Taxi Driver Online

I'm not sure if Cumberland Councils consultation actually is a consultation, they are asking for comments on individual bits of the consultation and not a general overview of how de-zoning has failed in some places, Durham and North Yorkshire being obvious examples.

The consultation wasn’t sent out either via email or post to every licensed person in the district. It follows to the question of whether or not disabled groups and other interested parties have been made aware of the consultation.

It fails to mention fees for the new area and point out that licensing departments are self funding and run at no expense to the tax payer. Therefore if they lay off staff, the only people that should benefit are the licensees.

There does not seem to be any assessment of the impact of the proposed changes to either the licensees or the public, particularly wheelchair users; this could be contrary to section 149 of the equality act.

Neither does it mention that if the zones are removed and a sh*tshow develops, they legally cannot revert back.

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Will plans to increase the number of wheelchair-accessible taxis in North Yorkshire work?

https://thestrayferret.co.uk/news/lates ... shire-work

It’s a question which has faced council officers for the last three years — how do you increase the number of wheelchair-accessible taxis in North Yorkshire?

Across the county, just one cab for every 9,000 people is suitable for wheelchair users, leaving disability campaigners demanding action to increase the figure.

The Stray Ferret has reported extensively on the problem, including the former Harrogate Borough Council’s failed attempt to increase the number of wheelchair-accessible vehicle licences in 2021.

This week, North Yorkshire Council unveiled its latest plan to tackle the issue by making every new hackney carriage licence application from April 2025 wheelchair-accessible vehicle compliant.

But will the proposal work and is it supported by the trade and campaigners?

Not a new problem

The problem over a lack of wheelchair-accessible taxis is not new.

In June 2021, Harrogate Borough Council took the unusual step of removing a cap on taxi licences in an effort to increase the number of wheelchair-accessible vehicle licences in the district.

The move came after a council-run study concluded wheelchair users were suffering from a “great deal of anxiety” over worries they could be left stranded due to a lack of accessible vehicles.

At the time, just 22 taxi licences out of 148 were for wheelchair-accessible vehicles in the Harrogate district.

The borough council's plan was to lift the cap on licences for the first time in 30 years and offer new licences to wheelchair vehicles.

Cabbies described the move as an effective “deregulation” of the market and warned it would end up with more licences than was necessary to meet demand.

However, 12 months later, the Stray Ferret reported that despite the council’s ambitious plan to tackle the problem, the number of wheelchair-accessible vehicles remained at 22.

Fast forward to the present day and North Yorkshire Council, which has replaced the now defunct borough council, is left with the same problem.

After controversially overhauling the licensing system in North Yorkshire by allowing drivers to operate anywhere in the county, the council has turned its attention to wheelchair-accessible vehicles.

Currently, only 70 hackney carriage licences are wheelchair-accessible, which is the equivalent of one cab for every 9,000 people.

In a report, Simon Fisher, the council’s licensing development lead, pointed out that the best performing rural authorities have one cab per every 2,000 people.

It would mean that the council would need an additional 200 licences to reach that ratio.

As a result, the council has gone one step further than Harrogate Borough Council and opted to make it a requirement that new licences for hackney carriages must be wheelchair accessible from April 2025.

In an effort to give current drivers enough time to adapt to the measure, renewals of existing licences will have to meet the same criteria from January 2030.

Mr Fisher said in his report the move was the best way to reach the desired outcome.

He said:

Although imposing a mandatory wheelchair-accessible requirement on all licensed vehicles would be likely to achieve the desired outcome, the council must have regard to the Regulators’ Code (Department for Business Innovation & Skills, Better Regulation Delivery Office) and avoid imposing unnecessary regulatory burdens where the desired outcome could be achieved by less burdensome means.

‘Not the answer’

But will the council’s plan work?

Richard Fieldman, who has run his taxi in Ripon for 29 years, is sceptical.

Mr Fieldman said cab drivers are already feeling the pinch since last year's introduction of the single licensing zone.

Although he understands the council’s motives for increasing the number of wheelchair-accessible vehicles, he believes the move will further increase expenses on new drivers.

He said:

I can see what they are trying to do, but it is really making it an unattractive business.

The sentiment is shared by Kevin O’Boyle, who runs Central Radio Cars in Harrogate.

In a letter to North Yorkshire Council’s licensing committee, which is due to consider the changes on its wheelchair-accessible vehicles policy on September 3, he points out the number of accessible vehicles in the district has fallen to six.

_________________
IDFIMH

Mr Fieldman is right, I would add, this move will see drivers and operators license themselves elsewhere

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Dear Sir or Madam

I write in respect of this consultation.

The gunning criteria for public consultations as laid out in 1985 are:

Gunning Principle 1: Consultations must occur while proposals are still at a formative stage.

Gunning Principle 2: Sufficient information needs to be supplied for the public to give the consultation ‘intelligent consideration’.

Gunning Principle 3: There needs to be an adequate time for the consultees to consider the proposal and respond.

Gunning Principle 4: Conscientious consideration must be given to the consultation responses before decisions are made.

The consultation itself, in my opinion does not appear to cover principle one as it is seemingly presented as a fait accompli.

The reasons for the consultation don’t appear to be mentioned i.e. the intention to de-zone resolves principle two.

The timing of the consultation was immediately after a general election and during school holidays, a time when many licensees take their own holidays as do councillors. This appears to be contrary to principle three.

Consultation period

I point out that similar consultations in Northumberland and North Yorkshire covered a period double that of Cumberland. Even now there isn’t any information on the consultation on the webpage dedicated to taxi licensing in Carlisle, the simplest way of finding it is via a Google search.

Transparency

I am additionally concerned the consultation wasn’t sent out either via email or post to every licensed person in the district. It follows to the question of whether or not disabled groups and other interested parties have been made aware of the consultation.

I am not sure if people are aware that whilst areas can be de-zoned they cannot be re-zoned, I didn’t see this key bit of information mentioned in the consultation.

Whilst I accept that current best practice is against zoning, it is based upon the presumption that the use of zoning is to limit numbers of Hackney Carriages, as you will be aware, there is no limitation on hackney carriage vehicle licenses within Cumberland. Indeed, if we were to conscientiously follow best practice, the proposals in respect of the age policy wouldn’t be considered as best practice.

The Law Commission commenced a review on Taxi and Private Hire in 2012 which recommended that Councils had the ability to determine different zones.

They stated at 10.52 in their final report “On balance, we consider that zones can play a useful role in local taxi regulation”.

The consultation itself is quite difficult to answer; I therefore have no intention in attempting a ludicrous point by point attempt, as required by whichever person derived it. I simply haven’t the time or inclination.

Licensing Fees

In respect of the funding of licensing departments, it doesn’t appear to have been made clear that they are not run at a cost to the tax payer and should be self funding, best practice guidance states at 3.4 in respect of licensing fees.

“It is essential to a well-functioning taxi and private hire vehicle sector that those administering and enforcing the regime are well-resourced. The licensing model is intended to be self-funding through licensing fees and it is expected that licensing authorities seek to provide a well-resourced system at the lowest cost to licensees. Licensing authorities should regularly review their fees to reflect changes to costs, both increases and reductions”

It is therefore concerning that reflection of licensing fees has not been a consideration in the consultation. Indeed, lawfully, any savings made by reductions in staff in the current three licensing departments should be reflected by a reduction in licensing fees. I am unsure if this has been clearly pointed out to councillors.

Impact assessment

It is disquieting that there does not seem to be any assessment of the impact of the proposed changes to either the licensees or the public, particularly wheelchair users; this could be contrary to section 149 of the equality act.

Best practice guidance states; To mitigate these physical barriers authorities must ensure that due regard is given to the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) (see section 149 of the Equality Act 2010) when taking decisions concerning the provision of taxi and private hire vehicle services and supporting infrastructure, and that reasonable adjustments are made to remove barriers preventing disabled people from accessing taxi and private hire vehicle services.

De-zoning

In the interests of balance, people should perhaps have been made aware that the situation in Durham, which followed a similar route to what is seemingly being proposed for Cumberland. Durham suffered with what was described as ‘honeypot areas’ where taxis gathered plying for trade, this created issues with the police who were concerned about the number of taxis within Durham City plying for trade. This was at the expense of outlying areas which were described as ‘taxi deserts’, due to the lack of taxis.

North Yorkshire, which again amalgamated the previous 7 out of 8 previous local authority areas, has only recently announced a 12 week public consultation in a ‘major overhaul of taxi services’; this is despite their previous ‘major overhaul of taxi services’ being in place for just over 12 months.

The Yorkshire press stated; ‘Despite previous incentives, including waiving licence fees and relaxing age limits for WAVs, the number of these vehicles in North Yorkshire has remained stable. The council now hopes to take more decisive action. “We are committed to ensuring the availability of an accessible and affordable taxi service across North Yorkshire, especially for those particularly reliant on it,” said Cllr Greg White, North Yorkshire Council’s executive member for licensing.’

What appears to have transpired in North Yorkshire can only be described as a policy failure, a failure that will be paid for by their licensees.

Prior to the de-zoning one council official in North Yorkshire stated ‘one benefit of this will be a wider distribution of wheelchair-accessible vehicles’, the obvious change in policy by North Yorkshire council suggests the contrary.

Further to the above within a few weeks of the policy starting one councillor cited ‘drivers flooding into urban areas such as Harrogate which has left rural villages and market towns without taxis’ and “In Harrogate they are having to find extra spaces due to influx of taxis. Over supply of taxis in hotspots are leaving rural and market towns empty.”

As previously stated, the law in respect of zoning is clear, once the zones are removed; there is no legal mechanism to revert back.

Having spoken to colleagues within Scarborough and Whitby, I have been told that those areas this past summer have witnessed taxis from the former outer areas deluging both towns with taxis. Whilst this is perfectly legal, I would be failing if I didn’t point out that this naturally means other areas would be short of taxis.

Northumberland Council decided in 2022 to retain their zones, in part it would appear this was based on a 12 week consultation, the knowledge of what occurred in Durham and the fact that if they de-zoned they couldn’t re-zone. Facts are important.

Dual Licensing

Issues such as dual licenses are perfectly fine, however a driver should have an option to have a sole private hire license or Hackney Carriage license, a dual license should not be compulsory because this smacks of a lazy licensing department who will use the private hire aspect of the dual license to effectively regulate the hackney carriage part.

Hackney Carriages drivers are regulated via byelaw, not conditions, as per Wathan vs. Neath Port Talbot.

In respect of the consultation, there does not seem to be any proposal in respect of Byelaws. Why? This is a fundamental part of taxi licensing.

More taxi licensing policies than prime ministers

As you will perhaps appreciate, any business needs a degree of stability to prosper, the licensed taxi and private hire trade in Carlisle and now Cumberland has suffered three overhauls to taxi licensing policy in less than 5 years. If the example of North Yorkshire is to be followed, and there isn’t a take up of wheelchair accessible licenses, then the proposed policy will fail and there will be another consultation.

Summary

It is not clear who will be making the final decision regarding this consultation. In Northumberland the decision was taken by elected councillors on their licensing and regulatory committee. Yet the fear is amongst many in Cumberland is that the decision will be made by a small executive, which bearing in mind the changes are irreversible doesn’t seem to be very democratic.

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

it wont make a blind bit of difference , but would appreciate comments and thoughts

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

You've put forward a coherent case, but we all know council officials are lip servants to councillors, and clearly the lead councillors want what they want, and this consultation is merely a tick-box exercise.

_________________
IDFIMH

Thanks, I know you don't necessarily agree, but thanks I agree with your sentiments

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

The letter looks ok to me, not had a lot of time to give the webpage my full attention, I’m still wading through it, it doesn’t feel like it was written by Cumberland council, it is very lacking in area specific needs, and it doesn’t feel that it was written by someone who has consulted, item.
1.7 a council would be ill advised not to consult even if it’s not required, not my words James Buttons. I like to quote him, they think he’s all knowing,
1.13 they keep stating “another” which implies you can not pass work onto your own company that’s licensed in a different area.

I thought the same myself, its like they're working from a template

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Another day another f*ck up

Dear Councillor McDermott

As you may recall with reference to my recent correspondence, I mentioned that the new head of licensing within Carlisle told a meeting of taxi drivers and proprietors that there was no limit of saloon hackney carriages within Carlisle and this had been the case since 2021.

The Head of licensing emailed the secretary of the local association confirming this.

I draw your attention to the attached document which is the licensing policy we are currently operating under within our district.

I draw your particular attention to 2.1 which states:

2.1. Limitation of Numbers

The Council currently has no limit on the number of hackney carriages which may be licenced within the District and has no intention of introducing one unless evidence of ‘no significant unmet demand’ can be provided. The cost of any ‘unmet demand’ survey would need to be borne by the existing licence holders and re-evaluated every three (3) years to maintain a cap. To assess the unmet demand for Hackney Carriage vehicles, this would be carried out through an independent survey, of which the results data would be analysed, and a decision made if as a Council we had sufficient licenced vehicles to cope with the demand. No powers exist for licensing authorities to limit the number of private hire vehicles that they licence.

I now draw your gaze to 2.13 which specifies the types of vehicles the council will license as Hackney Carriages:

2.13. New Vehicles Hackney carriages

All vehicle applications for a new hackney carriage licence, must be either:

a) a ‘London’ type hackney carriage, or
b) a suitable wheelchair accessible vehicle (WAV), approved by the Council.

I understand a number of applications are being considered by drivers for new saloon hackney carriage licenses, licenses that according to our licensing policy shouldn't be issued.

On another note, I understand from some colleagues that they have extended the consultation period for the current consultation in respect of taxi licensing within the whole of Cumberland, however, like many others, I have not yet been advised.

This is obviously consistent, but in the words of John Cleese in 'Clockwise', 'It's not the despair, I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand.'

Regards

Wayne Casey

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

I’m not an expert on unitary councils, but I know Shropshire adopted the 76act, so while I was searching through the minutes trying to find when they adopted act, it became apparent that they don’t stick to there own licensing conditions, I don’t have a problem with licensing conditions so long as they apply to everyone. Anyway if they don’t follow policy it’s open to corruption and I guess now they have set a precedent, in court.
Agenda item
Hackney Carriage Vehicles Licence Application
Meeting of Regulatory Sub-Committee, Thursday 22 June 2023 10.30 am (Item 14.)
View the declarations of interest for item 14.
View the reasons why item 14. is restricted
To consider an application to licence vehicles for Hackney Carriage Licences which does not meet the criteria of the Policy.
The Senior Licensing and Land Charges Officer submitted a report for the Regulatory Sub-Committee to consider licensing ten saloon type vehicles as hackney carriages which did not meet the criteria of the legacy Policy of Copeland Borough Council relating to age restrictions/Wheelchair accessible vehicles.
A motion was proposed to agree to authorise Licensing Officers to have delegated authority to allow the Applicant to licence up to 8 saloon type vehicles. Any remaining vehicles applied for must be wheelchair accessible, within policy.

They are allowed to do this I guess under section 47 of the 76 act;

47 Licensing of hackney carriages.

(1) A district council may attach to the grant of a licence of a hackney carriage under the Act of 1847 such conditions as the district council may consider reasonably necessary.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing subsection, a district council may require any hackney carriage licensed by them under the Act of 1847 to be of such design or appearance or bear such distinguishing marks as shall clearly identify it as a hackney carriage.

(3) Any person aggrieved by any conditions attached to such a licence may appeal to a magistrates’ court.

or section 38 TPCA 1847

38 What to be hackney carriages.

Every wheeled carriage, whatever may be its form or construction, used in standing or plying for hire in any street within the prescribed distance, and every carriage standing upon any street within the prescribed distance, having thereon any numbered plate required by this or the special Act to be fixed upon a hackney carriage, or having thereon any plate resembling or intended to resemble any such plate as aforesaid, shall be deemed to be a hackney carriage within the meaning of this Act; and in all proceedings at law or otherwise the term “hackney carriage” shall be sufficient to describe any such carriage:

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Reasons restricted

By virtue of paragraph(s) 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Explanation of Reasons
By Virtue of Paragraph 1
Information relating to any individual.

Condition:

Information is not exempt information if it relates to proposed development for which the local planning authority may grant itself planning permission pursuant to regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992

Information which-(a)falls within any of paragraphs 1 to 7 above; and (b)is not prevented from being exempt by virtue of paragraph 8 or 9 above, is exempt information if and so long, as in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information

I wonder why this was put in part B ?

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin