Bangkok metro police to deal with taxis refusing service

[webfact]

Metro police to deal with taxis refusing service



BANGKOK - (NNT) - The Metropolitan Police has announced that it will strictly enforce laws against taxi drivers in a bid to help prevent them from refusing service to customers and driving recklessly.

Deputy Commander of the Metropolitan Police Pol.Maj.Gen.Niphon Charoenphon said the metro police had been assigned by the National Council for Peace and Order to inspect taxi operators and enforce laws against taxi drivers who refused service, had no public driving license, had no insurance and drove dangerously.

The deputy commander encouraged people to notify police officers if they were taken advantage of by taxi drivers.

The metro police will also tackle taxis stopping for an exceedingly long time on the curb. Department stores, especially CentralWorld and Central Pinklao, will be asked to provide taxi stops inside in order to reduce the problem of traffic congestion.


-- NNT 2014-07-07

[soistranger]

Green and yellow is the best taxi,

[taony]

Getting people out of the habit of asking them first would go a long way too. Just open the door and get in. I have never been refused that way. Of course a lot of complaining, but that's their problem. The only time I haven't been able to is when they lock the door and open the window to talk. In those cases, I just walk away and wait for the next one.

[Bluespunk]

Ok, it's annoying, but taxi drivers should not be prosecuted for refusing fares. It's their car, it's their source of income, it's their decision. And yes I've been refused, but I've also walked away from taxis where the driver was clearly drunk or looked exhausted from working too long. Choice is a two way street with taxis.

Driving recklessly, now, that's completely different. Ban them for that, refusing a fare is one thing, endangering others a totally different one.

[lostsoul49]

A quite simple 3 strikes and you're out policy, but not the driver to take the hit... the actual car to be seized and crushed, then the boss who owns the cars will make sure it don't happen.

Hitting the drivers is useless, they tried that already, nothing was enforced, and if they banned the driver, they would ignore it and carry on driving anyway.

[Patje]

enforce laws against taxi drivers who refused service, had no public driving license, had no insurance and drove dangerously.

I beg you pardon ????

Edited July 7, 2014 by Patje

[UbonRatch]

Ok, it's annoying, but taxi drivers should not be prosecuted for refusing fares. It's their car, it's their source of income, it's their decision. And yes I've been refused, but I've also walked away from taxis where the driver was clearly drunk or looked exhausted from working too long. Choice is a two way street with taxis.

Driving recklessly, now, that's completely different. Ban them for that, refusing a fare is one thing, endangering others a totally different one.

Agreed. It is a taxi driver's right to say yes or no to a destination, IMHO.

If a taxi driver is planning on knocking off in 30 mins, then gets a fayre which takes him/her to the other side of BKK, as an example, 100Km away from home... why should he not have the right to only accept a few fayres which keep him within range of home, and his knocking off time? There are many such examples of a taxi drivers right to accept or refuse a fayre. Should a taxi have to accept a passenger who is inebriated, for example? The list is endless... and it's not a long wait in most places for another taxi to come passing.

[robblok]

Ok, it's annoying, but taxi drivers should not be prosecuted for refusing fares. It's their car, it's their source of income, it's their decision. And yes I've been refused, but I've also walked away from taxis where the driver was clearly drunk or looked exhausted from working too long. Choice is a two way street with taxis.

Driving recklessly, now, that's completely different. Ban them for that, refusing a fare is one thing, endangering others a totally different one.

Agreed. It is a taxi driver's right to say yes or no to a destination, IMHO.

If a taxi driver is planning on knocking off in 30 mins, then gets a fayre which takes him/her to the other side of BKK, as an example, 100Km away from home... why should he not have the right to only accept a few fayres which keep him within range of home, and his knocking off time? There are many such examples of a taxi drivers right to accept or refuse a fayre. Should a taxi have to accept a passenger who is inebriated, for example? The list is endless... and it's not a long wait in most places for another taxi to come passing.

I agree and disagree.

Just look at the taxis around the entertainment areas that only go if it is off meter.

I have been refused so many times for either too long or too short. They are always cherry picking and it gets a bit boring at times.

That is why I now either drive my motorbike or car (if i can) because i just don't want to deal with it too much.

[Suzy]

When are the police going to enforce the laws against car and motorcycle drivers who have no public driving license, no insurance and drive and park dangerously.

[robblok]

When are the police going to enforce the laws against car and motorcycle drivers who have no public driving license, no insurance and drive and park dangerously.

Never as they only seem to put roadblocks up.. Though that takes care of the driving license and insurance.. but never about how they drive.

[moe666]

When are the police going to enforce the laws against car and motorcycle drivers who have no public driving license, no insurance and drive and park dangerously.

the OP is about taxis who refuse to take fares.

[dddave]

Getting people out of the habit of asking them first would go a long way too. Just open the door and get in. I have never been refused that way. Of course a lot of complaining, but that's their problem. The only time I haven't been able to is when they lock the door and open the window to talk. In those cases, I just walk away and wait for the next one.

That's a tight call. I agree in principal with what you suggest but then again, do I then want to endure the following ride with a severely pissed-off driver?

Hmmmm.

I drove a taxi 30 years years ago when I was between jobs and it's a tough and sucky job.

It was illegal there, just as here to turn down fares but sometimes you had to. If you are driving a shared cab and your shift ends at a certain time and the other driver is waiting, you can't take a fare in the opposite direction during rush hour.

Aside from that, I never turned down fares just because it wasn't a particularly good job but I did turn down fares to places where I felt threatened or had no recourse if a fare did a runner, which in certain areas happened a lot.

[Seastallion]

Ok, it's annoying, but taxi drivers should not be prosecuted for refusing fares. It's their car, it's their source of income, it's their decision. And yes I've been refused, but I've also walked away from taxis where the driver was clearly drunk or looked exhausted from working too long. Choice is a two way street with taxis.

Driving recklessly, now, that's completely different. Ban them for that, refusing a fare is one thing, endangering others a totally different one.

I agree with you except for at the airport when the drivers are on a rotating rosta. In that case, they need to take the luck of the draw.

[iReason]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

When are the police going to enforce the laws against car and motorcycle drivers who have no public driving license, no insurance and drive and park dangerously.

the OP is about taxis who refuse to take fares.

From which the quote was taken.

[Loles]

It's much better if only push them to keep traffic rules and push to don't stop every-where like chicken.

I have no idea why have to push them to take every costumer ???

This is a contract and if one part doesn't want the contract is doesn't exist.

[NongKhaiKid]

" Strictly Enforce ' " Crackdown " etc. Here we go again same old headline, same old story.

[thesetat2013]

Ok, it's annoying, but taxi drivers should not be prosecuted for refusing fares. It's their car, it's their source of income, it's their decision. And yes I've been refused, but I've also walked away from taxis where the driver was clearly drunk or looked exhausted from working too long. Choice is a two way street with taxis.

Driving recklessly, now, that's completely different. Ban them for that, refusing a fare is one thing, endangering others a totally different one.

In most cases the car is rented to work for a company. Its not their car. They are refusing short trips or trips thru heavy traffic. They dont have the right to refuse. Many times i have been refused and stuck waiting more than 20 minutes for the next empty taxi to stop for me. Many times i have been in taxis who refused to run a meter and tried to charge me 3-5 times more than a meter would show

Sure i managed to get a rude later but that also mainly because i gave up waitin for an honest taxi to stop. They really need to be more fair to everyone and this is good news if the police follow throughy with it

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[scorecard]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Ok, it's annoying, but taxi drivers should not be prosecuted for refusing fares. It's their car, it's their source of income, it's their decision. And yes I've been refused, but I've also walked away from taxis where the driver was clearly drunk or looked exhausted from working too long. Choice is a two way street with taxis.

Driving recklessly, now, that's completely different. Ban them for that, refusing a fare is one thing, endangering others a totally different one.

Agreed. It is a taxi driver's right to say yes or no to a destination, IMHO.

If a taxi driver is planning on knocking off in 30 mins, then gets a fayre which takes him/her to the other side of BKK, as an example, 100Km away from home... why should he not have the right to only accept a few fayres which keep him within range of home, and his knocking off time? There are many such examples of a taxi drivers right to accept or refuse a fayre. Should a taxi have to accept a passenger who is inebriated, for example? The list is endless... and it's not a long wait in most places for another taxi to come passing.

So how does the country / any country ensure there is a workable, reliable taxi service.

To me this equates to allowing / continuing to allow a restaurant to prepare / serve food which is contaminated in some way.

In regard to shift change, why not use the same system that's been in place in Singapore for decades and works, they put a large print sign in the window saying:

'SHIFT CHANGE 4:00 PM' or whatever.

Not difficult.

[Bakseeda]

Ok, it's annoying, but taxi drivers should not be prosecuted for refusing fares. It's their car, it's their source of income, it's their decision. And yes I've been refused, but I've also walked away from taxis where the driver was clearly drunk or looked exhausted from working too long. Choice is a two way street with taxis.

Driving recklessly, now, that's completely different. Ban them for that, refusing a fare is one thing, endangering others a totally different one.

Its not about refusing fares that is the issue, Its about refusing to switch their meters on. And asking a fixed price which is way above the metered fare. But in reality they should not be able to refuse a customer unless of drunkenness or some other good reason. But to refuse a fare because the journey is too short is against their taxi licence rules, after all a taxi driver is in a way a public servant as his licence is granted by a public office.

The police should be cracking down on the illegal taxis , the yaba-fuelled drivers and the dirty broken taxis that are not fit for the roads.. Thats my lean on it... but who cares what another Farang thinks..?

[Basil B]

A quite simple 3 strikes and you're out policy, but not the driver to take the hit... the actual car to be seized and crushed, then the boss who owns the cars will make sure it don't happen.

Hitting the drivers is useless, they tried that already, nothing was enforced, and if they banned the driver, they would ignore it and carry on driving anyway.

Where a ban on a driver is hard to enforce as the diver knows there is little chance of being caught, but seizing cabs for a day or a week would certainly hurt not just the driver but the vehicle owners too so it is in there interest to ensure they only let legal and good drivers use their vehicles.

The same could also apply to other vehicles, just imagine daddy losing the use of thee family car, pick up or bike for a week, because they let their unlicenced son or daughter use it, or the rental company having to pick up their vehicle from the police compound because they rented it to someone who did not have a licence to drive it.

Edited July 7, 2014 by Basil B

[selftaopath]

Wouldn't it be fantastic to read about what the police et. al DID rather than what they (promise) they will do?

I'd love to hear something like: In the last.... days/weeks/months we have fined/arrested/ confiscated etc. for ...... as the LAW suggests.

All this we're gonna bla bla bla, and starting on Monday......

GEEZEUSH give me a <deleted> BREAK.

SHOW ME/US let's see the RESULTS.... Is that TOO much to ask?????

cheers,

[thaipod]

The only place I've been refused is Sukhumvit road and thats on multiple occassions. The other times which is around 3-400 pm when the taxi has to be returned to the depot.

[UbonRatch]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Ok, it's annoying, but taxi drivers should not be prosecuted for refusing fares. It's their car, it's their source of income, it's their decision. And yes I've been refused, but I've also walked away from taxis where the driver was clearly drunk or looked exhausted from working too long. Choice is a two way street with taxis.

Driving recklessly, now, that's completely different. Ban them for that, refusing a fare is one thing, endangering others a totally different one.

Agreed. It is a taxi driver's right to say yes or no to a destination, IMHO.

If a taxi driver is planning on knocking off in 30 mins, then gets a fayre which takes him/her to the other side of BKK, as an example, 100Km away from home... why should he not have the right to only accept a few fayres which keep him within range of home, and his knocking off time? There are many such examples of a taxi drivers right to accept or refuse a fayre. Should a taxi have to accept a passenger who is inebriated, for example? The list is endless... and it's not a long wait in most places for another taxi to come passing.

So how does the country / any country ensure there is a workable, reliable taxi service.

To me this equates to allowing / continuing to allow a restaurant to prepare / serve food which is contaminated in some way.

In regard to shift change, why not use the same system that's been in place in Singapore for decades and works, they put a large print sign in the window saying:

'SHIFT CHANGE 4:00 PM' or whatever.

Not difficult.

Is it a country's pre-requisite to have a reliable, workable taxi service, which is not ultimately responsible to the government, but is indeed a privately owned Co.? I don't see any equation at all between a taxi service and restaurants serving or not serving contaminated food... I'd appreciate your explanation on that one, please.

What happened to self-reliability, cycles, other modes of transport which governments are, to some degree (buses, trains), responsible for? Has it become laziness, and ingratitude if one has to wait 30 mins for a taxi, as opposed to calling a friend or family, cycling home, not having a car or motorbike (or not being sober enough to use such), and blame it all on a taxi driver who also has family responsibilities, and a life too??

In 11 years here, in all and all, I have never once had a bad taxi service/ride/dupe attempt, and I'm talking from North to South, east to West: not only Bangkok. Self is a lot to do with it, and attitude, even before getting into a taxi, and how one presents oneself to a taxi. If one is in control of one's assets, and has bothered to learn to speak Thai, even to say 'ow bai...., na krap'.. then the offered respect is generally reciprocated - in most circumstances aside of taxis also.

Until taxi services are government run, in any country as you allude to, and with which I agree, then what stops one from using self-means, or expecting to wait for kind service, if one doesn't perceive the initial offer acceptable??

[Bluespunk]

Deleted

Edited July 7, 2014 by Bluespunk

[UbonRatch]

Ok, it's annoying, but taxi drivers should not be prosecuted for refusing fares. It's their car, it's their source of income, it's their decision. And yes I've been refused, but I've also walked away from taxis where the driver was clearly drunk or looked exhausted from working too long. Choice is a two way street with taxis.

Driving recklessly, now, that's completely different. Ban them for that, refusing a fare is one thing, endangering others a totally different one.

Agreed. It is a taxi driver's right to say yes or no to a destination, IMHO.

If a taxi driver is planning on knocking off in 30 mins, then gets a fayre which takes him/her to the other side of BKK, as an example, 100Km away from home... why should he not have the right to only accept a few fayres which keep him within range of home, and his knocking off time? There are many such examples of a taxi drivers right to accept or refuse a fayre. Should a taxi have to accept a passenger who is inebriated, for example? The list is endless... and it's not a long wait in most places for another taxi to come passing.

I have been refused so many times for either too long or too short. They are always cherry picking and it gets a bit boring at times.

How do you get refused for being too long or too short? Does that mean if you're sober you stand upright, and if you're pissed you stoop? And taxi likes 5 foot 8 guys?

Sanuk sanuk .

[Bluespunk]

Ok, it's annoying, but taxi drivers should not be prosecuted for refusing fares. It's their car, it's their source of income, it's their decision. And yes I've been refused, but I've also walked away from taxis where the driver was clearly drunk or looked exhausted from working too long. Choice is a two way street with taxis.

Driving recklessly, now, that's completely different. Ban them for that, refusing a fare is one thing, endangering others a totally different one.

Its not about refusing fares that is the issue, Its about refusing to switch their meters on. And asking a fixed price which is way above the metered fare. But in reality they should not be able to refuse a customer unless of drunkenness or some other good reason. But to refuse a fare because the journey is too short is against their taxi licence rules, after all a taxi driver is in a way a public servant as his licence is granted by a public office.

The police should be cracking down on the illegal taxis , the yaba-fuelled drivers and the dirty broken taxis that are not fit for the roads.. Thats my lean on it... but who cares what another Farang thinks..?

Ok I agree refusing to use the metre or trying to rip people off with extortionate fares is a problem that does require some action.

However the OP and my post were about whether a taxi driver has the right to refuse a fare, not about drivers trying to exploit the customer.

Edited July 7, 2014 by Bluespunk

[peterdarby]

A quite simple 3 strikes and you're out policy, but not the driver to take the hit... the actual car to be seized and crushed, then the boss who owns the cars will make sure it don't happen.

Hitting the drivers is useless, they tried that already, nothing was enforced, and if they banned the driver, they would ignore it and carry on driving anyway.

Where a ban on a driver is hard to enforce as the diver knows there is little chance of being caught, but seizing cabs for a day or a week would certainly hurt not just the driver but the vehicle owners too so it is in there interest to ensure they only let legal and good drivers use their vehicles.

The same could also apply to other vehicles, just imagine daddy losing the use of thee family car, pick up or bike for a week, because they let their unlicenced son or daughter use it, or the rental company having to pick up their vehicle from the police compound because they rented it to someone who did not have a licence to drive it.

Impounding the cars seems eminently practical, although getting the cars to the pound might be awkward. A suitable fee to retrieve the vehicle (bribe) would go a long way to prevent unlawful activity (increase plod's monthly take).

[realenglish1]

Thank you Thank you Thank you . Some of the Taxi drivers bitch about not making too much Ok then find another job its that simple

If you do not want to play by the rules as a taxi driver then stuff it

[supaprik]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Ok, it's annoying, but taxi drivers should not be prosecuted for refusing fares. It's their car, it's their source of income, it's their decision. And yes I've been refused, but I've also walked away from taxis where the driver was clearly drunk or looked exhausted from working too long. Choice is a two way street with taxis.

Driving recklessly, now, that's completely different. Ban them for that, refusing a fare is one thing, endangering others a totally different one.

Agreed. It is a taxi driver's right to say yes or no to a destination, IMHO.

If a taxi driver is planning on knocking off in 30 mins, then gets a fayre which takes him/her to the other side of BKK, as an example, 100Km away from home... why should he not have the right to only accept a few fayres which keep him within range of home, and his knocking off time? There are many such examples of a taxi drivers right to accept or refuse a fayre. Should a taxi have to accept a passenger who is inebriated, for example? The list is endless... and it's not a long wait in most places for another taxi to come passing.

So how does the country / any country ensure there is a workable, reliable taxi service.

To me this equates to allowing / continuing to allow a restaurant to prepare / serve food which is contaminated in some way.

In regard to shift change, why not use the same system that's been in place in Singapore for decades and works, they put a large print sign in the window saying:

'SHIFT CHANGE 4:00 PM' or whatever.

Not difficult.

The reason they cant/wont do it here is because MOST that use that reason are LIARS..

Edited July 7, 2014 by supaprik

[sprq]

Getting people out of the habit of asking them first would go a long way too. Just open the door and get in. I have never been refused that way. Of course a lot of complaining, but that's their problem. The only time I haven't been able to is when they lock the door and open the window to talk. In those cases, I just walk away and wait for the next one.

What's your secret? Are you big, perhaps? Or totally fluent in Thai? What is it? I am quite big and speak quite good "Thai for taxi drivers", yet get refused frequently on major roads like Sukhumvit even for going a short distance like to Thonglor, usually after getting in and sitting down. I'm sure that's normal for everybody, foreigners and Thais, so what is it you've got that the rest of us haven't? A gun?

Edited July 7, 2014 by sprq