Taxi Driver Online

Taxi bosses in Plymouth have warned that fares will soar if the city council presses ahead with plans to raise cab licence fees by almost 800 per cent.

The council is carrying out a major overhaul of its charges for licensing hackney carriages and private hire vehicles. If the changes are approved, the cost of licensing a black cab for 12 months would rocket from £80 to £691 within three years.

Licence fees for private hire vehicles would rise from £35 to £311 over the same period.

Drivers' licences, application fees and driving tests will also become more expensive if the new charging regime is introduced.

The proposals are included in a consultation document, seen by The Herald, which has been sent to taxi firms. Operators say the fees are extortionate and will lead to sharp fares increases.

They say the council is increasing charges to claw back money it has spent in fighting court cases involving the taxi trade.

Taxifast boss John Preece said: "What they're trying to do is recoup legal expenses which they embarked on. It would be catastrophic as far as fares are concerned."

In 2005, The Herald revealed how the council had made a secret £120,000 payment to private hire firm Silverline following a failed legal bid to shut it down.

And the authority was ordered to cough up hefty legal costs last February after Mr Preece challenged the city's limit on black cabs in court. Mr Preece made another appeal, again relating to a hackney carriage plate, in June last year.

Roy Hamilton, secretary of the Plymouth Licensed Taxi Association, said he would ask the Audit Commission to investigate the legality of the council's proposals.

He said: "They're taking our money to fight the Taxifast case. It's unlawful, in our opinion."

Mr Hamilton said the council's papers did not state why the increases were needed.

He said: "What they sent out to everybody was the amount of fees required. Nowhere did they state why, and nowhere did they state the council's expenditure in this area over the last two or three years. They have to justify this, and people weren't able to make an informed comment as part of the consultation."

He branded the proposed structure 'preposterous. If a man or woman in 2010 has to renew their driving licence and their vehicle licence at the same time, they're going to have to find £1,500.'

Under the proposed changes, hackney carriage drivers would have to pay £339 for a one-year personal licence - or £809 for a three-year licence - in the financial year 2009-10.

The current rate is £101 for 12-month licences and £240 for three-year licences.

Driving licences for private hire vehicles would rise to £179 and £328 by 2009-10, compared to £90 and £190 currently.

Senior councillors are set to decide on the proposals in March.

Richard Burt, owner of Central Taxis, which runs private hire vehicles and hackney carriages, said: "They should increase the price a bit, but what they're trying to increase it to is extortionate. How they can claim that amount of higher fee, I don't know.

"It will have a big effect on our drivers, because we've got to pass the price down on to the driver, at the end of the day."

Mr Burt, whose firm employs more than 40 drivers, added that the council's charging proposals would deter people from seeking work in the industry.

He said: "If they bring it in, we've got to take it on the chin, but we will obviously lose a lot of drivers because of it. That will mean fewer taxis on the road and customers missing out.

"They're trying to claw back the money they lost with Silverline; that's my personal opinion.

"It seems we're being made scapegoats for their blunder."

Andy Wheeler, owner of private hire firm Crownhill Taxis, said: "It's astronomical, and we will fight it. Every operator has a representative who'll go in and lobby against the council.

"Our rates will go up and drivers' fares will go up, and if drivers' fares go up, the general public suffers."

A council spokeswoman appeared to confirm the operators' claims that the increases were connected to its legal actions.

"The licence fees are put into a trading account which provides the funding for legitimate costs incurred by the council to manage, administer and enforce the taxi and private hire trade in the city, not the public purse," she said.

"This review of fees is the first for some years. There have been a number of court cases specifically to do with the taxi trade and the costs which were incurred by the council are coming out of this trading account."

It looks to me that, if the council cannot win in the court, to keep a cap on cab numbers, they will try and price them off the road, and if they do introduce the new rates they will be making a vast profit, and if I'm correct that's against the law. I think there could be even more court action this time against the council, and or possibly major disruption.
That land train could brake down in some funny places and school contracts could be forgotten about, even a blockade of the city centre.
But there is one way to do it and that's at the ballot box with the elections looming

The council is carrying out a major overhaul of its charges for licensing hackney carriages and private hire vehicles. If the changes are approved, the cost of licensing a black cab for 12 months would rocket from £80 to £691 within three years.

Licence fees for private hire vehicles would rise from £35 to £311 over the same period.


Absolutle madness, and the driver's license increase is 100% in breach of King-v-Manchester.

The council has messed up twice big-time legally over the last few years, it is their fault and their fault only.

They should meet the bill for their cock-ups, not the local trade.

_________________
IDFIMH

The recent report that went to the latest cabinet meeting tells us that there is a shortfall of 180 grand in the reserve account. So just what is the reserve account and how does Plymouth Council fund it?

I would assume a percentage of the license fee goes to a seperate reserve account but it begs the question if Plymouth and perhaps every other council can cypher off a percenatage of the licensing fee for such things as court cases, then surely the Taxi trade is being ripped off every year? The actual cost of administering licenses must be the percentage that does not go to potential legal costs? I think someone in Plymouth should enquire just how much of their license fee goes to a seperate legal fund?

The council are asking taxi drivers to pay for their policy of restricting numbers, if as the council say, that their policy of restricting numbers is for the benefit of the public, then surely the public of Plymouth should pay for that benefit?

This is what you get when you let politicians with political agendas lose on the public purse.

2. General Fund Trading

Trading is projecting an overall favourable variation of £0.14m. Further details are given in Appendix D.

Taxi Trading Account – the projected favourable forecast is £0.048m due to salary savings. However this needs to be considered in the light of the reserve account shortfall of £0.180m and possible legal costs.

Regards

JD

2 questions what party controls the council?
JD you never answer this, but WHO exactly should control the public purse in a democracy, ive only been asking you this for 4 months, suffering a mental blockage on this one are we? Strange because your on the ball on most issues, this appears to be your ACHILLES HEEL!!!!!!!!!!
DECISIONS ARE TAKEN BY THOSE THAT TURN UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

_________________
The views expressed by this contributor do not neccesarily reflect the policys of The GMB Nationally or of the GMB London Region.

It's not the public purse it's our purse.

And those dickheads are wasting it.

And for [edited by admin] sake don't say join me and I will sort it because you can't.

My statement was in reference to the "Taxi trades public purse".

I am already on record as saying taxi licensing should be divested from the hands of councillors and placed in the hands of a national and regional body. Such as is the case in PSV licensing where you have regional commissioners.

That way we will have fixed legislation and we won't have our pockets emptied every time a council makes a cockup or dreams up a scheme such as Taxi Marshals which is solely designed to keep public order but in many cases expect us to pay for it?

I could go on and on and on but I will certainly clarify my opinion in due course. As for being my achilles heel, any views I submit on a new licensing regime would only be my personal views and opinions. Therefore just because I haven't yet set out my opinions, I cannot understand why I need to have an achilles heel in that respect, based entirely on my veiws?

Regards

JD

JD. I really do not understand why you advocat that Central government have total control, at least now when they Fccuk up we have the means locally to at least try to correct their mistakes, But we would have no chance if it was controlled in London and Let's face it they don't exactly inspire confidence. .

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

Currently labour by just 1 seat I believe.

We have local elections in may where it could swing back conservative who are to be fair just as "anti taxi"

lets hope they get back in, this lot have benn an utter shower of sh**.

JD PSV commisioners, WHO? who are they? who appoints them,what do they do,who are they answerable to, who pays them, who are they individually, what power do they have.
Your last paragraph what? I respect your knowledge on the industry, but to me you seem way off beam POLITICALY, just trying to get your views, you dont supply them, so i see a weakness, your ACHILEES HEEL. Nothing personal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Stevo have they, and what exactly have YOU done to influence them???
If they are Labour they would be amenable to pressure from Trade Unions,the other lot unlikely to listen.But to influence you need to be organised,not complicated? or too much bother?With the elections coming nows the time to OBTAIN commitments!
DECISIONS ARE TAKEN BY THOSE THAT TURN UP EVEN IN PLYMOUTH!

_________________
The views expressed by this contributor do not neccesarily reflect the policys of The GMB Nationally or of the GMB London Region.

This same scenario is about to happen in Edinburgh as well, If I'm correct, and its almost down to the same thing caps on the number of cabs
and the council running out of licence funds, so they keep the caps and hit em hard in the pocket

I know many on here have different views on how the taxi/PH should be run, be it locally or nationally, and TBH I'm still not convinced myself either way, but if we were all set a national license fee then if stupid councils waste stupid amounts of our cash, then it should be they that pay.

And then have to justify it to voters at election time.

_________________
IDFIMH

Sussex so a fair licence fee in Bodmin, would be fair in London nah, the licencing fee is supposed to finance the licenscing process, naturally different complexity in different locations. Answerable to the electorate of course, but very few on here agree, or are CAPABLE of putting an alternative i dont believe there is one, what we see is GUT reaction borne out of frustration. The perceived solution attempts to turn us all into AMATEUR lawyers, the success of that tactic can be ascertained by the current condition of the Industrys, CHAOTIC time to grasp the nettle?????
DECISIONS ARE TAKEN BY THOSE THAT TURN UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

_________________
The views expressed by this contributor do not neccesarily reflect the policys of The GMB Nationally or of the GMB London Region.

So the rate of VAT should be different in Bodmin than in London, or income tax?

As for the electorate, in some cases the folks paying the licensing fees are no-more than 1% of the electorate, so councils can f*** up at will.

Whereas if 100% of the electorate had to front up for council's f*** ups, then there would be far fewer.

The reason there are many amatuer lawyers is because there are 400 odd different councils, thus 400 odd different bands of drivers.

If there was just one set of rules, then you would have just one band of drivers, and that would be a bloody big one.

_________________
IDFIMH