Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 46 to 59 of 59

Thread: private not for hire questions

  1. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Westminster, MD
    Posts
    123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FamilyLimo View Post
    Remind me, do you have a private limo like me? I am wondering about insurance because I just have Farmers and the collision coverage is just for a regular town car, and not the extra value of a limo. So if I get totaled I am out about $10k. Do you have a better option?Insurance King gave me a recommendation, but they wouldn't even return my calls...
    Yes. I haven't researched it but I doubt Maryland would allow open containers in my cars.

  2. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FamilyLimo View Post
    For what it's worth, I had a lawyer friend review the Texas Open Container laws, and it's legal for my passengers to have alcohol back there even though I am not for hire.
    I'd be very nervous about letting people drink in your private, not for hire limousine for which you are not receiving compensation. I guess it could be read two ways, but here's the relevant extract from the Texas Penal Code
    PENAL CODE
    TITLE 10. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND MORALS
    CHAPTER 49. INTOXICATION AND ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE OFFENSES

    (c) It is an exception to the application of Subsection (b) that at the time of the offense the defendant was a passenger in:
    (1) the passenger area of a motor vehicle designed, maintained, or used primarily for the transportation of persons for compensation, including a bus, taxicab, or limousine;

  3. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kansas City Metro Area
    Posts
    2,668

    Default

    As I read it, I read it that the vehicle was designed to be used for the transportation of passengers for compensation. That doesn't mean that it has to be used for that purpose.
    Tim Wiegman, Jr.
    Boulevard Limousine
    Travel Confidently!
    Serving Kansas City, Lawrence, Topeka
    http://www.BoulevardLimoKC.com - Kansas City Limos
    KC Airport Car Service

  4. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Westminster, MD
    Posts
    123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FamilyLimo View Post
    For what it's worth, I had a lawyer friend review the Texas Open Container laws, and it's legal for my passengers to have alcohol back there even though I am not for hire.
    If 'or' was replaced with 'and' it would definitely not be allowed. But since 'or' is used, you get to pick one I guess so in this case, 'designed' would apply like Tim said. I'm not sure if 'primarily' applies to all three or just the use.

    However even though we see it that way, I doubt the government would even though they used 'or' instead of 'and.'

    So I guess you and Tim are saying in Texas based on this law, your situation would be interpreted as:

    It is an exception to the application of Subsection (b) that at the time of the offense the defendant was a passenger in the passenger area of a motor vehicle designed primarily for the transportation of persons for compensation.

    I think Maryland is a little more clear cut. I stumbled across it some time ago but didn't look further as what I found was no surprise. Personally owned vehicle laws apply to vehicles titled and registered as such no matter their design here.
    Last edited by Cougars 2 go; October 13th, 2013 at 07:35 PM.

  5. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Houston/TX
    Posts
    452

    Default

    The big bad government can't change the meaning of "or." I feel very comfortable now that I had a lawyer that deals with the laws all the time check it out for me. No offense, but that's a million times more reliable than anything I could read on here from arm chair lawyers.

  6. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BLVD Limo View Post
    As I read it, I read it that the vehicle was designed to be used for the transportation of passengers for compensation. That doesn't mean that it has to be used for that purpose.
    I tend to agree but I'm still betting that if he gets pulled over in Houston, for any reason, and he's not for hire, somebody's getting a ticket. Class 3 misdemeanor but it's still a violation of some sort. Outside of Houston, Austin, or Dallas, he's probably OK since regular police in Texas really don't care much about what goes on in limos, as long as you're not egregiously violating speeding laws.

    Again, YMMV.

  7. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Westminster, MD
    Posts
    123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FamilyLimo View Post
    The big bad government can't change the meaning of "or." I feel very comfortable now that I had a lawyer that deals with the laws all the time check it out for me. No offense, but that's a million times more reliable than anything I could read on here from arm chair lawyers.
    I agree that a lawyer's insight is better than here but the government can do a hell of a lot outside their written abilities.

    Oh, and that law identifies the defendant as a passenger. That little blurb didn't say anything about the driver or the defendant being a driver or the registered owner. So while the passenger in your car may be able to escape without charges, it doesn't say anything about the owner or operator of the vehicle registered as a private vehicle with open containers.

  8. #53
    Senior Member Party Bus Andy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Dayton Ohio
    Posts
    262

    Default

    In Ohio all occupants of the vehicle are considered passengers no matter which seat they occupy.
    Andy
    937-620-9120
    937-524-5899 (office)
    Dunlap Limousine, LLC
    http://www.dunlaplimo.com

  9. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Westminster, MD
    Posts
    123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Party Bus Andy View Post
    In Ohio all occupants of the vehicle are considered passengers no matter which seat they occupy.
    Interesting. That conflicts with the first few definitions in online dictionaries that I checked when performing a quick search of the meaning of 'passenger.'

    Anyone know a police officer they could ask? I'm curious what they know or what they would do if they happened upon this scenario.


    But, hey, that's one of the advantages of the forum - exchange thoughts, knowledge, experience, perspective, etc. Maybe I will dig deep and find out for certain what Maryland's laws are with this. I think I came across it in the past but I need to revisit that.

  10. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cougars 2 go View Post
    Interesting. That conflicts with the first few definitions in online dictionaries that I checked when performing a quick search of the meaning of 'passenger.'

    Anyone know a police officer they could ask? I'm curious what they know or what they would do if they happened upon this scenario.


    But, hey, that's one of the advantages of the forum - exchange thoughts, knowledge, experience, perspective, etc. Maybe I will dig deep and find out for certain what Maryland's laws are with this. I think I came across it in the past but I need to revisit that.
    The Texas statute I quoted above says specifically: "Passenger area" of a motor vehicle" means the area of a motor vehicle designed for the seating of the operator and passengers of the vehicle.




  11. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Westminster, MD
    Posts
    123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ausultimate View Post
    The Texas statute I quoted above says specifically: "Passenger area" of a motor vehicle" means the area of a motor vehicle designed for the seating of the operator and passengers of the vehicle.
    I was talking about the passenger though, not the passenger area. Your findings further support the distinction made between an operator and a passenger in that very statute otherwise they would have called everyone a passenger. What is Texas' definition of 'passenger' in their laws? How about 'operator' (since both types of people were identified in that statute)?

    "that at the time of the offense the defendant was a passenger..."

    It seems that just based on your quotes of the statute, that a passenger in the passenger area of a car designed for the transportation of persons for hire is an exception to whatever subsection B is. Since the definition of 'passenger area' also identifies another type of occupant, the operator, is there something in there that exempts that operator from subsection B? If subsection B is consumption, then I can see how passengers would be exempt but definitely not the driver. But if subsection B is open container, then there is still a vulnerability to the operator.

    *edit*
    I found it and read it and have come to the conclusion that at least what I found failed to identify what happens to the operator if they are charged. It doesn't state "that at the time of the offense, the defendant was an operator..."


    (2) "Passenger area of a motor vehicle" means the area of a motor vehicle designed for the seating of the operator and passengers of the vehicle.
    ...
    (b) A person commits an offense if the person knowingly possesses an open container in a passenger area of a motor vehicle that is located on a public highway, regardless of whether the vehicle is being operated or is stopped or parked. Possession by a person of one or more open containers in a single criminal episode is a single offense.
    (c) It is an exception to the application of Subsection (b) that at the time of the offense the defendant was a passenger in:
    (1) the passenger area of a motor vehicle designed, maintained, or used primarily for the transportation of persons for compensation, including a bus, taxicab, or limousine; or
    (2) the living quarters of a motorized house coach or motorized house trailer, including a self-contained camper, a motor home, or a recreational vehicle.


    I see where you guys are coming from. I guess I've seen the government do so much over the years that was unimaginable, that to me, the sky is the limit for them and they can interpret the law to their advantage whenever they want. And in this case, nothing is spelled out if the defendant is the operator yet there was identification made to two occupant types in part 2 of that section - operator and passenger. And this statute identifies both occupants but only 'goes up to bat' for one of them leaving the other type identified but not explicitly exempt. It also states "a person commits an offense if the person knowingly possesses an open container in a passenger area..." yet only makes exception for one of the two types of persons identified in that passenger area - the passenger.

    I know the horse is dead. And Texas isn't even my state. Maybe I'm just jealous you guys have more freedom than I do.
    Last edited by Cougars 2 go; October 18th, 2013 at 02:08 PM.

  12. #57

    Default

    Seeing as how you're in Maryland we most certainly do have more freedom in most areas, until the feds get involved.

    In reality, some state troopers here know the law about open containers and tint, and some don't. I was pulled over by a state trooper west of Austin a few months ago because the front windows are tinted beyond what they should be. I explained it was commercial and he said it wasn't. I got a warning ticket then came back to the office and printed out the statute from the state site just in case it happens again. I've also got the entire open container statute printed out and in each car - again just in case.

  13. #58

    Default

    Yeah it really depends on the mood they are in at the time. State Troopers are by far always the worse and they make statutes confusing for a reason as they only want one thing form us and that is our $ we are trying to earn to feed our family. I'm tinting my front windows as well but prob not too dark as first I gotta get used to driving the thing

  14. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Westminster, MD
    Posts
    123

    Default preservation vs innovation

    Quote Originally Posted by Cougars 2 go View Post
    I don't blame them either. But the interest groups have made insurance requirements for carrying four people once for pay 20 times the cost of carrying those same four people 200 times without getting paid.

    Add more cars, do more runs, more clients, and have more exposure to risk and which direction does the insurance per car go?

    I'm a little leery of those who are over-zealous to protect themselves or their self-interests from competition and innovation. Either with higher fees, more regulation, requirements, etc, etc. This approach continues to suppress new ideas, innovation, etc and we wonder why we are continually slipping in the global marketplace.

    Here's food for thought:

    http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranci....html?page=all

    All the regulation and expense placed on the industry has made the playing field uneven when something innovative comes along. So the answer seems to be to suppress the innovation rather than the over-regulation.

    And one of the associations pushes for an increase in insurance be placed on those operating legally with coverage because of the amount of people who aren't paying for insurance. So there is an abundance of illegal operators without insurance and licensing and the answer is to raise insurance and licensing requirements on the operators obeying the law? (yeah, this particular article is old but the mentality still applies.) I didn't catch anything in there that addresses the illegal operators but rather make it more difficult for those who operate legally.

    http://www.lctmag.com/operations/new...ance-standards
    French Taxi Drivers Attack an Uber Car in Paris
    "...first violent clashes in the ongoing battle between local cabbies and app-based car services"

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •