|
A taxi firm is running private hire cars in Nottingham without a licence, claiming the city council does not have the correct laws in place to make them apply for one. The council says they are wrong and is looking to prosecute. But for now, as JAMES SMITH reports, unlicensed taxis are being allowed to operate in the city
O
The business is listed in the Yellow Pages at its previous address in West Bridgford. Anyone can dial their number and book a cab.
But when they do, they are booking a car from a company that has no operator's licence, which will have a driver without a badge.
Abbey Cabs has been running like this since August last year, and continues openly to do so.
The owner, Mohammed Taj, says he told Nottingham City Council he was opening without a licence. But months later he has not been shut down.
So why is he running what is an apparently illegal business?
He claims it isn't illegal, because he believes there is a flaw in the city council's licensing laws.
"I told the council I was willing to come above board if they could show me the law," he said. "But they haven't done."
His advisor Abdul Rashid told the Post he had delved into the history of the city's taxi licensing laws dating back to 1847, and is convinced errors have been made.
"I challenged the council and said 'If you think I'm wrong, then come down and prosecute'," said Mr Rashid, of Annesley Grove.
"I wrote to the council about six months ago and told them to come to the office with a piece of paper in their hand showing the resolution, but otherwise don't bother."
Both men claim there are wider repercussions for the council.
"None of the taxi drivers in the city need to have a licence," explained Mr Rashid.
The council denies the claims outright and is confident its laws are in place.
A council spokeswoman said: "We are satisfied that the law is perfectly correctly applied.
"We have looked through the legislation very carefully and there are no grounds for their query."
And, as Mr Taj has no licence, he is not subject to the regulations governing the taxi trade.
So he says he is free to employ anyone as a driver - even a criminal - provided they have a full driver's licence.
He says he does make criminal background checks on drivers, however.
"I check their driving licence is up to date, get them to fill in a form and take a copy of their driving licence. I take these to the police for a police check," said Mr Taj.
"If there is something bad then I would not employ them as it affects my company, but I would take them on until I get the police check back."
Abbey Cabs was first set up by different owners in West Bridgford in 2000, but after two years failed to secure planning permission for its premises.
The previous owner failed to renew his operator's licence and it was closed down.
The firm was then taken on by Mr Taj, and he was taken to court by Rushcliffe Borough Council for running the company without an operators' licence, although the case was never concluded.
Abbey relocated to Alfreton Road, in Radford, in August last year.
Mr Taj claims his firm takes up to 2,000 calls a week and runs 20 cars. He says his vehicles are insured and have MOT certificates.
"I've been driving with no badge, no plate, nothing," he added.
Abbey Cabs' insurance company, GMI Insurance Services of London, say they would pay out regardless of whether the firm is licensed or not - only a drivers' licence is needed.
When the Post first contacted Nottingham City Council's licensing manager, Tim Coulson, three weeks ago, he said his department had investigating the firm.
But he said there had been difficulties gathering evidence.
"We are aware that somebody has opened up on Alfreton Road and believe we know who it is," he said.
"In that time, we have had the premises under observation and have been waiting for the go ahead from legal services in terms of the collection of evidence."
"We have been down to the site many times of the day and evening and found the premises either closed or nobody working there. We have also tried test bookings.
"We will be taking action against them if it is illegal, as it appears to be. We want to protect the safety of the public and other road users."
The situation has drawn scorn from the taxi trade, both for the firm operating without a licence and the length of time taken by the council to respond.
Bryan Roland, general secretary of the National Private Hire Association, told the Post he would have acted immediately.
"If the council applied immediately, they could probably shut the company down tomorrow," he said.
"The council should take immediate steps to close this."
His views were echoed by Norman Deegan, chairman of the National Taxi Association, based in Carlisle.
"If this firm has been running for that period without a licence, it is quite appalling and quite frightening. The unlicensed operation of taxis does go on, but I don't know of anything quite as blatant.
"The council could have taken an injunction and I'm appalled that it has taken so long after being brought to the attention of the council."
A council spokeswoman said this route had been considered, but they had been advised to seek a prosecution first.
"It may seem surprising to a lay man," she said, "but the law is very complicated and it's actually quite difficult to take out an injunction in this matter."
She added that, since the Post first contacted them, they had concluded their investigation. Mr Rashid is due to appear in front of Nottingham Magistrates on April 4 charged with operating a vehicle without a licence. However, there are no prosecutions against Mr Taj or Abbey Cabs.
She added: "We will take stock when this prosecution is concluded and decide on the next step."
A solicitor who specialises in taxi licensing law and has written a book on the subject said he could understand their caution. James Button, of James Button and Co solicitors, said: "They have conducted their investigation and decided it is in the public interest to prosecute.
"The council can seek an injunction, but it can be difficult to persuade courts to grant them."
A spokesman for Notts police said they had no recorded incidents involving Abbey Cabs.
ABBEY CABS - WHAT THEY ARE CLAIMING?
Licensing taxis is covered by several acts of parliament dating back over 150 years.
Some legislation refers only to Hackney carriages (black cabs), which can be hailed on the street. Others refer to private hire vehicles, which can only be pre-ordered either by phone or from a taxi firm's office.
The claim being made by the owners of Abbey Cabs relates to the Local Government Act of 1972, which came into force in 1974.
Under part of the Act - schedule 14, section 25 - local authorities were asked to pass a new resolution either applying or disapplying regulations originally set out in the 19th Century, which first covered Hackney carriages in England and Wales.
This should have been ratified by the Secretary of State, but Mr Rashid and Mr Taj claim it was never done.
They claim this means when the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 was introduced - the first Act ever to refer to private-hire taxis (which they run) rather than Hackney Carriages -this could not apply in Nottingham.
The 1976 Act is an 'adoptive act' changing the 1972 Act. They claim that if the 1972 act was never properly passed, the 1976 one cannot be law either.
Nottingham City Council has countered by saying that Section 15 of the 1985 Transport Act reapplied the provisions of the 1847 act covering Hackney carriages and that it had properly adopted the 1976 Act.
Taxi law expert James Button, of James Button and Co. solicitors, said: "I don't think Abbey Cabs have got a case. The 1972 Act applied Hackney carriage licensing to anywhere that was a county borough before 1974.
"Nottingham was and, accordingly, taxi licensing continued past 1974 without the need to pass a resolution.
"Therefore the adoption of the 1976 Act was proper, therefore I think they are operating illegally."
Bryan Roland, general secretary of the National Private Hire Association, said he has known similar situations. "What these men are saying is that there may be a flaw in the council's laws," he said.
"But even if they were right and, for example, the council hadn't properly advertised the law change in the 1970s and said, 'Mea culpa, we've got it wrong' they could redress it by advertising the laws in the paper and the operation would have two weeks left to trade. If these men feel they have found a loophole, then I would issue a summons tomorrow and let them go to court and try to prove it.
"I don't think they can - there's a huge amount of case law that says what they are doing is illegal."
National Taxi Association chairman Norman Deegan said that provided the council had properly adopted the 1976 Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act covering private hire vehicles, then all operations offering the services of a vehicle and driver would need to be licensed.
"If they have found a loophole and are correct, they are the first in the country to have done so," he said.
An operator's licence costs around £500 a year for each car run by a firm in the city. If it is found to be operating illegally, the firm can be fined £1,000 for each car.
Mmm the same Council who took Pats badge off him a few years ago for giving a thief a clip round the ear for nicking out of a petrol station.
|
Login
Register
FAQ
