to overturn it really quickly.

“If drivers demonstrate it could bring the city to a standstill.”

Kevin May, from Radio Taxis, said: “They gave us an extension of two years and if they take that away I will take them to court.

“It was democratically voted on by the councillors and it is the only thing they have given us in the last seven to eight years that will help drivers a little bit financially.

“We aren't asking for that much - in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks.”

Council chiefs want to scrap the £250 subsidy due to “parlous” financial situation.

They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” after the original decision was made.

The ultimate decision lay with council leader Simon Letts. He said: “After the original decision we got some correspondence from members of the business community suggesting that they were disturbed and disappointed by the original decision.

“Also, the older the car the more pollutants it will be producing.

“So I asked for the committee to have another look at it. They may decide they are happy with the original decision, that's up to the committee.”

The council has said it will wait until April 2016 to bring back the old policy in fairness to drivers who have put plans in place since the original decision was made in September.

Comments (58)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:49am Tue 8 Apr 14

skeptik says...

Wager this was down the list of subsidy cuts -after perks and expenses.
Wager this was down the list of subsidy cuts -after perks and expenses. skeptik
  • Score: 4

6:02am Tue 8 Apr 14

issacchunt says...

Blockade? They practise this regularly when picking up or dropping off fairs.i'm sure councillors are also suffering from cutbacks? Less biscuits maybe, giving up the free parking???
Blockade? They practise this regularly when picking up or dropping off fairs.i'm sure councillors are also suffering from cutbacks? Less biscuits maybe, giving up the free parking??? issacchunt
  • Score: 22

6:12am Tue 8 Apr 14

roofspace says...

"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX. roofspace
  • Score: 29

7:31am Tue 8 Apr 14

Bobs Your Uncle ? says...

roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
[quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word. Bobs Your Uncle ?
  • Score: 20

8:08am Tue 8 Apr 14

loosehead says...

On a local news bulletin they showed you Rowenna sat down with Taxi drivers discussing the new laws on taxi drivers how come Perry Mcmillan(hope I got the name right?) didn't bring this up with her?
Mind you look at Labours track record. Williams announces 1,500 job cuts ,Cuts to services & council tax rises in July 2011 only for a week later to say he didn't say it?
Labour out canvassing before the local elections said the Tories would cut jobs & services & cut Surestarts they the Labour party wouldn't but once elected U turn they cut cut cut & as the opposition party they already knew what the government cuts would be to a large extent so we have elections in May what lies will Labour think of before then? U-Turn Labour.
On a local news bulletin they showed you Rowenna sat down with Taxi drivers discussing the new laws on taxi drivers how come Perry Mcmillan(hope I got the name right?) didn't bring this up with her? Mind you look at Labours track record. Williams announces 1,500 job cuts ,Cuts to services & council tax rises in July 2011 only for a week later to say he didn't say it? Labour out canvassing before the local elections said the Tories would cut jobs & services & cut Surestarts they the Labour party wouldn't but once elected U turn they cut cut cut & as the opposition party they already knew what the government cuts would be to a large extent so we have elections in May what lies will Labour think of before then? U-Turn Labour. loosehead
  • Score: -1

8:08am Tue 8 Apr 14

elvisimo says...

roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
Yes no doubt they are concerned. After all it would appear that passengers will have to sit in these cars for hours on end to get through the road works.
[quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]Yes no doubt they are concerned. After all it would appear that passengers will have to sit in these cars for hours on end to get through the road works. elvisimo
  • Score: 4

8:30am Tue 8 Apr 14

chimneysweep 1234 says...

You can buy this on ebay for 35 pounds ..where's the 700 come from
You can buy this on ebay for 35 pounds ..where's the 700 come from chimneysweep 1234
  • Score: 5

8:34am Tue 8 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

chimneysweep 1234 wrote:
You can buy this on ebay for 35 pounds ..where's the 700 come from
Huh?
[quote][p][bold]chimneysweep 1234[/bold] wrote: You can buy this on ebay for 35 pounds ..where's the 700 come from[/p][/quote]Huh? Charlie Bucket
  • Score: -10

8:35am Tue 8 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
NO tax? Are you sure?
[quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]NO tax? Are you sure? Charlie Bucket
  • Score: -4

8:35am Tue 8 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.
[quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.[/p][/quote]Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: -1

8:38am Tue 8 Apr 14

aldermoorboy says...

Bring back the Tories
Bring back the Tories aldermoorboy
  • Score: -9

8:50am Tue 8 Apr 14

massimoosti says...

Having made the error of climbing in a city taxi the other night rather than calling the usual west quay cabs I'm sure that the additional £10 fare (£24.00 rather than £14.00) I was charged for my usual 11 mile journey could help the funding.
Having made the error of climbing in a city taxi the other night rather than calling the usual west quay cabs I'm sure that the additional £10 fare (£24.00 rather than £14.00) I was charged for my usual 11 mile journey could help the funding. massimoosti
  • Score: 15

8:53am Tue 8 Apr 14

Mr E says...

quote 'TAXI drivers in Southampton could bring the city to a standstill' .
If the recent Gridlock City reports in the echo are anything to go by nobody will notice a difference.
quote 'TAXI drivers in Southampton could bring the city to a standstill' . If the recent Gridlock City reports in the echo are anything to go by nobody will notice a difference. Mr E
  • Score: 18

8:57am Tue 8 Apr 14

From the sidelines says...

"... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..."

You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use.

By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers?
(See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).
"... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..." You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use. By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers? (See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis). From the sidelines
  • Score: 14

9:07am Tue 8 Apr 14

roofspace says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.
I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together.
Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God.
Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.[/p][/quote]Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.[/p][/quote]I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together. Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God. Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic. roofspace
  • Score: 0

9:23am Tue 8 Apr 14

bigfella777 says...

