Taxi Driver Online

http://www.ambervalley.gov.uk/News/pres ... asp?ID=680

_________________
IDFIMH

Crawley have been deregulated for two years, My man at the foreign office thinks they are still regulated lol



Mr Cummings is appealing agaisnt the Judicial review decision which went agaisnt him. I spoke to Cardiff today it seems he is just dragging things out until he can find some sucker to buy his million pounds worth of plates that are in his name.



A decision about Chelmsford is being made on the 26 January at a full council meeting.

Thank you for the help Sussex. I was just confirming what I had already established but convincing those in high places who supposedly have all the facts is sometimes an arduous task. I wish these officials would get keep their finger on the pulse.

Best wishes

JD

Bearing in mind that some members have agreed with officers that a justification can't be found, and the gov want the an answer published by the end of March, then the council haven't got any time to do anything bar de-limit.

_________________
IDFIMH

With regard to last weeks decision of woking, to de restrict numbers, here is their deregulated timetable.

Last Thursday, Woking Borough Council decided to gradually lift restrictions on the number of Hackney Carriage licences. From April 2005, 4 new additional licences will be issued (but only to vehicles which are wheelchair-accessible), and five further additional licences will be issued from April 2006 on the same basis.

In April 2007 all restrictions on the number of licences will be removed, and any one applying to the Council will be granted a licence provided that they meet all of the licensing criteria.

Best wishes

JD

Fair point, but I suppose they could imitate Woking, who have recently set out a time table for de restriction. Alternately they could totally disregard the Government request and do nothing. That would be interesting wouldn't it lol

I was Talking to Bassetlaw licensing last week and was told that since they de restricted in favour of Quality control, they have licensed just three vehicles. I assume that's because the vehilce that is to be licensed has to be brand new.

I guess it just goes to show that Quality control does have a limiting effect.

Best wishes

JD

I'm not too sure if I agree with the delay, if customer's needs aren't being met now, then why do they have to wait another two years?

Whilst the local trade might feel happy at the delay, I'm not sure they will be so pleased having to replace any vehicle over 8 years old with a brand new WAV.

Oh, and the council want to give PH great big yellow roof-lights.

_________________
IDFIMH

Calderdale Council issue the following licenses,

Halifax restricted to 37, but the present licence holders in return must provide WA vehicles over 5 years.

Brighouse, all new licenses on Wa vehicles, now open to all.
as is Sowerby Bridge, Ripponden and Hepton, Todmorden, Shelf,Hebden Bridge,

a new survey has just been authorised for Calderdale, though its understood only the Halifax zone will be surveyed.

which is bad news because they ask on the street questions regarding age of vehicles , quality of service, and ranks that the trade find useful.

Mr Yorkie, are Halifax licensed taxis allowed to ply in your zone/manor?

_________________
IDFIMH

On a wider note, seeing as all the zones apart from Halifax are unrestricted can the Cabs in the unrestricted zones ply for hire in any zone apart from Halifax, or are they restricted to their particular zone.

I've never been a fan of Zones but I suspect they must serve a purpose of some sort.

Best wishes

no.

John,
zoning ensures that the rural areas get taxis, if there was no zoning there would always be significant unmet demand somewhere.

funnily enough the biggest fans round here of zoning is the Halifax boys, if thier restricted numbers came to an end so would zoning.

but if you believe in no restricted numbers, you cannot believe in zoning?

Because of one or two anomalies regarding zoning the list has been amended to reflect the status of Calderdale. Solihull has been re introduced because although the councils stated numbers are being lifted in March 2005 the final decision will not be taken until the early New Year. Because Chelmsford are making their final decision on Jan 26th they too have been re introduced. Basildon is the latest Authority to remove numbers from 1/4/05.

Updated Restricted Quota List Dec 20th 2004.

Total number of Authorities that still have a policy of restricting Hackney Carriage proprietor licenses 125 or 36.44%.

Total number of licensing Authorities in England & Wales 343.

Practically all of the Authorities that have recently removed restrictions on Hackney Carriage numbers have opted for a policy of quality control, rather than quantity control. This policy works well where saloon type vehicles are in the ascendance. It gives a council the opportunity to build up its WAV requirement and assists those members of the public who are incapacitated or confined to a wheelchair. It also allows a time frame for existing Hackney carriage proprietors who own saloon type vehicles to budget for the inevitable DDA requirement.

The Quality control policy also meets the requirements as laid down in the Government guidance, it suggests licensing authorities should only limit numbers where it can prove that the public will benefit by such numbers being limited.

Those Authorities who have opted for Quality over Quantity control have decided on a varying degree of Quality. The Quality scale will no doubt have its varying degree of restriction. It could be argued that the higher you raise the quality bar, the higher you raise the level of prohibition.

A case in point is Bassetlaw. Since Bassetlaw introduced its no restriction policy, which stipulated a Brand new Wheelchair accessible vehicle, they have only licensed three vehicles. Therefore, it would seem that the high quality requirement that Bassetlaw has placed on the entry level has had a severe limiting effect on applicants.

The degree of quality will no doubt limit applicants but never the less it is a tool which is freely available for all Authorities to use as they see fit. The scale of Quality is no doubt up to each individual Authority but used wisely it should have the desired effect of controlling both numbers and quality of vehicle.

This list is compiled to reflect those Authorities that still have a policy of restricting Hackney Carriage numbers. Once a council has voted to remove those numbers the Authority will be removed from this list.

Updated list of Authorities who restrict H/C Vehicles by numbers:

1. Ashford. Restricted, to be reviewed early 2005.
2. Aylesbury Vale. Restricted
3. Babergh. Restricted
4. Barnsley. Unmet demand survey.
5. Barrow in Furness. Restricted
Basildon. New policy of no restriction 1/4/05 Quality control.
6. Basingstoke. Restricted
7. Bath and North East Somerset ua. Restricted
8. Bedford. Restricted.
9. Blackburn Darwen ua. Consultation on deregulation underway, scheduled to finish end Nov.
10. Blackpool. 256 hacks, 44 horse drawn. Intention is to keep a numbers policy.
11. Blyth Valley. 41 hacks, decision on change of policy early 2005.
12. Bolton. Restricted.
13. Bournemouth ua. Restricted
14. Bradford. Restricted. Policy to be reviewed Before Jan 2005
15. Braintree. Restricted
16. Brighton and Hove ua. Restricted.
17. Burnley. Restricted
18. Calderdale. Zoned area, only Halifax remains restricted.
19. Carrick. Conducting a survey.
20. Chelmsford. Recommendation to lift numbers, decision to be made on January 26th 2005.
21. Cherwell. Policy currently under review.
22. Chester. Undertaking unmet demand survey 2005.
23. Chester le street. Restricted
24. Chorley. Review of policy early 2005.
25. Colchester. Restricted
26. Congleton. Restricted
27. Conwy. Restricted
28. Copeland. Restricted
29. Corby. Restricted
30. Denbighshire. Restricted
31. Dover. Restricted
32. Durham. Restricted. Recently issued a quota of new licenses. Policy continually under review.
33. Easington. Restricted
34. East Riding. Restricted
35. Eastbourne. Restricted
36. Eastleigh. Internal report under consideration.
37. Ellesmere Port. Restricted
38. Exeter. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
39. Fylde. Restricted. Unmet demand survey to be carried out, consultation process to follow.
40. Gosport. Restricted
41. Great Yarmouth. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
42. Gwynedd. Restricted
43. Halton ua. A Recent licensing report stated that local plate values stood at 10/12k and this indicated no unmet demand. Possible flawed logic, which does not address DFT guidance.
44. Harrogate. Restricted
45. Hastings. Restricted. Policy change under review, decision imminent.
46. Havant. Restricted
47. High Peak. Restricted
48. Huntingdonshire. Restricted
49. Hyndburn. Restricted
50. Ipswich. Restricted
51. Kings Lynn. Restricted
52. Kingston upon Hull. Restricted
53. Kirklees. Restricted
54. Knowsley. Undertaking unmet demand survey
55. Lancaster. Restricted to 105 H/C/V
56. Leeds. Consultation on policy change currently underway.
57. Leicester. Restricted
58. Lincoln. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
59. Liverpool. Restricted
60. Luton ua. Restricted
61. Maidstone. Restricted
62. Manchester. Restricted. Has a policy of issuing 20/25 new licences annually.
63. Merthyr Tydfil. Decision imminent.
Middlesborough ua. Wav only
64. Mole Valley. Restricted
65. New Forest. Report for consideration to be presented to committee members in January 2005
66. Newcastle on Tyne. Restricted.
67. Newcastle under Lyme. Restricted
68. Nottingham. Undertaking an unmet demand survey.
69. Oldham. Restricted.
70. Oxford. Restricted. Recently voted to retain a restricted numbers policy.
71. Pendle. Restricted
72. Penwith. Restricted
73. Plymouth ua. Legal Challenge on refusal to issue H/C licence, Court hearing 2005.
74. Poole ua. Restricted
75. Portsmouth ua. Restricted
76. Preston. Restricted
77. Reading ua. Restricted. Policy change unlikely.
78. Reigate and Banstead. Restricted
79. Restormel. Restricted
80. Ribble Valley. Restricted.
81. Richmondshire. Restricted. Undertaking unmet demand survey. Halcrow.
82. Rochdale. Restricted
83. Rotherham. Restricted. 48 H/C. Currently undertaking an unmet demand survey.
84. Rugby. Conducting an unmet demand survey to consider options.
85. Salford. Presently addressing Government guidance could possibly commission local survey.
86. Scarborough. 97 H/C/V review in Early 2005.
87. Sefton. Restricted
88. Solihull. Stated numbers limit will be removed in 2005. Confirmation early 2005.
89. South Bedfordshire. Restricted. Policy currently under review.
90. South Ribble. Restricted
91. South Tyneside. Restricted
92. Southampton ua. Restricted
93. Southend on sea ua. Restricted
94. St Edmundsbury. Restricted
95. St Helens. Unmet demand survey being conducted early 2005.
96. Stevenage. Restricted
97. Stockport. Restricted. Commissioning a Mori survey to determine future policy.
98. Stoke on Trent ua. Restricted
99. Sunderland. Restricted. 308 H/C/V
100. Swindon ua. Policy under review, consultations being conducted with relevant parties.
101. Tameside. Restricted
102. Teignbridge. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
103. Test Valley. Restricted to 34 H/C, policy to be reviewed shortly in line with DFT request.
104. Thanet. Restricted
105. Thurrock ua. Restricted
106. Torbay ua. Restricted
107. Torfaen. Restricted.
108. Torridge. Decision on quotas imminent.
109. Trafford. Restricted.
110. Tunbridge wells. Restricted
111. Wakefield. Undertaking unmet demand survey.
112. Walsall. Review expected on 25 November 2004 Licensing Committee meeting.
113. Wansbeck. Policy under review. 30 H/C vehicles.
114. Warrington ua. Restricted
115. Watford. Preference to maintain a managed growth policy, next survey scheduled 2005/2006
116. Welwyn Hatfield. Re Restricted late 2003. Were previously unrestricted.
117. Weymouth. Restricted
118. Wigan. Restricted
119. Windsor and Maidenhead ua. Restricted
120. Wolverhampton. Decision on quotas imminent.
121. Worthing. Managed growth policy. Wav only. Conducting survey to measure demand.
122. Wrexham. Restricted.
123. Wyre.160 H/C/V Survey commissioned for Jan 2005 final report to committee, Feb 2005.
124. Wyre Forest. Provisional decision to de-restrict numbers, ratification imminent.
125. York ua. Policy under review.

I suppose a case could be made that Solihull hasn't been restricted for many years.

As de-limited Birmingham's taxis can freely ply in Soilhull, and vice-versa, then surely anyone wanting to ply in Solihull just gets a Birmingham plate.

Or have I missed something?

_________________
IDFIMH

I don't know if that interpretation is entirely correct Sussex so I can't say one way or the other. However, Solihull issued around 16 additional licenses this year so they still limit numbers until such time as their decision to implememt their stated policy is confirmed.

Now then, can you tell me the status of Mid Sussex because that is the only authority which is ambiguous.

Best wishes

JD

99.9% certain that they restrict saloons, but not WAVs.

_________________
IDFIMH