Taxi Driver Online

Firstly I would like to say how informative this site is and how the people who run it really do know what they are talking about, however I do take issue with the section on the thread new to the business which deals with planning permission.

It is not strickly true that as an operator you have to have planning permission to run a private hire operation from either a commercial or residential property. Therefore this section is somewhat misleading.

The requirement here is that the premises either has the planning granted OR the operator has obtained a letter from the local authority to confirm the premises does not require it.

I for example do not have planning permission to operate from my commercial premises, never have done, but the PCO issued me with my opertors license 4 years ago. However, I do have a letter from the local authority to say I do not need it. Which cost me nothing by the way not in time nor in money.

It is however down to the operator to put forward his/her reason for applying for exemption and then for the council to endorse it. There are lots of reasons you may not need it which will totally depend on the type of operation you run, and where you are located. Its worth thinking about obtaining planning can be very costly both in time and money and at the end of the day if it is granted you could still be bound by restrictions, the very same restictions you might have imposed on yourself to make you exempt.

Regards Eric

Eric I found your post very interesting and I am sure many others will to?

The Faq states the following.

19. How do I become a private hire operator?

You apply to the Licensing office but first you need to obtain planning permission for the premises you intend to license. There is a fee for the Operator Licence. Under normal circumstances the operator licence is granted immediately after planning permission has been given.

Section 3 states the following.

3. - (1) Any person may apply to the Secretary of State for a London PHV operator's licence.
(2) An application under this section shall state the address of any premises in London which the applicant proposes to use as an operating centre.
(3) The Secretary of State shall grant a London PHV operator's licence to the applicant if he is satisfied that-

(a) the applicant is a fit and proper person to hold a London PHV operator's licence; and

(b) any further requirements that may be prescribed (which may include requirements relating to operating centres) are met.

(4) A London PHV operator's licence shall be granted subject to such conditions as may be prescribed and such other conditions as the Secretary of State may think fit.

I draw your attention to clause "B" above and the following information from the PCO, below.

PCO requirements.

Operators Applying for a licence.

To apply for a London private hire vehicle operator's licence you need to obtain an application pack from the Public Carriage Office. Be sure to read the guidance notes enclosed within the pack thoroughly before submitting an application.

Applications may be accepted from individuals, registered companies or partnerships. An application for a London PHV operator’s licence must state the address of any premises in London, which the applicant proposes to use as an operating centre. (An operating centre being a premises at which private hire bookings are accepted.)

The specified premises must have the appropriate type of planning permission or equivalent, from the respective local authority for use as a private hire operating centre. Where planning permission is not required, the applicant must be able to produce a letter from the local council which confirms that the proposed use of the premises would be lawful without such permission. Any operator employing staff must have employers' liability insurance cover and where operating centres can be accessed by members of the public, the operator must maintain in force a policy of insurance against public liability risk which provides a minimum indemnity of £5m in respect of any one event.

Before any premises can be specified on a licence it must undergo, and pass, a licensing inspection. Information regarding what an inspection entails can be found in the application pack.

Operators will be subject to ongoing compliance inspections throughout the life of any licence that is issued to ensure that they continue to meet the obligations and conditions of their licence. Any operator found failing to meet the requirements of a London PHV operator licence may have that licence suspended or revoked.

PHV Licensing Section
Public Carriage Office
15 Penton Street
London
N1 9PU

If you read the section above which I have highlighted in bold, you will see that it states quite clearly the planning regulations for using any premises as a private hire operating centre.

The Faq is spot on.

If you are told by the council that your premises doesn't need planning permission then all well and good. The point is that you are required to ask the council if you do need planning permission? You will notice that there is a requirement for you to produce evidence to the PCO before they grant you a license that your premises doesn't need planning permission. You can only get that documentation from the council which means you have to contact them in order for them to make a decision on your premises. You will also note that the PCO inspect your premises.

I hope that clears the matter up.

Regards

JD

JD Wrote:



Sorry but not sure where I said you do not need to ask the LA.

Nor do I recall stating one would not need to show the licensing authority proof of that exemption.

I do recall stating one would still need to contact the LA to obtain this.

Sorry but the PCO will not inspect the premises with regards to it's suitability to or it's requirement to have planning permission. The PCO are responsible for licensing some 21 different LA area's in London and are fully aware that each will deal with an application for planning or a free request for exemption in it's own way depending on location conervation and all the usual issues associated with this, such as operating hours noise and such like.

My point here is, for new operators, especially In London, is that most if not all LA's will in fact refuse planning for a new operator, unless he/she can demonstrate it will not have any impact on the surrounding residential area's and in my case and many others I know of once this is demonstrated it appears one would not have had to apply for the planning in the first place.

So why pay the money when you can operate perfectly legally in the same way without it????

Or am I being totally stupid????

I can only draw from EXPERIENCE JD, not sure where you operate from but I doubt it is London.

Take care

Regards Eric

I think a lot of it depends on whether you have a customer waiting/booking area, cos many drivers have operator licenses based at their homes, and they are granted on demand.

It also might depend on what's in the operator's licensing conditions.

_________________
IDFIMH

I didn't mean to imply that you never stated any of the above, in fact it was after I had posted my own message that I saw you had stated you had an exemption letter from the council.



I never stated the PCO would inspect the premises to determine if planning Permission was needed. All I said was that "the PCO would inspect the premises".

I think everyone knows that the PCO has nothing whatsoever to do with planning permission.



If you or anyone else does not have the appropriate paperwork from the council for the premises you wish to operate from then you will not be granted a license, its as simple as that. Do you agree?



I think it's a case of splitting hairs here. You no doubt agree that you have to apply to the council to see if your premises need planning permission in order to carry out the business of Private hire operator?

You no doubt also agree that in order to get your license you have to prove to the PCO that your premises has been approved for the use of the license for which you are applying?

It doesn't matter in what form the approval is granted, every premises must be approved one way or the other? Would you agree?



I wouldn't say you were being stupid you were right to raise the question because I don't think the subject has ever been discussed at length on TDO before?

However I think you will find that every license of this type has to have premises approval from the council before granting a license? And that is why the FAQ reeds as it does?

Regards

JD

I think this has been discussed on here before, but then again what hasn't, and the issuing of an operator's license has got nothing to do with planning.

Some councils do insist on both, but not getting one shouldn't preclude the other from being issued.

_________________
IDFIMH

Do you know any licensing authorities that issue operator's licenses without planning permission or an exemption for the premises to be used for the purpose?

Regards

JD

Here are just a few councils who require planning permission. If anyone knows of a licensing authority that does not require planning permission or the need to notify an appropriate body that they are carrying on a business of private hire operator then please let me know?

http://www.solihull.gov.uk/section.asp?catid=668

http://www.hertsmere.gov.uk/business/li ... orslicence

http://www.caradon.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=10434

http://www.whitehorsedc.gov.uk/LegalSer ... e-7457.asp

http://www.whitehorsedc.gov.uk/Images/A ... 4-7447.DOC

Regards

JD

Would it be fair to assume that the letter you speak of came from the planning department of your local authority? If it didn't who did it come from?

Regards

JD

Blacket Hart & Pratt secure planning permission for Newcastle Taxi Firm!

The Planning Team have successfully secured planning approval for Tyneside’s largest private hire taxi firm to move its head quarters to Jesmond. Often large taxi firms lead to concerns stemming from the traditional image of fleets of taxis coming and going at all times of the day and night. These days fully computerised booking systems can overcome this problem.

Through our detailed submission the Team were able to show both planners and councillors how false their preconceptions might be about the modern day taxi operation.

Regards

JD

Taken from another post last year.

Bradford City Council v Iqbal
Planning Inspector
c.1988

(1988) 3 P.A.D. 82

Summary

Subject: Planning

Abstract: The council issued an enforcement notice alleging the unauthorised use of the property as a private hire taxi office. The appellant appealed under the Town and Country Planning Act 1971 s. 88(2) claiming that planning permission ought to be granted for the development. Two planning permissions had been granted for use of the appeal premises as a private hire taxi office, both of which were restricted to a named applicant and required that all parking should be on a car park. The appellant applied for permission for the continued use of the premises without complying with condition no.2 (the off-street parking). This was refused on the grounds that the use was likely to give rise to noise and nuisance to the detriment of residential amenity and because of the likelihood of on-street parking being detrimental to highway safety.

Summary: Held, quashing the enforcement notice, that (1) the enforcement notice contained a fundamental error which it was beyond the Inspector's powers to correct; (2) whereas the notice alleged a breach of planning control consisting of a change of use, it should have alleged a breach of the conditions attached to the original planning permission namely that all parking should be on the car park site; and (3) because the enforcement notice was being quashed, the Inspector did not have to consider the appeal under s. 88(2)(a) of the Act, but he did proceed with the appeal under s. 36 against the refusal by the council to grant planning permission for the proposed use. Held, dismissing the s. 36 appeal, that (1) the appellants' taxi business had given rise to serious disturbance in the locality which contained a significant number of older residential properties; (2) the appellant and his former partner were aware of the restrictive condition; (3) there was nothing to support the appellants' contention that local opposition to the business was motivated by factors other than nuisance and loss of amenity.

Legislation Cited

Town and Country Planning Act 1971 s. 36
Town and Country Planning Act 1971 s. 88(2)

J Toomey Motors and Intacab v Basildon DC and Secretary of State for the
Environment

(CA (Civ Div)) Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
c.1982

(1982) 264 E.G. 141
[1982] J.P.L. 775

Summary

Subject: Planning

Change of use; Severance

Material change of use; whether permission severable

Abstract: P had since 1975 operated a radio-controlled taxicab service from a site in Basildon consisting of a building with vacant land behind. The building, which was now used as an office, had, until 1969, been used as a bank, whilst the vacant land, now used for parking taxis, had previously been unused. In 1976 D issued an enforcement notice, prohibiting the use of the site for the taxicab business; this was quashed by the Minister, who granted permission for the site to be so used, except between midnight and 6.00 a.m. P purported not to "take advantage" of the permission in respect of the office, for which they claimed to have established use rights. D issued a further enforcement notice in respect of the use of the office during the prohibited hours. An inspector confirmed the notice.
Summary: Held, that the business constituted a "material change of use" for the whole of the site, and that P, in implementing the Minister's permission with regard to the storage of taxis on the vacant land, had implemented it with regard to the whole of the site. They could not for this purpose divide the site or their business into two parts (Newbury DC v Secretary of State for the Environment [1981] A.C. 578 distinguished).

Cases Cited

Newbury DC v Secretary of State for the Environment, [1981] A.C. 578; [1980] 2 W.L.R. 379; [1980] 1 All E.R. 731; 78 L.G.R. 306; (1980) 40 P. & C.R. 148; [1980] J.P.L. 325; (1980) 124 S.J. 186 (HL)

But there is nothing in the 1976 act to say that you need planning permission to be obtain an operator's license.

I haven't a clue about planning law, but I assume you would need it for any new offices, especially if a change of usage was being asked for.

But now with offices in town centres that don't need vehicle parking, or a dirty great pole on the roof, then maybe the 1976 act got it right.

_________________
IDFIMH

in b&h drivers with operators licenses just have to give the council their details. which they already have.
no planning lark or anythging like that.
dont know for the firms.
but ours has just opened up a suboffice in a restaurant and i dont think he needed planning permmission.
just a vist from the council.
i think.

Were talking about private hire operators licenses, are you saying "a private hire operator does not need planning permission" for the premises he wishes to use, in Brighton?

Regards

JD