The licensing criteria should be about safety not image or emissions if that was the case they would have to take all the buses of the road. A 2014 Ford Mondeo is the same shape as a 2007 Ford Mondeo so that's the image argument out the window.
All SCC taxis now have an MOT every 6 months so thats the safety and emissions argument squashed
You can't tell people to go out and spend 1000,s on cars and then 6 months later then tell them they have to get rid of them when it costs a £1000 just to fit the cab out with all the electronics.
This was supposed to be about giving cabbies some relief during the recession.
The licensing criteria should be about safety not image or emissions if that was the case they would have to take all the buses of the road. A 2014 Ford Mondeo is the same shape as a 2007 Ford Mondeo so that's the image argument out the window. All SCC taxis now have an MOT every 6 months so thats the safety and emissions argument squashed You can't tell people to go out and spend 1000,s on cars and then 6 months later then tell them they have to get rid of them when it costs a £1000 just to fit the cab out with all the electronics. This was supposed to be about giving cabbies some relief during the recession. bigfella777
  • Score: 3

9:27am Tue 8 Apr 14

camerajuan says...

massimoosti wrote:
Having made the error of climbing in a city taxi the other night rather than calling the usual west quay cabs I'm sure that the additional £10 fare (£24.00 rather than £14.00) I was charged for my usual 11 mile journey could help the funding.
Where are you getting £14 for 11 miles from?!?! Its £5.80 from Central Station to Jurys Inn if the lights turn red more then once!
[quote][p][bold]massimoosti[/bold] wrote: Having made the error of climbing in a city taxi the other night rather than calling the usual west quay cabs I'm sure that the additional £10 fare (£24.00 rather than £14.00) I was charged for my usual 11 mile journey could help the funding.[/p][/quote]Where are you getting £14 for 11 miles from?!?! Its £5.80 from Central Station to Jurys Inn if the lights turn red more then once! camerajuan
  • Score: 8

9:30am Tue 8 Apr 14

Mr saint76 says...

massimoosti wrote:
Having made the error of climbing in a city taxi the other night rather than calling the usual west quay cabs I'm sure that the additional £10 fare (£24.00 rather than £14.00) I was charged for my usual 11 mile journey could help the funding.
You'll get cheap service from West Quay because of the type of drivers they have. Did you not read what happened with West Quay drivers at the Dorchester.
[quote][p][bold]massimoosti[/bold] wrote: Having made the error of climbing in a city taxi the other night rather than calling the usual west quay cabs I'm sure that the additional £10 fare (£24.00 rather than £14.00) I was charged for my usual 11 mile journey could help the funding.[/p][/quote]You'll get cheap service from West Quay because of the type of drivers they have. Did you not read what happened with West Quay drivers at the Dorchester. Mr saint76
  • Score: 7

9:38am Tue 8 Apr 14

Mr saint76 says...

From the sidelines wrote:
"... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..."

You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use.

By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers?
(See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).
They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE
[quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: "... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..." You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use. By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers? (See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).[/p][/quote]They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE Mr saint76
  • Score: 3

9:40am Tue 8 Apr 14

Outside of the Box says...

I don't know why they're threatening to blockade the city, just to talk to Cllr Rayment, she does a great job of blockading the city already with her blend of roadworks and cruise ship arrivals.
I don't know why they're threatening to blockade the city, just to talk to Cllr Rayment, she does a great job of blockading the city already with her blend of roadworks and cruise ship arrivals. Outside of the Box
  • Score: 7

9:45am Tue 8 Apr 14

Bobs Your Uncle ? says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.
chucked the corporate propaganda tube out years ago , radio is so much better.
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.[/p][/quote]Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.[/p][/quote]chucked the corporate propaganda tube out years ago , radio is so much better. Bobs Your Uncle ?
  • Score: -1

9:52am Tue 8 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

roofspace wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.
I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together.
Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God.
Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.
And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?
[quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.[/p][/quote]Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.[/p][/quote]I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together. Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God. Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.[/p][/quote]And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers? Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 2

9:55am Tue 8 Apr 14

From the sidelines says...

Mr saint76 wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
"... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..."

You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use.

By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers?
(See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).
They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE
Thank you for the clarification.

Perhaps you could educate me as to how much difference this makes to the checks and tests applied by SCC?
[quote][p][bold]Mr saint76[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: "... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..." You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use. By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers? (See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).[/p][/quote]They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE[/p][/quote]Thank you for the clarification. Perhaps you could educate me as to how much difference this makes to the checks and tests applied by SCC? From the sidelines
  • Score: 3

10:04am Tue 8 Apr 14

Bobs Your Uncle ? says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
roofspace wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.
I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together.
Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God.
Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.
And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?
do common tv watchers know what hyperbole means ,or just a fake intellectual ?
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.[/p][/quote]Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.[/p][/quote]I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together. Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God. Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.[/p][/quote]And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?[/p][/quote]do common tv watchers know what hyperbole means ,or just a fake intellectual ? Bobs Your Uncle ?
  • Score: -5

10:11am Tue 8 Apr 14

Mr saint76 says...

From the sidelines wrote:
Mr saint76 wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
"... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..."

You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use.

By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers?
(See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).
They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE
Thank you for the clarification.

Perhaps you could educate me as to how much difference this makes to the checks and tests applied by SCC?
That's another story all together which I agree with you. UK born taxi drivers have a CRBA check. The others don't as they have no history in this country.So yes theoretically you could be getting into a car with a unknown criminal.
[quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr saint76[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: "... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..." You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use. By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers? (See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).[/p][/quote]They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE[/p][/quote]Thank you for the clarification. Perhaps you could educate me as to how much difference this makes to the checks and tests applied by SCC?[/p][/quote]That's another story all together which I agree with you. UK born taxi drivers have a CRBA check. The others don't as they have no history in this country.So yes theoretically you could be getting into a car with a unknown criminal. Mr saint76
  • Score: 6

10:16am Tue 8 Apr 14

sotonwinch09 says...

They can block the road all they like. I'm sure getting arrested for obstruction of the highway won't go down too well when renewing their taxi licence.
They can block the road all they like. I'm sure getting arrested for obstruction of the highway won't go down too well when renewing their taxi licence. sotonwinch09
  • Score: 2

10:20am Tue 8 Apr 14

Ronnie G says...

Council will save themselves £79k by making taxi drivers pay
Council will save themselves £79k by making taxi drivers pay Ronnie G
  • Score: 2

10:23am Tue 8 Apr 14

massimoosti says...

Mr saint76 wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
Mr saint76 wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
"... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..."

You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use.

By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers?
(See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).
They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE
Thank you for the clarification.

Perhaps you could educate me as to how much difference this makes to the checks and tests applied by SCC?
That's another story all together which I agree with you. UK born taxi drivers have a CRBA check. The others don't as they have no history in this country.So yes theoretically you could be getting into a car with a unknown criminal.
LOL - and the city taxi drivers who barely speak English ??

Daytime you get sotonian city drivers but of a night a different story........or the one time I did he was so off his face on speed I almost got out.

Hence private hire cabs for me from now on........the difference in cost is a no brainer. And lets not get these confused with Nigerian private hire cars in London FFS.
[quote][p][bold]Mr saint76[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr saint76[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: "... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..." You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use. By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers? (See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).[/p][/quote]They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE[/p][/quote]Thank you for the clarification. Perhaps you could educate me as to how much difference this makes to the checks and tests applied by SCC?[/p][/quote]That's another story all together which I agree with you. UK born taxi drivers have a CRBA check. The others don't as they have no history in this country.So yes theoretically you could be getting into a car with a unknown criminal.[/p][/quote]LOL - and the city taxi drivers who barely speak English ?? Daytime you get sotonian city drivers but of a night a different story........or the one time I did he was so off his face on speed I almost got out. Hence private hire cabs for me from now on........the difference in cost is a no brainer. And lets not get these confused with Nigerian private hire cars in London FFS. massimoosti
  • Score: 1

10:33am Tue 8 Apr 14

phil maccavity says...

I have a degree of sympathy with the majority of Taxi drivers. Long hours and having to put up with some difficult customers (especially late at night)
If there were indeed broken promises along the way with regard to timescales then that seems to be unfair
However wasn't there a similar dispute relating to parking at the Central Station a while back when there were threats of disruption?
I have a degree of sympathy with the majority of Taxi drivers. Long hours and having to put up with some difficult customers (especially late at night) If there were indeed broken promises along the way with regard to timescales then that seems to be unfair However wasn't there a similar dispute relating to parking at the Central Station a while back when there were threats of disruption? phil maccavity
  • Score: 4

10:47am Tue 8 Apr 14

Mr saint76 says...

massimoosti wrote:
Mr saint76 wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
Mr saint76 wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
"... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..."

You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use.

By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers?
(See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).
They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE
Thank you for the clarification.

Perhaps you could educate me as to how much difference this makes to the checks and tests applied by SCC?
That's another story all together which I agree with you. UK born taxi drivers have a CRBA check. The others don't as they have no history in this country.So yes theoretically you could be getting into a car with a unknown criminal.
LOL - and the city taxi drivers who barely speak English ??

Daytime you get sotonian city drivers but of a night a different story........or the one time I did he was so off his face on speed I almost got out.

Hence private hire cabs for me from now on........the difference in cost is a no brainer. And lets not get these confused with Nigerian private hire cars in London FFS.
Day Time use Southampton City council cars much cheaper than West Quay. The other day it cost £13 with West Quay from Bitterne to London Rd fair enough it was rush hour but their meters seem to go up a lot lot quicker than the proper taxi's.
[quote][p][bold]massimoosti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr saint76[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr saint76[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: "... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..." You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use. By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers? (See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).[/p][/quote]They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE[/p][/quote]Thank you for the clarification. Perhaps you could educate me as to how much difference this makes to the checks and tests applied by SCC?[/p][/quote]That's another story all together which I agree with you. UK born taxi drivers have a CRBA check. The others don't as they have no history in this country.So yes theoretically you could be getting into a car with a unknown criminal.[/p][/quote]LOL - and the city taxi drivers who barely speak English ?? Daytime you get sotonian city drivers but of a night a different story........or the one time I did he was so off his face on speed I almost got out. Hence private hire cabs for me from now on........the difference in cost is a no brainer. And lets not get these confused with Nigerian private hire cars in London FFS.[/p][/quote]Day Time use Southampton City council cars much cheaper than West Quay. The other day it cost £13 with West Quay from Bitterne to London Rd fair enough it was rush hour but their meters seem to go up a lot lot quicker than the proper taxi's. Mr saint76
  • Score: 4

10:53am Tue 8 Apr 14

loosehead says...

A person gets of a cruise ship hails the taxi gets told take hours to get to Tremona rd Southampton says what about going through dock gate 20 driver says why go that way?
Taxi drivers sitting in their cabs racking up the fares are one of the problems with the traffic at dock gate 4 unlike other towns cities these ones plug in their sat navs & that's the way they'll go no matter if there are routes with no traffic on it.
So this action will be no different to the usual taxi actions,
A person gets of a cruise ship hails the taxi gets told take hours to get to Tremona rd Southampton says what about going through dock gate 20 driver says why go that way? Taxi drivers sitting in their cabs racking up the fares are one of the problems with the traffic at dock gate 4 unlike other towns cities these ones plug in their sat navs & that's the way they'll go no matter if there are routes with no traffic on it. So this action will be no different to the usual taxi actions, loosehead
  • Score: 1

10:58am Tue 8 Apr 14

loosehead says...

aldermoorboy wrote:
Bring back the Tories
Talked to a refuse driver today he said they were better off with the Tories, after going on strike to then read & listen to council workers saying lose jobs but not our pay he spoke to Royston & what he heard wasn't what his manager or the Unions had told them.
I didn't ask his name as he'd been blacklisted for standing up & saying he would accept the Tory deal but now he says many of those who blacklisted him are now seeing he was right & they were better off with a Tory council & will be voting Tory in May.
So don't vote Labour liars let's get the Tories back.
[quote][p][bold]aldermoorboy[/bold] wrote: Bring back the Tories[/p][/quote]Talked to a refuse driver today he said they were better off with the Tories, after going on strike to then read & listen to council workers saying lose jobs but not our pay he spoke to Royston & what he heard wasn't what his manager or the Unions had told them. I didn't ask his name as he'd been blacklisted for standing up & saying he would accept the Tory deal but now he says many of those who blacklisted him are now seeing he was right & they were better off with a Tory council & will be voting Tory in May. So don't vote Labour liars let's get the Tories back. loosehead
  • Score: -2

11:08am Tue 8 Apr 14

camerajuan says...

massimoosti wrote:
Mr saint76 wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
Mr saint76 wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
"... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..."

You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use.

By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers?
(See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).
They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE
Thank you for the clarification.

Perhaps you could educate me as to how much difference this makes to the checks and tests applied by SCC?
That's another story all together which I agree with you. UK born taxi drivers have a CRBA check. The others don't as they have no history in this country.So yes theoretically you could be getting into a car with a unknown criminal.
LOL - and the city taxi drivers who barely speak English ??

Daytime you get sotonian city drivers but of a night a different story........or the one time I did he was so off his face on speed I almost got out.

Hence private hire cabs for me from now on........the difference in cost is a no brainer. And lets not get these confused with Nigerian private hire cars in London FFS.
**** right. Massive problem in this city.

If you have to direct your taxi driver from Central to your destination - less than a mile away(cases and child in tow, before anyone says anything) - and they reply using broken English and hand gestures then they shouldn't be driving Taxis.

RE: Long hours & difficult customers comment from Phil Macavity - It's very well publicised and documented that this is the job. If you don't think you can take it don't even apply for it. I couldn't be a fishmonger, I'm never going to apply for that job.
[quote][p][bold]massimoosti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr saint76[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr saint76[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: "... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..." You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use. By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers? (See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).[/p][/quote]They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE[/p][/quote]Thank you for the clarification. Perhaps you could educate me as to how much difference this makes to the checks and tests applied by SCC?[/p][/quote]That's another story all together which I agree with you. UK born taxi drivers have a CRBA check. The others don't as they have no history in this country.So yes theoretically you could be getting into a car with a unknown criminal.[/p][/quote]LOL - and the city taxi drivers who barely speak English ?? Daytime you get sotonian city drivers but of a night a different story........or the one time I did he was so off his face on speed I almost got out. Hence private hire cabs for me from now on........the difference in cost is a no brainer. And lets not get these confused with Nigerian private hire cars in London FFS.[/p][/quote]**** right. Massive problem in this city. If you have to direct your taxi driver from Central to your destination - less than a mile away(cases and child in tow, before anyone says anything) - and they reply using broken English and hand gestures then they shouldn't be driving Taxis. RE: Long hours & difficult customers comment from Phil Macavity - It's very well publicised and documented that this is the job. If you don't think you can take it don't even apply for it. I couldn't be a fishmonger, I'm never going to apply for that job. camerajuan
  • Score: 6

11:08am Tue 8 Apr 14

On the inside says...

loosehead wrote:
aldermoorboy wrote:
Bring back the Tories
Talked to a refuse driver today he said they were better off with the Tories, after going on strike to then read & listen to council workers saying lose jobs but not our pay he spoke to Royston & what he heard wasn't what his manager or the Unions had told them.
I didn't ask his name as he'd been blacklisted for standing up & saying he would accept the Tory deal but now he says many of those who blacklisted him are now seeing he was right & they were better off with a Tory council & will be voting Tory in May.
So don't vote Labour liars let's get the Tories back.
A complete lie made up by a tory party member.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]aldermoorboy[/bold] wrote: Bring back the Tories[/p][/quote]Talked to a refuse driver today he said they were better off with the Tories, after going on strike to then read & listen to council workers saying lose jobs but not our pay he spoke to Royston & what he heard wasn't what his manager or the Unions had told them. I didn't ask his name as he'd been blacklisted for standing up & saying he would accept the Tory deal but now he says many of those who blacklisted him are now seeing he was right & they were better off with a Tory council & will be voting Tory in May. So don't vote Labour liars let's get the Tories back.[/p][/quote]A complete lie made up by a tory party member. On the inside
  • Score: -2

11:11am Tue 8 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
roofspace wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.
I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together.
Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God.
Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.
And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?
do common tv watchers know what hyperbole means ,or just a fake intellectual ?
I'm a "fake intellectual" because I can string two disparate thoughts together without melting? This explains a few things.
[quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.[/p][/quote]Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.[/p][/quote]I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together. Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God. Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.[/p][/quote]And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?[/p][/quote]do common tv watchers know what hyperbole means ,or just a fake intellectual ?[/p][/quote]I'm a "fake intellectual" because I can string two disparate thoughts together without melting? This explains a few things. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 4

11:28am Tue 8 Apr 14

phil maccavity says...

camerajuan wrote:
massimoosti wrote:
Mr saint76 wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
Mr saint76 wrote:
From the sidelines wrote:
"... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..."

