Taxi Driver Online

Plans to put age restrictions on all hackney carriages and taxis in West Norfolk look set to be given the go-ahead at a cabinet meeting this week. West Norfolk Council originally looked at the controversial plans, which some taxi drivers have claimed will put people out of business, in November last year but deferred the matter so it could seek legal advice. The advice it received supported the proposal and councillors will now be making a decision on Tuesday.

The new rules, recommended for approval by officers, would mean that any new or replacement hackney carriage or private hire vehicle should not be given a licence unless it is less than a year old and has travelled fewer than 15,000 miles. Drivers would also not normally be able to renew an existing licence for a vehicle if it is more than ten years old.

Principal environmental health officer Nick Wilson said the new policy would: "Assist in improving the safety and quality of the hackney carriage and private hire fleet in Norfolk." He said cars aged around ten years were normally lower quality, and several councils across the country already had similar policies.

Some taxi drivers have raised concerns over the planned age restrictions as they fear the cost of buying a replacement car that is less than a year old would put several drivers out of business. Officers have also recommended that restrictions on the number of hackney licences issued should be lifted after the authority took legal counsel. Mr Wilson said councillors sought advice to ensure they were taking the right course of action.

The council commissioned Alexander Booth of the Chambers of Robin Purchas QC in November last year to give an opinion on the existing policy. In his report he said the council was not able to justify the policy, leaving itself open to a legal challenge from anyone who had been refused a hackney carriage vehicle licence. He said its reasons for the policy had little relevance to the key issue of "consumer benefit."

Mr Booth said: "The provision of hackney carriages in West Norfolk compares poorly with the rest of the county and as such the restriction is not a benefit to the consumer." He added that if hackney carriage drivers made a legal challenge after the council discontinued its current policy then it would be in a "very strong position" to defend itself against any such case.

Regarding the proposed age restrictions Mr Booth said the council had the option of consulting impartial bodies for further advice. If councillors approve the recommendations the policy would be reviewed within a year. Angry taxi drivers on Wednesday hit back against the derestriction proposal.

The secretary of Lynn Hackney Carriage Association, Becky Hill, insisted: "The public doesn't need derestriction, the hackney carriage trade doesn't want it and the Government doesn't insist on it. Why is it continuing to go through?" Mrs Hill said the council had spent £13,000 on a survey only to disregard its findings. "The survey showed no significant unmet demand. There is no need to issue more licences because there is no demand for them," she went on.

Local authorities did not have to derestrict if they could justify the decision. Nearly 50 other authorities had retained restrictions. "We submitted many reasons for keeping restrictions in force, including 300 signatures we collected from members of the public in less than 48 hours. The council is just choosing to ignore them," said Mrs Hill. There was also no documentary evidence of a potential legal challenge. "We think the council, with our help, would be able to throw out any such challenge," she said.

The association now plans to continue lobbying councillors.
The next step would be to take legal advice themselves and get a barrister to review the papers. A formal complaint to the council and the Ombudsman could follow.

_________________
IDFIMH

Because, in time, it will get rid of dead-wood like you for starters.

_________________
IDFIMH

Obviously an old version of the quota list.



Did Becky miss out the word "public" or was she referring to prospective "applicants" when she said there is no demand for them?

Regards

JD

Still not happy.

http://www.lynnnews.co.uk/ViewArticle2. ... ID=1324342

_________________
IDFIMH

Must be one of the toughest vehicle quality controls in the country but as the NTA and T&G state, Councils know best? lol

Regards

JD

"Current restrictions on hackney licences have been criticised by the industry for creating a shortage of cabs – but a council survey revealed no significant unmet demand.

Despite the finding, the council looked into deregulation in November but deferred a decision until now so it could seek legal counsel.

It found the existing restriction leaves the council open to legal action from anyone who had been refused a hackney licence, and should only be in place if it benefits the consumer.

Hours after Friday's meeting, Mr Dobson said the council had no choice but to relax the hackney rules – saying if the council was successfully sued, it could affect council tax."

"As a responsible administration we can't disregard this level of legal advice. It is difficult to get across to drivers the position we are in."

I would be interested in reading this advice, but I can guess its contents.

Regards


JD

Sounds to me like West Norfolk Council are trying to encourage drivers to invest their money in the vehicle rather than the plate, by imposing a strict (very strict) age rule combined with deregulation.

This in turn will slow the rate of increase of license uptake caused by the proposed deregulation, thus averting the danger of too many extra taxis suddenly appearing.

That rate will be governed by the age restrictions imposed on the vehicles - the older the vehicle they allow, the faster the uptake of licenses. It's important that they get this right and so it's no surprise that they have set the initial rate as slow as possible by imposing the strictest age limit possible.

So a sensible long term solution to any artificial plate value problem.

A pain for the private hire sector in the short term.

But a potential advantage to all the trade and its customers in the long term.

_________________
The higher the fewer.

I guess you hit the nail on the head.

Regards

JD

yup great for the "wanna plate" brigade, also great for the weekend crowd,

but as usual you folk seem too miss the point, namely the poor folk affected by this incredulous decision, the taxi drivers.

what do you think will happen as the fleet doubles? will the council increase rank space? what about takings? where will all the new customers come from?

I forget you live in la la land, as long as I can have a free plate, then all is wunderbar in lala land.

only thing is I still have to pay in excess of 25k for this plate.

that is unless i can drive a breadvan, in that case plates will will be handed out like confetti.......

How many of the 'weekend brigade' will want to spend thirty grand on a new motor?

And how many existing plate-holders moan about the 'weekend brigade' when they are driving their motors?

_________________
IDFIMH

I always thought you were one of the fraternity that said more cabs doesn't equal a better service? If that is the case, incumbent Taxi drivers have nothing to worry about because there will be less cabs out to service the public demand.

This week I read about a driver who got his marching orders from an owner in a restricted area because the owner just didn't happen to like his brand of free speech. Maybe you harbour the same thoughts for this driver as you do for every owner in a restricted authority who is faced with de-restriction but I doubt you do.

It's a good job Mr Casey and Mr Kavanagh subscribe to the theory that Councils know best. We really can't say anymore can we? Except that 187UMS might know best?

JD

I noticed the caption to the photo from the article above states that both hackney and private hire drivers attended a last-ditch meeting with the leader of the council.

The fact that both sides of the trade were seen working together there is great.

The fact that they were castigating the council for its efforts to provide a long term solution to what has been a major long term problem within the industry, was perhaps not so great.

The existing problem of the plate values is not the councils fault - they have always issued plates at their nominal value. The problem of the plate values lies within the trade itself.

So it follows that the solution to this problem, if there is to be one, must also be found within the trade itself.

And it has to be all sides of the trade, like at the meeting with the council, because it affects all sides - if one side is in disarray then the whole trade is unbalanced by it and made vulnerable.

_________________
The higher the fewer.

Does anyone out there want to explain how, by insisting on Brand new vehicles, (yes, I KNOW they are not, but they may as well, how many second hand, low mileage WAV's are out there, a big fat zero, I believe) and pushing up operator costs, which will result in higher fares, "benefits the consumer"?

Consumers get decent safe vehicles to travel in and the local authority fulfils its moral obligation to the 1995 DDA. New entrants don't have to spend 30 grand on a worthless piece of paper and another ten or twenty grand buying a vehicle. Everyone gets the equal opportunity to own and drive a cab and no driver is placed in a position of master and slave, where the slave is always susceptible to the power of the master.

Removing the master slave scenario is what equality is all about. But you knew that already, didn't you?

In other words invest in the vehicle and not in the plate.

Besides what would you rather do pay thirty grand for a worthless piece of paper or twenty five grand for a decent motor?

JD