Council accused of unlawfully overcharging for taxi licences
TAXI firm bosses have accused the council of acting unlawfully by overcharging for licences and keeping the money in its reserves.
Cab company owners argue that the local authority's department under the Local Government Act 1976 is not allowed to bank surplus revenue but must only cover administration costs.
A Freedom of Information (FOI) request has revealed that over the past three years the council has reserved £50,000 – which it says will go towards legal bills and a new computer system – but taxi bosses say the money belongs to the trade.
Graham Dinning and Steve Smith of Treble Twenty Cars, based in Brentwood, have lodged an objection with the Audit Commission. Company director Mr Smith first raised the issue with Brentwood council in July last year following a request for financial data under the Freedom of Information Act in February.
After receiving an "unsatisfactory" reply, he instructed taxi licensing expert Alan Fidler to take the matter directly to the Audit Commission in August.
The complaint refers to a total of £53,321, which the taxi bosses claim was overpaid to the council for licences over three years to the end of March 2010.
It showed that £20,000 of the surplus was being set aside to cover the costs of a judicial review, should the need arise, while another £20,000 was earmarked to pay for a new licensing software system.
The final £10,000 has been ring-fenced to pay for "back-scanning" historical documents, a memo to the transport company revealed.
But according to council accounts it was a surplus over and above expenditure during that period.
Mr Smith has described the council's behaviour as a "disgrace" and is demanding the money be returned to the taxi companies.
"I am actually shocked. We have not had answers to the questions that we have asked," he said.
"This all came up after the council announced another increase in licence fees, which we don't believe was properly justified."
Mr Smith is also concerned about how long it has taken to receive answers from the council.
The first correspondence was sent directly to the council in April 2010, followed by a letter in July and notes to the Audit Commission in August and December.
He said: "I am totally frustrated. I think the problem is that people know this should not have happened and they do not want this to come out but we do not intend to forget about this. We want answers."
A council spokesman told the Gazette: "Following a Freedom of Information request to the council by Treble Twenty, the council gave a robust response, within the allocated deadlines, and supplied all the details that were requested.
"Further to receiving a response from the council, Treble Twenty chose to refer their request on to a District Auditor for further investigation.
"The council strongly denies that it is holding up the investigation, and is currently supplying the independent auditor with the requested information, which will be reviewed to make a final decision."
source:
http://www.thisistotalessex.co.uk/news/
Login
Register
FAQ