You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use.

By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers?
(See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).
They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE
Thank you for the clarification.

Perhaps you could educate me as to how much difference this makes to the checks and tests applied by SCC?
That's another story all together which I agree with you. UK born taxi drivers have a CRBA check. The others don't as they have no history in this country.So yes theoretically you could be getting into a car with a unknown criminal.
LOL - and the city taxi drivers who barely speak English ??

Daytime you get sotonian city drivers but of a night a different story........or the one time I did he was so off his face on speed I almost got out.

Hence private hire cabs for me from now on........the difference in cost is a no brainer. And lets not get these confused with Nigerian private hire cars in London FFS.
**** right. Massive problem in this city.

If you have to direct your taxi driver from Central to your destination - less than a mile away(cases and child in tow, before anyone says anything) - and they reply using broken English and hand gestures then they shouldn't be driving Taxis.

RE: Long hours & difficult customers comment from Phil Macavity - It's very well publicised and documented that this is the job. If you don't think you can take it don't even apply for it. I couldn't be a fishmonger, I'm never going to apply for that job.
I use taxis quite a lot and most drivers I speak to take the job because it is fairly easy to obtain, once you have a licence. So provided you can drive there is no other special skill involved as would be the case with a fishmonger
This allows most people the opportunity to get a job as a taxi driver.
Some people do it as a full time occupation others to supplement income from other jobs.
Whatever you might say, at least they are working and not relying on the state.
Perhaps I have been fortunate but most of the drivers I have met seem to be decent individuals.
However I reckon the vast majority dislike their job and would prefer to be doing something else.
This may be because day time cab driving doesn't pay well.
To make decent money drivers have to work nights and put up with all sorts of nonsense.
Unfortunately that is a sad reflection on our society
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]massimoosti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr saint76[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr saint76[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: "... in Eastleigh the lifespan is 15 years for renewals. We are just fed up about it - it stinks..." You really should see some of the jalopies purporting to be taxis in Eastleigh. Yes, they stink of fifteen years hard use. By the way, why do taxis need cameras? Is it because the drivers cannot be trusted not to molest or beat up their customers? (See recent reports of the FOUR taxi drivers all prosecuted for fighting, as an indication of the type of people SCC trusts to run taxis).[/p][/quote]They were West Quay drivers at the time of the incident so they were Private Hire drivers not Taxi Drivers. BIG BIG DIFFERENCE[/p][/quote]Thank you for the clarification. Perhaps you could educate me as to how much difference this makes to the checks and tests applied by SCC?[/p][/quote]That's another story all together which I agree with you. UK born taxi drivers have a CRBA check. The others don't as they have no history in this country.So yes theoretically you could be getting into a car with a unknown criminal.[/p][/quote]LOL - and the city taxi drivers who barely speak English ?? Daytime you get sotonian city drivers but of a night a different story........or the one time I did he was so off his face on speed I almost got out. Hence private hire cabs for me from now on........the difference in cost is a no brainer. And lets not get these confused with Nigerian private hire cars in London FFS.[/p][/quote]**** right. Massive problem in this city. If you have to direct your taxi driver from Central to your destination - less than a mile away(cases and child in tow, before anyone says anything) - and they reply using broken English and hand gestures then they shouldn't be driving Taxis. RE: Long hours & difficult customers comment from Phil Macavity - It's very well publicised and documented that this is the job. If you don't think you can take it don't even apply for it. I couldn't be a fishmonger, I'm never going to apply for that job.[/p][/quote]I use taxis quite a lot and most drivers I speak to take the job because it is fairly easy to obtain, once you have a licence. So provided you can drive there is no other special skill involved as would be the case with a fishmonger This allows most people the opportunity to get a job as a taxi driver. Some people do it as a full time occupation others to supplement income from other jobs. Whatever you might say, at least they are working and not relying on the state. Perhaps I have been fortunate but most of the drivers I have met seem to be decent individuals. However I reckon the vast majority dislike their job and would prefer to be doing something else. This may be because day time cab driving doesn't pay well. To make decent money drivers have to work nights and put up with all sorts of nonsense. Unfortunately that is a sad reflection on our society phil maccavity
  • Score: 9

12:03pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

Most of the taxis in Northern Cyprus are decades old and don't have "spy" anything. Doesn't seem to stop the tourists. More displacement activity from council clerks, unable to work in the real world and justifying their existence?
Most of the taxis in Northern Cyprus are decades old and don't have "spy" anything. Doesn't seem to stop the tourists. More displacement activity from council clerks, unable to work in the real world and justifying their existence? Dai Rear
  • Score: 2

12:08pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

Anyone cancelled a trip to New York lately because of the age of the cabs?
Anyone cancelled a trip to New York lately because of the age of the cabs? Dai Rear
  • Score: 10

12:51pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Bobs Your Uncle ? says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
roofspace wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.
I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together.
Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God.
Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.
And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?
do common tv watchers know what hyperbole means ,or just a fake intellectual ?
I'm a "fake intellectual" because I can string two disparate thoughts together without melting? This explains a few things.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzz yawn.
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.[/p][/quote]Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.[/p][/quote]I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together. Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God. Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.[/p][/quote]And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?[/p][/quote]do common tv watchers know what hyperbole means ,or just a fake intellectual ?[/p][/quote]I'm a "fake intellectual" because I can string two disparate thoughts together without melting? This explains a few things.[/p][/quote]zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzz yawn. Bobs Your Uncle ?
  • Score: -3

1:19pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Jesta-a-View says...

Surely, if the cameras are compulsory, they are are tools of the trade and can therefore be claimed back through Tax refunds?

As for the age of cabs. As long as a Taxi is clean, well maintained and the driver a good sort...who cares about how old it is?

Personally, I'd be all for a Classic Cab Company setting up business.
Surely, if the cameras are compulsory, they are are tools of the trade and can therefore be claimed back through Tax refunds? As for the age of cabs. As long as a Taxi is clean, well maintained and the driver a good sort...who cares about how old it is? Personally, I'd be all for a Classic Cab Company setting up business. Jesta-a-View
  • Score: 7

1:28pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

Jesta-a-View wrote:
Surely, if the cameras are compulsory, they are are tools of the trade and can therefore be claimed back through Tax refunds?

As for the age of cabs. As long as a Taxi is clean, well maintained and the driver a good sort...who cares about how old it is?

Personally, I'd be all for a Classic Cab Company setting up business.
Only £140 could be offset unless they're Higher Rate Taxpayers and indeed one assumes no child of a So'ton councillor (if they are able to reproduce) has ever been allowed to go to his/her wedding in a vintage motor.
[quote][p][bold]Jesta-a-View[/bold] wrote: Surely, if the cameras are compulsory, they are are tools of the trade and can therefore be claimed back through Tax refunds? As for the age of cabs. As long as a Taxi is clean, well maintained and the driver a good sort...who cares about how old it is? Personally, I'd be all for a Classic Cab Company setting up business.[/p][/quote]Only £140 could be offset unless they're Higher Rate Taxpayers and indeed one assumes no child of a So'ton councillor (if they are able to reproduce) has ever been allowed to go to his/her wedding in a vintage motor. Dai Rear
  • Score: 1

1:34pm Tue 8 Apr 14

From the sidelines says...

phil maccavity wrote:
I have a degree of sympathy with the majority of Taxi drivers. Long hours and having to put up with some difficult customers (especially late at night)
If there were indeed broken promises along the way with regard to timescales then that seems to be unfair
However wasn't there a similar dispute relating to parking at the Central Station a while back when there were threats of disruption?
The working conditions of taxi drivers must come as such a surprise to them, what, with taxi driving being such a secretive job and completely distanced from the general population.

And yes, this is sarcasm.
[quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: I have a degree of sympathy with the majority of Taxi drivers. Long hours and having to put up with some difficult customers (especially late at night) If there were indeed broken promises along the way with regard to timescales then that seems to be unfair However wasn't there a similar dispute relating to parking at the Central Station a while back when there were threats of disruption?[/p][/quote]The working conditions of taxi drivers must come as such a surprise to them, what, with taxi driving being such a secretive job and completely distanced from the general population. And yes, this is sarcasm. From the sidelines
  • Score: 1

1:40pm Tue 8 Apr 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
roofspace wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.
I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together.
Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God.
Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.
And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?
do common tv watchers know what hyperbole means ,or just a fake intellectual ?
I'm a "fake intellectual" because I can string two disparate thoughts together without melting? This explains a few things.
You can spell, punctuate and use grammar and syntax correctly too. This makes you exceptionally fake. Much better to be illiterate on these boards.
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.[/p][/quote]Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.[/p][/quote]I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together. Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God. Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.[/p][/quote]And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?[/p][/quote]do common tv watchers know what hyperbole means ,or just a fake intellectual ?[/p][/quote]I'm a "fake intellectual" because I can string two disparate thoughts together without melting? This explains a few things.[/p][/quote]You can spell, punctuate and use grammar and syntax correctly too. This makes you exceptionally fake. Much better to be illiterate on these boards. WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: 2

1:50pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Lone Ranger. says...

On the inside wrote:
loosehead wrote:
aldermoorboy wrote:
Bring back the Tories
Talked to a refuse driver today he said they were better off with the Tories, after going on strike to then read & listen to council workers saying lose jobs but not our pay he spoke to Royston & what he heard wasn't what his manager or the Unions had told them.
I didn't ask his name as he'd been blacklisted for standing up & saying he would accept the Tory deal but now he says many of those who blacklisted him are now seeing he was right & they were better off with a Tory council & will be voting Tory in May.
So don't vote Labour liars let's get the Tories back.
A complete lie made up by a tory party member.
Surely not !!!
[quote][p][bold]On the inside[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]aldermoorboy[/bold] wrote: Bring back the Tories[/p][/quote]Talked to a refuse driver today he said they were better off with the Tories, after going on strike to then read & listen to council workers saying lose jobs but not our pay he spoke to Royston & what he heard wasn't what his manager or the Unions had told them. I didn't ask his name as he'd been blacklisted for standing up & saying he would accept the Tory deal but now he says many of those who blacklisted him are now seeing he was right & they were better off with a Tory council & will be voting Tory in May. So don't vote Labour liars let's get the Tories back.[/p][/quote]A complete lie made up by a tory party member.[/p][/quote]Surely not !!! Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

2:30pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
roofspace wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.
I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together.
Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God.
Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.
And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?
do common tv watchers know what hyperbole means ,or just a fake intellectual ?
I'm a "fake intellectual" because I can string two disparate thoughts together without melting? This explains a few things.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzz yawn.
Translation: "I'm out of my depth now, so I'm going to pretend this is beneath me". Classic Echo Idiot trick.
[quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.[/p][/quote]Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.[/p][/quote]I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together. Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God. Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.[/p][/quote]And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?[/p][/quote]do common tv watchers know what hyperbole means ,or just a fake intellectual ?[/p][/quote]I'm a "fake intellectual" because I can string two disparate thoughts together without melting? This explains a few things.[/p][/quote]zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzz yawn.[/p][/quote]Translation: "I'm out of my depth now, so I'm going to pretend this is beneath me". Classic Echo Idiot trick. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 3

3:18pm Tue 8 Apr 14

03alpe01 says...

