Taxi Driver Online

In March 2005 Ashford Executive voted to change its policy from Quantity control to Quality control. Some 12 months on they have had only 9 applications for licenses. They were previously restricted to 76 hackney vehicles.

Bassetlaw who currently have 35 hackneys have had 5 applications since they changed to a policy of Quantity control back in 2004.

Amber Valley changed to a policy of quantity control back in 2004 and has had 29 applications bring the hackney fleet up to 139 from 109.

Basildon has had an increase of 37 hackneys since they removed quantity controls back in April 2005. Prior to change of policy the number was restricted to 106.

I intend to gather the information of all those councils who have removed numbers control in favour of quality control and publish the effect the change of policy has had on the increase in numbers.

It would appear from the four authorities listed above that the increase in numbers since removing restrictions has been negligible. This puts into perspective the ranting of the T&G and the NTA that numbers will double if councils remove quantity controls.

The main aspect of quantity control is that licensing authorities have the mechanism to raise the bar as high or as low as they desire. So far quantity controls have mainly been applied to vehicles but I suspect it is only a matter of time before these same controls are applied to drivers?

In that respect I am talking about strict knowledge tests English language tests (which several authorities are now undertaking) a pre requirement to know all the bylaws and relevant legislation that Governs the Hackney trade and much more. Controversial perhaps but standards have to start somewhere and it is far better to have high standards than a barrier to entry such as quantity controls.

Regards

JD

in edinburgh
i think that most current owners would fail to meet higher standards should the bar be raised.
thus resulting in fewer plates on the streets
perhaps thas is what frightens them the most, thier own inability to compete in a free market

JD

What I feel is that the term 'quality control' is inaccurate.

Surely what these council have done is 'political correctness' control by saying that you can have a hackney plate if you provide a WAV.

Or have any opened up allowing saloons?


And when they do their 'political correctness' controls do they restrict it too certain types of WAV?

And I am sure the statisticians would argue that 30% can hardly be desribed as a negliable increase.

_________________
A member of the Hire or Reward Industry

JD

What I feel is that the term 'quality control' is inaccurate.

Surely what these council have done is 'political correctness' control by saying that you can have a hackney plate if you provide a WAV.

Or have any opened up allowing saloons?


And when they do their 'political correctness' controls do they restrict it too certain types of WAV?

And I am sure the statisticians would argue that 30% can hardly be desribed as a negliable increase.

_________________
A member of the Hire or Reward Industry

The actual increase in percentage terms is as follows.

Ashford 11.8%
Bassetlaw 16.6%
Amber valley 26.6%
Basildon 34.9%

The reason Basildon has the highest at 34.9% percent is probably because their quality vehicle controls are not as high as the other three mentioned. Basildon's conditions are set out below.

The authority that immediately springs to mind that removed restrictions without implementing quality control on WAVS is Denbighshire. I don't have details of that authorities increase in numbers but they kept the same vehicle licensing policy that existed before they removed numbers control. The reason they did this is because they felt it was premature to implement a WAV requirement before the Government has made its decision on the DDA.

At the moment it is exactly as I said the higher you raise the bar the harder it is for entry.

From experience councils who remove quantity controls are looking for other ways in which to control entry and at this moment in time it would seem the only way that can be done is by some form of Quality control mechanism. In my opinion there are basically three options as far as vehicle controls are concerned, they are stay with quantity controls, remove quantity controls and go with a system of quality vehicle control or remove restrictions completely and let any type and age of vehicle be licensed.

There is of course a preference for all three depending on which side of the fence you sit on. Experience tells us that the Dublin and Liverpool scenario of licensing practically any aged vehicle doesn't work. I think councils realise this, so it leaves them with limited options, do they retain numbers control with the uncertainty that this policy brings or do they plan for the future and introduce a policy that can be sustainable?

The way I see it is that you are very unlikely to get a free for all such as was the case in Liverpool and Dublin. The expansion of Europe will only exacerbate the entry situation so councils need to be minded of the pitfalls of laxed controls. I don’t know what your particular preference is Tom but if I had to choose between quantity control and quality control from an equality perspective I would definitely prefer the later.

HACKNEY CARRIAGE PRE-LICENSING CONDITIONS

1. In order that a reliable hackney carriage service of an acceptable standard is provided within the District, a person to be considered for a Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence on the first or subsequent occasions
shall –

Have a vehicle which is in satisfactory mechanical order and body condition and in operational order in every respect. This vehicle to be a London type cab, a multi-passenger vehicle, a saloon or an estate vehicle which according to the manufacturer’s unaltered specification has:-

(a) a minimum of four doors, each adjacent to and allowing direct access to and from the seats;

(b) rear seat accommodation for not less than three persons (for saloons and estates);

(c) separate front seats to accommodate one person in addition to the driver (excluding London style cabs);

(d) seats with a minimum width of not less than 17 inches (432mm) per person;

(e) all hackney carriage vehicles shall be fitted with appropriate seat belts to the front and rear seats of the vehicle. The number of seat belts fitted to the vehicle shall correspond with the number of passengers the vehicle is licensed to carry in forward facing seats, plus a belt for the driver;

(f) accommodation for not less than four passengers;

(g) all vehicles must be capable of carrying a wheelchair in a reasonable manner.

2A. A hackney carriage vehicle licence is renewed annually on 1 September.

(a) All saloons and estates, when first submitted for licensing, must be less than four years of age and at the time of renewal of the vehicle licence, be no more than seven years of age. There will be no extension to this period.

(b) For larger, high quality, executive saloon vehicles, the lower age of four years remains. Providing that the vehicle has been maintained to a high standard and has passed all the council inspections since it was first licensed, the upper age limit will be extended to ten years. A list of vehicles eligible for extended life can be obtained from the Licensing Office.

(c) For purpose built London style vehicles, when first submitted for licensing, must be less than eight years of age, with no upper age limit.

(d) For all other wheelchair accessible vehicles accepted for licensing as a hackney carriage, be less than six years of age and at the time of renewal of the vehicle license, be no more than ten years of age.

(e) A list of wheelchair accessible vehicles acceptable for licensing within the District Of Basildon is available for the Licensing Office.

So you mean to say the NTA and T&G got it wrong and the world hasn't ended?

_________________
IDFIMH

This is a quite interesting thread, on a subject that has interested me for some time. As you are fully aware, I am not a supporter of de-limiting, to say the least. And not in the interest of protecting a plate premium. I could live with plates being non-transferable, but let's put that aside for now and stick to the subject of Quality control.
One has to wonder if "quality control", as introduced by some LA's will prove to be of "benefit to the consumer", as the whole process of deregulation is supposed to provide. If you take the case of West Norfolk Council, (Kings Lynn) where it is now a requirement for all replacement vehicles to be less than a year old, or with less than 15,000 miles on the clock. I personally believe, that this will be a disincentive to Hackney owners to remain in the trade, because to do so, they will need to buy a replacement WAV at between £20-35K. Because there will be less Hackneys operating, (who knows for sure, maybe none at all,) the shift will be to PH or elsewhere. But suppose that ALL LA's introduced a similar rule, that all Hackney Carriage's had to be NEW WAV's? How would this benefit the consumer? All brand new cabs at first, maybe, but if there were to be an UPPER age restriction of say, ten years, where would you sell on your old vehicle? Good thing too, I can hear some say, but remember, in this theoretical position, you could not sell on a cab that was ONE YEAR old, because all LA's insist on "brand spanking new only" So, the only option open, would be to work a cab into the ground, so that in eight or ten years time, a taxi fleet is in a sorry state. It is clear that licensing conditions in some LA's are over the top. In Lincoln, for instance, there is no upper, or lower, age limit on vehicles, only a requirement that they are WAV. Yet, it is a fact that almost two thirds of the Hacks in Lincoln were BRAND NEW when first licensed here. Why should this be, if owners are not compelled to put on new vehicles? Could it possibly be that the owners felt confident to make a long term commitment to the taxi trade because the City regulates the number of licenses? Over regulation of licensing will distort the market far more than limiting licenses ever has. You don't have to take my word for it, (as if you would!) Read "Changes in the taxi parc" available on this site.

Rome wasn't sacked in a day.

Jimbo

I live in a deregulated world, and you would probably regard me as a 'taxi baron' or something less complimentary.

You raise a very valid point.

I don't believe in the need for all hacks to be WAV. As I said earlier this is purely for political correctness.

On your Norfolk example though I would be interested to hear the difference in rules for Hacks/PH. From my experience the distinction between to two'codes' only really exists in our major connurbations.

Once you get out of these there appears very few hacks who are not dependent 'on the phone' for their livelihood.

What percentage of hacks are not on a circuit of some description. And whatever Nidge and co might argue, a 'circuit' is a PH operation.

_________________
A member of the Hire or Reward Industry

Wirral has seen a 70% increase since they removed restrictions in 2002 but it would appear license applications have levelled off to a trickle. Contrast that with restricted Manchester, which has seen its fleet of 450 double since 1987 and still has a waiting list of over a thousand applicants. Manchester is still issuing licenses at a rapid rate of knots and is top of the percentage table of regulated councils that issue licenses on a yearly basis.

If you take the comparison of Wirral and Manchester you can see they are very similar in kind albeit the geography of the catchment area is widely different.

Taking three of the four examples of quality controls which I offered above you can see that Manchester has in the past set the quality bar far lower than the examples given?

Wirral has a three year vehicle age policy, which they could easily have made two years. This might have only given an increase of perhaps 50% and who knows? A new vehicle policy might have given an increase in line with Bassetlaw or Ashford of around 12 to 16%.

The Last time I enquired about the latest situation in the Wirral was when fairway said they had 215 cabs, Wirral told me they had 213 but there is not a great deal of difference between the two figures. It would be interesting to see what the figure is now.

You are right about the Taxipark report but we discussed that and I think most people agreed that where high quality vehicle control standards are in place, certain people will decide to take a cheaper option. If this does happen and I have no doubt that it will, then it proves that quality vehicle controls do work. I also think Quality driver controls will work, if set to the right standards.

The initial sounding of those councils that have so far changed to a policy of quality control looks highly promising.

Regards

JD

The quality control (WAV) isn't a benefit to customers, well apart from the small % of WAV customers, but is usually brought in to help stop the taxi trade from being flooded. A sort of half way house.

That said, if I was an existing taxi owner in a restricted area, then the two biggest fears I would have would be a) the loss of my premium and b) the loss of much of my work to a flooded trade.

Now de-limitation does get rid of premiums, but a WAV quality control should help out with the flood. And if a few of the old buggers had to go PH or leave the trade, then so be it.

_________________
IDFIMH

I agree entirely, it is political correctness, something that I take issue with but those councils who have a shortage of wheelchair accessible vehicles have drawn the conclusion that it is a way of complying with both the DDA and the Governments preference to remove quantity controls. While at the same time slowing the uptake of hackney carriage licenses.

I have always said that in most places where de restriction takes place drivers will become more reliant on Radio work. Especially in those area where no quality control mechanism is in place to slow down the uptake of licenses.

The Government has a hard task in finding a workable solution to the DDA because it would no doubt be discriminate to exclude all saloon type vehicles from becoming hackney carriages.

Regards

JD

The thought process behind deregulation is two fold, one you have the restricted practice element of limiting the number of vehicles to be licensed and second you have the assumption that unrestricted access to the market provides a better service to the public? The quandary restricted LA's find themselves in, is how do they comply with the Governments preference of removing quantity control while at the same time trying to restrict entry and comply with the DDA?

If it was just a case of providing a better service to the public local authorities could always do a Dublin or Liverpool? It is finding the right equilibrium that councils are concerned about.

I know you have a concern about kings Lynn but Kings Lynn is a case in point. The council wanted to remove numbers control before they agreed to a survey, in fact it is minuted in their committee meetings. I would ask you what the council should have done knowing that their preference was to remove quantity controls? I look to you for a solution because you are certainly not happy with the decision of Kings Lynn?



You could be right and if the policy doesn't work I have no doubt it will be changed. Like I said, it is finding the right equilibrium. According to the DfT Kings Lynn had no vehicle age policy prior to 2004, they had three purpose built vehicles only. It is not that hard to reason why they produced a policy such as this.



You make the mistake of referring to all councils but you know that only 151 councils had a policy of quantity control and of those, 54 have so far made a decision to remove those controls. Many councils in that figure of 151 already have a full fleet of purpose built vehicles and so far 76 of them have decided to retain quantity controls so we have to look at the situation in the cold light of day. In the main what we are seeing is authorities with a large compliment of saloon type vehicles having to implement a policy that they were previously not prepared for. Add to that the fact that they might wish to retain some form of control on numbers and it is easy to see why these authorities are moving to a policy of Quality control?

It is wrong to infer that all authorities will follow the Kings Lynn model because I have no doubt that all those authorities who already have an unrestricted policy will not change their present vehicle age requirements just because of the DDA.

What we are seeing is quantity control authorities removing restrictions while at the same time wishing to retain a level of restriction in the form of quality control. This course of action is only taking place in certain authorities and I think it would be magnanimous of you to accept that.

There are many authorities that for years have had a policy of Wav only vehicles so there is nothing new in that respect. I think perhaps what concerns you is that you don't mind any new entrant into the Kings Lynn Taxi trade paying 25 grand for a new Wav but you do mind members of the incumbent taxi trade paying 25 grand. I appreciate you don't subscribe to the NTA and T&G train of thought that all cabs in restricted areas are double shifted so I would assume you are concerned that existing owner drivers would not be bale to find a jockey to help pay for the new cab? In that case perhaps it might be a good idea for these guys to get together and go into a partnership and share a cab.

JD