Taxi Driver Online

I know what you are saying Gus and I don't necessarily disagree.

I am a company owner (hotel chain) and I have several people to be picked up and from several locations ( chain of hotels) and taken to other locations,(home or railway or other hotels).
I offer contract to a driver for say 1 week or 1 year to pick up and take said various people to said various locations.


Do these locations need to be owned or leased by me, or do these people need to be doing other business with me?
C G (s) A doesn't state or make these conditions.

A single contract, exclusive, and over a period of more than 24 hrs. Does driver need a taxi or ph license?

when I lived in Snowdonia a local pub/hotel would book me for 3 hours from 10pm to run customers home, I had an eight seater on PH plates, the hotel paid me £120, customers would come out, get in the bus and say where they lived. presumably i was breaking some obscure pre-war law?

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most

Not necessarily but it would depend on the circumstances. This is where it gets all fuzzy

Why would you provide FOC transport between two venues for a non patron, especially if you are paying for it?
Is someone else paying you in any way to arrange it or is someone else gaining by the arrangement (even goodwill can be considered a gain)?
It's hard to say without knowing the exact details.



Not if he's sticking to the rules.
If anyone else is paying or gaining by the enterprise (even tips) then yes both driver and vehicle should be licensed.

The English binned their similar exemption a few years ago, not least because the whole thing is a mess, and IMO we should do the same.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

It may have been binned but it still goes on.

_________________
Grandad,

At least there are no questions about it's legality. It's illegal, end of.
What you have now is an enforcement problem.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

I am a company owner (PH ) and I have several people to be picked up and from several locations (PH bookings) and taken to other locations,(home or railway or other hotels).
I offer contract to a driver for say 1 week or 1 year to pick up and take said various people to said various locations.

A single contract, exclusive, and over a period of more than 24 hrs. Does driver need a taxi or ph license?

Just exploring this further.


I didn't suggest it was FOC to the said persons, neither is it a condition of the Act. My company are gaining, either cash or other benefit. I might need a booking office license, I might not, but if we stick to the drivers contract and requirements.





What rules? Is there other legislation that applies?

Driver is apparently complying with the act. He might even collect money on my companies behalf but he only benefits from the single contract. Or say for now he only does account work, or perhaps as in near future all bookings are paid to company by card.

OK, I think I see where you are going now.

No booking office licence is required.
As you've studied the legislation so well, you will know that a booking office licence is only required if you are taking bookings for more than 3 or more licensed vehicles. As your vehicles are not licensed, it doesn't apply.
(Licensing of Booking Offices) Order 2009.

As for the rest, I would refer you to section 23 of the CGSA 1982

(1)
In sections 10 to 22 of this Act:-
“taxi” means a hire car which is engaged, by arrangements made in a public place between the person to be conveyed in it (or a person acting on his behalf) and its driver for a journey beginning there and then; and
“private hire car” means a hire car other than a taxi within the meaning of this subsection.
(2) In subsection (1) above, “hire car” means a motor vehicle with a driver (other than a vehicle being a public service vehicle within the meaning of section 1(1)(a) of the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981) which is, with a view to profit, available for hire by the public for personal conveyance.
(3) Notwithstanding that a vehicle in respect of which there is a licence for its operation as a taxi is, on any occasion, engaged as a hire car otherwise than in the manner referred to in subsection (1) above, the enactments relating to its operation as a taxi and to the driving of it as such (including any such enactments in this Act) shall nonetheless apply in relation to it; and that other manner of engagement on that occasion shall not of itself cause the operation or driving of the licensed taxi to be regarded for the purposes of this Act as the operation or driving or a private hire car within the meaning of subsection (1) above.

My interpretation is that if the vehicle is being run "with a view to profit" it needs a licence.
It doesn't matter if it actually makes a profit or who is making any profit. It only has to be "with a view to profit"
Now that's my interpretation. A court of law may see it differently.

BTW It goes without saying that if the vehicle needs a licence, so does the driver.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

I suggest you read again Rout v Swallow Hotel for what needs to be licenced, what constitute hire and reward; also the "Pink ladies again" thread elsewhere on here which involved a ph operator in Luton whose wife done an odd job in her unlicenced car, the operator had a financial benefit so hire and reward; and the case in Birmingham where an 8 seater was picking up friends kids on a regular basis taking them to school for "petrol money", hire and reward, more than social kindness".

As for the pub hiring you to take his customers home for £120 a night, I don't see anything illegal in that as you are a licenced ph/hack and are carrying passengers for hire and reward, irrespective of how many and where you take them. If you weren't licenced, then it's a fair cop guv.

No Gus I wasn't going anywhere with it. And no I don't know the rules or legislation that's why I am asking.

It was and still is, about where the line gets drawn for a single, exclusive contract.

That phrase implies payment or benefit, so in my view that blows the "with a view to profit" argument out the water.

That there is an exempt clause at all confirms that you do not require a license just to make a profit.

For me it seems to hang then on the meaning of "available for hire by the public for personal conveyance"
Which I don't think applies to a single exclusive contract. One contact point, taking instructions from a single source, taking payment from a single exclusive source. There need be no contract between the passenger and the driver at all.

If i was asked by that reasoning could a PH company operate within these boundaries and therefor provide work to a non licensed driver.
I don't know.
But you declared the exemption should be removed without giving a reason, and i couldn't see one, still don't. But I am giving you a loophole which I think should be addressed.

I'm beginning to wish I had ignored your question



Why ask if you don't like the answer? Like I said, its my opinion. Nothing more.



Then why ask about a booking office licence?
I trust your hypothetical friend is better pleased with that answer?



Perhaps you've misunderstood the point of it being an exemption?
There must be "a view to profit" before a licence is required. A licence must be required before an exemption can apply.
If no licence is required, no exemption is needed.

Now, you ask if it is possible to run a PH service with unlicensed vehicles and using the 24 hour contract exemption to avoid the licensing requirement?
Now IMO I would say the single contract you describe is in fact a series of individual contracts and the single contract is simply a sham to circumvent the law. I'm no lawyer and I could be wrong.
I am sure that if there is no precedent on this, someone would likely prosecute just to set one. Though TBH I'd be surprised if nobody has tried this in the last 30 odd years.

BTW, the very fact that someone is considering trying to run a PH service without any licences makes a pretty good argument for why the exemption should be binned. There's always some [edited by admin] who will try to exploit it to make a quick buck.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

I suspect you'll find that is is not only "with a view to profit" that counts but also "the carriage of passengers for hire and reward" that would be taken into account, which is why I repeated the case law a couple of posts above. It gives the answers.

First Gus, thank you for taking the time to answer my questions. It has been very helpful, which is what I hope to gain from using the forum.
I have read what legislation I am aware of and form opinion accordingly, but always aware that I might be wrong I ask for others opinions, even better if they can point me in the direction of other rules/ legislation that I might not be aware of.
(Sorry Roy but I English case law doesn't consider the relevant Act here in Scotland. Or does it?)
If there is it helps to sort out the difference from actual knowledge and just shooting from the hip.
Happy to consider the latter but there is a difference.



I didn't ask about a booking office, I stated it wasn't relevant to save you going down that road. It didn't work out, my mistake.
I think you misunderstand the point of an exemption. " "a view to profit" a licence is required." Except..........

I concur with your opinion that such use of the exemption to circumvent PH licensing should be blocked, but it does appear so far to be legal. No legislation, no Scots case law, just try it and see how far you get.

But I do not agree that the exemption should be scrapped.
Which brings us nicely back to the point.
I am aware of such uses of this exemption which IMO are quite acceptable, and it would be unnecessarily onerous to put them into the PH bracket.

Again I thank you, and Roy for responses, everyday can be a school day if you engage.

the rout v Swallow Hotel is UK case law in England and Scotland as it involved PSVs as well as private hire. You still have the exemption north of the borderrr which I undrestand will be scrapped when the LC reforms come into being.

I can't help further with Scottish law, but in my opinion the definition of hire and reward and the case laws above ought to be applicable there. We all keep learning!