Come on Council. Cooperate with the Cabbies please. The City is already blockaded enough as it is.
Come on Council. Cooperate with the Cabbies please. The City is already blockaded enough as it is. 03alpe01
  • Score: 2

4:43pm Tue 8 Apr 14

mickey01 says...

why threaten a blockade ? the council seem to manage that on its own lately
why threaten a blockade ? the council seem to manage that on its own lately mickey01
  • Score: -1

5:19pm Tue 8 Apr 14

loosehead says...

On the inside wrote:
loosehead wrote:
aldermoorboy wrote:
Bring back the Tories
Talked to a refuse driver today he said they were better off with the Tories, after going on strike to then read & listen to council workers saying lose jobs but not our pay he spoke to Royston & what he heard wasn't what his manager or the Unions had told them.
I didn't ask his name as he'd been blacklisted for standing up & saying he would accept the Tory deal but now he says many of those who blacklisted him are now seeing he was right & they were better off with a Tory council & will be voting Tory in May.
So don't vote Labour liars let's get the Tories back.
A complete lie made up by a tory party member.
Well as I didn't ask his name & I wouldn't print it anyway I can't prove I'm telling the truth but can you prove I'm lying before calling me a liar?
Tory Party Member? Can you read the Queens English?
Several times now I've said I'm not a Tory member & I've given my reason for leaving the party so I can only guess if you don't like hearing the truth & it's against Labour you can only come out with this rot can't you?
[quote][p][bold]On the inside[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]aldermoorboy[/bold] wrote: Bring back the Tories[/p][/quote]Talked to a refuse driver today he said they were better off with the Tories, after going on strike to then read & listen to council workers saying lose jobs but not our pay he spoke to Royston & what he heard wasn't what his manager or the Unions had told them. I didn't ask his name as he'd been blacklisted for standing up & saying he would accept the Tory deal but now he says many of those who blacklisted him are now seeing he was right & they were better off with a Tory council & will be voting Tory in May. So don't vote Labour liars let's get the Tories back.[/p][/quote]A complete lie made up by a tory party member.[/p][/quote]Well as I didn't ask his name & I wouldn't print it anyway I can't prove I'm telling the truth but can you prove I'm lying before calling me a liar? Tory Party Member? Can you read the Queens English? Several times now I've said I'm not a Tory member & I've given my reason for leaving the party so I can only guess if you don't like hearing the truth & it's against Labour you can only come out with this rot can't you? loosehead
  • Score: -2

5:20pm Tue 8 Apr 14

loosehead says...

On the inside wrote:
loosehead wrote:
aldermoorboy wrote:
Bring back the Tories
Talked to a refuse driver today he said they were better off with the Tories, after going on strike to then read & listen to council workers saying lose jobs but not our pay he spoke to Royston & what he heard wasn't what his manager or the Unions had told them.
I didn't ask his name as he'd been blacklisted for standing up & saying he would accept the Tory deal but now he says many of those who blacklisted him are now seeing he was right & they were better off with a Tory council & will be voting Tory in May.
So don't vote Labour liars let's get the Tories back.
A complete lie made up by a tory party member.
So are you saying no Refuse lorry driver spoke to Royston?
[quote][p][bold]On the inside[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]aldermoorboy[/bold] wrote: Bring back the Tories[/p][/quote]Talked to a refuse driver today he said they were better off with the Tories, after going on strike to then read & listen to council workers saying lose jobs but not our pay he spoke to Royston & what he heard wasn't what his manager or the Unions had told them. I didn't ask his name as he'd been blacklisted for standing up & saying he would accept the Tory deal but now he says many of those who blacklisted him are now seeing he was right & they were better off with a Tory council & will be voting Tory in May. So don't vote Labour liars let's get the Tories back.[/p][/quote]A complete lie made up by a tory party member.[/p][/quote]So are you saying no Refuse lorry driver spoke to Royston? loosehead
  • Score: -1

5:21pm Tue 8 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Ronnie G wrote:
Council will save themselves £79k by making taxi drivers pay
Ronnie how many council workers are now regretting voting Labour?
[quote][p][bold]Ronnie G[/bold] wrote: Council will save themselves £79k by making taxi drivers pay[/p][/quote]Ronnie how many council workers are now regretting voting Labour? loosehead
  • Score: 0

6:00pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Northam Lady says...

I have never heard of Southampton City Cabs - how do I get hold of them please? It would seem I've been ripped off by West Quay cabs for years!
I have never heard of Southampton City Cabs - how do I get hold of them please? It would seem I've been ripped off by West Quay cabs for years! Northam Lady
  • Score: 6

6:31pm Tue 8 Apr 14

seven777. says...

Demonstrate is it, block the city streets! who do these fu@kers think they are. Oxygen thief’s for the best part, there is a price to pay for doing business, if you don’t want to pay it don’t run a cab. Every business has overheads, how many ten year old company cars do you see, why should I have to pay good money to be driven the long way in a stinking old banger.
If I had my way anyone restricting the traffic flow deliberately would be arrested and have their car crushed and then charged for the privilege.
Demonstrate is it, block the city streets! who do these fu@kers think they are. Oxygen thief’s for the best part, there is a price to pay for doing business, if you don’t want to pay it don’t run a cab. Every business has overheads, how many ten year old company cars do you see, why should I have to pay good money to be driven the long way in a stinking old banger. If I had my way anyone restricting the traffic flow deliberately would be arrested and have their car crushed and then charged for the privilege. seven777.
  • Score: 0

6:42pm Tue 8 Apr 14

southy says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.
no he not,
last year the top 2% of the uk riches people and company;s avoided in paying £120 billion in tax on the interest the money made in there off shore tax free banking, and if this is not enough they pay little or no tax on profits they make
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.[/p][/quote]Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.[/p][/quote]no he not, last year the top 2% of the uk riches people and company;s avoided in paying £120 billion in tax on the interest the money made in there off shore tax free banking, and if this is not enough they pay little or no tax on profits they make southy
  • Score: -1

7:17pm Tue 8 Apr 14

NotoNwo says...

Well the day was won , this was because elected councillors realised the civil service were trying to override their democratic decision from last year using flimsy and fabricated "New" evidence.

The officers tried so hard to collude with unknown persons them tried to dupe the councillors but failed as the committee were sharp and saw through their scheme.
Well the day was won , this was because elected councillors realised the civil service were trying to override their democratic decision from last year using flimsy and fabricated "New" evidence. The officers tried so hard to collude with unknown persons them tried to dupe the councillors but failed as the committee were sharp and saw through their scheme. NotoNwo
  • Score: -3

7:18pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

"no he not,
last year the top 2% of the uk riches people and company;s avoided in paying £120 billion in tax on the interest the money made in there off shore tax free banking, and if this is not enough they pay little or no tax on profits they make"
I guess thinking ain't your strong point, but , at 1 3/4% interest that means they had more money abroad than there is in the universe. Of course if UK had rational taxes......But your Communist Party wouldn't stand for that, would it?
"no he not, last year the top 2% of the uk riches people and company;s avoided in paying £120 billion in tax on the interest the money made in there off shore tax free banking, and if this is not enough they pay little or no tax on profits they make" I guess thinking ain't your strong point, but , at 1 3/4% interest that means they had more money abroad than there is in the universe. Of course if UK had rational taxes......But your Communist Party wouldn't stand for that, would it? Dai Rear
  • Score: 1

7:44am Wed 9 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

WalkingOnAWire wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
roofspace wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.
I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together.
Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God.
Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.
And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?
do common tv watchers know what hyperbole means ,or just a fake intellectual ?
I'm a "fake intellectual" because I can string two disparate thoughts together without melting? This explains a few things.
You can spell, punctuate and use grammar and syntax correctly too. This makes you exceptionally fake. Much better to be illiterate on these boards.
me agree *grunt*
[quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.[/p][/quote]Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.[/p][/quote]I'm surprised you regard facts regarding tax havens and offshore accounts as hyperbole - then again looking at your reply I shouldn't be surprised at your comments only at the fact you can string a sentence together. Unlike you I do not regard anything being spoken on FOX news as the words of truth given to them as the chosen ones by God. Another fact for you 87 people own HALF of the worlds wealth which I find appalling and offensive unlike you whom i just find pathetic.[/p][/quote]And this has exactly what to do with a few taxi drivers?[/p][/quote]do common tv watchers know what hyperbole means ,or just a fake intellectual ?[/p][/quote]I'm a "fake intellectual" because I can string two disparate thoughts together without melting? This explains a few things.[/p][/quote]You can spell, punctuate and use grammar and syntax correctly too. This makes you exceptionally fake. Much better to be illiterate on these boards.[/p][/quote]me agree *grunt* Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 0

7:47am Wed 9 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

southy wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Bobs Your Uncle ? wrote:
roofspace wrote:
"They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits)
If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton.
Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.
yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.
Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.
no he not,
last year the top 2% of the uk riches people and company;s avoided in paying £120 billion in tax on the interest the money made in there off shore tax free banking, and if this is not enough they pay little or no tax on profits they make
Sources please. Then, once you've done that, explain where Southampton cabbies fit into this. Are they, too, secret billionaires that for reasons yet unexplored choose to put up with the long hours and endless abuse despite not needing the money?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobs Your Uncle ?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roofspace[/bold] wrote: "They say that Associated British Ports, the Southampton Hoteliers Association and Destination Southampton had “expressed their concern” on how older vehicles would “affect their organisations and the image of the city to potential investors or visitors” " (In other words their profits) If they are so concerned they could possibly lose extra profit then I suggest THEY pay the shortfall and not the residents of Southampton. Most people do not realize the the biggest drain on the treasury is not State benefits for the poor and needy but state benefits (the rich call it call it subsidies) to multi-nationals etc, a large percentage of which pay NO TAX.[/p][/quote]yes ,corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions a year and the profits stashed in the caymans ,robbery might be a better word.[/p][/quote]Needs more hyperbole. This is nowhere near hysterical enough. Hundreds of billions a year? Caymans? You've been watching too much TV.[/p][/quote]no he not, last year the top 2% of the uk riches people and company;s avoided in paying £120 billion in tax on the interest the money made in there off shore tax free banking, and if this is not enough they pay little or no tax on profits they make[/p][/quote]Sources please. Then, once you've done that, explain where Southampton cabbies fit into this. Are they, too, secret billionaires that for reasons yet unexplored choose to put up with the long hours and endless abuse despite not needing the money? Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 0

4:43pm Thu 10 Apr 14

camerajuan says...

massimoosti wrote:
Having made the error of climbing in a city taxi the other night rather than calling the usual west quay cabs I'm sure that the additional £10 fare (£24.00 rather than £14.00) I was charged for my usual 11 mile journey could help the funding.
This is still my biggest boggle this week!

5 of us got a taxi from the Black Boy in Winchester to the YMCA at the top of Rockstone Place and it cost us near to £50! Thats 13 miles!

11 miles for £11.00 is an unbelievable price! I want answers!
[quote][p][bold]massimoosti[/bold] wrote: Having made the error of climbing in a city taxi the other night rather than calling the usual west quay cabs I'm sure that the additional £10 fare (£24.00 rather than £14.00) I was charged for my usual 11 mile journey could help the funding.[/p][/quote]This is still my biggest boggle this week! 5 of us got a taxi from the Black Boy in Winchester to the YMCA at the top of Rockstone Place and it cost us near to £50! Thats 13 miles! 11 miles for £11.00 is an unbelievable price! I want answers! camerajuan
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree