Taxi Driver Online

Some councils (less than 1%) insist that PH operators have parking spaces for their vehicles. The other 99% don't.

Is it a requirement in London? Can you imagine Premier or Addison Lee having central London car-parks for their 700+ vehicles.

It makes no sense for drivers of medium to large circuits going back to their bases. If you have dropped in the out-skirts, what sense is there in going back to the office, only to be sent back from where you came.

I'm also not sure about the out of view issue. What is out of view?

If you think that I'm going to hide in some little garage waiting for a job, not only is it not going to happen, throughout the UK it doesn't.

_________________
IDFIMH

I've just had a read up of the legal books, and according to Nottingham-v-Woodings, it doesn't necessary follow that a line of PH vehicle constitutes an illegal rank.

In that case it was also determined that if a driver was not in the car, he could not be done for illegally plying for hire, no matter where the vehicle was parked.

I would assume the PH boys at Watford are using this, and perhaps the public/private land issue isn't relevant.

_________________
IDFIMH

Is it John, or is it Andy? [Good name that, Wotcha John! gotta new…! :O) ]

Sorry, I digress…I would be interested to know where your figures are obtained for councils re parking space...while it is certainly not 100% for reasons I gave earlier of a "blind eye" being turned for the sake of our travelling public and the Acts not keeping up with progress (what’s new ) I would take issue at the suggestion that it is less than 1%

As regards to London you must remember it is a different ball game there, there has always been different metropolitan legislation to the rest of the country. You must also realise there has NEVER ever, ever been one legal London PHV on the streets there either, hence the bitterness, nay!... blind hatred that has bred over generations at the illegal Miniscab trade there (but that’s another story) Even today as we speak it is not fully legal…it will still be some time before ALL operators, vehicles and drivers are Licenced and tested properly. So as such, it really is a waste of good breath suggesting there ever was PH legislation there to compel off street parking. When the new legislation does kick in soon Addison Lee in particular will not be very happy bunnies, there will be NO external signage allowed, enough to turn a man to drink I should imagine.

The “out of view“ issue as you term it has been reaffirmed by enforcements at Eastbourne, Peterborough and more recently…Watford. It does depend on the Station forecourt layout I imagine…but the interpretation taken so far by Licencing is that if the vehicles are in public view, then they are touting for trade proper to HC. The dodge “no driver in the car” has been identified as such it would seem. Sadly this sort of encroachment does nothing to bring the two trades together.

Kindest regards

Andy
These emoticons are fun

To expand, Nottingham-v-Woodings has been superceeded till proved otherwise... by local licencings interpretations at the sites mentioned.

I take it when you are waiting for a job it is in full public view on the off chance you will get a Billy? Hardly surprising the two trades are in thier current states, and diverging...no further comment.

Andy

The woodings case has nothing to do with forming a rank. There are no references in that case about forming a rank for the purpose of hire and reward. How did you draw a conclusion from something that was never said?

Woodings was found guilty on appeal by the prosecution because it was found that he plied for hire without an apropriate licence by way of accepting a hiring that didn't come by way of legal proccess.

In short it means that every hire undertaken must be got by legal means. That applies to anyone both Hackney carriage drivers and private hire drivers.

Another thing you must contemplate and that is the understanding of how the law works Mens reas and Actus reus are the two ingredients you will be convivted on. Mens reas is your state of mind before you commit the act, Actus reus is when you try to perpetrate the act.

When you place an unlicened vehicle on a Supermarket Forecourt what is the purpose in your mind? Unless you had a perfectly plausible reason most courts would draw the conclusion that you placed the vehicle there in order to draw custom, that, if you don't already know, is an offence. The fact that the law is not enforced in most cases is irrelevant, it is still an offence.

So the next tiime you pull onto a Supermarket Forecourt ask yourself why am I pulling on here? If you draw the conclusion that you are pulling on the forecourt in order to get custom then that is an offence. Read cinnamond V BAA

If anyone is unclear about vehicles forming a rank licenced or otherwise, they should phone their local lincensing department and ask the enforcement officer what constitues a rank.

Once he has told you the legal situation of what constitutes a Rank you may wish to apply your mind as to what constitutes a rank for the purpose of plying for hire?

Best wishes

John Davies.
Manchester.

To be honest I don't know of any council that has the 'back to base' condition.

However in James Button's book about HC and PH licensing laws, he thinks there is only one.

However if anyone wishes to say any different, then I'm all ears.

_________________
IDFIMH

Of course London is different, cos of it's size. But if the 'back to base' issue was relevant, then you would have thought that it would have been included in the Act.

As for Addison Lee not having advertising on there cars, if they have got the hump, then so be it.

From the info we have on here, and on the LPHCA site, they are grateful that it isn't being allowed. They want their cars to pick up the pukka account work, not some of the dross from the streets.

_________________
IDFIMH

It was mentioned in the Eastbourne judgment, but it didn't supersede it.

In Eastbourne, the drivers were sitting in their cars, in full view of the public highway.

If, as it seems in Watford, the drivers are not in their car, then Nott-v-Woodings should apply.

The thing about all of this that perhaps we are all missing, is the council are well aware of what's happening.

If they think something is wrong, then they would have done something a while ago.

If memory serves me right, the LO is a member of the Institute of Licensing's Board.

The Chairman is Mr James Button, a leading licensing barrister.

I don't believe for a second, that the two haven't exchanged views.

_________________
IDFIMH

Now then, you know as well as I we were not talking about back to base conditions, we were talking about ensuring the operator having sufficient space for the cars to park up...be it back to base or taking a break. The last thing local coucil want when granting an operators licence is rows of LPH half on the pavement outside when the footie or CITV is on

You have Buttons book...I'm impressed.

Yes you are quite right that he was found quilty of plying for hire, but that was when he was in the car.

However when he nipped out for a pee, as in the words of the judge;

In my judgement, when the defendant parked the marked car in the street, for the purpose of going to the toilet, he was not plying for hire, and when he came out of the toilet, he was not plying for hire. But when, having sat in the driver's seat, he told propective passengers that he was free to carry them, at that stage, bearing in mind where the car was and what the car looked like, plying for hire.

_________________
IDFIMH

Can there be two Jim Buttons?

Only Jim Button I know is a solicitor who specialises in local Governemt licensing. Is there a Barrister by the same name who practices in the same field? interesting.

Best wishes

John Davies.

Well I didn't know that you wasn't talking about 'back to base' condition, but that's by the by.

I don't think it really matters about having space for vehicles, or if it does, I think we are long past the time when anyone cares about such an issue.

The practicalities of having large spaces for PHs are immense. Cost has to be the largest hurdle. I haven't a clue where you could have spaces for the 2,600+ PH vehicles in Leeds, or the 3,500 in Birmingham.

Or even the 85 in Canterbury.

As for operator's licenses, the only grounds for refusal are them not being fit and proper.

_________________
IDFIMH

Yes, on relection it appears he only lists himself as a solicitor, but perhaps he is one of those that can do both now.

_________________
IDFIMH

Please pay attention Sussex...as I stated clearly there has "never" been a PH act in London…. that is why they would never had a back to base directive. As the new act is scribed, it can incorporate the provisions of modern technology that was not around when the 1976 act came in, or indeed the size of fleets.

Andy

Today I have been in contact with Watford local Authority. Their position and that of the police are outlined today in these documents. The first document will be put out as a press release today. I am not going to comment on either of them, I will let both documents speak for themselves.

Best wishes

JD

WATFORD JUCTION STATION – THE FACTS

The report of the situation at Watford Junction station (Council could have prevented protests and delays, page 3, 13 February 2003) was fundamentally flawed and contained a number of significant errors.

In particular, the Council has not performed a u-turn and strongly refutes the reporting that claimed, ‘Each week, the council has changed how the hire firm must operate.’ In fact the Council and Police have been consistent in their approach in relation to the law.

Superintendent Chris Taylor of Hertfordshire Police said: “We have a jointly agreed way of working with the Council on this issue. The Council will monitor and enforce licensing laws at Watford Junction and Hertfordshire Constabulary will assist with this and also prevent any criminal offences or disruption to local traffic. The Council and the Police are both very keen to support the maintenance of order in both sides of the licensed vehicle trade”

Alan Gough, Head of Environment, Health & Licensing at Watford Borough Council said: “The Council’s position has consistently been that it has been lawful for AA United to conduct its business from the station. They are a licensed private hire operator that use licensed private hire drivers in licensed private hire vehicles. It is the way in which drivers conduct a small part of their business that is the issue in question, as plying for hire by private hire vehicles is illegal. When we make a decision whether a private hire vehicle is plying for hire we look at all the circumstances at that particular time. We look forward to continuing our joint working arrangements with the Police.”

The Council has a government advised way of taking enforcement action, called the Enforcement Concordat, which is to give advice to potential law breakers on what they should and should not do. If this advice is not acted upon within an appropriate time frame then more formal methods, including prosecuting offenders, are used. In the Council’s view the time has come for more formal action in relation to AA United at Watford Junction as the advice given by council enforcement officers is not being heeded. If one day a driver keeps to the law, but the following day breaks it, then it’s hardly a u-turn to take action on the second day but not the first.

The hackney carriage drivers could have averted the whole situation by working with Silverlink to reach an agreement before the contract for the station forecourt was even put out to tender. Watford Borough Council had no part to play in the award of this contract, indeed when the hackney carriage drivers union contacted the Mayor’s Office about the tender they were advised to put in a tender for the contract. The role of the Council and the Police in this is in relation to upholding the law and preventing the occurrence of criminal offences.

The Council, as always, is rigorously enforcing regulations and byelaws relating to private hire vehicles and hackney carriages, and both sets of drivers, throughout the Borough as well as at Watford Junction. The Council has a proven track record of prosecuting private hire drivers who illegally ply for hire.

ENDS

PRESS STATEMENT – WATFORD JUNCTION STATION


1. Watford Borough Council is the licensing authority for hackney carriages and private hire vehicles within the Borough.

2. The procedure for obtaining a licence to drive a hackney carriage or a private hire vehicle is (with a very slight difference) the same.

3. There are three main differences between hackney carriages and private hire vehicles:

(a) the Council regulates the fares in hackney carriages for journeys completely within the Borough. Fares in private hire vehicles are private contracts individually negotiated with the private hire vehicle operator over which the Council has no control.

(b) hackney carriage drivers may either stand on taxi ranks in the street to be immediately hired, may be flagged down in the street, or may be booked in advance. Private hire vehicles must always be booked in advance through a licenced operator, although the law does not say how far in advance or how the contract should be made.

(c) in Watford, hackney carriages must either be painted black-and-white or be a London-style taxi. Private hire vehicles may be any four-door vehicle that meets the Council’s requirements and which do not look like Watford hackney carriages.

4. It is illegal under section 45 of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 for any vehicle that is not a hackney carriage to stand in a street or public place and to ply for hire. This is a criminal offence enforceable by the Council or the police, for which the maximum penalty is a fine of £2500.

5. Plying for hire amounts to being immediately available for hire, either without being licenced as a hackney carriage or by not being pre-booked through a licenced private hire vehicle operator. It is a question of fact in each case which can be inferred from the vehicle, the way in which the vehicle is displayed, and the conduct of the driver.

6. It is an offence under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 to operate private hire vehicles without a licence. ‘Operate’ simply means to invite or accept bookings for private hire vehicles. The law does not say how or when that booking must be made and so it can be made immediately before the passenger starts their journey.

7. There is nothing to stop private hire vehicles from being parked whilst they wait for their next pre-booked passenger.

8. The Council has adopted section 76 of the Public Health Act 1925 in relation to any railway premises in the Borough. This does not give any person any rights over or in relation to those railway premises, which remain private property. It means that any vehicle plying for hire on railway premises can be prosecuted as if they were plying for hire in a street or public place. The owner of the railway premises is entitled to eject trespassers from the premises.

9. The Council conducts a number of prosecutions each year against drivers found to be plying for hire. In the six months alone, four drivers have been successfully convicted of plying for hire, with penalties ranging from £100 to £500 and orders for costs being made. The Council has a power (but not a legal duty) to enforce the law in this area.

10. Silverlink Railways awarded a contract to AA United Taxis from 11 January 2004 to provide licenced vehicles from Watford Junction station. AA United explained to the Council that all bookings with passengers would be made before the journey began.

11. The Council has since 11 January been closely monitoring AA United’s operation to ensure that no evidence of plying for hire was observed. In line with the Government’s Enforcement Concordat, anyone found to be in breach of legislation or regulations is given a warning and an opportunity to correct the contravention before formal enforcement action (which can include issuing formal cautions or prosecuting) is undertaken.