Taxi Driver Online

Can any of you wise cabbies tell me what the goverment can do if, next year, they are not satisfied with an individual councils reason for keeping the plate numbers limited.Can they order the limits to be derestricted or will they have to lift the restrictions,of a council,through the law courts.Or is there any other action they will take.

I think the issue is that councils will have to justify that limits are a good thing, and that consumers agree. But your point is a valid one.

However as the Government mentioned Transport Plans, what they will do (in the short term) is reduce the amount that councils can spend on roads etc.

In the longer term, they will just legislate if councils ignore them.

the government officialy can do nothing, dont expect them to take councils to court.

but change can be made by a number of embarrasing reports, like audit commission on licensing spending or rejection of transport plans.

if the government want they can make life hard, but councils can be stubborn too which is why Blackpool and Reading still have transport undertalings that thatcher instructed had to be sold.

just stand and watch Halifax and Brighton squirm in the next 12 months.

In the past some councils have got away with doing nothing. The local trade have been quite happy keeping part of it as second class. Operators have been happy to keep PH drivers, PH drivers.

Now councils will have to get off their bums and do what they should have been doing for the last 19 years.

As thankfully many are starting to do.

_________________
IDFIMH

As the editor siad in private hire monthly, in a few years time not many restricted councils will be left.
So go out and find a solicitor or accountant who wants to buy a plate.

The thinking behind for the Governments insistance in making Local councils spell out why restricting numbers will benefit the public at large, is to make them legally accountable in a court of Law.

Local Governement administration is based on what is "reasonable" it is this element that the courts rely upon when judging the actions of a Local Council.

It is unrealistic to think that any reasonable person could possibly think that by limiting numbers the public will benefit from a better service. The Government know this, therefore they are putting a tool in the hands of any person who feels aggrieved at not being given a licence because of the actions of a local Council.

If I was a judge I would have great difficulty in reasoning that less means a better service for the public. I would however, reason that more means a better service. Therefore I would have no hesitation in thinking that the decison to deny the public a better service was unreasonable.

The the court would obviously take into account the logic behind such a council decison and look at the evidence of how that decission was arrived at.

Perhaps all an agrieved applicant has to prove under the Governments new guidance is that no reasonable person could believe that less means a better service.

I think Local Authorites who practice a severe policy of restricing numbers will have a very hard time indeed in coming up with a credible answer to the Governments policy.

Best wishes

John Davies.

I suspect many of them know that and will end up being rid of quotas.

_________________
IDFIMH

Could i ask John Davies,is Manchester Council satisfying the goverment and for that matter the courts by having unmet demand surveys every two years.

NEITHER THE LAW, THE GOVERNMENT OR THE COURTS ASK FOR SURVEYS EVERY TWO YEARS>

i DONT THINK YOU HAVE BEEN READING THE THREAD PROPERLY CHRIS

OR you listen to much to the likes of Halcrow Fox.

Oh you are so mean Mr Wharfie.

I will let John speak for himself, but I would say that Manchester will be in the same boat as the rest that restrict. They will have to give the government reasons why they restrict, and evidence that customers like restrictions.

In my highly biased opinion, nigh on impossible.

_________________
IDFIMH

Its a fair point you make,but i don't think you fully understand what i wrote.I asked a question but didn't make a statement.
If i upset you in any way i'm sorry.

all I can say Sussex is that Manchester have loads of taxis roaming the streets and they are very diciplined, you know if you put too many taxis on they all stop!

they all clog up ranks and there is none to flag down.

this comment should not mean I support limit by numbers.

Geoff

Chris mate,
I dont know where the 2 years comes from
the last speel I saw from government said 3 years, that did upset me!
it upset me because I hate surveyors, they dont earn thier keep and thier methodology is bullshit.

and OFT bless them at least got them to admit that.

all the law says is that the local authorities must proove demand is met.

it dunna say how.

forgive my intemperateness, just had some bad news, shouldnt take it out of the first poster I see

Geoff

The purpose of a regular survey is to help councils withstand the challenge of an applicant who feels aggrieved at being refused a licence and then pursues his grievance through a court of law.

The survey is not there to satisfy the courts or the Government, it is merely a tool to aid Councils in retaining a restrictive numbers policy.

A Survey complies with section sixteen of the 1985 Transport act, which allows a Council to refuse an applicant a licence if they can prove there is no significant demand in the area that remains unmet.

Section sixteen is ambiguous because it does not define how unmet demand shall be measured. It was left to the courts and the Ministry of Transport to guide Local Authorities on an accepted policy for measuring unmet demand. The way that guidance has evolved over the years has led to a stable set of criteria that is now accepted under normal circumstances in a court of law.

In a court of Law a survey is only as good as the content within. There has never ever been an "in depth" challenge to the contents of a survey in any court case appertaining to licence refusal that I know of. I specifically said “in depth”.

It is my opinion, that surveys in large Towns or Cities can never adequately give a true account of unmet demand. They concentrate their resources in the most populated public places and neglect the area as a whole. Therefore in most cases less than five percent of the whole licensed area is being properly surveyed.

In the case of Manchester the bulk of the survey takes place in the City centre, yet that is only a very small part of the Authorities area as a whole. Every survey that has ever been produced for Manchester has been flawed; if you have the knowledge, determination and the wherewithal you can easily pull the Manchester surveys to pieces. The fact is “no one has ever tried”.

Since the early nineties here in Manchester It has always been accepted by most people that a survey was good enough to thwart any challenge in a court of law.

The courts realised from an early stage that measuring demand is nigh on impossible and that councils were placed in the unenviable position of having to do this.

An accepted legal criteria was established when Lord Justice Woolf stated that a council who has not measured demand can withhold the issuing of licences until such demand had been measured. In another case it was established that measuring demand could take place every one or two years but more than two years would be challengeable.

Therefore, we have the situation where surveys have become acceptable in a court of law. However, surveys have never really had an in depth challenge so until such a challenge is forthcoming surveys will no doubt be accepted unconditionally.

In answer to your Question is Manchester Satisfying the Government and the courts I would have to say this, seeing as how Manchester has never been challenged in a court of Law, It would be folly to say that a survey would definitely secure Manchester’s position of restricting numbers. As I have previously pointed out a survey is only as good as its contents and if an experienced clever applicant decided to challenge that survey with his or her own data, including video evidence collected over a period of time and not just two weeks in one section of the Licensing area, then I think any Authority including Manchester would have a very difficult job in just relying on a limited survey to secure their numbers policy.

With regard to the Government, They are on record as saying that they disagree with the current practice of restricting numbers because they see it as a barrier for entrance into the trade. However under current legislation there is not a lot the Government can do, we have in place legislation that allows councils to restrict numbers if they can prove there is no demand which remains unmet.

The goal posts have moved somewhat in the last few months because the Government have voiced strong opinion that Councils can no longer just rely on a survey that states there is no unmet demand. Councils in future will have to tell the public why they believe restricting licences will supply a better service.

The Governments advice for Councils has yet to be delivered but it is strategy that will put councils in a very precarious situation. If a court challenge is made by an aggrieved applicant the advice given by the Government will have to be interpreted by a court of law. What you have to realise is that a Judge is obliged to interpret the meaning of the advice and instruction being stated by the Government. It places the same onus on the Judge as if it was legislation.

Judges interpret legislation as to the meaning of the act as parliament meant it to be. They would place the same interpretation on any clear instructions handed down to Councils from the Government.

So there you have it. I hope I have been able to answer your Question in the way you wanted. Of course we have to wait until the Governments advice is forthcoming but when it does the picture should be a lot clearer.

Best Wishes

John Davies

Hi,

One very valid reason for any council including Manchester is that (and also stated in the OFT report) is that in areas that de-limit the no of hackneys increase and there is a corresponding decrease in Private Hire vehicles/drivers.
This will result in a poorer service in Manchester and other similar cities as most hackneys in Manchester are non radio so there will be no-one to fill the gap left by drivers leaving ph to go into hackneys.
There is a substantial amount of work done in local areas by ph serving local pubs and other local areas where the fare is only the bare minimum(which the hackneys dont want and wont serve).
In the case of Manchester, the council have already adopted a different method to restrict hackney numbers.
This is done by making the ''knowledge'' or ''test'' very difficult.
In recent tests very few drivers have passed this test and currently there are too many cabs available to rent, so the effect is already being felt in the trade.
Additionally Manchester council also have a policy that requires a driver to take the test again if his badge has expired and not renewed upon expiry.Surprisingly a lot of these drivers are struggling to pass the test.
In due course I can see rents falling as too many cabs chase not enough badge holders.