Boro Taxis 'will not take disabled people' in fares row

Kryten2340 · 12 Jan 2014

What's people's verdict on this? Think I'm middle of the road. Yes you shouldn't discriminate someone because of their disability but at the same time it's pretty standard if you book a 7 or 8 sweater you pay a higher tariff for it. I can understand the guys comments where he says it's unecomical. A 7/8 sweater will cost more to tax, have a lower MPG and possibly higher insurance (that I'm guessing). The taxi firm as a business has to recover that cost somehow.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-25697433

The boss of Teesside's biggest taxi company has revealed the firm will no longer transport disabled passengers following a row over pricing.

Mohammed Bashir, of Boro Taxis, said the decision had been taken on economic grounds.

Teesside taxi operators were recently warned they could lose their licences for overcharging disabled passengers.

Middlesbrough Council believes the conduct breaches discrimination laws.

Mr Bashir said his company cannot afford to send an eight-seater minibus to pick up customers if it can only charge them the same price as it would an able-bodied person using a four-seater car.

'Morally totally wrong'
"The simple fact is if you order a car and four people jump in you are charged for a taxi. If you order an eight-seater minibus and eight people jump in you are charged for a minibus.

"If you order a minibus and there's only one person you will still be charged for a minibus because that's what you ordered.

"But because we are charging for a minibus we are breaking the law."

Mr Bashir told BBC Tees the decision was "morally totally wrong" but added it was "uneconomic" to continue carrying disabled passengers in minibuses.

Middlesbrough Council said it was looking into the matter and had written to taxi operators reminding them of their obligations under the Equality Act 2010.

Deputy mayor Dave Budd said companies "have a moral obligation to treat everybody the same".

Last month a report by the authority found wheelchair users were sometimes being charged up to double the standard fare.

RailUK Forums

Bushy · 12 Jan 2014

As I understand, a service provider must not discriminate against a person because they have a disability. If a customer asks for a taxi capable of carrying a wheelchair, they should not be charged more than any other customer.
If however they ask for a minibus they should be charged the same as any other customer asking for a minibus.

Regards

Bushy

ECML180 · 12 Jan 2014

But if the only taxi they have that's capable of carrying a wheelchair is a minibus-surely that is what they book and therefore pay for.

yorkie · 12 Jan 2014

On the face of it, I can see both sides to this.

The current situation is unfair, but so is the proposed solution.

The question is: far do you take rules saying that people shouldn't pay more than someone else? Perhaps it could be argued that people who have poor eyesight should not have to pay any more to correct their vision than people with good eyesight, therefore glasses should be provided free of charge?

It would be good if no-one had to pay any more for anything on the basis of any physical reason, but that's not realistic.

Can we take this back a step, and ask the question: is it possible to buy and use a wheelchair accessible taxi which costs no more than a non-accessible taxi? in other words, are the taxi companies forced to pay more, or have some taxi companies chosen not to have vehicles which are accessible and economical?

ECML180 · 12 Jan 2014

AFAIK all taxis are fully accessible, it's private hire cars that aren't. Some local authorities do allow normal cars to operate as taxis, perhaps they should insist that they are accessible. It would surprise me if there are no accessible car size taxis available in the area, which I'm sure would make more sense to use.

Simon11 · 12 Jan 2014

Disabled people receive additional benefits to cover the extra cost of providing them with a quality of life achieved by able bodies. They received this extra income, so why can't this go towards covering the additional expense of taxis, thus pay a slightly higher fare?

WSW · 12 Jan 2014

Not sure of the full details but I do know that if a wheelchair user orders a taxi, they don't order a minibus. If the taxi firm choose to use a minibus then that is the choice of the taxi firm. Most taxi firms use an accessible MPV type for wheelchairs which is taxed the same as a car, it is as economical as a car, is not taxed higher and is most certainly not a minibus. I have one of these wheelchair accessible cars. The taxi firm is trying it on and I'd say it is because they can't be bothered to get out of the driver's seat to help.

Steve

Kryten2340 said:
What's people's verdict on this? Think I'm middle of the road. Yes you shouldn't discriminate someone because of their disability but at the same time it's pretty standard if you book a 7 or 8 sweater you pay a higher tariff for it. I can understand the guys comments where he says it's unecomical. A 7/8 sweater will cost more to tax, have a lower MPG and possibly higher insurance (that I'm guessing). The taxi firm as a business has to recover that cost somehow.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-25697433

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Simon11 said:
Disabled people receive additional benefits to cover the extra cost of providing them with a quality of life achieved by able bodies. They received this extra income, so why can't this go towards covering the additional expense of taxis, thus pay a slightly higher fare?

Some, not all, disabled people do receive benefits to help with mobility issues, and many use the money for a taxi when there is no other transport option, unlike able-bodied people who have several options. And it does little to raise their quality of life to that of able-bodied. Making the disabled pay more for the same service because you are disabled is not fair and probably not legal.

Steve

Bushy · 12 Jan 2014

Our local authority issue a certain proportion of both Hackney Carriage and Private Hire licences as Accessible vehicle licences. I believe that a large company would be expected to take a reasonable proportion of such licences.
Hackney Carriage fares are normally controlled.

Regards

Bushy

ECML180 · 12 Jan 2014

WSW said:
Not sure of the full details but I do know that if a wheelchair user orders a taxi, they don't order a minibus.

In every circumstance? Every wheelchair user insists on having a vehicle that is definatley designed as a taxi and not as a private car? Highly unlikely, I would imagine like anyone else they ring and ask for a 'car' or 'taxi' from A to B, the only difference is they say it must be wheelchair accessible.

If the taxi company is trying it on out of laziness, they must not be very clever people as I don't think ending up in news articles like this is a good outcome.

Just to clarify: a minibus in the opinion of a taxi company is usually an 8 seater unless they have a driver certified to driver something larger.

grid56126 · 12 Jan 2014

Simon11 said:
Disabled people receive additional benefits to cover the extra cost of providing them with a quality of life achieved by able bodies. They received this extra income, so why can't this go towards covering the additional expense of taxis, thus pay a slightly higher fare?

Do they? Or do they just get some benefits that just about make their life bearable. I do not know any disabled people who are better off than myself just because they get some benefits.

To the original subject I suspect it's fair to say this is a localised issue of a contract that does not deserve renewal.

In the course of work over the last dozen or so years I have authorised probably getting into the hundreds of journeys for disabled travellers using whatever resources could be found and in one case I had to authorise the hire of a small van to get a mobility scooter moved after a shambles with an inoperative lift. Person went by taxi by the way! I have also authorised countless - and I mean countless - taxis for able bodied persons and sorted buses out etc as part of my everyday job.

I would absolutely not ever discriminate against anybody as part of this and like to think the industry as a whole do the same.

GaryMcEwan · 13 Jan 2014

We don't have extra surcharges in Glasgow, if I order a taxi and a 7 or 8 seater arrives, I don't get charged any extra. It's the same if you hail a hackney down in Glasgow and it's an 8 seater, you don't get charged any extra...

ECML180 · 13 Jan 2014

As far as I can tell about this operator, by looking at their website, they are operating private hire cars, not hackney carriages.

DarloRich · 13 Jan 2014

There seems to be some suggestion today the company have reversed their decision - mainly as it is illegal!

Tetchytyke · 13 Jan 2014

Wouldn't surprise me that they've reversed their decision, I'd imagine customer numbers have dropped off a cliff. I can't imagine that many of their elderly or disabled customers are actually wheelchair bound, but I can imagine that plenty of people who aren't have chosen to use another company.

If that company only has huge minibuses that are wheelchair accessible, then that is a failing of the company. There are plenty of car-sized vehicles available which can be wheelchair accessible.

ainsworth74 · 13 Jan 2014

There was certainly talk of a boycott so that will have played a part I'm sure.

Eagle · 13 Jan 2014

Interestingly... the original claims are now being refuted.

Teesside Evening Gazette said:
Boro Taxis refutes claims it banned disabled people from using service

Teesside’s biggest taxi firm today refuted claims it banned disabled people from using its service - saying there has been a "public misconception."

Boro Taxis admits that because of a row over pricing with Middlesbrough Council, it temporarily stopped providing a service to disabled people who required minibuses, as they cost more to hire. But the Gazette can reveal today that after the row flared - with people angrily threatening to boycott the firm - the company has now agreed to subsidise the bigger vehicle fare cost until Middlesbrough Council “sees sense”.

As previously reported, a crackdown on discrimination against disabled taxi passengers was approved by council chiefs after the authority discovered firms across Teesside were charging wheelchair users “up to twice the price of their able-bodied counterparts as a direct consequence of their disability.” As a result, taxi drivers and firms have been warned they face prosecution and/or referral to the council’s licensing committee if any future evidence of overcharging is presented.

But Boro Taxis - also known as Boro Cars - said that when any person requires a minibus, whether disabled or not, they are charged more due to the size of the vehicle. The firm therefore made a decision to temporarily suspend a service to disabled people who required a minibus after the “unguarded threat”. But it has since decided to "subsidise this service" and charge disabled passengers who require a larger vehicle the same price as they would for a car.

(continued)

poshfan · 13 Jan 2014

Simon11 said:
Disabled people receive additional benefits to cover the extra cost of providing them with a quality of life achieved by able bodies. They received this extra income, so why can't this go towards covering the additional expense of taxis, thus pay a slightly higher fare?

That's a laugh. I live with and care for my disabled mum (and work full time as well). She cannot walk at all and can only stand using a stand-aid. The only benefit she gets is attendance allowance of about £85 per week which does not even cover the cost of the carers. Everything else is means tested, and as my parents saved hard for their old age, she is just over the limit where you get nothing. Mind you, I hope she never drops below that limit, having seen the length of the form I would have to fill in.

We never use taxis anyway, as she can't go anywhere without me. If she needs to go somewhere I take her myself by car, just a normal Mondeo. It's a bit awkward getting her in and out, we have to use a turntable. I wouldn't suggest a taxi driver should do that though.

Blindtraveler · 13 Jan 2014

Whilst I agree that this company was both discriminatery and showed poor bustomer care, the big nono for me was the implication that all disabled are wheelchair users. I am blind and on the odd taxi trips I make I always state this when ordering the vehicle. just this claim would have refused me a service here and I am I guess lucky that a saloon car is fine for me. It is equally fine for my Wife and her guide dog who both prefer saloons to Hakneys. ↲↲ the issue of guide dogs and taxis is another one with Legal implications but Im sorry to say remains a major headake even now.↲i hope tìs guy gets a lot of hassle for this and woant be using him should I need too!↲

Tetchytyke · 13 Jan 2014

Simon11 said:
Disabled people receive additional benefits to cover the extra cost of providing them with a quality of life achieved by able bodies

Attendance allowance, the main disability benefit for people over the age of 65, does not have a mobility component.

This means that they do not receive any additional benefits to pay for travel.

I'd expect a fair chunk of Boro Taxis' customers to be elderly people who do not have good mobility.

They say they're "subsidising" people, I say they were trying to fleece old ladies and they've been caught. Here's hoping Middlesbrough Council think again about whether this company is fit to have a licence.

ECML180 · 13 Jan 2014

Arctic Troll said:
If that company only has huge minibuses that are wheelchair accessible, then that is a failing of the company. There are plenty of car-sized vehicles available which can be wheelchair accessible.

Quite right, if wheelchair passengers account for a lot of revenue then they should have moved towards a fully accessible fleet by now!

Edit: As mentioned above they should be clear over the difference between wheelchair users and the disabled in general.

swj99 · 13 Jan 2014

The requirement to treat everybody the same is flawed, because not everybody is the same. A requirement for equality is a 'one size fits all' policy, which is crazy, becuase one size hardly ever fits all. If a taxi operator wasn't allowed to only charge disabled users for a minibus then another option would be to charge everybody the higher prices, irrespective of what size vehicle was actually used, which would inevitably lead to them pricing themselves out of the market, so there would be no taxis for anyone.

If I need to hire a large estate car to move some furniture or bikes etc, I would expect to pay for that class of vehicle. If I had a disabililty, I don't see it would make any difference to anything.

I'd be interested to see what would happen if someone played the a disability card by trying to hire a top of the range Merc but only wanting to pay the price of a Ford Fiesta, and whether or not the hire firm tells them to do one.

Maybe if we just sacked the government for their failure to get rid of the recession it would be a start. Then when we have prosperity again, none of this will matter because people will have enough money not to worry about the price of a taxi fare anyway. Or something.

PermitToTravel · 13 Jan 2014

Bushy said:
As I understand, a service provider must not discriminate against a person because they have a disability. If a customer asks for a taxi capable of carrying a wheelchair, they should not be charged more than any other customer.
If however they ask for a minibus they should be charged the same as any other customer asking for a minibus.

Regards

Bushy

I would strongly disagree with that inconsistent interpretation. The words one uses when placing the order should be completely irrelevant.

swj99 said:
I'd be interested to see what would happen if someone played the a disability card by trying to hire a top of the range Merc but only wanting to pay the price of a Ford Fiesta, and whether or not the hire firm tells them to do one.

It is not "playing the disability card" when a wheelchair user hires a wheelchair-compatible taxi. Your comparison with hiring a different car because it is more luxurious is completely and utterly irrelevant.

For the record, I believe that if one needs to travel in a more expensive type of vehicle, then that person will need to pay the relevant premium. I don't profess to know much about disability benefits, but isn't this an example of a situation that the Personal Independence Payment is intended to help people with?

That said, I do not know what somebody who exceeds (or deceeds) the qualifying age for said benefit, like poshfan's mother, is meant to do. I think the government expects that people who aren't between the ages of 16 and 64 never need to travel.

richw · 13 Jan 2014

Fahad said:
That said, I do not know what somebody who exceeds (or deceeds) the qualifying age for said benefit, like poshfan's mother, is meant to do. I think the government expects that people who aren't between the ages of 16 and 64 never need to travel.

The best bit of the silly government rule is that if you are claiming prior to your 65th birthday for the mobility element, you keep that for the rest of your life. If you become disabled or a new claimant after your 65th birthday you are not eligible for the mobility element.

Regarding the taxi situation even a wheelchair adapted Citroen Berlingo Multispace costs considerably more than a like for like model.
A normal model is £12995 new, whereas an identical specification with wheelchair space is £19995. Is a taxi firm subsidised the extra £7000 to run a wheelchair vehicle? If not what is there to promote a taxi firm carry disabled passengers? How do they recuperate the extra £7k?

transmanche · 13 Jan 2014

richw said:
Regarding the taxi situation even a wheelchair adapted Citroen Berlingo Multispace costs considerably more than a like for like model.
A normal model is £12995 new, whereas an identical specification with wheelchair space is £19995. Is a taxi firm subsidised the extra £7000 to run a wheelchair vehicle? If not what is there to promote a taxi firm carry disabled passengers? How do they recuperate the extra £7k?

What do bus and rail companies do? I imagine that a low floor 'kneeling' bus costs more than a high floor one. And that bus wheelchair ramps cost a bit extra. The same goes for rail companies, in providing assistance for mobility-impaired customers. But they don't charge extra.

What about other non-transport related business who have to make alterations to premises etc. Do they charge mobility-impaired customers extra?

richw · 13 Jan 2014

transmanche said:
What do bus and rail companies do? I imagine that a low floor 'kneeling' bus costs more than a high floor one. And that bus wheelchair ramps cost a bit extra. The same goes for rail companies, in providing assistance for mobility-impaired customers. But they don't charge extra.

What about other non-transport related business who have to make alterations to premises etc. Do they charge mobility-impaired customers extra?

But are we talking about massive multi million(billion?) pound bus/ train companies against low annual turnover taxi companies? All of the small bus companies I know of still have majority non-DDA vehicles.
I don't know the size of the taxi business in question, but £7000 outlay is a considerable sum for a small taxi business.

transmanche · 13 Jan 2014

richw said:
But are we talking about massive multi million(billion?) pound bus/ train companies against low annual turnover taxi companies? All of the small bus companies I know of still have majority non-DDA vehicles.
I don't know the size of the taxi business in question, but £7000 outlay is a considerable sum for a small taxi business.

They claim to be the largest taxi business in North East England. So not a small outfit.

richw · 13 Jan 2014

transmanche said:
They claim to be the largest taxi business in North East England. So not a small outfit.

Fair enough then. My point is more valid for a small outfit.

transmanche · 13 Jan 2014

richw said:
Fair enough then. My point is more valid for a small outfit.

Even the 'one-man band' black cab drivers in London have to provide themselves with a wheelchair-accessible vehicle. It's just part of the cost of being in business.

alanf · 13 Jan 2014

On our local news over the weekend it showed a Boro taxis driver collecting a wheelchair user The driver had to go to the house collect the passenger pull the ramp out push the passenger on put the ramp back then repeat it all at the other end. In fairness they have to make a living.

pjnathanail · 13 Jan 2014

transmanche said:
What do bus and rail companies do? I imagine that a low floor 'kneeling' bus costs more than a high floor one. And that bus wheelchair ramps cost a bit extra. The same goes for rail companies, in providing assistance for mobility-impaired customers. But they don't charge extra.

What about other non-transport related business who have to make alterations to premises etc. Do they charge mobility-impaired customers extra?

But if the bus/rail companies vehicles were not wheelchair accessible, they would not receive revenue from wheelchair users (and potentially buggies, elderly people with shopping trollies, people with mobility issues, all of whom find kneeling vehicles useful).

Over the lifetime of a bus (15-20 years if not longer) the amount of additional revenue generated from these people paying fares, concessionary travel, plus the fares paid by any companions surely outweighs the initial capital cost.

In the case of the taxi firm however, the company should not be forced to make a loss or subsidise it. The vehicle costs more, the customer should have to pay more. Or, the local council should realise that it is not fair to make the wheelchair user or the taxi company pay the cost and subsidise it.

In addition, is a taxi always required? The options of the bus for free, the train at a reduced rate or some form of local community transport may also be available.

In short, a wheelchair user should not pay extra just because of their disability, but neither should the company make a loss. Sadly, if no external funding is forthcoming, the wheelchair user must pay as they are after all the ones using the additional space/special vehicle (although not by choice) and preventing it from carrying say 8 passengers and earning more revenue.

Boro Taxis 'will not take disabled people' in fares row

Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Member

Forum Staff

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Member