why? so many a day
-
And also there are workers trying to get more O/T just to put a better foods on the table, and there are also paxs trying to reduce the fare by complaining here and there, so that they can get discount and use it to buy other things.
-
Well said bowah!
everybody will try to get the best return within the shortest time
why can't we? why must it always be us?
we pay rental & are independent business operator
we don't have bosses paying cpf & benefit for us
if sick we eat grass & wind still got to pay rental
so what's wrong with us trying to maximise our profit during our business day?
-
Working OT or CEO trying to maximize his income is one thing and driving recklessly to maximize your income at the expense of other road users is another.
Unless you are talking about the CEO of the milk companies in China, they have been prosecuted under the full extent of the law.
Maximizing your income is fine so long as you don't jeopardize other road users safety.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
But I have also seen a minority of good taxi drivers on the road, they give way and don't drive recklessly like the rest.
We need more civil taxi drivers like these on the roads, not those money hungry taxi drivers trying each and every way to make an extra buck from commuters.
yes i agree with u some taxi drivers are really very reckless,just to earn that few more $$$ they perform dangerous stunts
hope these accidents photographs can be their wake up call!
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
Maximizing your income is fine so long as you don't jeopardize other road users safety.
Yes i agree!
-
HoeCheng: "Aiya! Look dear, Taxi driver accident again?"
SianLong: " Oh dear! I guessed he must had lost concentration and perhaps too tired."
HoeCheng: "Poor thing, taxi drivers working very hard to make a living in Singapore. Our taxi fare is one of the cheapest in the world, right?"
SianLong: "Yeah, no wonder they often speed up to make more trips and earn more $ for their family"
HoeCheng: "I think we shld do something for the taxi uncles now! I guessed we shld look into raising the fare for taxis.
SianLong: "Yes. I think it is timely!"
HoeCheng: "Yeah, they shld have a better life too. How about another 20% increase in fare? I think its fare."
SianLong: "Agree! I'll call Laymond tomorrow!"
HoeCheng: "Luv U dear. you are so kind"
-
Muaaah!
-
Sep 17, 2010
Jailed for dodging offences
Charlie Lim Chau Lee, 51, was jailed six months for dodging traffic offences. -- ST PHOTO: WANG HUI FEN
A SALES executive, who got two friends to take the rap for his traffic offences, was jailed six months on Friday.
Charlie Lim Chau Lee, 51, was also fined $1,000 for running a traffic light in a separate incident.
After a tip-off, the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau investigated and discovered that Lim had approached at least three fall guys.
One of them - Benny Sng Kwee Hock - was jailed 1 1/2 months by the same court on Friday for claiming to be driving Lim's car when it ran the red light along Lavender Street on Dec 28. Lim paid the $200 fine but Sng, 54, was docked the 12 demerit points.
Any motorist who got 24 points within two years will have his driving licence suspended for a year.
The prosecution had asked for a jail term of three months for Sng but Judge Low noted that the business consultant committed the offence out of friendship and not for financial gain.
Earlier that year, Lim had approached businessman Ding Chiang Kum, 52, to help him find someone to take the rap for a speeding offence for $100.
Lim Kim Hock agreed to do so but the 40-year-old cleaner backed out after finding out that it was illegal. Lim's friend Lim Ah Hwa, 39, is then said to have submitted her particulars to the police. She also paid the $150 fine with his money.
At a karaoke lounge in Chinatown the following month, she is believed to have received an additional $300. Her case will be heard on Oct 8 (10). Ding is claiming trial.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
It's not the long hours, it's the recklessness, because taxi drivers drive fast during peak hours so that they can get more pax turnover to earn more money.
If you keep the required distance, signal when required, stop on red light (not speed up on amber light), don't overtake recklessly. I am sure the accident figures will drop.
1 private vehicle = 1 taxi?
You think private vehicle owners only use their cars 1.2 hour a day?
You think you drive the full 12 hour shift?
Why? this happen.
SBS bus crashes into bus stop
AN SBS bus crashed into a bus stop along Euno Link on Saturday, injuring 21 people.
A reader from citizen journalism website, Stomp, witnessed the bus ramming into the bus stop. Photos were also sent to the website.
Another reader also witnessed another accident at the cross junction between a taxi and a car.
It is not known if these two accidents were related.A spokesperson from the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) informed Stomp in an email that they were alerted to an incident involving a bus colliding into a bus stop at around 12:32pm.
Upon arrival, SCDF rescuers and paramedics attended to the 21 casualties. No one was trapped.
"15 adults and 6 children were conveyed to the Changi General Hospital and KK Children?s Hospital respectively for follow-up medical attention.
"1 of the adult victims sustained head injury. The other victims suffered injuries such as cuts and bruises," said SCDF.
-
A 16-year-old girl was knocked down by a SBS Transit bus service 63 on Wednesday morning along Circuit Road.
The Deyi Secondary School girl was pinned under the bus for a few minutes until a passer-by - Mr Lim Choon Guan - pulled the girl to safety.
Mr Lim was pushing his bicycle along the pavement nearby when he heard shouts coming from Circuit Road.
He rushed to the scene and saw the girl lying conscious under the bus.
He told The New Paper that the bus was still moving because the bus driver did not know he had hit someone until pedestrians gesticulated to him to stop.
-
The first bus is SBS2786D
The 2nd one is SBS8074K
-
This is getting no where.....
Ok let talk some facts here.
Much of the taxis are driven non-stop 24hrs/7days a week. The total mileage of a taxi can reach over 300k in less than 3 years. Most private car for the purpose of traveling in Singapore for work and leisure purposes will definitely take longer to clock the kind of mileage.
There are over 91k TDVL holders. About 25k taxis are available in Singapore. In another words, we can safely say there about at least 30k, in reserve estimation, of active TD on the road each day.
The accident stats as shown by the original poster (OP) mentioned that though taxis only occupy 3% of the total vehicle numbers in Singapore and we are involved in 14% of the accident. It is in no doubt that we TDs are in the high risk group.
I am quite sure that if there is a statistic on the number of hours and mileage clock by all 4 wheel saloon users compared to taxi usage, we will definitely overshot 3% in overal total usage. (maybe there is one such stats and I am not aware. If u know where to get it, post it)
However, are we dangerous? or to be more exact, are we dangerous drivers all the time? Seriously, if we are so dangerous all the time, you should see us dies like insect by the dozen each day. If u look at the fatality and injuries rate, it is the motorcyclist and pedestrians that occupy the high risk group.
The stats as provided by the OP is meant for the purpose of explaining the cost of insurance for taxis is heavy due to the high accident rate. It is not a measurement of saying or making judgement on whether TD are dangerous. (if u ask me what kind of driver is dangerous, I would say woman drivers lol).
On top of that, this guy seems to be related to the taxi hating blog.....so shall we do the usual?...just ignore him...................close the thread, Poolman. no point arguing with TD hater. Waste time.
-
Wah you guys saw the news tonite..... the taxi ram into a shophouse at Geylang and kill 1 viet.... too tired or 2F2F....
Taxi driver also human, taxi driver also got family... which taxi driver wanna go out and risk their life for the few dollars..... taxi driver spend more time than the average private driver on the road.... so of course chances of suay suay is higher.... but not all the time accident involving taxi driver is their fault what....
Let them be lar those taxi hater..... we got more important thing to worry about.....
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
Just look at the statistics, one accident for every taxi per year, if that is the case with private cars, then it would be one accident for every private car per year.
Something you can't deny is, taxi drivers are indeed reckless.
Just read the first article, the statistics involved.
deleted.
point mentioned by earlier post.
-
Weird discussion here. Are statistics so hard to understand?
Driver A spends 20 hours on road and crashed 10 times.
Driver B spends 200 hours on road and crashed 50 times.
Statistics doesn't prove driver B is more reckless.
-
You can use statistics to verify events of a physical nature, like this machine produces a failure of 1 bolt for every 1,000,000 produced or this hard disk has a MTBF of 100,000 hours.
But you can't make the same comparisons for social sciences, you can't say that with increased population there will be more crimes, because crime has dropped (or remained the same) with Singapore's increased population.
There has been a substantial growth in air travel in the past decade, but if you compare the statistics in the Air Crashes Record Office, the accidents has decreased with the increase in air travel. Quantity of flights is not proportional to the number of accidents.
Unless you behave like a robot in a manufacturing plant, then I dare say you will behave proportionally to the failure rate and a set of fix equation.
Year 1999 = 211 accidents
Year 2009 = 122 accidents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_accidents_and_incidents
The accident rate amongst taxi drivers is a result of drivers chionging which leads to reckless driving.
-
If we follow your line of argument that more driving leads to more accidents, then at a 5% growth rate, the number of airline accidents should be 361 in year 2009, not 122 as stated by ACRO.
The growth of world air travel has averaged approximately 5% per year over the past 30 years, with substantial yearly variations due both to changing economic conditions and differences in economic growth in different regions of the world. Historically, the annual growth in air travel has been about twice the annual growth in GDP. Even with relatively conservative expectations of economic growth over the next 10-15 years, a continued 4-5% annual growth in global air travel will lead to a doubling of total air travel during this period.
http://web.mit.edu/airlines/analysis/analysis_airline_industry.html
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
Working OT or CEO trying to maximize his income is one thing and driving recklessly to maximize your income at the expense of other road users is another.
Unless you are talking about the CEO of the milk companies in China, they have been prosecuted under the full extent of the law.
Maximizing your income is fine so long as you don't jeopardize other road users safety.
There are also many Sale/marketing managers driving recklessly just to get the deal, and bear in mind, there are more drank private car drivers on the road everyday and nite much more than a few reckless taxi driver.Reckless is arguemental, if you understood a taxi driver plying for his living, you would had understand their condition and thus give them the benefit of doubt, I would said that many private car drivers in singapore are good enough to give way to us and to make an effort to divert out or wait for us behind to pick or drop pax, just like we understand why workers get retrenched by the CEO, becos he wanted to optimise his profit by reducing wage cost, and therefore, we become the scape goat and given the age and choice, chose to drive taxi, so far, so good.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
You can use statistics to verify events of a physical nature, like this machine produces a failure of 1 bolt for every 1,000,000 produced or this hard disk has a MTBF of 100,000 hours.
But you can't make the same comparisons for social sciences, you can't say that with increased population there will be more crimes, because crime has dropped (or remained the same) with Singapore's increased population.
There has been a substantial growth in air travel in the past decade, but if you compare the statistics in the Air Crashes Record Office, the accidents has decreased with the increase in air travel. Quantity of flights is not proportional to the number of accidents.
Unless you behave like a robot in a manufacturing plant, then I dare say you will behave proportionally to the failure rate and a set of fix equation.
Year 1999 = 211 accidents
Year 2009 = 122 accidents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_accidents_and_incidents
The accident rate amongst taxi drivers is a result of drivers chionging which leads to reckless driving.
The fault line lies on the mid range, most of taxi accident accounted for only 1/2 the fault blame on the taxi driver, and the public on the other half. And there are more private vehicle accident than taxi accident per day. And that is why private vehicle insurance had gone up tremedously. However, taxi rate still the same.
-
How many motorists, are there a day attending Court 21 Traffic court at Suborninate Court.
How many taxi drivers are there everyday, any figure.
Originally posted by βÎτά
The accident rate amongst taxi drivers is a result of drivers chionging which leads to reckless driving.
talkcock without data....knn
Take a day off just to satify youself...man.
than you know what? ... my intention asking you to go there, free admission.
than comeback to us, than... that will be better, rather than kpkb without statistics.
Why? head big no brain.
How many motorist already committed the below charges, and already serving the sentences by court decision..
This all about, the below.
By Lee Yih GiaWith the large number of vehicles and pedestrians competing for space on Singapore roads, road safety has become a major concern for road users and the authorities. Legislation helps to control the way in which our roads are used. This simple guide is designed to give drivers a general understanding to some common driving offences in Singapore.
Road Safety In Singapore
Duty To Help In A Road Traffic Accident
Police Action Against Drivers
Common Driving Offences
Speeding
Reckless Driving
Dangerous Driving
Driving Without Due Care and Attention
Driving Without Reasonable Consideration
Use Of Mobile Phone While Driving
Causing Death By Reckless Or Dangerous Driving
Drunk Driving
Causing Death By Rash Act
Causing Death By Negligent Act
Rash or Negligent Driving
Punishment for Driving OffencesDrivers are reminded that the standard of safety they need to maintain is very high. The courts in Singapore are of the view that drivers owe a very serious responsibility to other road users. Drivers must at all times ensure that they do not cause danger to other road users, including pedestrians.
The standard of safety a driver has to maintain may differ depending on the circumstances at a particular time. A driver must take into consideration all prevailing driving conditions for example, lighting conditions, the weather, volume of traffic and the presence or possible presence of pedestrians. It is also important to note that the mere fact that someone else was also at fault in causing an accident may not be a sufficient defence. In accidents involving pedestrians, for example, the Singapore courts have commented on the standard required of drivers:
Public Prosecutor v. Teo Lian Seng [1996] 1 SLR 19
"… It must be emphasised that the standard required for expressways cannot be the same as that for normal roads. While on the latter, especially in housing estates, there would be a need to be alert at all times to the possibility of persons crossing the road indiscriminately, particularly children and the elderly regardless of whether there are specific signs of their presence, such as schools, playgrounds or parks. And what is appropriate for a normal road would not be for car parks." (my emphasis)
Duty to help in a road traffic accident
Section 84 Road Traffic Act requires the driver involved in a road traffic accident to stop and render aid. The driver must also aid any police officer as may be reasonably required.
An offence is committed if Section 84 of the Road Traffic Act is not complied with. The offence carries a fine of up to $3,000.00 or imprisonment for up to 12 months. For a second or subsequent offence the maximum sentence is a fine of $5,000 or two years' imprisonment. Drivers should not move any vehicle, or persons killed or injured, unless:
- directed by the police, or
- it is done to extricate injured persons, to render aid or to
move injured to hospital, where no other vehicle is available or suitable,
or
- it is done to prevent further damage, to prevent fire or
to prevent obstruction to the public.
When a road traffic offence has been committed the police may take action under the Road Traffic Act or the Penal Code. Drivers may be formally charged in court, or the police may issue traffic summonses. The procedure of bringing a criminal charge against an accused person is dealt with in a separate article.
Many of the driving offences in the Road Traffic Act and the Penal Code may overlap. For one incident a driver may have committed offences under a number of provisions in the Road Traffic Act or the Penal Code. For example, if a driver uses his handphone while driving, he may have committed the offence of driving without due care and attention, or an offence of using a handphone while driving. Such an overlap actually gives the police, the courts and the driver, through the criminal process, the opportunity to arrive at an appropriate charge on which to prosecute, to convict or to plead guilty. The choice of an appropriate offence will depend on the facts of each case and the prescribed punishment for each offence. Set out below are some common driving offences and the prescribed punishment for each offence:
Speeding: Section 63 of the Road Traffic Act
Driving at greater than the maximum speed allowed for that vehicle or road.
Punishment:- Fine up to $1,000.00 or jail up to 3 months; and on second or subsequent conviction, fine up to $2,000.00 or jail up to 6 months. Disqualification from driving.
Reckless Driving: Section 64 of the Road Traffic Act
Driving a vehicle on a road recklessly, having regard to all the circumstances of the case. Driving recklessly means:
- driving in such a manner as to create an obvious and serious
risk of causing physical injury to some other person using the road, or doing
substantial damage to property, AND
- (i)without having given any thought to the possibility of there
being any such risk, OR
(ii) having recognised that there was some risk involved, proceeding to take that risk.
Example:- Driving a vehicle at excessive speed, knowing there is a serious defect in its braking mechanism.
Punishment:- Fine up to $3,000.00 or jail up to 12 months or both. On a second or subsequent conviction, fine up to $5,000.00 or jail up to 2 years or both. Disqualification from driving.
Dangerous driving: Section 64 of Road Traffic Act
Driving at a speed or in a manner which is dangerous to the public, having regard to all circumstances of the case. Driving dangerously means:
- driving with selfish disregard for the safety of others and with
a degree of recklessness (see "reckless driving" above), OR
- driving with momentary inattention or misjudgement.
Example:- Non-compliance with a red traffic light signal when turning right and thereby colliding into an oncoming vehicle.
Punishment:- Fine up to $3,000.00 or jail up to 12 months or both. On a second or subsequent conviction, fine up to $5,000.00 or jail up to 2 years or both. Disqualification from driving.
Driving without due care and attention: Section 65 of the Road Traffic Act
Driving without due care and attention to other road users.
Example:- Using a handphone while driving or driving without keeping a proper lookout for other road users.
Punishment:- Fine up to $1,000.00 or jail up to 6 months or both. On a second or subsequent conviction, fine up to $2,000.00 or jail up to 12 months or both. Disqualification from driving.
Driving without reasonable consideration: Section 65 of the Road Traffic Act
Driving without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road.
Example:- Failing to give way to another car with right of way.
Punishment:- Fine up to $1,000.00 or jail up to 6 months or both. On a second or subsequent conviction, fine up to $2,000.00 or jail up to 12 months or both. Disqualification from driving.
Use of mobile phone while driving: Section 65B of the Road Traffic Act
Using a mobile phone by holding it in one hand to communicate with any person while driving on a road or public place.
Punishment:- Fine up to $1,000.00 or jail up to 6 months or both. On a second or subsequent conviction, fine up to $ 2,000.00 or jail up to 12 months or both. Disqualification from driving.
Causing death by reckless or dangerous driving: Section 66 of the Road Traffic Act
Causing the death of another person by driving recklessly, or at a speed or in a manner which is dangerous to the public, having regard to all circumstances (See "reckless driving" and " dangerous driving" above).
Example:- (See "reckless driving" or "dangerous driving" above. In this present section, death must have resulted from the reckless or dangerous driving).
Punishment:- Jail of up to 5 years. Disqualification from driving.
Drunk driving: Section 67 of the Road Traffic Act
- Driving or attempting to drive on a road or public place while
under the influence of drink or drug or an intoxicating substance, to such an
extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vehicle; OR
- driving or attempting to drive on a road or public place while
having more than 35 micrograms of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath, or 80
milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood.
Example:- Driving a car after consuming beer and thereby having blood alcohol concentration exceeding 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood.
Punishment:- Fine between $1,000.00 to $5,000.00 or jail up to 6 months. On a second or subsequent conviction, fine between $3,000.00 to $10,000.00 and jail up to 12 months. Disqualification from driving.
Causing the death of any person by doing any rash act: Section 304A of the Penal Code
Offence Causing the death of any person by doing a rash act, even when there was no intention to cause such death or knowledge that in all probability death would be caused. Rashness here refers to the doing of an act with the knowledge that such an act is wanton and dangerous. The criminality lies in running the risk of doing such an act with recklessness or indifference to the consequences. While the section does not apply specifically to driving offences, the police frequently charge drivers under this section, instead of the more severe section 66 Road Traffic Act above, which carries mandatory imprisonment.
Example:- Driving at an excessive and dangerous speed in attempting to cross a junction before the traffic lights turn to red, resulting in a collision with other vehicles and causing death.
Punishment:- Jail up to 2 years or fine or both. Disqualification from driving.
Causing the death of any person by doing any negligent act: Section 304A of the Penal Code
Causing the death of any person by doing a negligent act, even when there was no intention to cause such death or knowledge that in all probability death would be caused. Negligence here refers to gross and culpable neglect or failure to exercise reasonable care and precaution, having regard to all the circumstances.
Examples:- Failing to keep a proper lookout for other road users on a dark road and thereby colliding into a cyclist, killing him as a result.
Punishment:- Jail up to 2 years or fine or both. Disqualification from driving.
Rash or negligent driving: Section 279 of the Penal Code
Driving any vehicle in a manner so rash or negligent as to endanger human life, or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any other person (See "rash driving" and "negligent driving" above). It is not necessary that the rash or negligent act result in injury to life or property.
Examples:- Reversing a trailer and colliding into parking kiosk, or driving on the wrong side of the road.
Punishment:- Jail up to 6 months or fine up to $1,000.00 or both. Disqualification from driving.
Punishment for driving offences
The punishments set out for each of the offences in this article are statutorily provided. The actual punishment for each offence will depend on all the circumstances in each case and may vary from case to case. Disqualification from driving is commonly ordered by the courts, the periods also depending on the circumstances of each case.
- directed by the police, or
-
Ok.
You guys have managed to convinced me.
Taxi drivers are the safest drivers in the world.
-
Yes.
Taxi drivers only half of the fault, the other half goes to the pedestrian, like the Viet lady who was killed at Geylang Lor.41, she shouldn't be sitting outside the pub with her friends, it's her fault. Taxis have the right of way to drive their vehicles into five foot ways.
I totally agree with you guys that taxi drivers are the best drivers in the world.
-
I think these stompers are so wrong with their negative comments about taxi drivers.
We should clarify to them that taxi drivers are in fact very safe drivers.
-
If we look back on the thread starter's first post, we'll all know he/she belongs to one of those TD haters.
Are all accidents caused by TDs' reckless driving? Private cars and others road users don't drive recklessly or cause accidents?
I wish you're not a driver on the road and if you are, drive safely.
-
Originally posted by Mvp30sg:
If we look back on the thread starter's first post, we'll all know he/she belongs to one of those TD haters.
Are all accidents caused by TDs' reckless driving? Private cars and others road users don't drive recklessly or cause accidents?
I wish you're not a driver on the road and if you are, drive safely.
<!--Session data-->
Thread starter is a CityCab taxi driver .